Post on 14-Apr-2017
www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu
Solutions for Sustainable Production and Consumption Patrick ten Brink
Head of Green Economy Programme, IEEP with thanks to
Jean-Pierre Schweitzer, Alison Ratliff and Céline Charveriat
Next steps for a sustainable European future: Reforming Europe, implementing SDGs
European Economic and Social Committee
Sustainable Development Observatory Conference
Brussels, 7th July 2016
Contents: Sustainable Production and Consumption
1. SDG 12 and beyond – Ensuring sustainable consumption & production (SCP) patterns central to SDGs
2. Decoupling as a lens
3. Limits of linear economy
4. Opportunities in a circular economy
5. Tools – policy instruments to bring circularity
6. Sustainable Consumption – examples
7. Sustainable Production – examples
8. Looking forward to innovation in Europe
SDG 12: Ensuring sustainable consumption & production (SCP) patterns
Goal 12 key targets & indicators: - Policy – national SCP policies - Resources – material footprint;
DMC/capita; DMC/GDP - Food systems – global food loss
index - Waste – recycling rate;
hazardous waste standards - Business/CSR – company
sustainability reports - Public sector – GPP programs - Education – sustainability
mainstreamed
Relevance of SCP for other SDGs
• SCP is central to SDGs, it has cross-cutting relevance and requires a comprehensive and global response
• Reaching goals for SCP would bring us closer to achieving :
Relevant specific targets include: Targets 8.4 on resource efficiency, 7.2 Renewable Energy, 6.4 Water Efficiency, 14.2 on managing pollution of oceans (marine litter); also an opportunity to develop a fairer society through the inclusion of wide range of stakeholders (towards gender equality, more jobs created)…
Decoupling as a lens
Decoupling and earth systems science can be used as a lens to consider SCP
Source: Fedrigo-Fazio, D.; Schweitzer, J.-P.; ten Brink, P.; Mazza, L.; Ratliff, A.; Watkins, E. Evidence of Absolute Decoupling from Real World Policy Mixes in Europe. Sustainability 2016, 8, 517. http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/517
Relative decoupling of resource use and pollution is welcome and necessary But absolute decoupling essential to ensure sustainability
Decoupling
Effective decoupling looks beyond GDP, respecting absolute resource limits, ecosystem critical thresholds and planetary boundaries. An emphasis on increasing well-being & resilience useful to complement economic growth.
Source: Patrick ten Brink in Fedrigo-Fazio, et al
Our linear economy
Source: Patrick ten Brink and Paulo Razzini
Limits of our linear economy: built in wastefulness
• Waste – significant economic losses, – average EU citizen 16 tonnes of material consumed, >60% to
landfill/incineration, 95% of material and energy value lost • Future trends – growing populations and consumption.
– 5 billion global middle class by 2030 increasing environmental & resource pressures
• Environmental pressure – over exploitation of natural capital threatens planetary boundaries and the economy
The economy is currently based primarily on linear production and consumption model. Consequently resource use and wastefulness are inherent. The economy is closely coupled with environmental degradation and advancing planetary boundaries.
Extraction Production processes
Distribution Consumption/
use Collection
The Circular Economy
Source: Patrick ten Brink and Paulo Razzini
Opportunities in a circular economy
• Reducing input – efficiencies, closing the loop, industrial symbiosis, diversifying streams
• Reducing demand – sharing/collaborative models, repair • Innovative design – biological waste streams, intelligent/modular
design • Creating social opportunities – job creation, inclusion of minority
groups and promotion of gender equality in the development of this economic model
Circular economy approaches can reduce the extraction of raw materials and reduce the production of waste – hence support decoupling.
This offers benefits for job creation in processes/innovation and in value retention in otherwise waste or underutilised materials.
This requires changes in both production and consumption systems.
Policy opportunities at the EU level not limited to CE Action Plan i.e. CAP reform; Innovation via FP7/Horizon 2020; trade dialogues e.g. TTIP
Tools – policy instruments to bring circularity
A number of instruments can support the transition to a circular economy. These can support sustainable production and consumption systems.
Policy Instrument Type of intervention Example
Regulatory based
Eco-design regulations; Emissions requirements; Product bans; Land planning
Micro-bead ban in cosmetics in the USA, Styrofoam ban in San Francisco
Market based
Pigovian/environmental taxes; Charges; Deposit Refund; Quotas; Cap and trade; GPP; EHS reform
AB Svenska Returpack deposit refund on PET, glass and cans in Sweden
Information based Certification; Labelling; Education; Awareness Raising
EU Ecolabel
Assessment tools/indicators Whole life costing; Foot-printing; Life Cycle Analysis
Eurostat Resource Efficiency Scoreboard
Other, non policy Grass roots; Volunteering; Collaborative/sharing models; Industrial symbiosis
Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) schemes across EU
Unsustainable Production – Microbeads
Plastic micro beads in cosmetics (EU wide) – plastic beads used as an abrasive in cosmetics Policy: USA ban on micro beads from
June 2017, EU only voluntary agreements
Impact: estimate more than 4,000 tonnes of microbeads used in 2012, straight into the ocean as not captured in water treatment facilities.
Relevant SDG – 14.1 By 2025 reduce marine pollution from land based activities; 12.4 By 2020 environmentally sound management and all wastes throughout their life cycle
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/EllenMacArthurFoundation_Growth-Within_July15.pdf Plastic Soup Foundation (2016) Companies that have pledge to stop using microbead. Beatthemicrobead. Available online (21st June 2016) at: https://www.beatthemicrobead.org/en/industry
Sustainable production – restoring fish stocks
Sustainable fish stocks (national, Iceland) - over exploitation of fisheries led to a collapse of fish stocks and marine biodiversity. Policy mix: Total Allowable Catches
(TAC), Individual Tradable Quotas (ITQs) and a resource tax were slowly introduced.
