1 s2.0 S0959652623026124 Main

Journal of Cleaner Production 421 (2023) 138454
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Circular economy and waste management to empower a climate-neutral

urban future
Margot Möslinger a, *, Giulia Ulpiani b, Nadja Vetters a
a
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Brussels, Belgium
b
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Handling editor: Giovanni Baiocchi To mitigate climate change while catering to the needs of a growing population, cities need to find smarter ways
to manage their resources, while reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Since waste management and circular
Keywords: economy will be instrumental in this endeavour, the current level of circularity in cities, the environmental
Circular economy impact of related activities and sharable best practices need to be explored. This paper examines the roadmap to
Climate neutrality
zero emissions of the 362 cities that expressed interest in the Horizon Europe 100 Climate-Neutral and Smart
Zero-emission cities
Cities Mission. Based on an unprecedented suite of city inputs, this study answers a set of research questions so
Waste-to-energy
Green transition far unaddressed due to the lack of a suitable dataset. The analysis focusses on a) current actions undertaken by
Wastewater management cities in achieving a circular economy and reducing/optimising waste streams, b) envisioned circular actions in
supporting climate neutrality by 2030, and c) urban sectors and metabolic flows for which circularity has a
particularly high potential to mitigate climate change. Best practices are captured to create an informative set of
actions aimed at policy-makers and at encouraging peer-to-peer learning. Finally, the barriers to incrementing
circular approaches that emerge from the cities’ self-assessments are compared to those identified in existing
scientific literature to provide input for a more comprehensive conceptual framework. Overall, this study distils
how circular economy imaginaries are translated into local governance and policy-making by focussing on a
large group of cities. This is key to truly understand why some initiatives fail and others succeed and can inform
all relevant stakeholders on the next steps to take.
1. Introduction from waste (especially methane emissions), reduced waste transport

emissions, and potential energy recovery, as well as lower industrial
With two thirds of the global population expected to live in cities by emissions and lower emissions for primary material generation if pro
2050, a growing pressure will be put on resources, materials, and the cessed materials can be reused (Ackerman, 2000). Circular waste man
housing and transport sectors. Globally, resource demand is set to agement could save energy, fuel, labour, maintenance costs, and
double in the next 40 years, while, already today, cities contribute to eventually GHG emissions (Hannan et al., 2020) to an extent that de
70% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Fausing, 2020). A pends on the quality of waste streams (Corsten et al., 2013), on the waste
unidirectional causal flow runs from municipal waste and economic management technologies and practices (Yaman, 2020), and on the
growth to GHG emissions (Magazzino and Falcone, 2022), with the degree of eco-efficient symbiosis embedded in the urban metabolism
consumption domains of food, housing and transport being hotspots for (Xiao et al., 2022). As such, investigating how resource use can become
both urban material and carbon footprints (Christis et al., 2019). sustainable is key for managing and reducing GHG emissions in all urban
Notably, up to 32% of GHG emissions are generated by food production sectors (Hannan et al., 2020).
and 33% by buildings (Bajželj et al., 2013). Under the triple pressure of The term “circularity” refers to several strategies to keep resources
urbanization, population growth, and urban sprawl, collecting waste and materials in longer virtuous loops of production and consumption,
and valorising its re-use is one of the grand challenges urban societies such as reducing, reusing, recycling, and renting rather than owning
face today. At the same time, minimising waste production will be vital things (Khatiwada et al., 2021; Zeng and Li, 2021). In a circular econ
for reducing GHG emissions, due to the reduction of direct emissions omy (hereinafter, CE), the aim is to retain and optimise the value of
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Möslinger).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138454
Received 19 January 2023; Received in revised form 20 July 2023; Accepted 12 August 2023
Available online 14 August 2023
0959-6526/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M. Möslinger et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 421 (2023) 138454
products and materials through design for reusability, redesign and Large-scale research on the uptake of CE solutions needs to be a priority,
refurbishing, increased lifespans and durability, reparability and even notably in the direction of achieving zero-emission urban futures. This is
tually recyclability of products. In the food sector, 30–50% of all food also pointed out in (Fratini et al., 2019), where the authors looked at the
made for human consumption is estimated to be wasted, yet the appli translation of the CE imaginaries into city policy-making and concluded
cation of circular concepts has shown great potential to reduce GHG that future research has to move beyond highly scientised and tech
emissions (Jurgilevich et al., 2016), retain nutrients, and mitigate water nologised approaches to CE (with particular emphasis on products or
and energy consumption (Möslinger, 2019). Further, circularity helps to industries) towards a deeper focus on local government dynamics. This
reduce landfill waste, of which one third stems from the construction is key to truly understand why some initiatives fail and others succeed.
sector (Ghaffar et al., 2020) and can reduce mining activities of gravel, Their study also pinpoints the need for further research into the critical
sand, and limestone. As cement production has the highest GHG emis aspects of implementing CE-strategies, in terms of environmental
sion impact in construction, shifting to different building materials and rebound effects, social and geographical injustices, and associated
increasing circularity can significantly reduce emissions (Huang et al., governance challenges. Several other authors highlighted the lack of
2018) up to − 58% in Europe, when actions are taken along the entire research on policy measures and interdisciplinary approaches to achieve
lifecycle of the building (Rehfeldt et al., 2020). sustainability and CE (e.g. (Pomponi and Moncaster, 2017)) or the
Some studies, concerned with the environmental impact of circu insufficient level of data-sharing and trans-disciplinary monitoring of
larity measures, demonstrate that the substantial reduction of CO2 and the CE transition (Petit-Boix et al., 2022). However, answering these
other GHG emissions is possible through appropriate policies for effec research questions and investigating local government dynamics in
tive materials management, eco-design, and reuse (Bellezoni et al., more detail requires data on different aspects of CE from a significant
2022; Hailemariam and Erdiaw-Kwasie, 2022; Joensuu et al., 2020; sample of cities (possibly accounting for their individual perspective on
Petit-Boix and Leipold, 2018). Notably, analyses conducted in cities that the matter). So far, there has not been any fit-for-purpose dataset.
are pioneering CE-concepts reveal how industrial symbiosis (in terms of In 2021, the European Commission launched the Mission on 100
industrial solid waste exchange, traditional recycling, municipal solid Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities to support 100+ EU cities in becoming
waste utilisation, and energy symbiosis) comes with dramatic resource climate-neutral by 2030 (European Commission, 2021). In this frame
saving and carbon footprint mitigation (Fang et al., 2017). There is also work, (net) zero emissions are to be achieved across all main emitting
evidence that physical and virtual infrastructure, stakeholders’ rela sectors (including energy, transport, waste/wastewater, industry, and
tionship and user engagement are key elements for the development of agriculture). In total, 362 cities1 (hereinafter called eligible cities)
the full climate mitigation potential associated with CE (Viglioglia et al., located in all EU Member States and beyond filled out the Expression of
2021). Interest (EOI) questionnaire in order to participate in the Mission. As the
As CE-strategies implemented at urban scale can have a significant questionnaire comprises more than 370 questions, the resulting dataset
impact on climate change (Christis et al., 2019), several research pro represents an unprecedented compendium of cross-sectoral and sectoral
jects have explored how cities around the globe can become more cir information on where cities with the ambition to reach zero emissions
cular. For instance, in (Dagilienė et al., 2021), the authors looked at stand in terms of climate mitigation and GHG emissions reduction. The
barriers and solutions to circularity in Lithuanian municipalities. They questions cover aspects of preparedness, capacity, ambition, and holistic
created a framework of circular solutions for local governments by thinking in climate action, including cities’ awareness and actions
mapping national and foreign practices through five perspectives (i.e. concerning CE as well as their vision for the future. The analysis of such
learning, sharing vision, reflexive governance, regulation, and negotia responses offers a picture of the landscape and wealth of existing
tion in networks). From their research, it is evident that local policies CE-solutions and actions taken by European cities. Through the analysis
should move from a waste management orientation that only responds of the EOI questionnaire, this study aims at addressing the following key
to regulatory requirements to a wider implementation of CE principles. research questions:
In line with a similar study about circularity shifts in Swedish environ
mental policy (Johansson and Henriksson, 2020), an identified problem - How deeply have CE principles permeated the policy logics of local
is the lock-in of legislation in the linear economy. A similar research was governments?
conducted for Danish municipalities (Christensen, 2021), Finnish re - What is the role of waste management and circularity in the strategic
gions (Vanhamäki et al., 2020), and Dutch cities (Campbell-Johnston planning for climate neutrality?
et al., 2019). Using document/discourse analysis, these studies - Do cities leverage CE-strategies to create a cross-sectoral and more
concluded that municipalities could function as an important agent of holistic approach to climate challenges?
change to support and facilitate the transformation towards a circular - What are the CE-strategies with which cities are more familiar and,
economy through multiple modes of governance, public procurement, conversely, which areas can and should become more circular?
tendering and zoning laws, suasive measures, capacity building, and - What are the key elements for the success of a CE policy in cities
knowledge exchange. However, multi-level policy integration is neces across different sectors?
sary to alter value chains, enable a greater reduction in material inputs, - What are the barriers that cities face in materialising plans and vi
and bend the linear mindset of relevant stakeholders. The emphasis on sions for circularity and how can they be overcome?
stakeholder engagement for the identification and validation of circular
solutions is also mentioned in (Sánchez Levoso et al., 2020), where the The analysis yields an immediate snapshot of current practices and
authors developed a methodological framework aimed at facilitating the plans for further improvements that can inspire other cities on the same
understanding and application of CE-strategies in urban systems, journey, inform scientists on key technical and technological gaps,
through a network of potential decisions and different convergence and support policymakers, practitioners, and the public to create an enabling
divergence points. environment, and increase the acceptance of CE-related climate-neutral
Even if various CE-strategies have been explored in literature (e.g. strategies and technologies in the urban domain.
