A Review of India’s transition to circular economy and initiatives in a developing world

Abstract
The transition from linear to circular economy (CE) models has drawn worldwide attention
in policy formulation, adoption and implementation in recent times. While the pioneers in
this transformative journey are the developed nations, others have also initiated the process
despite the inherent developmental challenges. India has introduced CE within a resource
efficiency (RE) framework, with majorly a techno-centric and business-centric approach.
This review paper investigates such initiatives and analyses the rules, strategies and policies
announced by the Government of India that are practiced by the public and private
enterprises. The enquiry identifies certain policy gaps and suggests inclusion of all
stakeholders and sectors to the CE agenda. International examples may help in introducing
regenerative agriculture and food waste management, in including neglected sectors like
tourism and hospitality, in sensitizing citizens towards circular consumption and behavioural
change and so on. Moreover, appropriate fiscal incentives and institutional support are
necessary for encouraging economic agents to adopt CE principles and attain sustainability
in the long run.

Keywords: Circular economy, resource efficiency, sustainability, 4 R’s, waste management

JEL classification: Q01, Q58

1. Introduction
1.1 The importance of circular economy
The report of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) and McKinsey presented during the
World Economic Forum 2012 in Davos opened the gateway for worldwide discussions and
deliberations on the potential benefits of transition to a circular economy (CE). Subsequently,
governments and businesses around the world started to plan the amalgamation of the
principles of CE to their economic systems and industrial setups (Wautelet, 2018). The
concept of CE has emerged as an alternative to the open-ended and linear economic system
where natural resources influence the economy by providing inputs for production and
consumption, making nature a sink for outputs in the form of waste (M. Geissdoerfer et al.,
2017). The current economic growth is powered by a linear ‘take, make and waste’ model
that is unsustainable in a world of finite resources and ecosystem constraints (Wautelet,
2018). The CE model is a sustainable answer to decouple continued economic growth from
continued environmental degradation. It helps in increasing productivity and reducing waste
by bringing in focus the reuse and recycling of materials, the design of products to emphasize
longevity and repair, the creation of new business models including sharing economy and the
development of local closed-loop systems (Circular Colab, 2018).
The CE framework is based on three major objectives, namely, designing out the negative
externalities such as, pollution and wastage, keeping products and materials in use through
reuse, refurbishing, remanufacturing and recycling and ultimately regenerating the natural
systems by avoiding the use of non-renewable resources and returning valuable nutrients to
the soil to support regeneration (EMF, 2012). CE is an industrial economy which is
regenerative and restorative through intention and design, targeted to achieve a closed-loop
material flow in the whole economic system (Geng & Doberstein, 2008). It aims to keep
products, components and materials at their maximum value and utility at all times and is
restorative by design (Pollard et al., 2016). It is the design and business method strategies that
tend to slow, close and narrow down resource loops, thereby facilitating resource use to its
full potential life, minimizing energy use, waste generation and emissions through the
strategy of reduce, reuse, recycle and recover (4 R’s) (Bocken et al., 2016). The CE
framework is designed to function at three levels, namely, micro, meso and macro that
involve manufacturers and consumers, industries and SEZs and finally cities, regions and
countries.
1.2 From SDG to CE
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) come from the cumulative efforts of world leaders to
work towards some specified goals that aim to create a better world with reduced poverty,
improved living conditions, reduced climate change and so on (Hák et al., 2016). The 17
goals and 169 targets have been inculcated in the policies of both private and public sectors
around the world and have been described as the ‘framework to achieve a more sustainable
future for all’ by the year 2030 (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017).
The perspective of sustainability is overlapping in the notion of CE and the conventional
linear economy. In a linear economy, the guiding principle of sustainability is economic
efficiency which aims to minimize the ecological impact to get the same output. However,
sustainability in the CE framework seeks an increase in the economic efficiency of the system
that minimizes the ecological impact and brings in greater positive economic and social
impact within the planet’s natural capacity (Kjaer et al., 2019). Although, the term CE does
not appear in the SDGs 2030, (Schroeder et al., 2019), the linkages between these two
agendas seem to be evident. CE can be used as a tool by different countries, institutions and
social agents to achieve some SDGs, especially SDG 12 consisting of necessary modalities of
responsible production and consumption. CE may be considered as a possible solution to
issues such as the ever-increasing demand for resources, volatility of price of resources, and
the continuously growing global population and consumption. In this sense, CE can be
defined as a system which is based on models of businesses that replace the ‘end-of-life’
concept with the 4 R’s in production and consumption with the target to achieve sustainable
development (SD) by creating qualitative environment, social equity and economic prosperity
to the benefit of present and future generations (Kirchherr et al., 2017).
1.3 The relevance of resource efficiency
The idea of Resource Efficiency (RE) is interconnected with conceptual framework of CE in
the sense that it creates more value in economic terms by using less input of resources. It
intends to reduce the impact of resource use on the environment by breaking the link between
economic growth and hasty use of natural resources including land, water, energy and other
ecosystem services (Hirschnitz-Garbers et al., 2013). The thrust on RE has emanated from the
idea of sustainable management of secondary raw materials that has seen unprecedented rise
over the recent years. The global extraction of primary materials increased from 24 billion
tons in 1970 to 70 billion tons in 2010, causing a rise in per capita global material use from 7
tons to 14 tons. The extraction of both biomass and fossil fuels have doubled, while
extraction of metal ores has tripled and the extraction of non-metal minerals has nearly
quadrupled during the period. The highest growth is recorded in Asia where extraction of
primary resources has quintupled during 1970-2010, especially after 1990 (UNEP, 2016).
Rapid growth in resource extraction has important linkages to environmental impacts
including resource depletion, air pollution, changes in ecosystems, human health, biodiversity
loss and climate change. CE brings in the perspective of efficient resource management into
an overall framework of efficient production, waste management, energy security and
resource recovery for further use. The RE concept tries to lower the energy intensity of the
economy, reduce natural resource use and Green House Gas (GHG) emissions. Both RE and
CE tend to prioritize the environmental as well as economic importance of mining,
conversion, utilisation, and wastage of material resources, put emphasis on houses, business
processes or national and regional governance, thus making the two interrelated in the macro-
level sustainability approach (van Ewijk, 2018).
Achieving a resilient and resource-efficient economy requires creation of better market
conditions for goods and services with lower environmental impacts, recyclability,
repairability and durability (Taranic et al., 2016). RE and CE together can enhance the
possibility of achieving SD by addressing three critical aspects of resource access and equity.
It tries to ensure that all human beings at all places have access to a minimum level of income
and environmental quality, promote equitable distribution of benefits and risks of resource
use and finally bring in intergenerational equity along the path of sustainable production and
consumption (NITI Aayog, 2017).
2. Adopting CE in a developing country framework
2.1 The developmental challenges
Developing nations in the twenty-first century face a number of daunting challenges in
attaining economic prosperity through industrialisation and urbanisation, population growth,
food and water scarcity, environmental degradation, death and diseases, disasters and climate
change. These have been aggravated by the existence of a large informal economy, a
fragmented and undeveloped private sector, an overburdened state, lack of policy
prerogatives, institutional inadequacies and political strife (Fiksel et al., 2020). In this
turbulent era, there is a need for resilience in the socio-economic and ecological systems, to
which CE may offer a sustainable solution. The mainstreaming of CE in business systems
and technological climate in developing countries require specific policy designs to suit the
growing need for closing the production loops and adjusting consumption patterns. Achieving
resilience requires a two-pronged strategy of committed government policy initiatives and
successful leadership by social and environmental innovators who have the capacity to adapt
to these challenges.
The implementation structure of CE in the developing countries has been focused primarily
on production, design and waste management at the micro, meso and macro levels (table 1)
although green consumption has been mentioned as a tool to reshape consumer behaviour.
Table 1. Implementation structure of CE in developing countries

