1,720,985 research outputs found
Scenario of the plastic waste recycling in Emilia Romagna Region (Italy) as effort for the recent European Strategy for plastics in a circular economy
No full text
Plastic waste management: a comprehensive analysis of the current status to set up an after-use plastic strategy in Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy)
Full text linkThe evidence of the impact of the mismanagement of plastic goods in the environment has captured the attention of scientists, policy makers and manufacturers. Urgent measures, regarding a combination of preventing plastic use and massively improving waste management, have been acclaimed by different stakeholders with the common goal to make a more resilient and competitive plastic industry. European Commission has pledged itself publishing the first EU-wide policy framework on plastics. The new recycling targets and calculation method put under pressure the current waste management system (WMS), characterized by fragmentation in responsibilities and underperforming cost-benefit balance. In addition, the public-private governance and the increasing number in waste consortia and platforms contribute to make the waste streams traceability challenging. The following study, resulting from a collaboration between the University of Bologna (UNIBO), the Emilia-Romagna Region (ERR), and the Regional Agency for Prevention, Environment and Energy (ARPAE), investigates the current panorama of plastic waste recycling system in ERR (Italy) with the aim to find out to what extent the current performance fulfils the future scenario established by the European Commission. The market of secondary plastics (SPs) has been investigated as well. The secondary resources, which are no longer waste, are not registered and monitored by official data collection scheme. Data extrapolated from official waste databases are integrated with results coming from individual questionnaire submitted to local recyclers. The identification of the main polymeric streams and, therefore, the exploitation of economic potential represent the preliminary actions to strategically plan an after-use plastic economy whose main goal is having all recyclable and/or recycled plastic packaging by 2030
Designing a new institutional setting to implement the 2030 Agenda: evidence and research orientation
No full textVALORIZATION OF RARE EARTH ELEMENTS FROM END-OF-LIFE FLUORESCENT LAMPS: A CONTRIBUTION TO URBAN MINING
Full text linkIn recent decades, Rare Earth Elements (REEs) have assumedfundamental place
in the electrical and electronic (EE) industry as a result of the increasing interest
in low-energy and intelligent technologies. Availability of those elements in limited
area of the globe, the complexity of extraction processes and the high costs of their
valorization negatively influence the supply chain to such an extent as to jeopardize
the future offer of EE equipment. This issue is particularly acute in Europe where all
REEs are imported, particularly from China that has a dominant position in the global
market. To contrast this dependence and ensure a stable future demand, industrial
stakeholders have embarked on an ambitious path aimed at recovering REEs from
EEE waste. Indeed, the promotion of policies and measures for a circular economy
has identified in urban mining the way to address this challenge.Cities are considered as a reserve of minerals, although applied research is still in its infancy and
currently only 1% of REEs is recovered. Whilst handling waste, fluorescent lamps
proves mainly challenging due to the presence of hazardous substances; however,
they yield the highest purity rare-earth oxides. This article represents a preliminary
multi-criteria analysis aimed at assessing the feasibility of launching an urban mining project based on the valorization of REEs from fluorescent lamps. The work is the
result of the activities undertaken by the Italian WEEE company DISMECO in collaboration with the University of Bologna, paving the way for a more profitable circular
economy for REEs
From cooperation to collaboration: value co-creation and preservation for circular bio-economy
No full textReporting and managing circular economy: are standards walking on common ground?
No full textMeasuring circular economy (CE) has gained increasing attention among scholars and practitioners in the
last ten years (Kirchherr et al., 2017; 2023). Despite the flourishing literature (Ghisellini et al., 2015; 2016),
the multitude of metrics, composite indicators and tools led to a heterogeneity of approaches (Murray et al.,
2017; Saidani et al., 2018) and, consequently, to “a lack of a structured and standardized method” hindering
replicability and comparability (De Pascale et al., 2021; Opferkuch et al., 2023). For their nature, standards
address this issue by promoting common understandings and practices (Tecchio et al., 2017; Flynn and
Hacking, 2019). Regarding CE management, the first standards aimed to set principles (BSI 8001:2017)
and support the implementation of management systems (XP X30-901:2018). More recent standards (ISO
59020 and UNI/TS 11820: 2022) are aimed, instead, to establish a common language “to harmonize the
understanding of the circular economy and to support its implementation and measurement” (Heras‐
Saizarbitoria et al., 2023). Furthermore, efforts are currently envisaged in CE disclosure (Opferkuch et al.,
2021), as registered by GRI-306 and ESRS E5 on Resource Usage. Nevertheless, the plethora of competing
standards may hinder the uptake of CE among businesses. In this sense, it is compelling to investigate
commonalities and differences among those standards, and how indicators for internal decision-making and
external reporting are interconnected and jointly lead to the ultimate aspiration of CE model to retain the
intrinsic value of materials and products along value chains (European Commision, 2015).
