Circular Economy of Phosphorus Flow

HENVI Workshop 2015: Circular Economy and Sustainable Food Systems

Moro Abdulai

Anna Kuokkanen

Barbara Plank

Eetu Virtanen

Gen Zha

Abstract Current population of the world is around 7 billion and this number is projected to only con-tinue growing. In order to feed and fulfill the increasing consumption, humans are extracting and depleting the earth’s resources at increasing rates without consideration for the natural balance of the environment. Phosphorus is one of those critical raw materials and it is used in fertilizers of agricultural lands, supplement in animal feeds, pesticides, and medicines. Phos-phate rock, the world’s main source of phosphorus, is a non-renewable resource that neither can be produced synthetically nor replaced. Its declining reserves accompanied by the increas-ing global demand is problematic. It is the contention of this paper to discuss the importance and the ways of meeting the world’s phosphorus demand in a resource efficient way. The report identifies the opportunities of circular economy application onto the phosphorus flow in the EU agriculture and food systems as well as reviews relevant policy frameworks. The report starts with the outline of phosphorus flow in agriculture and discusses why phos-phorus is a critical raw material in the EU. The second part of the study introduces the concept of circular economy and opportunities to increase the efficiency of resource use as well as min-imizing losses. Then the report brings together the two introductory parts by applying the con-cept of circular economy to phosphorus flow in the EU food systems. It identifies at which stages losses occur and in which impacts they result. After that, it analyzes EU policy frameworks rel-evant for phosphorus flows in the EU and it concludes the previous parts of the report and fo-cuses on the future challenges of the transition to circular economy of the phosphorus flow in the EU food systems.

Table of Contents

Objective and Scope of the Report............................................................................................. 4

1. General Introduction................................................................................................................... 5

2. Introduction to Phosphorus Flow and the Current Situation …………………......... 5

3. General Principles of Circular Economy ……..................................................................... 8

4. Principles of CE applied to phosphorus flow.................................................................... 10

5. Existing Policies Related to Phosphorus Flow and Food Systems........................... 14

6. Transition to a Circular Economy in the EU – Future guidelines.............................. 17

7. Conclusion and Future Challenges………………………………………………………………. 19

References............................................................................................................................................. 21

Objective and Scope of the Report The following report identifies and analyzes the opportunities of circular economy application onto the phosphorus flow in the EU agriculture and food systems as well as analyzes relevant policy frameworks. The objectives are to:

• identify stages of the phosphorus flow at which losses occur, • find opportunities offered by circular economy, • analyze existing policy frameworks, • discuss future challenges on the way towards circular economy in regards to phospho-

rus flow in the EU food systems. The report starts with the outline of phosphorus flow in agriculture and discusses why phos-phorus is a critical raw material in the EU. This part of the report, performed by Moro Abdulai, serves as an introduction to the study as it will allow to analyze at which stages of the flow losses may occur and will further be used as a basis. The second part of the study, presented by Gen Zha, introduces the concept of circular economy and opportunities to increase the efficiency of resource use as well as minimizing losses. Third part of the report, written by Barbara Plank, brings together two introductory parts by applying the concept of circular economy to phosphorus flow in the EU food systems. It identi-fies at which stages losses occur and in which impacts they result. The fourth part of the report, performed by Anna Kuokkanen, analyzes EU policy frameworks relevant for phosphorus flows in the EU. It creates the basis for further discussion on which policies would help utilize the concept of circular economy in order to raise the efficiency of phosphorus flow in European agricultural sector. The fifth part, written by Eetu Virtanen, concludes the previous parts of the report and focuses on the future challenges of the transition to circular economy of the phosphorus flow in the EU food systems.

1. General Introduction Current population of the world is around 7 billion and this number is projected to only con-tinue growing. In order to feed and meet the increasing consumption demands, humans are extracting and depleting the Earth’s resources at growing rates without consideration for the natural balance of the environment. Over the history, people have continued to shape, manipu-late and change the physical environment to meet the needs of the society. Last 150 years of industrial evolution was dominated by a linear-model of production and consumption with re-sources being extracted on a one-way-track. Utilization of resources was material and energy intensive; goods were manufactured from raw materials, sold and used with 80% of the mate-rials ending up as waste (Polman 2013). Increasing needs coupled with limited resources, and wasteful use of goods are producing adverse effects on earth, leading to an unsustainable life-style that needs to be changed.

2. Introduction to Phosphorus flow and the Current Situation Elemental phosphorus was first discovered by accident in the seventeenth-century by a Ger-man chemist from Hamburg called Henning Brand, when he was distilling urine in an attempt to obtain gold from the golden liquid. He first thought urine contained gold, but what he rather obtained was a whitish flammable solid called white phosphorus. For over ten decades, white phosphorus was the main source for elemental phosphorus. However, phosphorus can today be obtained from calcium phosphate mineral called apatite [Ca3(PO4)2].

2 Ca3(PO4)2(S) + 6 SiO2(s) +10 C(s) → P4(g) + 6 CaSiO3(l) +10 CO(g) The achieved product, phosphorus consist of P4 molecules, and the bond between the P atoms is 60o which actually makes the P4 molecule unstable and very reactive.

Figure1: Structure of elemental Phosphorus showing small bond angle of 60o between the phosphorus atoms. (Citizendium.org/wiki/Phosphorus) When white phosphorus is heated to about 300 °C, it structurally changes to a different form called red phosphorus.