Areas Macro (Provinces, Meso (Inter firms) Micro (Enterprises)

region, cities, states)

Design Sustainable design Environmentally friendly design Eco-design

Production Eco-municipality, Eco-industrial park Cleaner production

eco-provinces,

eco-city

Waste Urban symbiosis Market for waste trade, Product reuse and
Management
industrial symbiosis recycle system

Consumption Renting service Environmentally friendly Green purchase and

park consumption

Source: Su et al., 2013

Despite having the sincere agenda of CE implementation, the developing economies face
several structural shortcomings, ranging from technological backwardness to insufficient
institutional supports (table 2). States have often shown reluctance in promoting
technological development through research and development (R&D), allocating necessary
finances, having inertia to really change existing policies and also in bringing in behavioural
changes in citizens through either incentives or command-and-control policies.
Table 2. Challenges to CE in developing countries

Technical Challenges Financial Challenges Societal Challenges Institutional

Challenges

Lack of advancements Lack of funding and Lack of education and Absence of global
in technology investment from the awareness policy for promotion of
public and private CE
sectors
 Inadequate data Reluctance in making Perception of using or Minimum incentives
collection on emissions, special budgetary buying recycled for CE promotion
footprints and reuse provisions for R&D in products
planning CE

Machinery for waste Financial constraint in Reluctance to adopt Linear economy

generation rather than already debt-ridden circularity in daily life dominant policies
waste reuse countries

