A taxonomy of circular economy indicators (1901.02709v1)

Abstract: Implementing circular economy (CE) principles is increasingly recommended as a convenient solution to meet the goals of sustainable development. New tools are required to support practitioners, decision-makers and policy-makers towards more CE practices, as well as to monitor the effects of CE adoption. Worldwide, academics, industrialists and politicians all agree on the need to use CE-related measuring instruments to manage this transition at different systemic levels. In this context, a wide range of circularity indicators (C-indicators) has been developed in recent years. Yet, as there is not one single definition of the CE concept, it is of the utmost importance to know what the available indicators measure in order to use them properly. Indeed, through a systematic literature review-considering both academic and grey literature-55 sets of C-indicators, developed by scholars, consulting companies and governmental agencies, have been identified, encompassing different purposes, scopes, and potential usages. Inspired by existing taxonomies of eco-design tools and sustainability indicators, and in line with the CE characteristics, a classification of indicators aiming to assess, improve, monitor and communicate on the CE performance is proposed and discussed. In the developed taxonomy including 10 categories, C-indicators are differentiated regarding criteria such as the levels of CE implementation (e.g. micro, meso, macro), the CE loops (maintain, reuse, remanufacture, recycle), the performance (intrinsic, impacts), the perspective of circularity (actual, potential) they are taking into account, or their degree of transversality (generic, sector-specific). In addition, the database inventorying the 55 sets of C-indicators is linked to an Excel-based query tool to facilitate the selection of appropriate indicators according to the specific user's needs and requirements. This study enriches the literature by giving a first need-driven taxonomy of C-indicators, which is experienced on several use cases. It provides a synthesis and clarification to the emerging and must-needed research theme of C-indicators, and sheds some light on remaining key challenges like their effective uptake by industry. Eventually, limitations, improvement areas, as well as implications of the proposed taxonomy are intently addressed to guide future research on C-indicators and CE implementation.

• The paper’s main contribution is introducing a structured taxonomy that classifies 55 circular economy indicators into ten distinct categories.
• It employs an extensive literature review to differentiate indicator levels and loops, highlighting diverse focuses at micro and macro scales.
• The study presents an Excel-based query tool that aids practitioners and policymakers in selecting appropriate indicators for CE performance evaluation.

A Taxonomy of Circular Economy Indicators

The paper "A Taxonomy of Circular Economy Indicators" offers a comprehensive review and classification of circular economy indicators, addressing a critical need for structured assessment tools to support sustainable development practices. Authored by Michael Saidani et al., the paper systematically categorizes 55 sets of circularity indicators (C-indicators) developed by scholars, consulting companies, and governmental agencies. This taxonomy is designed to assess, improve, monitor, and communicate circular economy (CE) performance across various systemic levels.

Key Contributions

The paper provides a nuanced classification of C-indicators into ten categories based on criteria such as levels of CE implementation (micro, meso, macro), CE loops (maintain, reuse, remanufacture, recycle), performance (intrinsic, impacts), perspective of circularity (actual, potential), and degree of transversality (generic, sector-specific). This taxonomy is integral for users such as industrial practitioners and policymakers in selecting appropriate indicators according to their specific needs and contexts.

Major Findings

• Comprehensive Inventory: Through an extensive literature review, 55 sets of C-indicators were categorized, offering a robust basis for assessing CE activities. The paper identifies that the focus of macro-level indicators, particularly developed in China, is predominantly on recycling, while micro-level indicators are more diverse, covering additional loops like reuse and remanufacture.
• Need-Driven Taxonomy: The proposed taxonomy provides clarity on the purposes and potential usages of the indicators, addressing the confusion stemming from the ambiguous definitions and scopes of CE in the literature.
• Selection Tool Development: An Excel-based query tool accompanies the taxonomy, facilitating easy identification and selection of suitable C-indicators for specific applications through a user-friendly interface.

Implications

The implications of this paper are both practical and theoretical. Practically, it aids in the effective implementation of CE strategies by providing a structured approach to monitoring and evaluation. Theoretically, it enriches the academic discourse on sustainability metrics by bridging gaps in understanding what existing indicators measure. This organized framework can guide future developments in CE measurement tools, potentially leading to their standardized application across industries and regions.

Future Developments

The paper identifies several areas for future exploration, including:

• Enhancing Indicator Robustness: There is a call for more rigorous scientific evaluation of C-indicators to establish their reliability and validity. This involves assessing their relevance, accuracy, and comprehensiveness in capturing the complete picture of circularity.
• Improving Industry Uptake: Current barriers to the adoption of C-indicators include data availability and a lack of awareness among practitioners. Efforts to simplify indicators and integrate them into industrial processes could enhance their applicability.
• Indicator Integration: Further research may explore how existing C-indicators can complement each other, facilitating a more holistic assessment of circularity across different levels and sectors.

Conclusion

This paper makes a significant contribution to the evolving field of circular economy indicators by providing a well-structured taxonomy and practical selection tool. By addressing current challenges and offering pathways for future research, it underscores the importance of tailored assessment tools in advancing sustainable development goals within the framework of a circular economy.