Figure 2: Structure of elemental white Structure of red Phosphorus Phosphorus. (Gensonscience.wikispaces.com)

Global phosphorus flow, from reserve, through agricultural, food and sewage systems

Figure 3: Key phosphorus flow through the global food production and consumption system (Schröder et al. 2010, 35) Why Phosphorus is a critical raw material in the EU

Phosphorus is an important raw material for the manufacturing of fertilizers used in agricul-tural lands to increase food production. Furthermore, it is used as a supplement for animal feeds and for the preparation of pesticides and medicines. Without phosphorus, there will be low production yields in agricultural crops, leading to a decrease in food production. Currently almost all countries within the EU depend on imported phosphate minerals for the manufacture of phosphorus containing feed supplement and fertilizers. The movement of Phosphorus traded materials was overshadowed by rock phosphate, phosphoric acid and fertilizers resulting in net import of 1.8 million tonnes of phosphorus. Some 0.6 million tonnes out of the 1.8 was es-timated to have ended up in durable materials. It was approximated that 2.2 million tonnes of

phosphorus was removed from soil, specifically agricultural lands. Around 2.2 million tonnes of phosphorus returned to soil through livestock manures and 1.3 million tonnes to fertilizers. The use of Phosphorus is essential for food production; nevertheless, phosphorus usage has its damaging impacts on the environment specifically in relation to food security. Phosphate rock which is the world’s main source of phosphorus, is non-renewable, reserve of quality phosphate is in decline, and the use of phosphate would exhaust in two to three generations. Access to high quality phosphate is becoming physically laborious because of increasing waste accumulation and cost. In addition to that, there is also growing global demand for phosphorus due to rising demand for agricultural yields to feed the growing population of the world. Phosphorus re-serves are found in few countries and for the past decade production of food has become highly dependent on fertilizers containing phosphorus. Sooner or later when this essential commodity becomes scarce, food availability and security will be under threat. Although alternative phos-phorus source is likely be found in the future, it’s obvious that this commodity is in short supply together with instable prices relative to human consumption. The scarcity of phosphorus should not only be defined by physical insufficiency of phosphate rock, there is also the problem of management of phosphorus throughout the systems of pro-ducing and consuming food. In addition, there is the problem of economic scarcity, where farm-ers with buying power get access to fertilizer market, instead of it been accessible to all farmers who need it for crop production. Furthermore there is the lack of proper governmental struc-tures globally that aim to ensure long-term availability and equal distribution of phosphorus for food production. Global phosphorus dilemma in relation to food production and security needs to be approached in a holistic manner.

Figure 4: Instability in Phosphate price (www.infomine.com) Phosphorus is one of the influential commodities needed for sustenance. Currently there is no replacement for phosphorus in the production of crops. Phosphorus cannot be produced syn-thetically, making it necessary to ensure that phosphorus is available not only for a short term but also long term for the production of global food.

‘‘We may be able to substitute nuclear power for coal, and plastics for wood, and yeast for meat, and friendliness for isolation—but for phosphorus there is neither substitute nor replacement’’ (Asimov, 1974).

3. General Principles of Circular Economy Tighter environmental standards combined with resource scarcity means that a much higher share of consumer materials should be recovered. A circular economy seeks to rebuild capital financially, socially and naturally to ensure enhanced flow of goods and services. The idea of circular economy replacing the status quo linear economy of take-make-use-dispose model is gaining popularity in the political and business sphere. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015), circular economy is a “global economic model that decouples economic growth and development from consumption of finite re-sources”. The model promotes circularity across a range of materials, products and actors at different stages in product and value chains. It focuses on the attempt to reuse and extract the maximum value from products before safely returning them to the biosphere. Circular economy transforms and optimizes the chain of consumption of biological and technical materials by keeping the materials circulating in economy for longer. It goes beyond waste reduction by pro-moting technological, organizational and social innovation.

Figure 5: Biological and technical materials cycling through the economic system (Polman 2013) “Circular economy draws a distinction between consumption and use of materials” (Polman 2013). The irreversible consumption of technical materials present in a linear system is mini-mized in a circular model. The key aims of circular economy are to focus on effective design and use of materials, provide opportunities for innovation, prevent waste, and to work towards re-newable energy sources. For example, the aim to increase the use of ‘functional services’ for