Limited circularity in Lack of special funding Uncertain Not so well-developed

systems by the government organisational culture institutional
infrastructure

Source: Hossain & Khatun, 2021

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the fore the enduring importance of
environmental protection and ecological balance for our common sustainable future. CE
offers a way ahead for attaining the pathway towards a regenerative economic system that
embodies the principles of natural cycles. Several developing countries have initiated the
transformation through business models, manufacturing processes and legislative actions.
Despite their structural constraints, they are trying to include the 4 R’s into production
processes, streamline urban waste streams, ideate remanufacturing and energy recovery and
inculcate the principle of optimizing industrial processes for circular production.
2.2 The good performers in the developing world
2.2.1 China
The Government of China introduced the idea of CE in the 1990s (Shi et al., 2010; CCICED,
2005) and formally accepted it in 2002 as a new strategy for development that is achievable
under the national policy for SD (McDowall et al., 2017). The State Environment Protection
Administration mandated the guidelines for development, planning and operation in 2002
(Pesce et al., 2020), followed by the setting up of the National Development and Reforms
Commission (NDRC) in 2004 to take over the charge of implementation.
The major initiatives announced by NDRC include initiation of legislative procedure, R&D
efforts, training and education, industrial restructuring, use of performance indicators,
application of economic instruments and development of a financing mechanism (Su et al.,
2013; Zhijun and Nailing, 2007). In order to enhance the answerability of stakeholders, a trial
system on CE evaluation was formed in 2007 that includes indicators for resource output,
resource consumption, waste emission and resources use (Geng & Doberstein, 2008).
As one of the first globally, the Circular Economy Promotion Law (CEPL) was moved in
2008 and became effective in 2009. The approach has been one of command-and-control
from the government to the people (Ghisellini et al., 2016). These policies focused on
recycling and reduction of wastage, packaging materials, saving scarce natural resources,
maintaining optimum energy standards, phasing out of products, cataloguing outdated
technologies and prohibiting toxic materials usage in electronic products. Further laws were
enacted during the planning processes for national, social and economic development to
stimulate cleaner production, pollution prevention and waste control (Murray et al., 2017).
The resultant increase in reuse of industrial waste was 72 per cent along with 15 per cent
increase in efficiency by 2015 in the newly developed industrial parks in pilot cities with near
zero emission and waste production (Li, W. and W. Lin, 2016; Mathews and Tan, 2016).
2.2.2 Brazil
The CE initiatives in Brazil started as an inclusive programme called Circular Economy 100
(CE100) with efforts in various sectors to amplify the transition process involving corporates,
governments, NGOs, academic institutions and various innovators (Silva et al., 2019).
Active adoption of CE principles can be seen in Brazilian agricultural policies and practices.
While facilitating global competitiveness, the environmental certification encouraged
regenerative agricultural practices, such as, tracking soil fertility and water usage, restoring
degraded land, adopting integrated farming, crop rotation, composting, cover cropping,
minimum tillage etc. It further included phasing out of non-biodegradable toxic materials,
minimizing nutrient leakage, preserving the stability of the natural system, for example, the
practice of zero tillage to leave the crop residues in the soil, zero use of mechanized tools to
turn the soil, minimisation of weeds by natural methods and so on.
Innovators and industry professionals have been working around circular models to give back
energy to the Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) sector which is a high-output and
valuable industry in the Brazilian economy (CE100, 2019). The National Waste Management
Policy set the orientation through Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool
(EPEAT) and Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) certifications. These systems
optimize the market standard for each global EEE company across the product lifecycle
including production, energy use, design and recycling and mandate the maximum levels for
prohibited hazardous substances. Businesses in Brazil have been quick in adopting the 4 R’s
and reverse logistics in EEE. The National Solid Waste Policy (NSWP) mandates a shared
responsibility policy for life cycle of the product and necessitates reverse logistics as an
instrument policy of social and economic development through a sustainable waste disposal
process (Azevedo et al., 2017; Demajorovic and Migliano, 2013). Although the waste
management is in a nascent stage, the positive tendency towards waste management
represents the potential of CE incorporating effective proposals for resource management,
such as regenerative design (Lyle, 1996).
2.2.3 Bangladesh
Bangladesh has emerged as one of the major growing economies of the world with
agriculture as its base and manufacturing as a sunrise sector. On acquiring the status of a
developing country recently, it has to compromise with the benefits it has been getting in
terms of being a least developed country (Moktadir et al., 2018). The recent pandemic has
added to the challenges to maintain its global competitiveness, over and above the pre-
existing challenges of environmental and economic sustainability.
The two major industries of Bangladesh are garments and leather, both of which are part of
the fashion industry that are among the most linear models in the world. Embracing CE offers
a way-out for the global exporter of garments in view of environmental degradation and
pollution associated with these sectors. The wastage and depletion of natural resources in the
textile sector will be handled by developing recycling capacity under the Circular Fashion
Partnership, monitored by Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association
(BGMEA) (Karim, 2021). Several international firms and various recycling firms in
Bangladesh have united to become the sustainability paradigm in fashion for other leading
countries in the garment sector. This initiative is expected to play an important role in
pursuing effective strategies for SDG 12.
The highly polluting leather industry has been mandated to implement sustainable
manufacturing practices to remedy their tarnished image and to comply with the government
legislation. Several tie-up arrangements have been made with a two-pronged strategy of
reducing environmental damage and promoting the export potential of Bangladeshi leather
products. These will make available income-opportunities and employment to small and
medium enterprises while working more sustainably using advanced technologies (Moktadir
et al., 2018). The stated objectives include more efficient measures for reducing consumption,
promoting recycling and reducing waste, introducing standard institutional structure for
sustainable production, improving safety and health in this occupation and finally enhancing
exportability of Bangladeshi leather products (Moktadir et al., 2020).
3. Mainstreaming CE and RE in India
3.1 Resource extraction scenario in India
Economic development in India over the last two decades have brought decline in poverty
rates, increased urbanisation and raised demand for various goods and services. India is rich
in primary materials and 97 per cent of its resource consumption is extracted domestically
which has increased 420 percent during 1970-2010. The rate of resource extraction is 1580
tons/acre which is much higher than the world average of 450 tons/acre. With the third largest
material demand in the world and material productivity lower than the global average,
resource extraction has leapfrogged six times from 1.18 billion tons (BT) in 1970 to 7 BT in
2015. The projected consumption of primary materials is 14.2 BT in 2030 consisting of 6.5
BT minerals, 4.2 BT fossil fuel and 0.8 BT metals. The recycling rate in India is 20-25 per
cent compared to around 70 per cent in the developed countries. India records the third
highest level of CO2 emission and the highest withdrawal of water for agriculture in the world
(NITI Aayog, 2017). Moreover, 30 per cent of the land is undergoing degradation (Bhat,
2014). The rising trends in primary resource use, associated environmental impacts and the
resulting problems of sustainability have prompted the government to prioritize the transition
to CE.
3.2 From environment policy to resource efficiency strategy
The National Environment Policy (NEP) was introduced in 2006 to inculcate the idea of SD
with additional focus on social justice and ecological constraints. India has promulgated
policies for various sectors since 1999 that subsume the idea of efficient resource utilisation,
starting from product design to improvement of product life and use of recycled materials in
manufacturing etc. Several rules have been passed related to industrial technology, design,
innovation, waste management, renewable energy use, biofuel blending with fossil fuel etc.
(table 3). However, the idea of CE was not the underlying principle till the RE certification
was introduced in 2010 and later revisions expanded the scope of the rules to include plastic,
e-waste, C&D, labelling and certification.
Table 3. Evolution of policies for CE and RE in India
Year Name Objective
1999 Fly Ash Utilisation Policy Sustainable transportation and utilisation of fly ash