Impact: Fish stocks have been stabilised and industry demonstrates growth. Exploitation stabilised less than 10% of catches, doubling of biomass (1997-2012)
Relevant SDG – 14.4.1 Fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels
Source: Fedrigo-Fazio, D.; Schweitzer, J.-P.; ten Brink, P.; Mazza, L.; Ratliff, A.; Watkins, E. Evidence of Absolute Decoupling from Real World Policy Mixes in Europe. Sustainability 2016, 8, 517. http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/517
Sustainable production – CSA permaculture
TERRA Urban Farming (local, Luxembourg) – agricultural systems in the EU are highly unsustainable, dependent on subsidies and fertilizers Policy Mix: grass roots, cooperative
community supported agriculture (CSA) 1.5 ha farm in Luxembourg City, permaculture and heritage cultivars
Impact: initiative supports local sustainable food production for 150 families, employment, biodiversity and community engagement.
Relevant SDG – 2.4 By 2030, ensure sustainable food production
Schweitzer J-P., Mutafoglu K., ten Brink P., Paquel K., Illes A., Gitti G., Kettunen M., TwiggerRoss C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Tyrväinen L., Hujala T., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection: Annex 1: 20 Cases. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London/Brussels http://ieep.eu/assets/2075/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_-_Final_Report_Annex_1_-_20_cases_sent.pdf
Unsustainable Consumption – EHS
Tax reduction for diesel fuel – lower tax on diesel intended to favour commercial vehicles. Example for DE: Policy: 47.04 cents per litre
compare to 65.45 per litre for petrol (2010)
Impact: concession for diesel of EUR 6.15 billion per year, diesel 10x more nitrogen oxides, and 13% more CO2
Relevant SDG – 12.c – rationalise inefficient fossil fuel subsidies
https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/publikation/long/3896.pdf Oosterhuis F. and ten Brink P. (Eds) (2014) Paying the Polluter. Environmentally Harmful Subsidies and their Reform. Edward Elgar 2014) http://www.e-elgar.co.uk/bookentry_main.lasso?currency=US&id=15338 http://www.e-elgar.com/shop/paying-the-polluter?___website=uk_warehouse
Sustainable Consumption – Bag tax Ireland
Plastic bag tax (national, Ireland) – single use plastic bags a common issue for terrestrial and marine litter. Policy mix: 2002 incrementally
introduction of a plastic bag tax (EUR 0.15 – 0.22), accompanied by an awareness raising campaign. Funds from the tax were earmarked for environmental protection.
• Impact: measurable reductions in bag use (328 per capita p.a. to 14)
• Relevant SDG – 14.1 By 2025 reduce marine pollution from land based activities
Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, 2016, Plastic bag levy. http://www.environ.ie/environment/waste/plastic-bags/plastic-bag-levy http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/517
Sustainable Consumption – GPP Denmark
Green Public Procurement (national, Denmark) – public procurement is equivalent to EUR 2 trillion in the EU (19% of GDP), EUR 38 bn in Denmark Policy Mix: DK established a
Partnership for GPP with the Ministry of Environment and Food. 14 partners integrate greening across 11 product groups
Impact: total procurement value now EUR >5 billion
Relevant SDG – 12.7 Promote sustainable public procurement practices
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/denmark-public-procurement-as-a-circular-economy-enabler
SDGs, SCP, decoupling and the circular economy
• SCP can help realise a range of SDGs
• Need to accelerate relative decoupling and move to absolute decoupling to meet SDGs and SCP ambitions.
• Need to fast track circular economy measures to keep resources and their value in the economy and out of the environment
• These will bring benefits to the economy, society (i.e. jobs) and environment
• Range of tools that address each – from fiscal reform, to standards, product design, information provision, enabling civil society action, assessment tools, investment….
• Requires all stakeholders to engage
• EU has self-interest in progress & responsibility within global context
www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu Follow us!
IEEP is an independent, not for profit institute dedicated to advancing an environmentally sustainable Europe through policy analysis, development and dissemination.
In 2016, we celebrate 40 years since IEEP was established!
Recent and ongoing work at IEEP
Analysing new areas of policy …
• e.g. The optimised cascading use of wood– for DG Growth
Assessing socio-economic costs…
• e.g The Socio-Economics of Marine Litter – for UNEP
Assessing socio-economic benefits …
• e.g. Health and Social Benefits of Biodiversity and Nature Protection – for DG Environment
Presenting the evidence base and innovative solutions …
• e.g. Paying the Polluter book edited by Oosterhuis and ten Brink
Reviewing stakeholders roles …
• e.g. Building the Europe we want: Models for Civil Society Involvement in the Implementation of the SDGs
Engaging stakeholders and capacity building …
• e.g. Capacity building in environmental taxation reform (ETR) to address resources & pollution – for DG Environment
Disseminating best practice …
• e.g. Beyond GDP Service – for DG Environment
Pooling knowledge …
• e.g. ACES: Alliance for Circular Economy Solutions – for the MAVA foundation, with the Green Alliance and partners:
Aldersgate Group (UK), De Groene Zaak (NL), Ecologic Institute (DE) & UnternehmensGrün (DE)
IEEP aims to make the value of the environment better understood and to better integrate it into policies in Europe and beyond. Work on the SDGs and supporting SCP, decoupling and the circular economy are priority areas for IEEP. Our activities include: