School of the Environment, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Caufield East, VIC, 3145, Australia.
J Environ Manage. 2024 Jun;360:121070. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121070. Epub 2024 May 13.
Countries' circularity performance and CO emissions should be addressed as a part of the UN net-zero Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2030. Macro-scale circularity assessment is regarded as a helpful tool for tracking and adjusting nations' progress toward the sustainable Circular Economy (CE) and SDGs. However, practical frameworks are required to address the shortage of real-world circularity assessments at the macro level. The establishment of CE benchmarks is also essential to enhance circularity in less sustainable nations. Further, monitoring the extent to which nations' circularity activities are sustainable and in line with the SDGs is an area that lacks sufficient practical research. The current research aims to develop a macro-level framework and benchmarks for national sustainable circularity assessments. Methodologically, we develop a dynamic network data envelopment analysis (DN-DEA) framework for multi-period circularity and eco-efficiency assessment of OECD countries. To do so, we incorporate dual-role and bidirectional carryovers in our macro-scale framework. From a managerial perspective, we conduct a novel comparative analysis of the circularity and eco-efficiency of the nations to monitor macro-scale sustainable CE trends. Research results reveal a significant performance disparity in circularity, eco-efficiency, and benchmarking patterns. Accordingly, circularly efficient nations cannot necessarily be considered eco-friendly and sustainable. Although Germany (as a superior circular nation) can be regarded as a circularity benchmark, it cannot serve as an eco-efficiency benchmark for less eco-efficient nations. Hence, the new method allows decision-makers not only to identify the nations' circularity outcome but also to distinguish sustainable nations from less sustainable ones. This, on the one hand, provides policymakers with a multi-faceted sustainability analysis, beyond the previous unidimensional analysis. On the other, it proposes improvement benchmarks for planning and regulating nations' future circularity in line with real sustainability goals. The capabilities of our innovative approach are demonstrated in the case study.
各国的循环性能和二氧化碳排放应作为联合国净零可持续发展目标(SDGs)2030 的一部分得到解决。宏观层面的循环评估被认为是跟踪和调整各国向可持续循环经济(CE)和 SDGs 过渡的有用工具。然而,需要实际框架来解决宏观层面实际循环评估的短缺问题。建立 CE 基准对于提高不太可持续国家的循环性也至关重要。此外,监测各国循环活动在多大程度上可持续并符合 SDGs 是一个缺乏足够实践研究的领域。本研究旨在为国家可持续循环评估制定宏观框架和基准。在方法论上,我们为经合组织国家的多期循环和生态效率评估开发了一个动态网络数据包络分析(DN-DEA)框架。为此,我们在我们的宏观框架中纳入了双重角色和双向结转。从管理角度来看,我们对各国的循环性和生态效率进行了新颖的比较分析,以监测宏观可持续 CE 趋势。研究结果揭示了循环性、生态效率和基准模式方面的显著绩效差异。因此,循环效率高的国家不一定被认为是环保和可持续的。尽管德国(作为一个优越的循环国家)可以被视为循环基准,但它不能作为生态效率较低的国家的基准。因此,新方法不仅使决策者能够识别国家的循环成果,还能够区分可持续国家和不太可持续的国家。这一方面为决策者提供了多维可持续性分析,超越了以前的一维分析。另一方面,它为规划和监管各国未来的循环性提供了改进基准,以符合实际的可持续性目标。我们的创新方法的能力在案例研究中得到了证明。