2000 Solid Waste Management (SWM) Identification of waste types and disposal
Rules
2006 National Environment Policy Economic and social development with ecological
sustainability
2007 National Design Policy Promote design-enabled Indian industries and create
internationally known brands
2010 Renewable Energy (RE) Promotion of companies to meet renewable purchase
Certification obligation targets, boost to renewable energy, increase
RE capacity of the country
2013 Science, Technology and Adoption of science and technology to enhance
Innovation Policy sustainable and inclusive growth, foster resource-
optimized, cost-effective innovations, across size and
technology domains
2015 National Electric Mobility Bring a decisive shift in the transportation sector that
Mission Plan envisages introducing 6–7 million battery operated
electric or hybrid vehicles by 2020
2016 Solid Waste Management Rules Revised over SWM rule 2000

2016 E-Waste Management Rules Promote formal treatment of e-waste and bring them
back to product stage for consumption after
undergoing recycling, mandate Extended Producer
Responsibility authorisation
2016 Plastic Waste Management Rules Segregation, colour coding, disposal and recycling
under delegated responsibilities
2016 C & D Waste Management Rule Segregation and disposal under delegated authorities
2016 Bureau of Indian Standards Act Certification of consumer products that oblige to
optimum environmental specifications that includes
quality standards as well for these products
2017 ZED (Zero Effect-Zero Defect) Promote production with zero defects and have
Certification Scheme minimum environmental impact or zero ecological
effect, especially in micro, small and medium
enterprises (MSME)
2018 National Biofuels Policy Achieve 20% blending of biofuels with fossil-based
fuels by 2030, enabling usage of excess food and non-
food crops for bio-fuel production and minimize
 wastage
Source: Author’s compilation from different Ministry websites and TERI & YES Bank,
2018
The Government of India has initiated the transition to CE with emphasis on RE for
sustainable management for secondary materials. The Indian Resource Panel (InRP) was
established in 2015 as an advisory body under the Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change (MoEFCC) to assess the existing policies for RE and carry out baseline
studies to identify gaps for the purpose of future policy formulation (Singhal, 2021). The
National Institute for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog, founded in 2015, prepared the
strategy paper with special focus on the current status of four sectors, namely, steel, e-waste,
aluminium and construction & demolition (C&D). RE was the major thrust area for the
government (NITI Aayog, 2017) and responsibilities were delegated to eleven committees
involving ministries, academics, industry representatives and domain experts (table 4). The
MoEFCC established a Resource Efficiency Cell in partnership with The Energy and
Resources Institute (TERI) to develop an institutional framework for mainstreaming RE in
2018, followed by the National Resource Efficiency Policy (NREP) in 2019 with the goal to
attain sustainability and efficient material use to inculcate the ideals of CE (Press Information
Bureau, 2021).
Table 4. Stakeholders for promoting the ideals of CE in India

S. No. Focus Area Concerned Ministry/Department

1 Municipal Solid Waste and Liquid Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs
Waste

2 Scrap Metal (Ferrous and Non- Ministry of Steel

Ferrous)

3 Electronic Waste Ministry of Electronics and Information

Technology

4 End-of-life Vehicles (ELVs) Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

5 Lithium Ion (Li-ion) Batteries NITI Aayog

6 Toxic and Hazardous Industrial Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals

Waste

7 Solar Panels Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

8 Gypsum Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal

 Trade

9 Agricultural Waste Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare

10 Used Oil Waste Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

11 Tyre and Rubber Recycling Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal
Trade

Source: Press Information Bureau, 2021

The Strategy for Secondary Materials Management for promoting RE and CE in Electrical
and Electronic Equipment Sector, 2018 and the Strategy for Promoting Processing of C&D
Waste and Utilisation of Recycled Products, 2018 were the predecessors of the overarching
NREP which was revised further to include a CE perspective, namely, the Resource
Efficiency and Circular Economy Strategy, 2019. The broad RE framework consists of
policies, programmes and regulations on one hand, and technological development,
innovation, capacity building and outreach on the other (table 5).
Table 5. The RE Framework in India
National Programmes Regulations Setting up Technology Capacity
policy and dynamic and R&D development,
formulation mainstreaming recycling monitoring
industries and outreach
RE for all Mainstream National Establish Develop Creation of
resources, existing flagship coordinating material scalable accredited
lifecycles programmes body, Bureau recovery technologie testing
and of Resource facilities in s laboratories
stakeholders Efficiency allocated land
Sustainable Corporate Social State Level Facilitate urban Knowledge Provide
public Responsibility coordinating local bodies platforms capacity
procurement bodies (ULB) for urban with development
to reduce mining and academia- support at
resource creating secure industry national and
consumption landfills participatio state levels
and waste n
generation
Innovation Corporate Mandatory Producer Leverage Develop
in materials Environmental filing of the responsibility technologie informal
and Responsibility Resource Use organisation for s like sector skill
technology and Efficiency waste artificial development
for RE Statement by management intelligence,
concerned robotics,
industries block-chain
etc. for the
 recycling
industry
Existing Extended Establish and Integrate Launch
mining Producer mandate a informal sector citizen
policies to Responsibility ‘Consent to in waste awareness
include RE Close’ collection and programmes
requirement for recycling
industries in
RED category
End-of-life National Rationalize tax Innovation for Inter-
vehicles Chemical regime on resource governmental
(ELVs) Management critical virgin recovery and collaboration
Plan for safe and raw materials improved waste and
circular and price value chain knowledge
management of competitiveness exchange
chemicals
Waste-to- National clean Establish a Monitoring
resource energy and remanufacturing and outcome
management environment fund council/ indicators for
and clean association to tracking
technology catalyze progress
remanufacturing
Hazardous Create Certification
waste platforms for for operators
management waste exchange managing
waste-to-
resource
recycling
centres
Source: GOI, 2019