technical materials is promoted. This can be done by having manufacturers retain ownership and only selling the use of products. Another area of management is waste disposal. Biological and technical materials should be designed to fit within the biosphere in order to eliminate waste. Biological materials can be returned to soil by composting while technical materials can be recovered or upgraded. In addition, the use of renewable energy can be promoted by run-ning agricultural production on solar power. Priorities in the circular model include focusing on agricultural products and waste, wood and paper, plastics, metals, and phosphorus. Priority sectors include packaging of food, electronic and electrical equipment, transport, furniture, and buildings (European Commission 2014b). A goal of the circular model is to create more value from materials used in consumer goods. This can be achieved by retaining resource value by converting waste into by-products, retain effec-tiveness of the system by thinking holistically and not only focusing on the individual parts of a process while neglecting the impacts from a system as whole. The circular model seeks to un-derstand how parts across fields influence one another within a whole and the relationship of the whole to the parts. Components within the circular model are considered in relation to the environmental, technical, social, and economic context. For high in demand consumer goods, a creation of an efficient redistribution and reuse system is necessary. For example, ways that can enhance the collection and wash of bottles to refill with beverages or reuse of clothes, are effective ways to keep materials circulating longer. Additionally, designing durable products that allows for use in more consecutive cycles can be beneficial. A shift to a circular model could minimize the strain on earth by keeping products at their high-est utilize and value. With any new model seeking to replace a status quo, there exist barriers. Some of the obstacles include insufficient skills and investment, lack of incentives and motiva-tion for business actors, limited information, lack of consumer awareness, lack or insufficiency of governmental and institutional structures, and insufficient investment and funding (Euro-pean Commission 2014b). Overcoming these difficulties is essential; capturing new opportuni-ties requires partnership, development of new technologies, and education of the public. Tran-sition to circular economy is a multi-level governance challenge; actions need to be taken at multiple levels, from global to member state, local, private sector and individual. Already a number of policies are in place that support a circular economy model, but a lot of a work still needs to be done. By increasing resource efficiency, minimizing waste and improving market conditions, the world can move towards a greener and more sustainable lifestyle.

4. Principles of the Circular Economy Applied to Phosphorus Flow After presenting the major principles of circular economy (CE), this report will continue to ap-ply them to the phosphorus flows through the food production and consumption system. As already seen above, substantial losses occur at all stages of the system: mining and fertilizer processing, transport and storage, application and harvest, food processing and retailing, and food consumption. Approximately 15 Mt of phosphorus per year are extracted out of the in-creasingly scarce phosphate rock especially for food production, whereas just 3 Mt are finally consumed in the food eaten by the world population. (Cordell et al. 2009a, 295f) An apparent loss of 80% could easily be interpreted as absolutely inefficient. However, the possibilities within the scope of the CE to integrate those losses back into the system should not be forgotten. At first, different types of phosphorus losses were looked at. Schröder et al. (2010, 31f) classi-fied them into two groups, namely permanent losses, which imply a phosphorus flux that is exported from the entire food production and consumption system, and temporary losses, which are temporarily lost from a certain sub-system, but remain in the whole system and can therefore be potentially recovered. Table 1 gives the major sources of phosphorus losses di-vided into those two categories and besides divided into certain functional groups used for our further analysis. These groups represent the main areas of losses in the phosphorus flow and are again divided into certain examples followed by appropriate sustainable response strate-gies in the context of CE, which will be elaborated upon below.

I. Losses to the environment At the first stage of the production process, losses occur during the extraction and the rock amelioration process whereby contaminants (e.g. iron phosphate) are removed and contained or disposed into rivers. Some spillages also take place during storage and transport of phos-phate rock. Prud’homme (2010) anticipates an increased importance of minimizing those losses through improved management, new efficient technologies and adequate financial in-centives in the future, although there is of course a physical limit to what is possible. In addition, there is a great need to reduce environmental impacts such as disturbance of natural land-scapes and ecosystems, water pollution or discharging of radioactive and toxic substances. (Schröder et al. 2010, 45f). The production process of phosphate rock into phosphate products causes a significant amount of loss as well, especially phosphorus that is extracted in the form of the by-product phos-phogypsum, that also causes severe environmental impacts because of its radioactivity. (Prud’homme 2010) With some investments in new safe processing technologies there might be a possibility to recover phosphorus from those big phosphogypsum stockpiles. (Schröder et al. 2010, 72). When moved on to the production process in agriculture, it is inevitable that erosion is the main reason for worldwide permanent phosphorus losses and subsequent soil degradation. Erosion abatement measures often aim at improving the soil infiltration capacity through e.g. less re-moval of crop residues, ridge tillage, terracing, reforestation and so on. (Schröder et al. 2010, 73f).

Table 1: Typology of phosphorus losses and appropriate CE response strategies. Based on Schröder et al. (2010, 33f)

Loss type Examples CE response strategy

A. PERMANENT LOSSES from the food production &

I. LOSSES TO ENVIRON-MENT

• Mining losses

• Losses in rock ameliora-tion and P extraction

• Reduce spillages, wastage

• More efficient recovery techniques

consumption system

• Losses in fertiliser pro-duction

• Phosphogypsum stockpi-les

• Spillage during storage, transport

• Process improvements

• New recovery techniques

• Reduce spillages, wastage

• Erosion, runoff, leaching (to water or non-arable land)

• Improving the soil infiltra-tion capacity

• Discouragement of ero-sion sensitive crops

• Wastewater discharged to rivers, oceans

• Encourage efficient recov-ery of P for productive re-use in agriculture

B. TEMPORARY LOSSES within the food production & consumption system

II. ACCUMULA-TION in agricul-tural soil

Excess P in soils due to:

• Abundant (risk aversive) fertilization

• Soil testing and manage-ment

• Better utilization of soil P reserves

• Fertilizer placement

• Mycorrhizal fungi

(i.e. poten-tially recoverable)

• Local excess of manure due to concentration of livestock

• Policies aiming at lives-tock production

• Manure processing and export of nutrients from surplus areas

• Using low P feed

III. ORGANIC WASTE BY-PRO-DUCTS losses (due to inefficient use, unneces-sary waste production or suboptimal

• Slaughterhouse waste

• Crops used for non-food purposes

• Crop residues

• Organic waste from food and feed industry

• Food preparation & con-sumption waste

• Manure, human excreta

• Improve reuse in agricul-ture

• Prioritize P use for food security

• Improve reuse to con-serve nutrients

• Composting with other or-ganic rest streams

• Collect organic household waste followed by e.g. bio-gas production

recycling) • Source separation and re-use in agriculture

• Sewage sludge reuse

II. Accumulation in agricultural soil Phosphorus losses from the crop itself are negligible as it immediately becomes a part of the crop mass and is either harvested or grazed, where almost all of the consumed phosphorus is returned to the soil as urine and faeces. In today’s Europe pests and diseases also do not cause significant losses as they occur rarely. (Schröder et al. 2010, 37f) A severe problem is rather caused by the accumulation of phosphorus in agricultural soil, which is indicated by the OECD (2015) as the soil surface phosphorus surplus (amount of P applied to land minus amount re-moved in harvested crops). In Western Europe more phosphorus is generally imported than exported from agricultural land, because of a risk-averse attitude and the will to maximisze crop yields. So there is a high, unused phosphorus surplus in 70-80 % of the European arable soils. (Römer 2009). Therefore, Römer (2009) calls for a critical revision of the common recommendations of phos-phorus levels to ensure a more efficient use of phosphorus fertilizer and also to wipe out the misconception that mineral fertilizers are more available to crops than organic resources such as manures. Furthermore, there is a need to replace current application strategies by more pre-cise application positioned sub-surface close to seed rows in the most intensely rooted parts of the soil, where plants have the best ability to uptake phosphorus. (Schröder et al. 2010, 74f). There are also several attempts to find ways of improving crop genotypes or to create a symbi-osis with the arbuscular mycorrhizal funghi, which can improve the availability of soil phos-phorus for the crops. (Schröder et al. 2010, 76). However, not only the phosphorus input can be addressed in attempts to enhance the reduction of phosphorus losses, also the output should be extended to equalize the soil surplus. Here, not only is the focus on crops, milk, eggs, meat and wool, but also on manure. Locally excessively high concentrations of soil phosphorus are emerging due to the deposition of urine and faeces. As there is a high separation between farms specialising in crop or in livestock production, the phosphorus in the manure does not return to the land where the feed originates from. Solutions that are recommended by Schröder et al. (2010, 77f) could be a better distribution of livestock over the feed production area, manure processing and export of nutrients from the surplus ar-eas and adjusting livestock diets by using less phosphorus containing feed. Of course, it would be advisable to shift away our consumption from meat and dairy products, as one of numerous reasons for this measure is that the amount of phosphorus consumption per kilo output is very high compared to vegetables, fruits or grains. (Hislop and Hill 2011, 30).

III. Organic Waste and By-Products losses Losses occur as well between harvest and food consumption. There are still many potential efficiency measures in improved management or technical practices to reduce losses in crop and food storage, processing and trade, food retailing and in the household food storage, prep-aration and consumption like shifting the production closer to the point of demand or reducing wastage of edible food. (Schröder et al. 2010, 79). However, some losses are still unavoidable, but can be composted or otherwise reintroduced into the phosphorus cycle. Furthermore, almost 100% of the phosphorus consumed in food is

directly excreted, but until now only a very small amount of the human excreta is actually treated for reuse and either ends up discharged to water as effluent or non-agricultural land as landfill. (Schröder et al. 2010, 44). Recovering phosphorus from organic waste streams could have many important benefits. First of all, it could prevent pollution of water bodies where it could lead to eutrophication and other disturbances of the ecosystem. Phosphorus could also be recovered from different wastewater streams and thus improves wastewater treatment and the possibilities of its reuse. Secondly, the recovered phosphorus could be used as a renewable fertilizer source or used in industrial applications and therefore substitute the increasingly scarce mineral phosphates. There is already a wide range of technical processes used to recover phosphorus ranging from low-cost, low-tech small-scale (decentralized) processes through to more expensive, high-tech large-scale (centralized) recovery processes. As they are described by Schröder et al. (2010, 85f) they have both pros and cons, but anyways many technologies are already antiquated and need immediate modernization. Especially when it comes to recycling of municipal sewage sludge a lot of caution is needed because of high concentrations of contaminants. Therefore, more research and more efficient technologies are strongly necessary to recover phosphorus in an uncontaminated and plant-available form. In addition, Schröder et al. (2010, 92f) state that “end of pipe” measures as the recovery of phosphorus out of seawater, aquaculture, ocean sediments or landfills do not seem realistic for technical and economic reasons.

Figure 6: A sustainable scenario for meeting long-term future phosphorus demand through phosphorus use efficiency and recovery (Schröder et al. 2010, 71, redrawn from Cordell et al. 2009b) When following a recent global phosphorus scenario analysis as it is shown in figure 1 all those above presented measures are needed to meet the world’s increasing long-term phosphorus demand in a sustainable way, measures as well in demand management (70%) and in recover-ing and reuse (30%). In addition, the above mentioned pathways of phosphorus loss and the nature of environmental effects differ substantially from country to country, so the strategies to abate losses and improve the efficiency of phosphorus must differ as well on a national level. (Schröder et al. 2010, 70f).