(Christis et al., 2019; Petit-Boix et al., 2022; Petit-Boix and Leipold, The next Section describes the dataset, the city sample, and the
2018)), so far, solutions are either at pilot or conceptual level. In addi methodology. Section 3 presents the main results on i) the policy
tion, the implementation of CE from a local governance point of view
has been examined in a rather fragmented manner (Campbell-Johnston
et al., 2019; Dagilienė et al., 2021), focussing on small groups of cities or 1
Whenever referring to answers provided in the EOI questionnaire, the term
on specific regional/national contexts (e.g. (Cavaleiro de Ferreira and “cities” is used to signify those representatives who have contributed, e.g.
Fuso-Nerini, 2019; Christis et al., 2019; Gravagnuolo et al., 2019)). municipal employees, urban planners, specialists, designers and consultants.
2
evolution to align with the target of climate neutrality, ii) the best (Ulpiani et al., 2023a, 2023c).
practices and interventions that hold promise in terms of scalability, iii) As displayed in Fig. 1, the analysis performed in this study builds on a
the emerging frontiers for enhanced circularity, and iv) the barriers/ subgroup of questions that have direct or indirect relevance to CE and
gaps/assistance needs that cities perceive in zeroing their emissions. waste management (see Supplementary Material, Note 1). The dataset is
Finally, Section 4 presents a critical discussion on the role of both local screened to compare current and future policies, measures and strategies
authorities and scientific communities in delivering more circular and to help cities reach a carbon-neutral and waste-free status, decarbonise
sustainable cities and lifestyles. the flows of goods and materials, and bend the input-output linearity
into more circular patterns and more symbiotic relationships whereby
2. Materials and methods by-products or waste products (energy, materials, water) from one
process can become raw materials for another. Cities were asked to
The EOI dataset contains the answers of 362 cities to 374 questions, select the types of policies and policy instruments they leverage in these
including descriptive information (e.g. population, type of administra domains and those they intend to deploy to close the gap to climate
tive unit, land area) and quantitative/qualitative information on current neutrality by 2030. Separate collection practises are analysed to seize
GHG emissions and climate action with particular focus on energy, the potential for optimised routes of re-use, recycling, re-purposing, and
transport, waste/wastewater, and digitalisation. In addition, the EOI conversion for multiple waste streams. Cities were also invited to single
explores the city visions on how to reach climate neutrality by 2030 and out up to five key measures they have implemented or are implementing
includes information on financing, partnerships, governance, as well as that stand out in terms of impact, innovation, resource-efficiency, cost-
barriers and risks. Detailed and cross-sectoral investigations on aspects efficiency, time-efficiency, and/or replicability and that could represent
related to emissions and risks in delivering (net) zero emissions by 2030 best practices. In addition, cities could highlight up to three in
can be found in (Ulpiani et al., 2023b; Ulpiani and Vetters, 2023), while terventions that could be scaled-up in the future to curb emissions and
a dedicated analysis on the role of renewable energy sources, energy initiate more virtuous lifestyles. Finally, cities were invited to reflect
efficient solutions, and building-level interventions is carried out in upon the gaps, barriers, risks, and assistance needs they identify in the
Fig. 1. Methodological approach.
3
transition to climate neutrality. Closed questions were analysed via waste/wastewater policies. The green boxes to the right indicate by how
descriptive statistics and relationship analysis, while open questions much the percentage of eligible cities tackling specific areas would in
were analysed using text mining, which consists of text pre-processing crease compared to those currently addressing the same areas. Both in
(e.g. lemmatisation, stopwords removal), tf-idf analysis (i.e. term current and future policies, municipal waste prevention and industrial
frequency-inverse document frequency statistical analysis), and k- symbiosis between local businesses stand at the very top and very bot
means clustering. The algorithm is thoroughly described in Supple tom of the ranking, respectively, indicating the areas where cities feel
mentary Material, Note 2. Text mining was used to instruct and ease the the power to act the most and the least. However, industrial symbiosis
manual reading of the cities’ replies according to homogeneous narra will receive much more attention (+16.6%). As indicated in red font in
tives and city profiles. In addition, a dedicated text mining exercise was Fig. 2, only 5 other areas will be addressed by 10+% more cities in the
performed based on the keywords “circularity” or “circular” future: sustainable buildings (with an outstanding +26.8%), circular
+“economy” to spot all contexts and ways in which the topic was economy business models (+17.7%), food waste prevention (+17.4%),
addressed. The EOI questions (most of which were not compulsory) are wastewater reuse (+17.1%), and redirecting food surplus and food
split between single/multiple choice questions, open free-text questions scraps (+15.8%). Four areas are investigated only in terms of future
and conditional questions that depend on the responses in preceding policies. Of these, ‘Other innovative measures promoting the circular
questions. As such, even if the whole cohort of 362 cities that answered economy concept’ is selected by almost 70% of the eligible cities, ‘Up
the EOI questionnaire is considered in the analysis, the sample size is grade of wastewater treatment’ by 54.7%, ‘Waste heat recovery’ by
always specified in the following analyses as respondents may vary in 51.7%, and ‘Anaerobic digestion’ by 45.6%.
number on a question-by-question basis. The cities represent all EU Overall, in terms of circularity, the use of recycled and recyclable,
Member States as well as Türkiye, United Kingdom, Norway, Israel, renewable and sustainable materials and CE-business models aimed at
Albania, Iceland, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. The city encouraging the reuse, repair and/or recycling of products are key
size ranges from 11,000 to 15 million inhabitants, spanning various future areas, as indicated by 85.6% and 84.3% of the eligible cities.
climate zones from subtropical to arid and from temperate to polar cli Circular efforts in biowaste and food redirection will be strongly
mates. Furthermore, the cohort of cities is characterised by a highly emphasised in the near future, yet currently less than 80% of cities are
diverse starting point in emissions baselines, emissions accounting and tackling these areas. In terms of waste avoidance, litter prevention in
target setting, and climate mitigation strategic planning as analysed in public spaces and/or marine litter prevention as well as food waste
(Ulpiani et al., 2023b). prevention form part of cities’ future policies in over 67% of the cases
and of current policies in over 61% of the cases. Areas related to
3. Results wastewater are more rarely incorporated in current policies, with
‘Stormwater management’ and ‘Wastewater reuse’ selected by about
3.1. Policy evolution 55% and 40% of the eligible cities respectively, however the increment
in the number of cities willing to address these areas in the future is
Devising efficient policies requires evidence-based planning. How substantial. Less than half of the eligible cities (47%) tackle energy re
ever, only 62.3% of the eligible cities account for the emissions from the covery, in the form of ‘Efficient waste/landfill gas to energy/fuel’ with
waste and wastewater sector in their inventories, with three thirds of the even less cities looking at ‘Efficient thermal treatment/landfill man
rest indicating that emissions are currently not estimated. Despite this, i) agement’ (42.5%) that may facilitate waste-to-energy conversions.
90% of the eligible cities collect/report data on waste (generation, Energy-related areas feature at the bottom of the ranking in the future
collection and treatment) at least annually, ii) almost 70% have set too, which may indicate a lack of technological thrust and/or trust in
emissions reduction targets for the waste sector, iii) almost 30% have this domain.
promulgated dedicated action plans, and iv) almost 90% have indicated As displayed in Fig. 3, 95.3% of the eligible cities identified the
that they have the legal powers to act/make policy decisions in this field. policy instruments that they plan to use to support the necessary actions
Fig. 2 shows the ranking of the areas that cities aim to tackle in future in the afore-mentioned policy areas. ‘Awareness raising and training’
Fig. 2. Areas addressed in future waste/wastewater policies (bars) and increment in the percentage of cities tackling each option compared to current policies
(green boxes).