3.3 Performance in circularity and sustainability

The expected benefits of RE in material saving in the Indian manufacturing sector alone is
Rs. 60.8 billion which can also reduce the country’s import dependence and improve the
trade balance. For example, the steel sector alone can save 21 million tons (MT) of iron ore,
8.25 MT of coking coal, 3.75 MT of limestone by 2025. While improving the resource
availability critical for industrial growth, there is also potential for creating jobs in recycling
industries, reducing conflict and displacement in mining areas, improving health conditions
of local people due to reduced extraction pressure and so on. It may further bring in
affordability and access to resources that are critical for poverty reduction and preserve
resources for future generations. Reduced resource extraction can bring in environmental
benefits by checking land degradation, pollution, CO 2 emissions, restoration of landscapes
and water bodies, management of solid waste landfills etc. (NITI Aayog, 2017; TERI 2019).
The implementation of these strategies is under progress and can be properly assessed upon
completion of the respective target periods.
The level of attainment of responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), complemented
by development of sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11) may be used as an
assessment indicator for India’s efforts for transition to CE. The expected outcomes of the
SDGs are increased quality of life and livelihood, which essentially overlap with the ultimate
aims of CE, though not pronounced categorically. The performance indicators of SDG 11 and
12 in India indicate clear gaps between actual and attainable targets with the normalized
scores as 79 and 74 respectively (table 6). These measures essentially focus on waste
management with focus on proper segregation, sewage treatment and drainage in line with
SWM Act 2016. Different types of wastes, such as, plastic, biomedical and hazardous waste
materials have also been studied under SDG 12. High consumption of fossil fuel and low
generation of grid interactive bio-power show achievements less than targets.
Table 6. Performance of SDG 11 and SDG 12 in India (2020-21)

SDG 11 Actual Target

Installed sewage treatment capacity to total 38.86% 100%
sewage generation
Complete door to door waste collection 96.77% 100%
Treated municipal solid waste to total 68.1% 100%
generation
Wards with source segregation 78.03% 100%
Urban households with drainage facility 87.6% 100%
Total score 79 100

