‘The transition to the circular economy will be systemic, deep and transformative, in the EU and beyond. It will be disruptive at times, so it has to be fair. It will require an alignment and cooperation of all stakeholders at all levels—EU, national, regional and local, and international’. (European Commission, 2020)
Taking into consideration the geographic, environmental, economic, and social as‐ pects, a low‐carbon CE will be different in each European city and region. The industrial structure of the city or region is also a fundamental feature to be accounted for, with service and resource‐intensive sectors demanding distinctive types of support. For example, the difficulties with applying resource‐efficient transportation, district heating systems, and a sharing economy are much higher in less accessible territories (e.g., islands and peripheral regions), in contrast to metropolitan areas with a larger critical mass. As pointed out in the CoR report (2019), ‘the diversity of territorial contexts translates into different needs and opportunities that circular economic approaches should address’ (CoR, 2019).
The transition towards a CE is a systemic change (European Commission, 2015). Besides the steered engagements impacting every stage of the value chain and key sectors, it is essential to develop a suitable setting for the flourishing of a low‐carbon CE, where resources can be mobilised. Innovation has a leading role in this systemic change. Reconsidering the modus operandi of manufacturing, consuming and converting waste into high‐value‐added goods entails new technologies, processes, services, and business models. Therefore, promoting research and innovation (R&I) is key to fostering the transition, which will be instrumental in supporting the competitiveness and modernisation of the EU industry (CoR, 2019).
Instrumental to effective, timely, and just implementation of the New Circular Economy Action Plan and the Green Deal is the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders and the harnessing of their experience and knowledge (CoR, 2020; CoR 2020a). The engagement is needed at all altitudes, from European to local, and by all actors, including government, industry, academia, civil society, and citizens (OECD, 2020). Including technical support from researchers and institutes, capitalising on the innovative approaches from industry, and encompassing bottom‐up approaches from the wider public improves the resilience of policies, contributes to wider and faster acceptance, and ultimately leads to better outcomes (CoR, 2020). Dynamic, unambiguous, and fitted communication strategies are a prerequisite for the inclusion of all stakeholders. Nevertheless, information alone is insufficient: raising awareness of CE costs, benefits, challenges, and opportunities is equally relevant. Different groups of actors have different objectives and motives for shifting towards the CE. For this reason, it is crucial to encourage all parties to seek common aims, incentivising them to establish framework conditions for building synergies at the correct scale and minimising future liabilities for society at large (OECD, 2020).
In this context, the Triple Helix model (TH) emerges, representing the traditional academia-industry-government nexus. This builds upon political commitment, clear vision for the comparative advantage of the country/region (defined as strategic priorities), mobilisation of stakeholders and triple helix actors for innovation, experimentation and entrepreneurial discovery (Arsova et al., 2020).
However, even though the TH is probably the most widely adopted, it is not comprehensive enough when it comes to complex scenarios such as the devising of CE policies. By focusing on the industry-government-university nexus, it disregards the social dimension. Hence, the “societal voice” is not fully accounted for in the process; as discussed above, this dimension can be of pivotal importance in devising CE interventions, especially in bottom-up settings. Therefore, the need for a more inclusive model arises (Arsova et al., 2021; Arsova et al., 2020a).
The Quadruple Helix Model (QRH) approach widens the TH approach by acknowledging the active role of civil society not only as consumers, but as innovation users as well. Therefore, such an approach acknowledges the contribution to the innovation cycle deriving from the inclusion of civil society. Within this framework, civil society is not intended as a mere user (e.g., citizens not only demand innovative products and services) but they become an important element of the innovation system. Businesses and academia are mainly there to support civil society in innovation activities and the government helix establishes the regulatory framework, but also provides the financial support for devising and applying innovation strategies and policies (Arsova et al., 2021; Arsova et al., 2020a).
However, considering that CE is implying a socio-ecological transition, a respective ecologically sensitive model is indispensable for mobilizing all relevant stakeholders. Hence, the extension of the QRH into the Quintuple Helix model (QNH), by including the natural environment as a new component and new subsystem for knowledge and innovation models. With the inclusion of the fifth component, sustainable development and social ecology became constituents for social innovation and knowledge production (Arsova et al., 2020). More specifically, the CE-centric QNH model (Figure 1) proposed by Arsova et al. (2021) depicts the natural environment (the spatial dimension of the model) as the nucleus of the model. The environment is not perceived as a mere helix; rather, it is seen at the centre of the model, as a driver of innovation, influencing and inspiring the other helices, and moreover as a reference point for all CE efforts, aiming to preserve the natural ecosystem. This is a pivotal feature of the balanced development model, allowing it to drive the transition towards a CE, given that, in a CE context, innovations, technological solutions, and production methods should be true to nature, regenerative, and restorative by design (Arsova et al., 2020a).
References:
Arsova, S.; Genovese, A.; Ketikidis, P. H.; Alberich, J. P.; Solomon, A. Implementing Regional Circular Economy Policies: A Proposed Living Constellation of Stakeholders. Sustainability (2021). 13, 4916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13094916
Arsova, S.; Genovese, A.; Georgantzis‐Garcia, D.; Kennedy, S.; Solomon, A.; Ketikidis, P.H.; Yoon, M. Circular Economy Implementation at a Regional Level: A Preliminary Review. ReTraCe Project Deliverable D4.1 (2020). Available online: http://www.retrace‐itn.eu/wp‐content/uploads/2020/04/ReTraCE‐D4.1.pdf
Arsova, S.; Genovese, A.; Georgantzis‐Garcia, D.; Ketikidis, P.H.; Lowe, B.; Solomon, A.; Yoon, M. Mapping Stakeholder Interactions for Designing CE Policies in Regional Contexts. ReTraCe Project Deliverable D4.2 (2020a). Available online: http://www.retrace‐itn.eu/wp‐content/uploads/2020/07/ReTraCE‐D4.2.pdf
Committee of the Regions (CoR). Is the Green Deal fit for Combating Climate Change in EU Regions and Cities; (2020). Commission for the Environment, Climate Change and Energy, European Commission: Brussels, Belgium.
Committee of the Regions (CoR). The Local and Regional Dimension in the New Circular Economy Action Plan; (2020a). Commission for the Environment, Climate Change and Energy, Committee of the Regions: Brussels, Belgium.
Committee of the Regions (CoR). Implementing a Place‐Based Approach to EU Industrial Policy Strategy (2019). Available online: https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/studies/Documents/CoR_Industry.pdf
European Commission. A New Circular Economy Action Plan For a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe; COM (2020). 98 final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2020. Available online: https://eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN
European Commission. Closing the Loop—An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy; COM (2015). 614 final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. Available online: https://eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614
OECD. The Circular Economy in Cities and Regions: Synthesis Report; (2020). OECD Urban Studies; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, doi:10.1787/10ac6ae4‐en.
Follow us στη σελίδα στο Facebook ΕΔΩ για να βλέπετε όλα τα νέα