4
Fig. 3. Future policies in waste/wastewater management – policy instruments.
stands out as the most common policy instrument (88.7% of the eligible circular economy and approaches that encourage waste valorisation
cities), followed by ‘Recycling targets for household or municipal waste’ through collection, recycling, reuse, and conversion. Through these
(over 75%). All other well-identified options are ticked by less than 60% measures, cities are gaining experience in the treatment of a wide
of the cities, with 5 instruments chosen by less than half of the eligible spectrum of waste types, including gardening waste, packaging, glass,
cities (‘Bans or restrictions on single use or non-recyclable materials’, light bulbs, clothing/footwear textiles, bulky furniture, mattresses,
‘Grants and subsidies’, ‘Bans or restrictions on the discharge of untreated batteries, machinery, and vehicles. Door-to-door collection and reversed
sewage’, ‘Third party financing, Public Private Partnerships’, and ‘Codes collection services were highlighted as particularly impactful measures
or regulations for hazardous chemicals’). This may suggest that most by several cities, together with pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) schemes and
cities may not have the power or the intention to impose bans or re filling-level sensors for waste bins (Akram et al., 2021; Rossi et al., 2022;
strictions to align with the planned agenda, and that they do not envi Taleb and Al Farooque, 2021). Other cities praised the integration of
sion a significant contribution from the private sector in this domain. waste disposal sites at neighbourhood level for the higher recycling and
Regardless of the specific policy instrument, a fundamental enabler reuse rate of different categories of household wastes or out-of-use items
to circular resource management is the separation of waste into different compared to door-to-door collection (Pasang et al., 2007). Cities are also
streams. Of the 352 cities that specified which types of waste are investing in centralised recycling and energy recovery facilities at city or
collected separately (Fig. 4), more than 90% target glass, plastics, regional level, where waste is recycled, electricity is injected into the
cardboard and paper as well as electrical waste and metals. Over 80% grid, and exploitable materials and sub-products are extracted and
and 70% separately collect hazardous waste and garden waste, and food reused (e.g. ash for construction applications). In other cases, specific
waste respectively. centres (e.g. recycling malls or second hand, recondition and upcycling
centres) are devoted to repairing and upcycling through a variety of
3.2. Current action: key measures specialised shops where goods for sale have been recycled or reused, or
organically or sustainably produced. Conversely, for high-value re
In total, only 71 cities described key climate change mitigation/GHG sources (e.g. biodiesel and nappies), decentralised solutions have been
reduction measures exclusively dedicated to the sector of waste and explored.
wastewater management. The resulting set of 74 key measures is ana To avoid waste, cities described overarching measures to extend the
lysed under different categories (see Fig. 5). Measures could fall under lifetime of products, machines and materials, and better establish sym
multiple categories. bioses across different users. In their effort to create the basis for more
Most of the key measures (80%) focus on different aspects of a circular concepts, cities have implemented or are implementing new
Fig. 4. Separate waste collection per waste type.
5
Fig. 5. Classification of key measures dedicated to the waste/wastewater sector.
eco-practices to reduce waste at source, typically by banning the use of Another set of measures, accounting for nearly 30% of the total, are
disposable plastics in cities’ institutions and in the organisation of public devoted to increasing the efficiency and share of renewables at plant
events. In this domain, and to favour self-sustained circularity, cities are level. The majority of the remaining measures look at critical enablers
also stimulating collect-and-sell practices, where the revenues arising across digitalisation, regulation, planning and financial instruments, as
from the collection and sale of old items are transparently managed to well as awareness raising and education.
finance e.g. reuse centres or environmental education. Unsold items are
donated to non-governmental organisations working with homeless 3.3. Future action: scalable interventions
people or socially disadvantaged residents. Against this general back
drop, some cities highlight the efforts in avoiding, collecting, and Scalability is critical to ensure that the climate neutrality target can
recycling/reusing/converting specific waste types, notably construction be reached in less than a decade. Indeed, for would-be climate neutral
waste and biowaste. These sectors are analysed in detail in Section 3.5. cities, it is fundamental to identify solutions (within their own territories
Fig. 6. Scalable interventions: wordcloud plot of the city descriptions and categorisation of topics and waste streams.
6
and through their peers/networks) with proved efficacy, possibly raising. Other scalable interventions deal with circularity in biowaste,
reduced rollout time, and better risk anticipation to be scaled up by construction waste, and energy flows (see Section 3.5), with some tar
2030. In describing such interventions in the waste/wastewater domain, geting increased circularity in the wastewater sector as schematised in
many cities focused on increasing circularity in their territories (Fig. 6). Fig. 7.
In particular, among the 765 scalable interventions analysed, 189 Beyond circularity, scalable interventions are also devoted to the
mainly focus on CE solutions with the goal to establish a fruitful regu decarbonisation of waste collection. To gradually ensure emission-free
latory, purchasing, and tendering framework. Most typically, cities aim waste collection, many cities are looking into replacing their waste
to upscale zero-waste neighbourhoods and CE-districts in view of collection fleet and utility machinery with more efficient and cleaner
gradually extending the zero-waste space to the whole city. In this effort, alternatives, mostly involving electric but also hydrogen- or CNG-
cities tend to leverage training and awareness-raising initiatives for powered vehicles. The effort of decarbonising waste collection is
citizens, professionals and businesses. Similarly, CE-districts, involving becoming more and more supported by route optimisation using AI
residents and businesses, are promoted as catalysts for increased circu systems in combination with the installation of sensor-equipped bins
larity, innovation, and technology transfer. reporting the degree of filling and other status information. In some
In addition, cities aim at promoting initiatives that stimulate the cases, these containers (and their sensor equipment) can be powered by
growth of circular businesses and the symbiosis of industry and small/ solar panels and can crush or compact their content. In addition, alter
medium enterprises (SMEs), through grants, public procurement, native ways cities are considering to reduce fuel consumption and
rewarding schemes, financial incentives, technical assistance for start- emissions in waste collection include pop-up container parks and recy
ups, or extended partnerships with the private and industrial sector cling points or underground pipeline systems for storage and transport
and knowledge institutions. This approach is particularly relevant for of municipal waste.
expanding the existing CE-cluster of businesses, especially in emission Finally, cities aim at upscaling efforts to increase energy efficiency
hot spots, such as port areas, to help build zero-waste zones. The planned and renewables in relation to waste collection and treatment (31 in
expansion would be enabled by the creation of a new CE infrastructure terventions) and to wastewater management systems and facilities (56
with dedicated parks, R&D&I centres, and waste/CE observatories. At interventions). Cities envisage an increased use of solar energy and the
least seven cities (with multiple examples in The Netherlands) plan to installation of heat pumps capturing wastewater heat, along with energy
further upscale circularity (business) hubs based on specific residue saving measures. Energy-intensive equipment will be replaced with
streams like textiles, wood or plastics. Examples of circular business more efficient technologies, tele-management systems to reduce losses
models for plastic waste include reuse with industrial 3D printers, and discontinuities, and smart metering.
dismantling and separation of e.g. CDs/DVDs into multiple plastic Despite the breadth of scalable interventions described by cities, only
mono-flows, industry clusters dedicated to circular polymers, or pyrol 19 come with an estimation of the impact in terms of emissions reduc
ysis and upgrading plants able to process hard-to-recycle plastic waste tion, energy saving or energy generation potential. As such, a quantifi
into marketable and high-quality pyrolysis derivatives to reincorporate cation of the contribution to closing the GHG emissions gap is not
in the petrochemical industry. Another type of circular infrastructure possible at this stage.
that cities aim to upscale encompasses repair cafes, sharing/second-
hand facilities and reuse centres. These often fulfil other purposes,
including i) social services (e.g. offering materials, books, toys, or sports 3.4. Emerging frontiers for enhanced circularity
equipment), ii) job creation; iii) promotion of recycling and other start-
ups using circular business models, and iv) education and awareness In this section, we focus on solutions and practices that, while being
well known and explored in scientific literature, have not been
Fig. 7. Strategies suggested by eligible cities to enhance circularity in the wastewater sector.