5. Existing Policies Related to Phosphorus Flows and Food Systems Phosphorus is an essential macronutrient in agriculture that cannot be replaced by any other element. It is mainly produced out of phosphate rock, which is a finite mineral and which big-gest reserves are found in geopolitically sensitive areas. At the same time, European phospho-rus flows in the food system are highly inefficient and have enormous leakages to the water bodies, where phosphorus causes serious eutrophication and dead zones. The balance between P imports and exports can illustrate the extent of the problem; a total of 2600 Gg of P was im-ported to EU-27, of which 1500 in the form of fertilizer and the remainder in food and feed, while out of this amount only 600 Gg of P i.e. 22% was exported (Schoumans et al. 2015). The rest accumulates in waste and soil, and finally runs off to the water. Hence, the problem is man-ifested by wasteful use of vital element, which in the long term threatens both resource security and environmental sustainability. The linear open-ended phosphorus flows are pinned down to inefficient nutrient management in the primary production, triggered by the decisions in food supply and demand chain, and on the other end, lack of recycling recovered phosphorus back to the use in food production, thus minimizing losses to the environment. So far policies have been targeting the environmental runoff from point sources and considerably less from diffuse sources i.e. agricultural sector. Industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants are bound by polluter-pays-principle, thus forced to meet nutrient runoff targets. However, these recovered nutrients are not always returned back to agricultural use, the EU average being 41% (Kelessidis & Stasinakis, 2012). In contrast, EU-level legislation to prevent nutrient pollution from agriculture has mainly relied on the Nitrate Directive, which does not explicitly address phosphorus. Resource security has not been addressed yet (Schröder et al., 2010). Recently though, phosphorus was added to the European critical raw materials’ list (European Commission 2014a), which might trigger new policies. There is no EU-level phosphorus legislation, although many member states’ national regulation accommodates phosphorus. As there is no EU-wide framework, phosphorus regulation varies from country to country. The most relevant directives are stated in the table below. It should be noted that as most of these are directives, they allow member states to decide themselves how to meet stated objectives. Hence, there can exist a wide array of strategies. Roughly, phos-phorus policies can be divided into two groups by their aims and objectives. On the other hand there are policies addressing phosphorus inputs in agriculture. Agricultural sector causes biggest leakages, however, also tackling this stage is the most difficult. On the other hand, there are policies that are directed at the ‘end-of-pipe’ stage, in which phosphorus streams are smaller, but more manageable and concentrated, mainly in the form of sewage sludge, wastewater, and organic residues. The aim here has been removing phosphorus and preventing its leaching to waterways. However, lately the interest towards recovering and re-cycling phosphorus from this stage back to use has increased, as the value of phosphorus re-source has been understood.

Table 2: EU-level policies regarding nutrient use (European Commission 2014b)

Legislation Sector Measures

Water protection sector

Directives on Bathing Wa-ter (76/160/EEC) amended by (2006/7/EC)

Water

Water Framework Direc-tive (2000/60/IEC)

Water quality · Achieving and maintaining a good status for all surface wa-ters and ground waters by 2015

· Prevent deterioration and en-sure the conservation of high water quality

· River Basin Management Plans have to be implemented

Groundwater Directive (2006/118/EC)

Groundwater quality

Marine Strategy Frame-work Directive (2008/98/EC)

Marine industry

Agri-environmental management

Common Agricultural Po-licy

Cross-compliance Agri-environmental schemes

· Land has to be kept in good ag-ricultural and environmental condition

· Fertilizer application re-striction can be part of AEP

Code of Good Agricultural Practices (part of CAP)

Manure spread, treat-ment and storage, and application

Advisory instrument for farm-ers or minimum level of re-quirements

Fertilizer Directive (in preparation)

Fertilizers Fertilizer criteria

Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC)

Nitrogen pollution from agriculture

· Identifying and designating ni-trate vulnerable zones

· Establishing Codes of Good Ag-ricultural Practice

· Establishing action programs · Monitoring the progress of im-

plementation · Maximum amounts of animal

manure applied on land 170kg N/ha/y

Waste prevention and management sector

Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC)

Biodegradable waste Reduce landfilling biodegradable waste

Waste Framework Direc-tive (2008/98/EC)

Waste End-of-waste criteria

Industrial Emissions Di-rective (2010/75/EU)

Industrial emissions

Directive on Dangerous Substances (76/464/EEC) à (2006/11/EC)

Dangerous substances

As already mentioned, there is no European-level overarching phosphorus legislation in the food system, some examples of P policies are mentioned in the table 5. Common Agricultural Policy has included cross-compliance principle, which requires land to be kept in good agricul-tural and environmental condition. In addition, there is agri-environmental scheme, which grants payments for up-taking agri-environmental measures in agricultural production. AEP can include such measures as fertilizer application restrictions, manure application re-strictions, buffer zones, and etc., but these vary between member states. However, on average only 24% of agricultural land is subject to AEP, although in some countries this might be considerably higher, in Finland this accounts for 95%. Therefore, there is varia-tion between member states to which extent phosphorus applications are restricted and con-trolled, and by which means (Amery & Schoumans 2014). In some countries there are no ex-plicit limits at all, only indirect limitation of manure phosphorus by Nitrate Directive. The new CAP, which is enforced since the beginning of 2015, has included more ‘greening’ practices that are meant to foster better overall agri-environmental management. In Pillar 1 at least 30% is directed at Green Direct Payments, which focus on permanent grassland, ecology and crop di-versification (European Commission 2013b). In addition, 30% of the second pillar must be di-rected at amongst others organic farming and pro-environmental investments (European Com-mission 2013b). Table 3: Examples of P restrictions in some of the member states