SDG 12 Actual Target

Consumption of fossil fuel (per capita) 157.3 Kg 64.1 Kg
Use of Nitrogenous fertilizer 64.39% 57%
Hazardous waste generation (per 1000 8.09 MT per 4.04 MT
population) annum per annum
Hazardous waste recycled 44.89% 100%
Plastic waste generation 2.54 MT 1.27 MT
(per1000 population) per annum per annum
Treated biomedical waste to total generation 86.91% 100%
Installed capacity of grid interactive bio- 7.62 MW 21.81 MW
power per 10 lakh population
Total score 74 100
Source: NITI Aayog, 2021
In India’s commitment towards the attainment of SDGs, penetration of CE principles has
generally been less than adequate. The sustainability indicators concentrate almost
unilaterally on waste management and exclude consolidation of other enablers of CE, such
as, circularity in cities, consumer behaviour, community transformations etc. City planning
can help in the sustainability and circularity agenda through circular production as well as
consumption. Sustainable cities and communities can become circular through digitisation,
localisation, substitution, sharing and optimisation (Williams, 2019). Beyond the legislative
provisions for rules, policies and strategies, there is a need for all stakeholders to behave
positively with a self-motivated intention.
4. Discussion
India is a case of mixed outcomes in the assessment chart for policy initiatives and practical
actions towards the transition to CE with a lot already designed and more to be adopted.
While EU, USA, South Korea and Japan are pioneering examples of CE initiatives in
business and manufacturing, developing countries like Brazil, China and Bangladesh can
show pathways for regenerative agriculture, models of redesigning manufacturing, regulatory
and legislative procedures and so on. Despite the low level of development, African countries
have set examples of introducing CE in clothing, food wastage and e-waste, though
undertaken informally in general.
4.1 Potential sectors for circular action beyond manufacturing
The industrial sector contributes 25.92 per cent of India’s gross value added while agriculture
and services account for 16.38 per cent and 53.89 per cent respectively (MoSPI, 2021). In
view of their significant shares in national output and employment, the latter sectors and
allied subsectors need to be brought under the purview of circular action in an attempt to
implement CE in a holistic manner.
4.1.1 Agriculture
Strengthened and regenerative agricultural practices through advancements in technology,
skill and techniques may help ensure food security and gain export advantage. Digital
technology to support agricultural businesses, collect data on weather forecast, land record
etc. may establish efficient and smart agriculture. Examples from Japan may serve as models
for the Indian farmers in getting digitally connected and sustainably prepared for agricultural
development. Digital advancement may be inculcated in the supply chain of agricultural
products that will be resilient in functioning, transparent in processing and effective in
management. Following the Brazilian model, regenerative agriculture can help bring the
natural components into use, eliminating toxic materials, decreasing nutrient leakage and thus
preserving the natural integrity of the agricultural system. It integrates agriculture and
livestock to bring in additional nutrient support. Methods that can be adopted include
reduction of tillage, use of fertilizers to preserve soil quality, adoption of crop rotation etc.
Sugarcane production in Brazil has boomed due to the adoption of regenerative farming
methods and leaving behind the linear production model. Regenerative agriculture can further
solve issues of acidity/alkalinity of soil, desertification etc. Knowledge and asset sharing
platforms can make information accessible to the small-scale farmers thereby enabling them
to be part of large value markets or derive benefit out of the economics of scale. Several
African countries like South Africa, Ghana and Kenya and also Brazil have introduced bio-
composting legislations to practice bio-composting at national, regional and
private/organisational levels. Anaerobic digestion technology for valorisation of agricultural
waste, such as, bio-gas production, offers a promising CE model for agriculture. Adequate
policy support and regulatory framework may encourage business with the use of agricultural
waste (CE100, 2019).
4.1.2 Transport and automobiles
With the second largest road network, fifth largest rail network, fastest growing aviation
market and automobile production, India needs to focus on the transport and vehicle
manufacturing sector in the bid to bring in overall circularity. The CE principles may be
inculcated by adopting a product-to-service model in order to minimize waste and maximize
efficiency. European countries are pioneering in the transformation in the transport sector by
promoting inland transport system and developing inland ports as the hubs of circular green
energy. In air transport, they are enhancing R&D for developing solutions to increase aircraft
performance through circular aviation that improves resource efficiency and reduces material
cost throughout the aircraft life cycle. To manage the boom in demand for automobiles with
time, India may adopt policies for alternative fuels, such as, solar power, Compressed Natural
Gas (CNG), ethanol and the fuel of the future namely, hydrogen. Electric vehicle is an
example of the emerging environment-friendly technology. Incentivisation is required for
production and consumption of these alternate fuels and R&D for exploring new possibilities.
The industrial practices of 4 R’s can be applied to the transport and vehicle manufacturing
sector too.
4.1.3 Construction and city planning
Fulfilling the housing needs of a large population has led to the phenomenal growth of the
C&D sector in India, necessitating the adoption of sustainable technologies. Use of waste
plastic for manufacturing durable and sturdy bricks or other construction materials is
practiced in several African countries. Better urban planning needs to be prioritized for the
growing number of Indian cities for better traffic movement, solid waste management,
disaster preparedness, urban greening, local and digital urban set-ups based on circular city
principles and so on. Selection of locally available, durable and non-toxic materials, use of
fly ash in making bricks etc. may synchronize the CE efforts in construction and city
planning.
Adoption of a circular city model can help establish an urban system that is regenerative,
accessible and waste-neutral. Going beyond the RESOLVE framework that rests on
regenerate, share, optimize, loop, virtualize and exchange, a circular city model can help
implement the CE principles through three circular actions, namely, looping, regenerating
and adapting and four supporting actions, namely, optimisation, sharing, substitution and
localisation. Consequently, circular cities can eliminate and/or reduce waste, keep the highest
values of the assets, become digitally enabled and can thereby generate prosperity, improve
livability and develop resilience for the communities living in the cities. This may lead to
habit formation for green consumption emanating from environmental consciousness of the
citizens.
4.1.4 Fashion and consumption
The Indian fashion industry is on a rise with one of the highest impacts of a take-make-
dispose model. There is ample scope for introducing circularity in this sector for refurbishing
and recycling, promoting durability of clothes, adopting the rental clothes model and so on.
However, this requires behavioural changes in consumers, which has not been given due
attention in India while formulating the CE policies based on RE. Circular consumption as a
practice can extend the scope for CE beyond the roles of producers, manufacturers, regulators
and/or the government.
4.2 Some missed agenda
The Government of India has initiated the CE agenda in the industrial framework through
rules, policies and certain action plans. Emphasis on RE in manufacturing and exclusion of
other major sectors in the CE framework can be considered as a gap in policy focus.
Moreover, major waste generating sectors, such as, hospitality and tourism have been entirely
ignored while housing and construction needed more attention. Similarly, appropriate policies
for food and nutrition could have been formulated in regulating wastage of food, channelizing
discarded food for regenerative uses, such as, bio-composting.
Although the policy documents intend to include the government’s flagship programmes such
as, Make-in-India, Start-up-India, Digital-India etc., the focus on big industries and business
has overlooked the potential of the Indian micro, medium and small enterprises (MSME) in
the transformation. Studies show that environmental commitment, attitude, social pressure
and green economic incentives positively influence the readiness of the MSMEs and may be
geared to design strategic plans for CE implementation (Singh et al 2018).
Cities have not been announced as part of the CE initiatives in the RE framework although
these are the major centres of production and consumption, generators of waste and
environmental externalities. Circular cities can unlock environmental, economic and social
benefits, thereby making it a potential model to adopt.
There are strong linkages between CE, SD, renewable energy and waste management.
Although there have been studies on waste management policies and practices, research
dedicated towards energy recovery from waste in India is inadequate and lacks integration
with SD (Priyadarshini, et. al, 2020). Waste management challenges have attained greater
heights in the post-COVID world of threatened environmental sustainability and ecological
balance.
Considering the role of the SDGs in environmental management, CE could be integrated to
form a common agenda for development. Sustainable consumption must go beyond food
security and create an overall environment for circular consumption practices in non-food
items in the larger consumption baskets as well.
Inculcating the idea of circularity among all stakeholders through regulation and sensitisation
remains a challenge. Consumer acceptance of remanufactured and recycled products is
essential for the success of closed loop supply chains that is the mainstay of CE. Although
very few studies have been conducted, the Indian consumers have revealed adverse purchase
intention and willingness to pay (Singhal et al, 2019).
The overarching importance of business and manufacturing in the CE discourse has left it
techno-centric and business-centric, thereby missing many other enabling factors, such as,
governance, skills and knowledge, stakeholder awareness and participation, interaction and
exchange among stakeholders and so on.
4.3 The road ahead
For furthering the CE agenda in India, more consolidated, focused and extended policies need
to be drawn up at national, state and local levels concerning specific sectors, materials and
resources. Participation of all sectors and involvement of all stakeholders are the prime
requirements for drawing up a successful transition to CE.
All the excluded sectors, such as, agriculture, transport, fashion, hospitality, tourism etc. must
be incorporated in the larger policy framework beyond RE in manufacturing and business.
Their potential to adapt to circular practices need to be honed in designing sustainable
economic practices for long term development.
Integrating SWM and RE policies within an umbrella CE policy can provide greater impetus
towards achieving the simultaneous goals of SD and CE. Swacch Bharat Abhiyan, AMRUT
Mission, Smart Cities Mission etc. may be consolidated in developing circular city models.
An efficient fiscal incentive structure is necessary for the successful implementation of CE
policies. Implementation of GST and possible consumption taxes, invitation of venture
capital and investment, expenditure on R&D in innovation etc. may contribute in building the
necessary fiscal climate for the CE transition.
Dedicated federal bodies may be formed for monitoring, coordinating and implementing
rules, policies and strategies. The recent experience of banning plastic has been an example
of state failure in policy implementation. Similar is the case for SWM 2016, further worsened
during the massive generation of COVID-19 related waste.
Finally, citizenry has a very significant role in the desired transition. Self-nudging towards
environmentally conscious behaviour may be a great driver over and above the policy-
nudging effected by the state. Behavioural and lifestyle changes are the ultimate pillars of
stakeholder responsibility towards the transition to sustainability and circularity.
The promise of a new economic system called CE entails a philosophy of stewardship and
intergenerational equity that can refocus the linear society towards circular practices within
an environmental management framework in particular and SD in general. A judicious mix of
policies, government leadership and stakeholder participation can bring in the requisite
dimensions in the CE transformation in developing countries. Despite the structural
challenges, developing countries like India can transit to newer levels of achievements and
performances through appropriate measures in sustainability and circularity.