7
translated into broad and widespread application in cities appropriate containers and specific bags/bins for the collection of bio
(beyond pilot projects or demonstrators). As such, we single out waste to be transformed into organic compost or energy. Cities also flag
“emerging” frontiers compared to business-as-usual city practices for measures aimed at reducing food wastage by balancing overproduction
construction waste, biowaste and energy generation from waste. and food security, by expanding bio-market gardening and local distri
bution networks, by increasing the share of locally produced organic
3.4.1. Construction waste food, and by reducing the share of red meat and other emission-intensive
According to the analysis of key measures, so far, cities have made food in the meals served by the municipality (e.g. to school children and
sporadic attempts to better handle construction and building materials the elderly). Some Swedish cities are also working on calculating the
with a few examples of recycling depots and second-hand shops to re- climate impact of restaurant menus to provide low-impact meals and are
inject used materials into the construction or other sectors. In sharp assessing the amount of food waste and CO2 emissions from restaurants,
contrast, a quarter of the scalable interventions dedicated to CE concerns whilst working to maximise waste avoidance.
construction waste and the reuse and recycling of building materials. The separate collection of biowaste forms a recurring element of
Cities aim at operating and creating new circular construction hubs and future waste management strategies and is highlighted in the scalable
material platforms to reuse, repurpose or upcycle construction waste interventions of 115 cities. This underlines the importance of improving
material. These are oftentimes developed into full-service nodes or in the management of this waste stream and its potential for contributing
tegrated in circular business models, by: to GHG emission reductions in the waste and the energy generation
sectors, while reducing landfilling and related costs for collection,
- developing, together with third parties, the necessary competences transport, sorting, and processing. Home and community composting
and technologies/techniques to ensure that reuse is the first choice in will be strengthened via the provision of individual and shared/com
every construction project; munity composters, the installation of composting zones in public
- forming partnerships with the private sector and expanding the parks/sites or by offering garden waste grinding services, alongside
range and categories of materials collected and offered for reuse; awareness raising, trainings and technical support. Bio-based pro
- maximising the use of eco-materials in the development of public ductions from organic waste, such as bio-hydrogen, bioplastics, PLА and
spaces; bio-asphalt, are expected to be scaled up in the context of the Mission.
- promoting emission-free construction sites; At least 38 cities consider measures for the reduction or avoidance of
- creating sorting and storage facilities for reused construction mate food waste as an important instrument to directly and indirectly reduce
rials, using remediated brownfields and contaminated sites; GHG emissions. For instance, several cities are planning urban resource
- providing (free of charge) reusable sorted construction waste like hubs to link supply and demand for food surpluses and organic waste
tiles, wood, plywood or roofing sheets in municipal recycling streams. Another approach is to develop advanced registration systems
centres. for meals in school canteens or labelling systems for restaurants and
hotels with menu booking platforms to prevent food wastage.
Cities are pioneering innovation in circular construction processes
and the recycling of building materials. In Finland, standardised meth 3.4.3. Energy generation
odologies and processes are under development to reuse construction In the context of the Mission, renewable energy generation is a key
material in refurbishment and new building projects, through specific instrument to decarbonise at scale along with energy efficiency mea
criteria in land allocation agreements. In France, working groups of sures, as emerges from a dedicated analysis (Ulpiani et al., 2023c).
companies and professional waste collection centres work to support the However, waste management and its final way of utilisation are addi
implementation of “Extended Responsibility Sectors” for construction tional emission-curbing levers. Waste-to-energy is a form of energy re
products and materials in the building sector. In the United Kingdom, covery that cities are planning to explore further. It refers to the process
cities require reclamation, storage, and categorising of waste materials of generating energy in the form of electricity and/or heat from the
from over-estimated contracts, with plans to mainstream the approach primary treatment of waste, or the process of transforming waste into a
within the local construction industry. fuel source, such as methane, methanol, ethanol or synthetic fuels
In other cases, the focus is on prevention and reduction of con (Sharma et al., 2020). In total, 148 scalable interventions fully or
struction and demolition waste from an early stage of project design by partially fall under this broad category, further divided into the pro
selecting biodegradable raw materials, minimising resource consump duction of biogas, hydrogen, waste heat utilisation, and biochar. While
tion in their manufacture, or privileging multifunctional materials. The the primary focus is on organic solid waste, separation of wastewater
need to use new low-carbon or bio-based building materials is included (such as separating black water from grey water) also opens up the
in procurement specifications. potential for better reuse for energy generation.
Another aspect emphasised by some cities is land management and Biogas production from organic waste comes with a number of
the reuse of soil waste in construction projects to improve agricultural reusable products and can therefore play an important role in improving
soils, for instance. In Finland, pre-calculating and managing the exca circularity for organic products and nutrients (Fagerström et al., 2018).
vated landmasses created by construction activities is possible by using a In describing cross-sectoral key measures, a variety of cities point at
regional digital ground mass coordination and monitoring system aimed biogas production and its local use as a key lever to eradicate GHG
at reducing emissions from soil transport between construction sites. emissions, praising its excellent contribution to renewable energy gen
Circular construction practices are in many cases enabled by eration and to closing the loop of nutrition from food waste and sewage.
different smart and digital solutions, e.g. digital platforms used for Several measures are described to stimulate the production and uptake
mapping harvestable materials and flows and for monitoring the of biogas, including i) the installation of biogas tank stations, ii) the
embodied carbon and resource footprint of buildings. purchase of vehicles (including private vehicles, buses, garbage trucks,
and vessels) running on biogas, iii) biogas production at sewage water
3.4.2. Biowaste treatment plants, and iv) dedicated public procurement measures. Many
A number of cities are paying special attention to the separate eligible cities have invested in biogas facilities to treat food waste and
collection and reuse of biowaste (16 key measures) from, for example, sewage, to upcycle nitrogen and phosphorus, and to produce biogas for
school canteens, restaurants, kindergartens, markets, grocery shops, and the industry/transport/energy sector and bio-fertilisers for the agricul
other tertiary buildings as well as households, while improving the tural sector. As a result, former waste storage areas have been turned
collection of green waste from public parks and gardens. Most typically, into power plants and green areas. This goes in tandem with measures to
cities are introducing public compost installations or offering create climate-smart and low-impact food systems. Concerning future
8
action, 64 cities reported scalable interventions to expand or upgrade transformation, including cultural barriers’. This is the only option
the production of biogas through anaerobic digestion, mainly using flagged by more than half of the eligible cities, exacerbated by
separately collected biowaste as raw material but also sewage sludge
and agricultural residues. Many cities plan to substitute natural gas with ‘Limited community engagement and support’ (20.2%) and, in some
bio-methane, which would be injected into the gas network or used to sporadic cases, by the ‘Spread of illegal practices in shipping, dumping
fuel waste trucks or other large transport vehicles, including public or burning waste’ (11.9%) and/or by the ‘Difficult balancing between
buses, trucks, and vans. promoting recycling and protecting consumers against harmful chemi
Several cities are assessing, expanding and/or improving their cal substances in recycled materials’ (8.3%).
hydrogen production capacity as a way to treat waste and wastewater
and to produce energy. Feasibility analyses are taking place for the - In terms of infrastructure, almost half of the eligible cities (49.2%)
installation of electrolysers at waste-to-energy plants for the production pointed at the ‘Lack of infrastructure for circular economy measures’
of green hydrogen intended for sustainable mobility initiatives and for which is a prerequisite to build virtuous symbiotic loops amongst
direct injection into the city’s gas distribution network. The production citizens, industries, and services that keep materials longer in the
of orange hydrogen generated by waste-to-energy power stations is also production chain and extend their use.
foreseen for use as a sustainable fuel for heavy municipal vehicles. In - From a technical and planning perspective, ‘Insufficient waste sep
total, 13 scalable interventions also referred to the capture and uti aration and quality of separated waste’ (45%), ‘Ineffective waste
lisation of waste heat. The sources and processes targeted for waste heat prevention’ (37.6%), ‘Inefficient recycling processes’ (25.7%),
recovery include waste incineration plants, pyrolysis biochar plants, ‘Inefficient energy recovery of waste’ (21.3%), and ‘Downcycling’
food waste processing, black and grey wastewater, and sewage sludge (5%) – namely recycling waste into products of inferior quality and
recycling. Some cities are linking district heating cogeneration to waste reduced functionality – are significant barriers in decreasing order of
heat through a new piping infrastructure and low-temperature district frequency. As almost all of these options rank high, it can be inferred
heating network in combination with heat pumps and thermal buffering. that in the waste/wastewater management sector, major techno
Other cities are mapping waste heat resources and providers in their logical and methodological advancements need to occur to set the
territory while designing the regulatory framework. grounds for an emission-free scenario. However, to do so, efforts
Finally, the conversion of organic material into biochar through need to be made to avoid ‘Insufficient data collection’ (15.7%) and
pyrolysis is being targeted for energy production (electricity and heat thus avert misinformed planning and design.
generation), for improving soil quality and for use in the construction - Policy-wise, the ‘Lack of effective and sustainable waste management
sector. Cities in Scandinavia and Central Europe plan to invest in biochar policy at local level’ is more frequently flagged than the ‘Lack of
production based on garden waste or sludge and plan to expand its uses enabling waste policy at Member State level’ and the ‘Lack of
to concrete and polymer production. enabling waste policy at EU level’ (8.8% versus 8.6% versus 3.3%).
