It is quite astonishing: all the different contexts that the term ‘circularity’ or ‘circular economy’ is being used in these days. I started to wonder: how many of us – me included – are actually aware of what it means? It’s actual definition, beyond the suggestion of a ‘cart wheel’ shape, if you like.
Thankfully, the Ellen McArthur Foundation has taken the pain to outline the definition. Or maybe more accurately – outline a circumscription:
A circular economic model
- Designs out waste and pollution
- Keeps products and materials in use
- Regenerates natural systems / the biosphere
I would stretch this a little bit further, and add one more, fourth bullet point:
- It reframes our economic system so as to be socially inclusive
The Circular Economy: What’s the hype all about?
They key point for most of course is the waste reduction promises inherent in the term ‘circular economy’, and the subsequent lower dependency on finite resources.
But, in addition to reducing waste, carbon – or rather carbon footprint – is a key factor. One would think at least.
However, taking as example the research by Quantis International on the fashion industry (‘Measuring Fashion’), when it comes to carbon the insights are rather sobering:
- By 2030, the industry may have a nearly 50% higher production carbon footprint than we have had around 2019.
- Even with near perfect fibre recapture and re-use, at best we could achieve a mere 10% sector-wide emissions reduction within the broader apparel value chain.
- More pragmatically, but already challenging because far from where we are:
Even by reaching the already really ambitious target of recycling 40% of fibres in clothing by 2030, the study estimates the sector would reduce emissions by just 3-6%.
In other words:
Keeping products and materials in use (point 2 from the Ellen McArthur Foundation’s definition above) will not make a truly deep dent in our carbon footprint.
Albeit possibly yes, a significant dent to the tonnage of waste going to incineration, landfill as well as ‘the wild’ every year.
Without question therefore, the remaining 3 points:
- Design out waste and pollution
- Regenerate natural systems / the biosphere
- Reframe our systems so as to be socially inclusive
are hugely important.
Notably more so given the context of many consumer goods industries, including the textile industry.
Because of it’s link to agriculture. And also because its role in creating livelihoods for many to-date still marginalised countries and communities. The industry simply needs to do a much better job than it historically has done.
3 concrete challenges, exemplified
Continuing with the fashion industry theme, 3 specific and concrete problems – or challenges if you prefer the US terminology – that we’re facing are:
1. Reverse Logistics
To full fill even that minimum expectation of 3% to 6% of the current industry footprint, creating functioning and reliable reverse logistics systems is essential.
How do we get all the valuable fibre back into our production cycles?
How does a system look like that encourages, cajoles, forces, the end consumer – us as individual citizens – to return our used items so that the fibre can be recuperated and have another life?
2. Scale out innovation, and quickly.
This again links to two areas specifically:
How can we get rid of fibre mixes, and attain a predominant market share of monopolymer products?
How can we find, scale up, and ensure commercial viability of those up and coming technologies that allow for efficient recuperation of fibre materials?
Whether it is the so-called ‘chemical recycling’ technologies or more traditional ‘mechanical’ technologies does not matter.
What does matter, and immensely so:
- One, the quality of output.
- And two, the resiliency in regards to diverse and potentially low quality input.
Interestingly: most of these points and arguments do actually apply as good as all other consumer goods industries, too. And indeed also other industries like construction, albeit different time lines and financial incentives are at play.
3. New paradigms in treating the land
Fashion and textile has a historically strong link to the agricultural sector. And it has an equally strong, and growing link, to the extractive industry.
Agriculture is both, the biggest challenge as well as possibly the biggest opportunity when it comes to looking at our future as humanity. 70% of freshwater resources are consumed by it according to the World Bank. A huge amount of carbon, pollution and contamination is created by it also.
Extractives shows a similar challenging profile – but can offer significant opportunities when a proper thorough job is done when recovering the land and soil once industry withdraws.
We know that with methods such as Holistic Planned Grazing – to just name one – the soil can recover and start to act as a carbon sink.
We need more of that.
The challenge for consumer goods industries in this regard hence is:
How can the industry live up to the requirements of our time and become leading in recovering the health of soil and land on the one hand, and turn them at the same time into carbon sinks?
And all this while farmers can make a decent livelihood that indeed merits to be labelled that way?
Conclusion
None of the above is optional.
It is a path all industries must sign up to in order to stay in business.
Indeed, in order for our global society to stand the chance of long-term survival.
