Page added on January 20, 2015
Is there a more sustainable way to drill a hole? Consider that power drill stored at the back of a cupboard at home. On average it’s used for six minutes a year. Surely it would be better to rent one when you need to fix that wonky door? But this would require us to reconsider such tools as services not products. And it would need an entirely different approach to design, manufacturing and disposal. If we pulled it off, the Circular Economy would be much closer.
At Davos this year, the Circular Economy finally looks like an idea whose time has come. As the world population continues to grow and economic growth charges on in the emerging markets, with over 500 million middle class consumers in Asia alone by now, the global economy is pushing up against its physical limits given our existing model of production and consumption. At the current rate of growth and levels of resource intensity we will need three planets’ worth of resources by 2050. Obviously, this is impossible. Instead of giving up on material wealth, though, what if we simply became more attuned to “stewarding” precious resources through the value chain and returning them as inputs to new, refurbished or recycled products? The theory is simple enough. The challenge comes in the practicalities.
The Circular Economy requires businesses to rethink more than just their resource footprints and energy efficiency. It demands a more radical remodelling of business models. As Sir Ian Cheshire of retailer, Kingfisher, points out, shifting from buying power drills to renting them requires an organizational and cultural shift. And it requires the integration of technology – from mobile payments to GPS – into product offerings. Kingsfisher owns B&Q, a company that, among other things sells those drills. So, Sir Ian is making a much more profound point about the future of the business. One that requires us to understand much better how digital capabilities and new consumer behaviour is broadening the art of the possible when it comes to selling services rather than products. In Kingsfisher’s case, selling “holes drilled” rather than drills, for example.
The sharing economy is just one of the many business models that constitute the Circular Economy. Accenture has identified five new business models and ten emerging technologies that will define and enable progress. The Industrial Internet of Things and advances in material science are among the key enablers.
The variety of approaches shows that environmental concerns are not always the prime motivator even if they are addressed by new business models. There’s a world of difference between how a company like AirBNB is opening up the market for holiday accommodation without the need to build new hotels, and a company like Nike, which has managed to reduce the amount of material used in its Flyknit Racer shoes by 80%, or a company like Ecovative which is “growing” new packaging materials from (of all things) mushrooms. Throughout the process we’ve been spurred on by recent research from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the World Economic Forum that the world stands to gain a staggering $1 trillion from rolling out circular business models, whilst becoming significantly less wasteful in the process.
But are we likely to see the Circular Economy becoming mainstream any time soon? There are reasons to be optimistic. Governments and regulators are active. I was encouraged by Li Keqiang’s comments at the World Economic Forum’s summer meeting last year for example. Likewise, Janez Potočnik has been nominated for a Circular Economy leadership award at this year’s inaugural “Circulars” (the Circular Economy “Oscars”) at Davos. Potočnik has played a major role in pushing the European Union to adopt an ambitious circular economy package.
Irrespective of policy though, companies are pursuing the Circular Economy more aggressively than is often appreciated. They may be motivated by the chance to enhance brand reputation. But they are also being driven by the need to be more competitive. That means cutting costs but it also means creating entirely new growth opportunities through a product innovation and service differentiation.
The World Economic Forum has helped put the Circular Economy on the map. The finalists at the inaugural Circulars awards illustrate the extent of progress from established players to small start-ups. If the Circular Economy does become mainstream, there may come a time beyond which these new awards no longer serve a purpose.
8 Comments on "The Circular Economy. Great Idea, But Can It Work?"
ghung on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 6:49 pm
Too many people. Too much entropy. Too much bargaining.
ghung on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 6:50 pm
Not enough planet.
Makati1 on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 7:12 pm
“But are we likely to see the Circular Economy becoming mainstream any time soon?”
Not in our lifetime, unless it is the barter and trade among the few who survive, after.
Apneaman on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 7:22 pm
The Circular Economy=Another elite circle jerk. They all got together in Davos because they care about the future of humanity.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/19/luxury/davos-private-jet-flight/
Davy on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 7:47 pm
I guess “green” has lost its allure so now we pitch a “circular economy”. There is no fix for the drag on complexity from limits and diminishing returns. You can reach for the stars in spirit with your exceptionalism driven innovative concepts but reality is looking a different direction. We see this with the smart grid that is not so smart. Many of our cherished concepts are complexity oriented with increased interconnectivity, technology, or systematic shifts to great complexity.
The bumpy descent is about other things altogether. Descent is about abandonment, random decay, irrational actions, dysfunctional networks, and loss of confidence. If one recognizes growth has pole shifted to a bumpy descent all these confidence strategies are doomed. They are attempts at more with less but reality is saying less with less. You might ask what the definition of less with less is. This definition is there will be less stuff to do less activity by less people. Since we are growth educated less with less has a strange meaning. The reality of descent is less resources mean less actions and less actors. Is there anything about less you don’t understand? More has no place in the equation.
Modern industrial man is faces the dusk of growth. This dimming of the light of progress will produce more attempts to spark light to counter the darkness. As the predicaments of limits, diminishing returns, overshoot, and extinctions magnify and multiply a new societal meme will coalesce through an environment of survival. Just read about what the Native Americans went through when their world view was swept away in a few short years. Everything you have come to know and learn is about to be swept away. I am not saying reality, facts, or truths. The fiction, the myth, and the fantasy based upon exceptionalism of human progress are what is in danger.
Go Speed Racer. on Tue, 20th Jan 2015 9:09 pm
Circular economy is circling the drain.
Rita on Wed, 21st Jan 2015 6:14 am
Japan during the Edo Period had a circular economy. It can be done, if we all behave like the japanese. But many cultures and races are much more aggressive than that, they will reach sustainability through war.
ghung on Wed, 21st Jan 2015 9:00 am
Yeah, Rita, and Japan’s population was relatively stable for a long time, estimated around 30 million. Goes to environmental carrying capacity. Their per capita consumption was also a tiny fraction of industrial age consumers’. Their economy was based largely on producing what was needed; not on consuming resources as fast as they possibly could.