However, the offset between the first two options is extremely nar
3.5. Barriers, gaps and assistance needs in pursuing climate neutrality row and based on a limited pool of cities. Compared to the other
emission-intense sectors, policy barriers appear to be less of a
The above analysis demonstrates that cities are proactively inte concern in terms of waste/wastewater management.
grating waste management and circular economy in their strategic - From a regulatory lens, ‘Weaker norms outside the EU which
roadmap towards climate neutrality. However, the journey is not ex incentivise waste export’ are also flagged by 16 cities (4.4%) which
pected to be unhindered. Fig. 8 shows the ranking of the main barriers/ emphasises the need for a careful estimation of Scope 3 emissions to
gaps/assistance needs envisaged in pursuing climate neutrality by 2030 truly realise emission-free city futures.
in the waste/wastewater management sector. It reveals that:
Twenty-seven eligible cities identified ‘Other’ constraints (out of the
- Cultural barriers are the most common barriers across eligible cities, 28 cities that ticked this option), predominantly associated with
with 59.4% of them having selected ‘Slow behavioural contextual difficulties in the establishment of a functional resource
management ecosystem. The most frequent barrier (4 cities) is the lack
Fig. 8. Main barriers/gaps/assistance needs envisaged by eligible cities in the waste/wastewater sector in pursuing climate neutrality by 2030.
9
of direct control over the process (when the authority is assigned to 4 barriers have so far rarely focused on industrial symbiosis and
another administrative level), yet individual cities also flagged i) slow, wastewater reuse (see table in Fig. 9). On the other hand, they almost
complex and/or disaggregated authorisation processes especially for chorally indicated the integration of i) circular economy business
wastewater treatment plants but also for waste treatment facilities and models ii) more circular and sustainable materials, and iii) municipal
biogas production plants; ii) fragmentation of responsibilities and op waste prevention among future areas of intervention (see table in
erations, and iii) predominance of consumeristic design principles and Fig. 10). In addition, cities that identified behavioural inertia and/or
widespread use of cheaper products produced outside of the EU con ineffective waste prevention as a critical barrier have seldom incorpo
taining harmful chemical substances. Besides planning and management rated sustainable buildings in their current policies, while those that
challenges, other demanding issues are techno-political in nature. Cities highlighted an infrastructural barrier for circular economy measures or
highlighted the lack of economic regulations to support the sector as insufficient waste separation/quality of separated waste seem to have
well as the lack/inadequacy of national EPR (extended producer re little familiarity with redirecting food surplus and food scraps.
sponsibility) schemes on textiles and furniture, or, on the contrary, the
existence of legislative barriers to implement CE principles or ‘monop 4. Discussion
olitical’ situations that hinder multi-actor decision-making. Cities also
find the offer of technologies and techniques inadequate (e.g. for waste Throughout the questionnaire, cities demonstrated awareness of the
treatment and recovery, wastewater recycling, and waste incineration). important role of the waste and wastewater management sector in
In terms of circularity, cities identified disconnections between society reducing emissions, with 70% of the eligible cities indicating that waste/
and industry, difficulties in upcycling and promoting industrial symbi wastewater is being addressed as part of their emission reduction targets
osis, widespread perception of limited waste usability (‘trash status’), or through either specific sectoral plans (26%) or as part of cross-cutting
even challenges in informing/educating high amounts of temporary plans. In total, 80% of the key strategies focus on circularity and re-
citizens (such as tourists or university students) about local rules. evaluation of resources. Nonetheless, in terms of policy evolution, cit
Moreover, there is concern on how to establish a circular economy at a ies will keep prioritising municipal waste prevention and the use of
scale that has meaningful climate benefits. From an economic perspec recycled and recyclable, renewable and sustainable materials, while
tive, respondent cities advocate the need for more resources and funding waste-to-energy and waste heat recovery measures will be considered by
schemes (notably, blended financing). less than half of the eligible cities. This finding aligns with what is
The relationships between frequent barriers (notably, the first four observed in (Dagilienė et al., 2021; Johansson and Henriksson, 2020), i.
barriers in Fig. 8’s ranking) and current/future policies are visualised in e. that local governments appear anchored in business-as-usual or purely
Figs. 9 and 10, respectively. Those cities that indicated at least one of the regulation-driven CE initiatives, while showing little proactiveness in
Fig. 9. Chord diagram connecting the four most frequent barriers in the waste/wastewater sector (B1-B4) to the areas addressed in current policies. For each barrier,
the table shows the three 3 least targeted areas and the associated number of cities. For better visibility, the following short versions are adopted: i) ‘Materials’ for
‘Use of recycled and recyclable, renewable and sustainable materials’; ii) ‘Industrial symbiosis’ for ‘Industrial symbiosis between local businesses’; iii) ‘Litter pre
vention’ for ‘Litter prevention in public spaces and/or marine litter prevention’; and iv) ‘Circular economy business models’ for ‘Circular economy business models,
aimed at encouraging the reuse, repair and/or recycling of products’.
10
Fig. 10. Chord diagram connecting the four most frequent barriers in the waste/wastewater sector (B1-B4) to the areas addressed in future policies. For each barrier,
the table shows the three most targeted areas and the associated number of cities. For better visibility, the same short versions used in Fig. 9 are adopted, plus
‘Innovative circular measures’ for ‘Other innovative measures promoting the circular economy concept’.
strengthening the circular value chain. The responsibility for establish recycling. There is less focus on higher value R-options, indicating the
ing circularity is typically left to the market, which, however, cannot limited approach towards a holistic CE transition and capacity to do so at
replace the effect of multi-level and multi-governance approaches and scale (Campbell-Johnston et al., 2019). Indeed, both current key mea
rethinking of conventional economic development policies in dealing sures and future scalable interventions described in the EOI question
with the complexity and multi-sectoral nature of CE (Pitkänen et al., naire strongly focus on CE approaches that encourage waste valorisation
2016). Nonetheless, the EOI analysis reveals that sustainable buildings, through collection, recycling, and conversion, without putting emphasis
CE-business models, food waste prevention, wastewater reuse, redi on the most circular actions that would result in lower carbon emissions.
recting food surplus and food scraps, and industrial symbiosis between This could be achieved through enhanced circularity, efficiency, and use
local businesses are the six domains were most R&I efforts and most of renewables already at the production stage. Indeed, as cities plan to
investments are likely to be concentrated in the next decade. The most upscale significantly the generation and consumption of renewable en
popular policy instruments are awareness raising, information dissem ergy to advance in the pathway to climate neutrality (Ulpiani et al.,
ination, and regulatory measures. Participatory and partnership ap 2023c), the integration with circular concepts may represent the
proaches to circularity, scope 3 and consumption-based emissions have linchpin to multiply benefits and co-benefits. However, there is also a
already been well developed by eligible cities and include a number of financial dimension that ignites the mechanism of lower value R’s pri
partnerships with the private sector and citizen engagement. This oritisation. In general, measures that have large mitigation potential but
highlights a positive trend for those cities having the ambition to reach require considerable investment seem to be of interest only to a small
climate neutrality in the short haul. In fact, evidence shows that a share of cities, indicating either public funding or public-private part
stakeholder-based approach is crucial to a continuous development to nerships as funding sources. As such, many impactful waste and
wards a society built on a circular economy (Sánchez Levoso et al., 2020; CE-projects requiring high capital investment would not be commonly
Vanhamäki et al., 2020), with education and social innovations as key considered, especially by smaller cities that lack funding and face
long-term tools to achieve higher CE performance (Dagilienė et al., complex administrative and regulatory processes inherited by higher
2021). Both in the past and in the future strategic planning, measures levels of governance. Stimulating public and private investments would
and technologies that directly reduce GHG emissions (including energy set an important step ahead but would also require a fundamental
and resource efficiency and renewables) are outweighed by measures change in the financial system on many levels (Magazzino and Falcone,
which either lead to the avoidance of GHG emission generation 2022). It could be achieved through market-based and regulatory in
(including management and use of organic waste streams or struments such as mandatory green public procurement criteria, grants,
waste-to-energy) or the indirect reduction of GHG emissions (including and financial support programs for an industry-led industrial symbiosis
CE-solutions and practices). This also links to how cities are juggling and for creating long-term assets (i.e. in transportation, energy, and
with the 5Rs of a CE, namely Reduce, Reuse, Remanufacture, Recycle, social infrastructures). In addition, the development of local, national,
and Recover (Ghisellini et al., 2016; Reike et al., 2018). Scientific evi and international coherent environmental policies is a critical initiator
dence highlights that cities are prioritising lower value R-options, e.g. to making circular options more viable, creating new funding
11
opportunities, or setting targets for future development (Pitkänen et al., policies and resulting in higher quality waste streams. The most common
2016). Finally, there is a sense of technological distrust and demotiva use of digital technologies mentioned by eligible cities is the installation
tion. Cities have raised concerns over the technological and methodo of filling sensors at collection points, vehicle sensors and/or cameras
logical requirements/needs to set the grounds for an emission-free coupled with management software to reduce the number and length of
scenario. They stress the inadequacy of the existing offer of technologies trips. EU Regulation, e.g. on a planned Digital Product Passport (DPP)
and techniques, notably for waste treatment and recovery, wastewater within the Circular Economy Action Plan (European Commission,
recycling, waste incineration, and other waste-to-energy applications. 2022b), will help to shed light on components, production processes and
From an environmental perspective, caution is needed to ensure that lifecycles of products, which will facilitate future repair and recycle
circularity leads to reduced emissions and environmental impacts. For processes and could potentially even estimate the environmental foot
instance, increased circularity of wastewater streams could require prints of products. The second recurrent element is the focus on edu
increased energy use (Möslinger, 2019) or certain material value chains cation and awareness raising for the private sector and for citizens.