Declaration
The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References
1. Azevedo, S., Godina, R., & Matias, J. (2017). Proposal of a Sustainable Circular
Index for Manufacturing Companies. Resources, 6(4), 63.
https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040063
2. Bocken, N. M. P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product
design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial
and Production Engineering, 33(5), 308–320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124
3. Bhat, T. A. (2014). An analysis of demand and supply of water in India. Journal of
Environment and Earth Science, 4(11), 67-72.
4. Bureau of Indian Standards. (2021). Bureau of Indian Standards.
https://bis.gov.in/index.php/the-bureau/bis-act-rules-and-regulations/
5. CCICED. (2005). 2005 Annual Policy Recommendations. China Council for
International Cooperation on Environment and Development.
http://www.cciced.net/cciceden/POLICY/APR/201608/t20160803_74629.html
6. CE100 Brasil Network. (2017). A CIRCULAR ECONOMY IN BRAZIL: An initial
exploration. ellenmacarthurfoundation.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/A-Circular-Economy-in-
Brazil-An-initial-exploration.pdf
7. Demajorovic, J., & Migliano, J. E. B. (2013). Política nacional de resíduos sólidos e
suas implicações na cadeia da logística reversa de microcomputadores no Brasil.
Gestão & Regionalidade, 29(87), 64-80.
8. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2012). Towards the Circular Economy.
Ellenmacarthurfoundation.Com.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/towards-the-circular-economy
9. Fiksel, J., Sanjay, P., & Raman, K. (2021). Steps toward a resilient circular economy
in India. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 23(1), 203-218.
10. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Circular
Economy – A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143,
757–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
11. Geng, Y., & Doberstein, B. (2008). Developing the circular economy in China:
Challenges and opportunities for achieving “leapfrog development.” International
Journal of SD & World Ecology, 15(3), 231–239.
https://doi.org/10.3843/SusDev.15.3:6
12. Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: The
expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, 11–32.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007
13. GOI. (2019). Economic Survey 2018–19 (Vol. II). New Delhi: Government of India.
14. Hák, T., Janoušková, S., & Moldan, B. (2016). Sustainable Development Goals: A
need for relevant indicators. Ecological indicators, 60, 565-573
15. Hirschnitz-Garbers, M., Montevecchi, F., & Martinuzzi, A. (2013). Resource
Efficiency. In S. O. Idowu, N. Capaldi, L. Zu, & A. D. Gupta (Eds.), Encyclopedia of
Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 2018–2018). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_728
16. Hossain, M. S., & Khatun, M. (2021). A Qualitative-Based Study on Barriers to
Change from Linear Business Model to Circular Economy Model in Built
Environment—Evidence from Bangladesh. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1-
15.
17. Karim, N. (2021). Bangladesh garment industry could save $500 million a year by
recycling cotton. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bangladesh-fashion-
recycling-trfn-idUSKCN2DS11P
18. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular
economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
127, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
19. Kjaer, L. L., Pigosso, D. C. A., Niero, M., Bech, N. M., & McAloone, T. C. (2019).
Product/Service‐Systems for a Circular Economy: The Route to Decoupling
Economic Growth from Resource Consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology,
23(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12747
20. Lee, G. (2018). US Circular Economy Report. CircularCoLab.
https://www.circularcolab.org/us-circular-economy-report
21. Li, W. and W. Lin (2016). ‘Circular Economy Policies in China’, in Anbumozhi, V.
and J. Kim (eds.), Towards a Circular Economy: Corporate Management and Policy
Pathways. ERIA Research Project Report 2014-44, Jakarta: ERIA, pp.95-111.
22. Lyle, J. T. (1996). Regenerative design for SD. John Wiley & Sons.
23. Mathews, J. A., & Tan, H. (2016). Circular economy: lessons from China. Nature
News, 531 (7595), 440.
24. McDowall, W., Geng, Y., Huang, B., Barteková, E., Bleischwitz, R., Türkeli, S.,
Kemp, R., & Doménech, T. (2017). Circular Economy Policies in China and Europe:
Circular Economy Policies in China and Europe. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3),
651–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12597
25. Ministry of MSMEs. (2021). All Schemes | Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium
Enterprises. Ministry of Micro, Medium and Small Enterprises. Government of India
https://msme.gov.in/all-schemes
26. Ministry of PNG. (2021). REFINING - POLICY ACTS | Ministry of Petroleum and
Natural Gas | Government of India. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas.
https://mopng.gov.in/en/refining/policy-acts