Our study aims to fill this knowledge gap by adopting a qualitative content analysis (Neuendorf, 2002;
Krippendorf, 2018) of the most relevant standards for management and reporting CE. A coding framework
has been adopted to categorize and classify the standards’ structures and contents. The coding process was
performed by two authors and diverging coding results were discussed with a third researcher to reach
consensus.
Results show how some standards present features that are still anchored to a recycling economy, while
others adopt a more comprehensive concept of CE linked with sustainable development goals. Our results
highlight differences and similarities in CE concepts and KPIs among standards, suggesting caution when
boards are called to choose a specific standard for management and disclosure.
This work is important because standards adoption affects actual companies' practices. As reported by
Vigneau et al. (2015), reporting standards usage influences the management structure, intra-organizational
practices, the choice of corporate social responsibility activities, and the interpretation of corporate
performance. Additionally, results provide a practical contribution to corporate managers and practitioners,
by offering a comprehensive overview of the nature of the standards and their features, thus orienting
organizations in selecting those that better suit their needs. From a theoretical point of view, the study
contributes to the ongoing debate on measuring CE, by narrowing the focus on the role of standards towards
the harmonization of CE management and reporting practices.
This study is not free of limitations. First, the investigation relies on the limited number of standards
analysed. Second, among GRIs, only GRI:306 has been considered. Third, ISO 59000 and EFRAG 5 are
still in the draft version. However, these limitations offer important insights to expand the study to all the
standards aimed at measuring CE. Additional future research could deepen the support of this study to
companies that are including CE reflections within their control systems and sustainability reports
Accounting for circular bioeconomy: reflections from the case study of a value network in the bio-based plastic sector
No full textThe use of alternative materials to conventional plastics has received increasing attention in the last years
(Paletta et al., 2019). The awareness about marine plastic pollution, together with the ambitious mission
to become circular by 2030 (European Commission, 2018) and climate neutral by 2050 (European
Commission, 2019) are among the elements that encouraged companies to innovate their product
portfolio and business models. Bio-based plastics represent one of the most interesting solutions. Their
demand moved from 1.7 Mt in 2021 to 2.2Mt in 2022, with a projection of 6.3Mt in 2027 (European
Bioplastics & nova-Institute, 2022; Nazareth et al., 2022). Yet, the EU Commission highlights the need to
apply a systemic approach to underpin decisions and prove the positive environmental outcomes of biobased, biodegradable and compostable plastics (European Commission, 2022).
Based on a case study methodology, this study examines the use of accounting systems in guiding
company decisionsto introduce sustainable and circular solutions. Specifically, the case deals with a value
network (Yan et al., 2017), i.e. a multidimensional connectedness (Peltoniemi, 2004), of six actors along a
supply chain, from the polymer supplier to the packaging user, passing through layer, film, packaging and
packaging machinery manufacturer, who joined efforts to produce a compostable packaging for foodcontact applications.
Results report the difficulties to identify and apply an integrated and comprehensive tool able to support
the decision-making and assess social, environmental and economic performance simultaneously. Open
innovation guided the use of technical data. Profitability ratios and business plans were used in vain to
estimate the necessary investments. Environmental impacts were scrutinized by the focal company with
the adoption of life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. Outcomes related to the decision at stake were
assessed according to a siloed approach: using different tools for different sustainability aspects. In
addition, concerns about being accountable at the network level did not emerge. Nevertheless, the case
shows how the use of LCA promoted by the polymer producer can be considered beneficial to the players
involved. This company is the focal actor of the entire network (i.e., R&D efforts give them a distinct
competitive advantage) and its expertise in measuring environmental impacts created the conditions to
disseminate the culture of sustainability and prompt other companies to revise their approach to
sustainability measurement.
In line with past and present debate on sustainability management accounting (Schaltegger & Wagner,
2006; 2017; Burritt & Schaltegger, 2010; Schaltegger et al, 2022), the study makes evidence of the urgent
need to establish accounting systems supporting sustainability-oriented innovation and limit green
washing practices or misleading information disclosure with resulting consumer misinformation and
hidden negative impacts at the end-of-life (Nazareth, 2022). Implications of this study are that accounting
requires a deep dive to comply with the complexity of sustainability and circular economy matters as well
as the new logic of doing business. Accounting tools designed to focus on financial performance and
limited to corporate boundaries are no longersuitable. Multi-dimensional perspective with an eco-system
view through an emphasis on outside-in techniques are fundamental to move accounting forwards and
support management decisions to adopt a tangible circular bio-economy model in the bio-based plastics
industry
- …