might be considered circular but not sustainable (e.g. in the case of using Several cities rely on dedicated campaigns or eco-friendly events tar
biofuels) (Velenturf and Purnell, 2021). geting the general public or companies to make their cities circular,
A large group of eligible cities have set the foundation for tackling promote sustainable lifestyles or share best practices for specific waste
scope 3 and consumption-based emissions in their territories, with many avoidance and reduction (e.g. for plastics, food, batteries). Co-creation
good practices that can feed into peer learning for cities that want to with citizens and sustainable development integrated in school
follow suit but have shown less ambition in becoming circular or curricula is emphasised. Some cities promote green and zero-waste
climate-neutral. Despite the proactiveness in elaborating low-carbon or events as part of their CE-interventions and awareness-raising efforts.
zero-waste strategies, the majority of the city plans lack a rigorous The last key element is research and innovation. The expansion of
quantification of the expected impacts. partnerships with universities and technology centres in view of pro
Measuring the contribution of waste management and circularity moting innovation and research is foreseen by cities. Horizon projects
measures in cities appears to be challenging as only 2.5% of the scalable are frequently referenced as supporting the development of
interventions come with an estimation of the quantified impact (emis eco-innovative and participatory solutions on critical streams of mate
sions reduction, energy saving or energy generation potential). Beyond rials. The EOI analysis also discloses three frontiers that represent
quantifying impacts, even just measuring the level of implementation of relatively new endeavours for cities in the pursuit of enhanced circu
CE measures is challenging. Indeed, while multi-sectoral and macro/ larity: construction waste, biowaste, and energy generation from waste.
meso/micro level frameworks to monitor (and set goals for) CE imple Several cities aim at operating and creating new circular construction
mentation in cities are being developed and piloted (Cavaleiro de Fer hubs and material platforms to reuse, repurpose or upcycle construction
reira and Fuso-Nerini, 2019; Henrysson et al., 2022; Muñoz et al., 2022), waste material. In relation to management and use of organic waste
there is still little exploration and agreement on how to track the streams, cities typically focus on reducing food waste and on increasing
progress and impacts of a city’s circularity, which indicators to use, and the separate collection of biowaste and controlled composting. Projects
what data to collect (Avdiushchenko and Zając, 2019; Azevedo et al., can be placed along the bioeconomy waste hierarchy with prevention of
2017; Petit-Boix et al., 2022). waste at the top followed by reuse for human consumption, reuse for
In terms of implementation, eligible cities are operationalising CE animal feed, material recycling, nutrient recovery, energy recovery and
according to different strategies. The majority are in the process of finally disposal (Teigiserova et al., 2020). In energy generation, cities
anchoring CE in their regulatory framework and/or of promoting CE- are expected to boost the production of biogas, hydrogen, and biochar
practices and the application of the waste hierarchy as defined in the while optimising waste heat utilisation.
Waste Framework Directive (European Commission, 2022a), with focus Cities also reflect on barriers, gaps, or assistance needs in the
on prevention, minimisation and reuse. Others concentrate on the decarbonisation of the waste sector. Cultural barriers linked to slow
optimised use of resources and waste reduction through CE-networks behavioural transformation are most common and, at times, com
and systems. Green public procurement, including fully circular pur pounded by limited community engagement and support, and spread of
chasing and tendering, as well as economic and non-economic in illegal practices. Further, cities point towards inadequate infrastructure
centives for companies are among the most frequently mentioned for circular conversion and, at the same time, stress the lack of big and
measures to stimulate circularity. Another strategy is to support the open urban data infrastructure and slow digitalisation (e.g. of city op
growth of circular businesses and partnerships among industries, SMEs, erations) hampering the transformation. Cities also denounce a number
and start-ups. As explained in (Christensen, 2021), municipalities can of inefficiencies (in waste separation, prevention, recycling, and energy
support and boost CE through multiple modes of governance, e.g. by recovery) that may hinder the achievement of the full potential of their
leveraging own assets, providing ownership of utilities and waste com plans. Existing literature confirms such analysis, with evidence that
panies, enforcing rules and/or economic regulation, or by facilitating, community skepticism, policy and regulation inefficiency, lack of
coordinating, collaborating, and encouraging the departure from a financial feasibility and strategic diagnostics, low prioritisation of en
linear mindset. The EOI analysis shows that, indeed, steps are foreseen ergy recovery and waste valorisation, insufficient AI application and
to move to a fully-fledged operationalisation of CE through multiple acceptance due to failures related to data management and security
governance levers. result in ineffective or incomplete societal transformation conducive to
The analysis also reveals that cities unanimously consider a number wider CE implementation (Batista et al., 2021; Bui and Tseng, 2022;
of key enabling elements in the pursuit of zero-waste or zero-emission Fang et al., 2017; Magazzino and Falcone, 2022; Viglioglia et al., 2021).
scenarios. Digital solutions play a critical role in reducing waste- Notably, in (Campbell-Johnston et al., 2019), the authors produced an
related emissions through optimising collection circuits, avoiding in-depth description of specific barriers and limits concerned with
overflowing, monitoring waste flows and tracking materials and prod circularity in Dutch cities. Hard barriers include i) adopting circular
ucts, producing evidence-based management decisions, and creating designs and applying suitable technologies; ii) knowledge of material
incentives for citizens to participate in waste avoidance and improve quality and quantity within the city; iii) financing CE business models;
recycling (Sarc et al., 2019; Viglioglia et al., 2021). This perfectly aligns iv) upscaling pilot projects; and v) low costs of virgin materials. Soft
with one of the key findings in (Dagilienė et al., 2021): to support the barriers include i) measuring CE; ii) multi-level regulatory complexities;
transition to CE, local governments should focus more on smart waste iii) short-term business mentality (linear mindset); iv) knowledge of
management, on automatisation of waste segregation, collection, and useful material applications; and iv) space and logistics. As these bar
route optimisation, as well as on digital apps for creating communica riers are interconnected and interdependent, the authors conclude that
tion and eco-innovations related to waste management schemes and multiple level policy-integration and coordination between scales and
12
actors is necessary to address city level barriers. The EOI analysis, expertise in the fields of circular economy, digitalisation, and emissions
stretched across 35 European countries, endorses this analysis and adds accounting and need to set clear key performance indicators that are
a complex cultural and social dimension to it, linked to cultural inertia, specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. City gov
climate illiteracy, and climate justice concerns. Indeed, as advocated in ernments need to be aware of trade-offs of different solutions (such as
(Johansson and Henriksson, 2020), a weak circularity excludes social energy consumption vs. degree of circularity or costs vs. effectiveness
responsibility and tends to reinforce unequal power relations. There is a and durability). Cities should focus on training, collaborative networks
need to identify and clarify governance challenges with the potential for between peers but also between industry and research institutes, and
creating an unjust prioritisation of social groups and for losing touch implement legislation where needed. As technological and regulatory
with local communities. Such predicaments might result in the dele barriers intertwine with complex social deterrents (mostly linked to
gitimisation of circular urban strategies, and the risk of preventing cultural inertia), multiple level policy-integration and coordination be
sustainable implementations of circular urban pathways (Fratini et al., tween scales and actors would be necessary to avoid forms of delegiti
2019). Nonetheless, the measures presented by eligivle cities highlight mation of circular urban strategies and ensure a just transition. City
the opportunity for a just and social transition. The transition needs to be governments need to ensure that all social groups are involved and
managed consciously by cities not to leave any vulnerable groups vulnerable groups are not negatively affected, for instance by focussing
behind. This could be achieved by providing free (re-)training to ensure on free retraining and renovation of social housing. The analysis further
inclusion in the labour market, green public procurement, and subsidies reveals that financial constraints may result in the prioritisation of
for social housing and renovations as well as by focussing on co-creation cheaper measures that have lower climate mitigation potential. In this
of solutions with all social groups. In addition, interventions should not regard, market-based and regulatory instruments such as mandatory
negatively impact vulnerable social groups. This translates, for instance, green public procurement criteria, grants, and financial support pro
in ensuring a sustainable bioeconomy and in preserving the affordability grams should be explored and innovative financing mechanisms should
of healthy circular food options for all (He et al., 2021). Eligible cities be researched.