Denmark Poland The Netherlands Sweden

There is a total limit of 140-170kg N/ha/y for the en-tire Danish territory, which restricts P ap-plications from ma-nure. There is also maximum applica-tion rate for total P, but it is only consul-tative. In addition, since 2005, there is a tax on mineral P in feed. When animal farms are willing to expand their pro-duction in the P sen-sitive areas, they face additional re-strictions for the manure P surplus. (Amery & Schou-mans, 2014)

Has no re-strictions on P appli-cations or other re-strictions. (Amery & Schoumans, 2014)

From 1998-2005 The Netherlands had intro-duced MINAS accounting tool to manage N and P in-puts and outputs, surplus being taxed. It was an eco-nomic instrument rather than physical mandate and gave insight into farm management options and farm benchmarking. It did not punish highly efficient farms, but forced ineffi-cient ones to change their management or pay taxes. Albeit, the system was con-sidered promising, it was seen as incompatible with the N Directive by EU Court of Justice and abro-gated. (Oenema & Barent-sen, 2005)

As part of environmen-tal objectives adopted by Sweden, an interim target was set in 2005 (Swedish Government 2005) that by 2015 at least 60% of P com-pounds present in wastewater should be recovered for use on productive land, at least half of which should be returned to arable land. Recycling of P in-creased, but the interim target seemed to be dif-ficult to meet (Natur-vårdsverket 2011) and it’s not anymore in-cluded in the new mile-stones published in 2013 (Naturvårdsverket 2013).

6. Transition to a Circular Economy in the EU – Future Guidelines Dealing with Phosphorus As discussed in chapter 3, there are already some policies and measures in place in the EU re-lated to phosphorus flows in food systems, but no specific regulation over phosphorus use in many EU countries. There are initiatives underway addressing the transition to circular econ-omy by private actors and stakeholders that are parallel with the EU policy discussions. According to the “Scoping study to identify potential circular economy actions, priority sectors, material flows and value chains” (European Commission 2014b) the implementation of the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe (European Commission 2011a) would be an important step on the way towards a circular economy. The Roadmap concentrates on the key sectors nutrition, housing and mobility that are typically responsible for 70-80% of all environmental impacts in the EU countries. Addressing food systems, in its Budget for Europe 2020 communi-cation (European Commission 2011b) the Commission proposed measures that a reformed Common Agricultural Policy would need to take to achieve higher resource-efficiency. The sus-tainable supply of phosphorus is an additional issue for long term global food security. The Roadmap states that further research is needed to find out how improvements to the fertilizer, food production and bio-waste issues could reduce the EUs dependence on mined phosphate. The Roadmap (European Commission 2011a) defined a milestone addressing food systems: “By 2020, incentives to healthier and more sustainable food production and consumption will be widespread and will have driven a 20% reduction in the food chain's resource inputs. Disposal of edible food waste should have been halved in the EU”. In The Roadmap, Commission also expressed its will to assess more closely the security of supply of phosphorus and possible ac-tions towards its more sustainable use. This will resulted in the Consultative Communication on the Sustainable Use of Phosphorus (European Commission 2013a). Relevant for the transi-tion to a circular economy, the communication on the Sustainable Use of Phosphorus mapped potential for and obstacles to a higher efficiency in the use of phosphorus. Price of phosphate rock and its derived products was found to be an obstacle for technological development both in the efficiency of phosphate rock extraction, processing and industrial use and the processing of recycled phosphorus. (European Commission 2013a). Although some initiatives within EU have already led to more efficient phosphorus use and re-ductions in losses of phosphorus in agriculture there are a lot of possibilities for significant im-provements in phosphorus use and efficiency at farm level. In 15 out of 22 EU countries, the main source of phosphorus to agricultural land is recycled phosphorus in manure, but in many regions in the EU there are many opportunities for processing manure and using it in place of mineral fertilizers. The communication finds that the Research Framework Programme for 2014-2020 and forthcoming European Innovation Partnership for agricultural productivity and sustainability could be important in finding new solutions for a more efficient use of phos-phorus in agriculture. (European Commission 2013a). Also any reduction of food waste at all life cycle stages would reduce the need for inputs of new phosphorus into the system. Food waste issues have been comprehensively studied in the EU. Large quantities of phosphorus is lost to landfill with food waste as such and when ashes from incineration of food waste and biodegradable are not reused. Reusing biodegradable and food waste composted, digested or as ashes would recycle considerable amounts of phosphorus and

