Sevasti Chatzopoulou Department of Social Sciences and Business Roskilde University Denmark Circular Economy is an alternative to a traditional linear economy make use dispose in which we keep resources in use for as long as possible extract the maximum value from them whils ID: 700405
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Braking the silos-Transnational networks..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Braking the silos-Transnational networks in the multi-level governance of circular economy
Sevasti Chatzopoulou, Department of Social Sciences and Business Roskilde University, DenmarkSlide2
Circular Economy is
an alternative to a traditional
linear economy (make, use, dispose) in which we keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from them whilst in use, then recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of service life
.
‘an
industrial economy that is
restorative by intention. It aims to enable effective flows of materials, energy, labour and information so that natural and social capital can be rebuilt. It seeks to reduce energy use per unit of output and accelerate the shift to renewable energy by design, treating everything in the economy as a valuable resource. The final objective is an economy that sustains the value of its products, materials, and resources for as long as possible, while at the same time minimizes the generation of waste throughout production and consumption’ (Ellen MacArthur Foundation). Slide3Slide4
Food surplus: Loss and Waste‘Food loss’ or ‘food wasted’ used interchangeably
, but are not the sameFood “loss”: ‘food mass that gets extracted out of the food chain all the way up to, but excluding, retailers and consumers’ (Barneveld et. al., 2016:34)at the production, post-harvest, and
processing.Food “waste”: food mass that gets lost in the end of the food chain, mainly related to behaviour of retailers, food providers and consumers. (Barneveld et al. 2016:34),at the retailer, food donor and consumer level. it is estimated to amount up to 40% (European Commission, 2016). Slide5
Theoretical framework-governance literature
Actors –agency (various levels)
public (public authorities in the EU and the member states)The Commission as policy entrepreneurprivate business operators (producers
, processors and retailers)Donorsrecipients (‘front’ and ‘back line’)
Structures
Institutional settings- Interactions
inter-institutional project platformRegulatory framework Regulations/directives/Decisions and CommunicationsSlide6Slide7
Regulatory instruments
Regulation 178/2002 Art. 11,12,14,17,18,19 and 20; Directive 85/374/EEC, Art. 21 on defective products-mainly manufactured).
Regulation 1639/2001, for the collection of data in the fisheries sector and laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1543/2000;
Regulation 2150/2002 on waste statistics;Regulation 852/2004 Art. 8, §3 on food hygiene, which combines the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP);
Directive 2006/112/EC places an extra tax on food donations
Directive 2008/98/EC) Waste Framework Directive;
Regulation 589/2008 (best before dates for eggs without considering storing conditions);Regulation 1069/2009 to avoid cannibalism for safety reasons (e.g. TSE), and the extra work stemming separation;Regulation 849/2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste statistics;Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers;Regulation 931/2011 on traceability;
Regulation 1169/2011 on food packaging information which has just been updated
;Slide8
Opportunities
Economic Growthnew jobseffective use of resourcesAlternative uses -InnovationAnimal feed,Anaerobic digestion
CompostingIncinerationEnvironmental benefits Resources (water, soil)Reduction of CO2Slide9
Challenges and risks
Regulatory: lack of necessary instrument when it concerns food donation Fragmentation and flexibility due to differences among MS Targets definitions (waste framework directive)Conflicting options in legislation (Hygiene standards)Liability tax (differs among MS based on how they define food banks as business operators or charities)
Value added tax (differ among the member states depending on ‘unsellable’ or ‘sellable’)GovernanceLack of coordination mechanisms Lack of implementation enforcement (waste framework directive)Administrative capacity (The French example)InfrastructureDigitalisationPoints of collection
Quantity and storage SocialOpportunity for whom? SMEs / Large firms/societyStigmatisation/inequality/obesityRace to the bottom of the food quality of the poor or the weak part of the societyFraudSlide10Slide11Slide12
Conclusion
The way food waste is governed is not sustainableRedefine and clarify the regulations Concerning safety Coordinate national legislationEnsure equality in food quality for food surplus recipients
Deal with potential unequal distribution in profits for certain part of the food chainPotential Solutions:Better and clear regulationRequires fundamental ‘mind’ and ‘systemic’ shift not only on how we consume but also on how we produce
Education and training of the consumer, producer and business operators