shared positive examples of co-design with citizens and different social As concerns scientific efforts, future research strands should focus on
groups for climate neutrality and socioeconomic prosperity, with cir delivering and applying circular economy at large scale. This needs to go
cular infrastructure often fulfilling additional purposes (e.g. social ser beyond pilot schemes or technological improvements for better resource
vices, job creation; start-ups promotion, education and awareness management (from waste avoidance to energy recovery) and it should
raising). Indeed, with a strong conceptualisation of circularity, the also incorporate the governance, economic, and societal instruments to
producers and governments are responsible for creating a closed, ma instil the necessary level of acceptance, participation, and symbiosis to
terial loop limited in size and space, based on the principle of fair dis achieve circularity in the short haul. Notably, more large-scale in
tribution of resources (Johansson and Henriksson, 2020). Finally, in vestigations are needed to identify common challenges and barriers for
agreement with (Vanhamäki et al., 2020), CE-strategies in cities should CE, as well as best practices and particularly impactful instruments and
focus on closing both technical and biological loops, as well as pro monitoring frameworks. In addition, more research should be conducted
moting sustainable energy technologies, new consumption models, and focussing on the environmental and social impacts of different circular
demonstration sites. This would create more business opportunities at economy solutions, to ensure a just transition and minimal negative
the interface of material and energy cycles even if financing challenges environmental impact. Given the fact that this analysis used data from
are involved. Regulations are needed to support the implementation of some of the most ambitious cities in Europe, these recommendations are
effective symbioses emerging from new solutions, but are also essential even more critical for cities that do not yet envision becoming circular
to safeguard the environment and human health when closing biological and climate-neutral by 2030.
loops. Finally, with the adoption of the European Critical Raw Materials Act
in March 2023, a responsible, sustainable, and circular use of resources
5. Conclusions and outlook will be central to upcoming efforts at different governance tiers. This
push should be leveraged to expand the knowledge of technological and
This study examines the answers provided by 362 cities to the non-technological mechanisms underpinning a fair and futureproofing
Expression of Interest questionnaire of the European Mission on 100 circular transition in cities.
Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities by 2030. The analysis sheds light on Overall, this study contributes to the existing knowledge and liter
how cities in Europe and beyond are performing in terms of waste ature on how CE concepts are materialised in cities. It confirms the
management and circularity and how CE principles are leveraged to educated perception that integrating local governance dynamics in the
accelerate the transition to zero emissions. study of circularity is key to fully understand the determinants for the
The analysis showcases the importance of waste management and success of a given strategy. It also confirms and expands the analysis on
circularity for strategic planning in the transition to climate-neutrality the barriers to a legitimate and broad implementation of circular models
with over 90% of cities collecting data on waste and waste manage based on a large pool of cities, which makes the key findings general
ment. Overall, cities having the ambition to reach climate neutrality in izable to a wide spectrum of urban realities. The analysis further pro
less than a decade demonstrate a good degree of integrated strategic vides evidence of a number of perceived inefficiencies and needs (in
planning, creativity and proactiveness in the waste/wastewater sector, waste separation, prevention, recycling, energy recovery, and digital
and see circularity as a key lever to reach the goal. These cities employ isation) that are as much technological as non-technological in nature.
holistic thinking to go beyond waste management and incorporate All these insights can guide future advancements in this domain in a
strategies for better designing, producing, keeping, sharing and repair concerted effort between science and policy-making.
ing products to reduce or revalue waste along its life cycle. The analysis
identified key areas for improved circularity in the construction sector, Disclaimer
the bioeconomy, and the energy generation sector. Using and upscaling
R&I solutions in the field of CE, including digital solutions, is seen as a The views expressed here are purely those of the authors and may
key enabler for enhanced circularity. The focus is also on knowledge not, under any circumstances, be regarded as an official position of the
sharing and collaboration, notably as a means of connecting different European Commission.
cities and experiences. Nonetheless, several barriers remain.
Our study has relevant managerial implications for putting circular CRediT authorship contribution statement
principles into practice. It demonstrates that, to truly accelerate the
circular transition, administrations need to be strengthened with Margot Möslinger: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology,
13
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Giulia Ulpiani: European Commission, 2022b. In: Proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products
Regulation. https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-ecodesign-su
Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation,
stainable-products-regulation_en.
Methodology, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original European Commission, 2021. In: European Missions - 100 Climate-Neutral and Smart
draft, Writing – original draft. Nadja Vetters: Conceptualization, Cities by 2030 - Info Kit for Cities. https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/s
Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – ystem/files/2021-11/ec_rtd_eu-mission-climate-neutral-cities-infokit.pdf.
Fagerström, A., Al Seadi, T., Rasi, S., Briseid, T., 2018. The Role of Anaerobic Digestion
original draft. and Biogas in the Circular Economy. IEA Bioenergy Cork, Ireland.
Fang, K., Dong, L., Ren, J., Zhang, Q., Han, L., Fu, H., 2017. Carbon footprints of urban
transition: tracking circular economy promotions in Guiyang, China. Ecol. Model.
Declaration of competing interest 365, 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.09.024.
Fausing, K., 2020. Climate Emergency: How Our Cities Can Inspire Change. World
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial Economic Forum.
Fratini, C.F., Georg, S., Jørgensen, M.S., 2019. Exploring circular economy imaginaries in
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
European cities: a research agenda for the governance of urban sustainability
the work reported in this paper. transitions. J. Clean. Prod. 228, 974–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.04.193.
Data availability Ghaffar, S.H., Burman, M., Braimah, N., 2020. Pathways to circular construction: an
integrated management of construction and demolition waste for resource recovery.
J. Clean. Prod. 244, 118710 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118710.
The data that has been used is confidential. Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati, S., 2016. A review on circular economy: the expected
transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean.
Prod. 114, 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007.
Acknowledgements Gravagnuolo, A., Angrisano, M., Fusco Girard, L., 2019. Circular economy strategies in
eight historic port cities: criteria and indicators towards a circular city assessment
This study was funded under the Horizon Europe Missions Work framework. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133512.
Hailemariam, A., Erdiaw-Kwasie, M.O., 2022. Towards a circular economy: implications
Programme 2021–2022 (European Commission Decision C(2022)2975 for emission reduction and environmental sustainability. Bus. Strat. Environ.
of May 10, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3229.
Hannan, M.A., Hossain Lipu, M.S., Akhtar, M., Begum, R.A., Al Mamun, M.A.,
Hussain, A., Mia, M.S., Basri, H., 2020. Solid waste collection optimization
Appendix A. Supplementary data objectives, constraints, modeling approaches, and their challenges toward achieving
sustainable development goals. J. Clean. Prod. 277, 123557 https://doi.org/
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123557.
He, P., Feng, K., Baiocchi, G., Sun, L., Hubacek, K., 2021. Shifts towards healthy diets in
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138454. the US can reduce environmental impacts but would be unaffordable for poorer
minorities. Nat. Food 2, 664–672. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00350-5.
References Henrysson, M., Papageorgiou, A., Björklund, A., Vanhuyse, F., Sinha, R., 2022.
Monitoring progress towards a circular economy in urban areas: an application of
the European Union circular economy monitoring framework in Umeå municipality.
Ackerman, F., 2000. Waste management and climate change. Local Environ. 5, 223–229.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 87, 104245 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104245.
Akram, S.V., Singh, R., Gehlot, A., Rashid, M., AlGhamdi, A.S., Alshamrani, S.S.,
Huang, L., Krigsvoll, G., Johansen, F., Liu, Y., Zhang, X., 2018. Carbon emission of global
Prashar, D., 2021. Role of wireless aided technologies in the solid waste
construction sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81, 1906–1916. https://doi.org/
management: a comprehensive review. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/
10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.001.
su132313104.
Joensuu, T., Edelman, H., Saari, A., 2020. Circular economy practices in the built
Avdiushchenko, A., Zając, P., 2019. Circular economy indicators as a supporting tool for
environment. J. Clean. Prod. 276, 124215 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
European regional development policies. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/
jclepro.2020.124215.
su11113025.
Johansson, N., Henriksson, M., 2020. Circular economy running in circles? A discourse
Azevedo, S.G., Godina, R., Matias, J.C., 2017. Proposal of a sustainable circular index for
analysis of shifts in ideas of circularity in Swedish environmental policy. Sustain.
manufacturing companies. Resources. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040063.
Prod. Consum. 23, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.05.005.
Bajželj, B., Allwood, J.M., Cullen, J.M., 2013. Designing climate change mitigation plans
Jurgilevich, A., Birge, T., Kentala-Lehtonen, J., Korhonen-Kurki, K., Pietikäinen, J.,
that add up. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 8062–8069. https://doi.org/10.1021/
Saikku, L., Schösler, H., 2016. Transition towards circular economy in the food
es400399h.
system. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010069.