other nutrients. The Communication states that highly fragmented interpretation of the stand-ards for biodegradable waste is complicating making use of this waste stream across the EU. There are also many other waste streams from agriculture and by-products from food produc-tion that, if properly managed, could recycle significant quantities of phosphorus. (European Commission 2013a). There are a lot of technologies available enabling recovering phosphorus from waste water treatment plants. The technologies have been developed considerably recently, with several pilot projects and also commercial scale operations across Europe. About 25% of waste water phosphorus is currently reused in the EU, most often through direct application of sewage sludge on to fields. The total achievable potential for recovery is about 300,000 tonnes of phos-phorus per year in the EU. The significant differences in sewage sludge application between the different EU countries shows potential for harmonization of best practice. The Communication demands harmonization of higher quality standards that would encourage confidence amongst farmers and consumers on the safe use of sludge. A common strategy to promote the use of these renewable sources by farmers is lacking. The price of recycled fertilizer is usually higher than the price of mineral phosphate fertilizer. Much more could be done to identify markets for recycled phosphorus and barriers to increasing its use and implementing the available technol-ogies. (European Commission 2013a). The scoping study (European Commission 2014b) also finds that implementation of the 7th Environmental Action Programme - 7th EAP (European Commission 2013c) would support a circular economy in the EU. The 7th EAP states that “further efforts to manage the nutrient cycle in a more cost-effective, sustainable and resource-efficient way, and to improve efficiency in the use of fertilizers are required” through investments in research and improvements in the coherence and implementation of EU environment legislation. The 7th EAP calls for addressing the nutrient cycle as part of a more holistic approach integrating existing EU policies and thus avoiding problem shifting. The 7th EAP expects to ensure that by 2020 the nutrient cycle (ni-trogen and phosphorus) is managed in a more sustainable and resource-efficient way through better source control and the recovery of waste phosphorus. The Circular Economy Package was published in July 2014 (European Commission 2014c) and withdrawn for revision by the Commission in March 2015 (European Commission 2015). The package included an overarching communication (COM(2014)398), a proposal to amend as-pects of six EU waste Directives (COM(2014)397), and related communications on sustainable buildings (COM(2014)445), green employment (COM(2014)446) and green action for SMEs (COM(2014)440). The communication “Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe” (Eu-ropean Commission 2014d) lists specific waste challenges that are related to significant loss of resources or environmental impacts. Recycling of phosphorus is acknowledged as one of the main challenges, because of its significant security-of-supply risks and the way its current use causes waste and losses at every phase of its life cycle. The Commission is developing a frame-work for further action, following the findings of the Consultative Communication on the sus-tainable use of phosphorus. Phosphorus is also tightly linked to the challenge of food waste. The Commission is considering to present new proposals to reduce food waste. Phosphorus is also classified as a critical raw material because its production worldwide is concentrated in few countries, it has low substitutability and it has low recycling rates. The Commission promotes efficient use and recycling of critical raw materials through the framework of the Raw Materials

Initiative and the European Innovation Partnership on Raw Materials. (European Commission 2014e) As Withers et al. (2015) present, the sustainability challenge of phosphorus use in Europe can be seen as a test case for other non-renewable resources on which Europe depends and also for building global phosphorus stewardship. It is a test case for the EU on how to address this chal-lenge when interpretation of standards is fragmented, common strategy and policies are lack-ing, and national regulation is missing in many EU countries.

7. Conclusion and Future Challenges After a short introduction about the history and chemical properties of the element phosphorus we shifted our focus to emphasize the urgent need to apply the principles of the circular econ-omy on the worldwide and particularly EU phosphorus flow as it is identified as a critical raw material and could cause severe problems for the worldwide food security in the near future. Therefore, we continued to describe the main principles of the circular economy concept and then applied the possibilities within the CE on the phosphorus flow in particular. The analysis showed that there are severe losses on all stages of the production and consumption process, namely about 80% of the phosphorus imported into the process cannot be consumed in form of food products. That is why there is an urgent need to improve policies that help to close the loop as there are also already plenty of possibilities and ideas how to minimize the losses or to recycle phosphorus. However, there is certainly still a strong need for more research on mini-mizing and recycling strategies as the price of recycled phosphate fertilizers is still higher than the price of mineral fertilizers which causes a bias on the free market and does not represent the true value ratios. As it is seen in this paper the worldwide problem of phosphorus scarcity is hitting and policy makers should set immediate action to address the severe losses on all stages of the production and consumption system and to ensure food security for the growing world population in the future. Albeit the challenge is not easy and straightforward, there are promising signs in the European policy agenda towards the right direction in the sustainable P cycle. Phosphate rock was added to the critical material list, which implies the increasing interest in reducing P import dependence and securing resource availability in Europe. At the moment circular economy package is being revised and at least based on the previous version, food system is one of the central focal points. In addition, the new CAP period started from 2015 onwards, with inclusion of stronger environmental focus than ever. In the waste sector, restrictions on landfilling of biosolids is enforced from 2016, providing strong impetus for developing new strategies to deal with biowaste. Keeping in mind these positive drivers, there are still big challenges remaining but also opportunities. The most crucial thing in transition to circular economy is to address the entire food system, from agriculture to waste management, including input industries:

• Agriculture and primary production • Increasing nutrient-use-efficiency • Improving manure use and distribution • Considering technological innovations for manure treatment e.g. small-scale bio-

gas plants • Taking up agro-ecological measures to improve natural nutrient circulation

• Food supply chain • Reducing food waste

• Managing food waste • Food consumption

• Reducing food losses • Consuming less resource-intensive products, such as meat

• Waste and wastewater treatment • Re-considering technology for nutrient recycling needs • Recovering P • Developing the end product suitable for agricultural use • Closing the nutrient loop

• Input and fertilizer industry • Expanding fertilizer product portfolio • Improving market and marketing of organic fertilizers • Developing smarter and less resource-intensive fertilizing services

In conclusion, the current phosphorous flow in food systems is inefficient and recycling phos-phorus remains as one of the biggest challenges. The implementation of measures at EU level that address transition to a more circular model is vital to resource security and environmental sustainability. The current EU level phosphorus regulation lacks universality and consistency, thus much more can be done to implement an objective framework that aims to use phosphorus in a cost-effective, sustainable and resource efficient way. A circular model defining sustainable food production, consumption, recovery and recycling of phosphorus complemented by imple-mentation of technologies could lead to a more efficient phosphorus use and reduction in losses.