27. MoSPI (2021). Press Notes on Provisional Estimates of Annual National Incomes
2020-21 and Quarterly Estimates of GDP for Q4 2020-21, NSO, Ministry of Statistics
and Programmeme Implementation, Government of India.
https://mospi.gov.in/documents/213904/416359//Press%20Note_31-05-
2021_m1622547951213.pdf/7140019f-69b7-974b-2d2d-7630c3b0768d
28. Moktadir, M. A., Rahman, T., Rahman, M. H., Ali, S. M., & Paul, S. K. (2018).
Drivers to sustainable manufacturing practices and circular economy: A perspective
of leather industries in Bangladesh. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1366–1380.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.063
29. Moktadir, Md. A., Kumar, A., Ali, S. M., Paul, S. K., Sultana, R., & Rezaei, J. (2020).
Critical success factors for a circular economy: Implications for business strategy and
the environment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(8), 3611–3635.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2600
30. Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The Circular Economy: An
Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context.
Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-
2693-2
31. NITI Aayog. (2017). Strategy Paper on Resource Efficiency. National Institute for
Transforming India, Government of India.
32. NITI Aayog. (2021). SDG India (Index and Dashboard 2020–21).
https://sdgindiaindex.niti.gov.in/#/
33. Priyadarshini, P., & Abhilash, P. C. (2020). Circular economy practices within energy
and waste management sectors of India: A meta-analysis. Bioresource technology,
304, 123018.
34. Pesce, M., Tamai, I., Guo, D., Critto, A., Brombal, D., Wang, X., Cheng, H., &
Marcomini, A. (2020). Circular Economy in China: Translating Principles into
Practice. Sustainability, 12(3), 832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030832
35. Pollard, S., Turney, A., Charnley, F., & Webster, K. (2016). The circular economy – a
reappraisal of the ‘stuff’ we love. Geography, 101(1), 17–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00167487.2016.12093979
36. Press Information Bureau. (2021, March 18). Govt Driving Transition from Linear to
Circular Economy [Press release].
https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1705772
37. Schroeder, P., Anggraeni, K., & Weber, U. (2019). The Relevance of Circular
Economy Practices to the SD Goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 23(1), 77–95.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12732
38. Shi, H., Chertow, M., & Song, Y. (2010). Developing country experience with eco-
industrial parks: a case study of the Tianjin Economic-Technological Development
Area in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(3), 191-199.
39. Silva, F. C., Shibao, F. Y., Kruglianskas, I., Barbieri, J. C., & Sinisgalli, P. A. A.
(2019). Circular economy: Analysis of the implementation of practices in the
Brazilian network. Revista de Gestão, 26(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-
03-2018-0044
40. Singhal, R. (2021). Recourse to the Circular Economy: The Path Ahead. In P.
Dasgupta, A. R. Saha, & R. Singhal (Eds.), SD Insights from India (pp. 261–280).
Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4830-1_13
41. Singhal, D., Jena, S. K., & Tripathy, S. (2019). Factors influencing the purchase
intention of consumers towards remanufactured products: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 57(23), 7289-7299.
42. Singh, M. P., Chakraborty, A., & Roy, M. (2018). Developing an extended theory of
planned behaviour model to explore circular economy readiness in manufacturing
MSMEs, India. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, 313-322.
43. Su, B., Heshmati, A., Geng, Y., & Yu, X. (2013). A review of the circular economy in
China: Moving from rhetoric to implementation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 42,
215–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.020
44. Taranic, I., Behrens, A., & Topi, C. (2016). Understanding the Circular Economy in
Europe, from Resource Efficiency to Sharing Platforms: The CEPS Framework.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14272.94728
45. TERI & YES Bank. (2018). Circular Economy: A Business Imperative for India. YES
Bank and The Energy and Resource Institute of India (TERI).
46. TERI. (2019). Reference Report for National Resource Efficiency Policy of India. The
Energy and Resource Institute.
47. UNEP. (2016). UN calls for urgent rethink as resource use skyrockets.
https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/un-calls-urgent-rethink-
resource-use-skyrockets
48. Van Ewijk, S. (2018). Resource Efficiency and the Circular Economy: Concepts,
Economic Benefits, Barriers, and Policies. The Department for Environment, Food &
Rural Affairs (Defra). UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, London’s Global
University.
49. Wautelet, T. (2018). Exploring the role of independent retailers in the circular
economy: a case study approach (Doctoral dissertation, Thesis for: Master of
 Business Administration. DOI: 10.13140/RG. 2.2. 17085.15847. Advisor: Professor
Dr. phil. Christoph Georg Hartmann).
50. Wautelet, T. (2018). The Concept of Circular Economy: Its Origins and its Evolution.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17021.87523
51. Williams, J. (2019) Circular Cities. Urban Studies, 56(13), 2746-2762.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018806133
52. Zhijun, F., & Nailing, Y. (2007). Putting a circular economy into practice in China.
Sustainability Science, 2(1), 95-101.