Batista, M., Goyannes Gusmão Caiado, R., Gonçalves Quelhas, O.L., Brito Alves Lima, G.,
Khatiwada, D., Golzar, F., Mainali, B., Devendran, A.A., 2021. Circularity in the
Leal Filho, W., Rocha Yparraguirre, I.T., 2021. A framework for sustainable and
management of municipal solid waste – a systematic review. Environ. Clim. Technol.
integrated municipal solid waste management: barriers and critical factors to
25, 491–507. https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2021-0036.
developing countries. J. Clean. Prod. 312, 127516 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Magazzino, C., Falcone, P.M., 2022. Assessing the relationship among waste generation,
jclepro.2021.127516.
wealth, and GHG emissions in Switzerland: some policy proposals for the
Bellezoni, R.A., Adeogun, A.P., Paes, M.X., de Oliveira, J.A.P., 2022. Tackling climate
optimization of the municipal solid waste in a circular economy perspective.
change through circular economy in cities. J. Clean. Prod. 381, 135126 https://doi.
J. Clean. Prod. 351, 131555 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131555.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135126.
Möslinger, M., 2019. A CE Indicator Scorecard and Circular Economy Business Model
Bui, T.-D., Tseng, M.-L., 2022. Understanding the barriers to sustainable solid waste
Canvas for the Food and Beverage Industry.
management in society 5.0 under uncertainties: a novelty of socials and technical
Muñoz, H.M.E., Novak, M., Gil, S., Dufourmont, J., Goodwin Brown, E., Confiado, A.,
perspectives on performance driving. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29, 16265–16293.
Nelemans, M., 2022. Tracking a circular economy transition through jobs: method
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16962-0.
development and application in two cities. Front. Sustain. Cities 3, 157.
Campbell-Johnston, K., Cate, J. ten, Elfering-Petrovic, M., Gupta, J., 2019. City level
Pasang, H., Moore, G.A., Sitorus, G., 2007. Neighbourhood-based waste management: a
circular transitions: barriers and limits in Amsterdam, Utrecht and the Hague.
solution for solid waste problems in Jakarta, Indonesia. Waste Manag. 27,
J. Clean. Prod. 235, 1232–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.106.
1924–1938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.09.010.
Cavaleiro de Ferreira, A., Fuso-Nerini, F., 2019. A framework for implementing and
Petit-Boix, A., Apul, D., Wiedmann, T., Leipold, S., 2022. Transdisciplinary resource
tracking circular economy in cities: the case of porto. Sustainability. https://doi.org/
monitoring is essential to prioritize circular economy strategies in cities. Environ.
10.3390/su11061813.
Res. Lett. 17, 21001.
Christensen, T.B., 2021. Towards a circular economy in cities: exploring local modes of
Petit-Boix, A., Leipold, S., 2018. Circular economy in cities: reviewing how
governance in the transition towards a circular economy in construction and textile
environmental research aligns with local practices. J. Clean. Prod. 195, 1270–1281.
recycling. J. Clean. Prod. 305, 127058 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.281.
jclepro.2021.127058.
Pitkänen, K., Antikainen, R., Droste, N., Loiseau, E., Saikku, L., Aissani, L.,
Christis, M., Athanassiadis, A., Vercalsteren, A., 2019. Implementation at a city level of
Hansjürgens, B., Kuikman, P.J., Leskinen, P., Thomsen, M., 2016. What can be
circular economy strategies and climate change mitigation – the case of Brussels.
learned from practical cases of green economy? –studies from five European
J. Clean. Prod. 218, 511–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.180.
countries. J. Clean. Prod. 139, 666–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Corsten, M., Worrell, E., Rouw, M., van Duin, A., 2013. The potential contribution of
jclepro.2016.08.071.
sustainable waste management to energy use and greenhouse gas emission reduction
Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A., 2017. Circular economy for the built environment: a
in The Netherlands. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 77, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
research framework. J. Clean. Prod. 143, 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2013.04.002.
jclepro.2016.12.055.
Dagilienė, L., Varaniūtė, V., Bruneckienė, J., 2021. Local governments’ perspective on
Rehfeldt, M., Herbst, A., Porteron, S., 2020. Modelling circular economy action impacts
implementing the circular economy: a framework for future solutions. J. Clean. Prod.
in the building sector on the EU cement industry. Proc. ECEEE Ind. Summer Study.
310, 127340 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127340.
Gothenburg, Sweden 14–17.
European Commission, 2022a. In: Waste Framework Directive. https://environment.ec.
europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/waste-framework-directive_en.
14
Reike, D., Vermeulen, W.J.V., Witjes, S., 2018. The circular economy: new or refurbished Ulpiani, G., Vetters, N., Maduta, C., 2023a. Towards (net) zero emissions in the
as CE 3.0? — Exploring controversies in the conceptualization of the circular stationary energy sector: a city perspective. Sustain. Cities Soc. https://doi.org/
economy through a focus on history and resource value retention options. Resour. 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104750.
Conserv. Recycl. 135, 246–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.027. Ulpiani, G., Vetters, N., Melica, G., Bertoldi, P., 2023b. Towards the first cohort of
Rossi, M., Papetti, A., Germani, M., 2022. A comparison of different waste collection climate-neutral cities: expected impact, current gaps, and next steps to take to
methods: environmental impacts and occupational risks. J. Clean. Prod. 368, 133145 establish evidence-based zero-emission urban futures. Sustain. Cities Soc. 95 https://
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133145. doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104572.
Sánchez Levoso, A., Gasol, C.M., Martínez-Blanco, J., Durany, X.G., Lehmann, M., Ulpiani, G., Vetters, N., Shtjefni, D., Kakoulaki, G., Taylor, N., 2023c. Let’s hear it from
Gaya, R.F., 2020. Methodological framework for the implementation of circular the cities: on the role of renewable energy in reaching climate neutrality in urban
economy in urban systems. J. Clean. Prod. 248, 119227 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Europe. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 183 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.119227. rser.2023.113444.
Sarc, R., Curtis, A., Kandlbauer, L., Khodier, K., Lorber, K.E., Pomberger, R., 2019. Vanhamäki, S., Virtanen, M., Luste, S., Manskinen, K., 2020. Transition towards a
Digitalisation and intelligent robotics in value chain of circular economy oriented circular economy at a regional level: a case study on closing biological loops. Resour.
waste management – a review. Waste Manag. 95, 476–492. https://doi.org/ Conserv. Recycl. 156, 104716 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104716.
10.1016/j.wasman.2019.06.035. Velenturf, A.P.M., Purnell, P., 2021. Principles for a sustainable circular economy.
Sharma, S., Basu, S., Shetti, N.P., Kamali, M., Walvekar, P., Aminabhavi, T.M., 2020. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 27, 1437–1457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.02.018.
Waste-to-energy nexus: a sustainable development. Environ. Pollut. 267, 115501 Viglioglia, M., Giovanardi, M., Pollo, R., Peruccio, P.P., 2021. Smart district and circular
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115501. economy: the role of ICT solutions in promoting circular cities. Sustainability.
Taleb, M.A., Al Farooque, O., 2021. Towards a circular economy for sustainable https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111732.
development: an application of full cost accounting to municipal waste recyclables. Xiao, S., Dong, H., Geng, Y., Tian, X., 2022. Low carbon potential of urban symbiosis
J. Clean. Prod. 280, 124047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124047. under different municipal solid waste sorting modes based on a system dynamic
Teigiserova, D.A., Hamelin, L., Thomsen, M., 2020. Towards transparent valorization of method. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 179, 106108 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
food surplus, waste and loss: clarifying definitions, food waste hierarchy, and role in resconrec.2021.106108.
the circular economy. Sci. Total Environ. 706, 136033 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Yaman, C., 2020. Investigation of greenhouse gas emissions and energy recovery
scitotenv.2019.136033. potential from municipal solid waste management practices. Environ. Dev. 33,
Ulpiani, G., Vetters, N., 2023. On the risks associated with transitioning to climate 100484 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2019.100484.
neutrality in Europe: a city perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 183 https:// Zeng, X., Li, J., 2021. Emerging anthropogenic circularity science: principles, practices,
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113448. and challenges. iScience 24, 102237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.102237.
15

1 s2.0 S0959652623026124 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0959652623026124 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0959652623026124 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Cleaner Production 421 (2023) 138454

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

Circular economy and waste management to empower a climate-neutral

1. Introduction from waste (especially methane emissions), reduced waste transport

Fig. 1. Methodological approach.

Fig. 3. Future policies in waste/wastewater management – policy instruments.

Fig. 4. Separate waste collection per waste type.

Fig. 5. Classification of key measures dedicated to the waste/wastewater sector.

You might also like