References

Amery, F. & Schoumans, O.F. 2014. Agricultural phosphorus legislation in Europe. The Insti-

tute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO). Merelbeke: ILVO. Cordell, D., Drangert, J.-O. & White, S. 2009a. The story of phosphorus: Global food security

and food for thought. Global Environmental Change 19(2): 292-305. Cordell, D., Schmid-Neset, T., White, S. & Drangert, J.-O. 2009b. Preferred future phosphorus

scenarios: A framework for meeting long-term phosphorus needs for global food de-mand. In International Conference on Nutrient Recovery from Wastewater Streams, Vancouver, 2009. Edited by Don Mavinic, Ken Ashley and Fred Koch. London: IWA Pub-lishing.

Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2015. The Principles. Accessed March 29. http://www.ellenmac-

arthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/circular-economy. European Commission. 2011a. Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe. COM(2011)571 European Commission. 2011b. A Budget for Europe 2020. COM(2011)500 European Commission. 2013a. Consultative Communication on the Sustainable Use of Phos-

phorus. COM(2013)517 European Commission. 2013b. Overview of CAP Reform 2014-2020. Agricultural Policy Per-

spectives Brief No 5/December. Brussels: European Union DG Agriculture and Rural De-velopment, Unit for Agricultural Policy Analysis and Perspectives.

European Commission. 2013c. The 7th Environmental Action Programme - 7th EAP (Deci-

sion No 1386/2013/EU) European Commission. 2014a. 20 critical raw materials - major challenge for EU industry. Eu-

ropean Commission - Press Release Database, 26 May. p.1. European Commission. 2014b. Scoping study to identify potential circular economy actions,

priority sectors, material flows and value chains. ENV.F.1./FRA/2010/0044. Luxem-bourg: European Union European Commission.

European Commission. 2014c. European Commission - Press Release Database, 2 July. p.1. European Commission. 2014d. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Eu-

rope. COM(2014)398 European Commission. 2014e. The European critical raw materials review. Memo 14/377. Eu-

ropean Commission - Press Release Database, 26 May. p.7.

European Commission. 2015. Commission Confirms Withdrawal of 73 Pending Proposals An-nounced in 2015 Work Programme. European Commission - Press Release Database, 7 March. p.1.

Hislop, H., & Hill, J. 2011. Reinventing the wheel: a circular economy for resource security.

Green Alliance, London, http://www.sita.co.uk/downloads/ReinventingTheWheel-1110-web.pdf

Kelessidis, A., & Stasinakis, A.S., 2012. Comparative study of the methods used for treatment

and final disposal of sewage sludge in European countries. Waste Management, Vol. 32 (6): 1186-1195.

Manahan, S., 2009. Environmental Chemistry. Ninth edition. CRC press. Naturvårdsverket. 2011. Accessed April 1, 2015. http://www.miljomal.se/Environmental-Ob-

jectives-Portal/Undre-meny/About-the-Environmental-Objectives/15-A-Good-Built-En-vironment/Interim-targets/Waste/ Page updated: 2011-03-31

Naturvårdsverket. 2013. Accessed April 1, 2015. http://www.miljomal.se/Environmental-Ob-

jectives-Portal/Undre-meny/About-the-Environmental-Objectives/ Page updated: 2013-05-30

Oenema, O. & Barentsen, P., 2005. Manure policy and MINAS: Regulating nitrogen and phos-

phorus surpluses in agriculture of the Netherlands. Paris: OECD. OECD, 2015. Agri-environmental indicators. Accessed March 18, 2015,

http://www.oecd.org/tad/env/indicators. Polman, P., 2013. Towards the Circular Economy: Opportunities for the Consumer Goods Sec-

tor. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Prud’homme, M. 2010. World Phosphate Rock Flows, Losses and Uses. International Fertilizer

Industry Association, Phosphates 2010 International Conference, 22-24 March 2010 Brussels.

Romer, V.W. 2009. Concepts for a more efficient use of phosphorus based on experimental ob-

servations (Ansatze fur eine effizientere Nutzung des Phosphors auf der Basis experi-menteller Befunde). Berichte uber Landwirtschaft 87(1): 5-30.

Schoumans, O.F., Bouraoui, F., Kabbe, C., Oenema, O., van Dijk, K.C., 2015. Phosphorus manage-

ment in Europe in a changing world. Ambio, Vol. 44(suppl 2): 180-192. Schröder, J.J., Cordell, D., Smit, A.L & Rosemarin, A. 2010. Sustainable Use of Phosphorus (Eu-

ropean Union tender project ENV.B.1/ETU/2009/0025). Report 357, Plant Research In-ternational, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 122 pp.

Swedish Government, 2005. "Svenska miljömål - ett gemensamt uppdrag." Proposition

2004/05:150.

Tro, Nivaldo J. 2011. Chemistry: A Molecular approach. Second edition. Prentice Hall. Withers, P. J., van Dijk, K. C., Neset, T. S. S., Nesme, T., Oenema, O., Rubæk, G. H., Schoumans, O.

F., Smit, B. & Pellerin, S. (2015). Stewardship to tackle global phosphorus inefficiency: The case of Europe. Ambio, 44(2), 193-206.