dealing with the transition from in line economy to...
TRANSCRIPT
355
and SNP discovery in elite germplasm. BMC genomics, 20(1), 278.
Vlasenko, V., Bakumenko, O., Osmachko, O., Bilokopytov, V., Meng, F., Humeniuk, O. (2019). The usage perspectives of the Chinese current wheat germplasm in the breeding of a new Ukrainian variety generation. AgroLife Scientific Journal, Vol.8, Number 2, ISSN 2285-5718, 162-17.
Vyhnánek, T. & Bednár, J. (2003). Detection of the varietal purity in sample of harvested wheat and triticale grains by prolamin marker. Plant Soil and Environment, 49(3), 95-98.
Wang, F.G., Zhao, J.R., Guo, J.L. & Liu, L.Z. (2003). Series of Research on Establishing DNA Fingerprinting Pool of Chinese New Maize Cultivars I. The Establishment of a Standard SSR System Fitting for Maize Cultivars' Identification [J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 1.
Wang, L.X., Jun, Q.I.U., Chang, L.F., Liu, L.H., LI, H.B., Pang, B.S. & Zhao, C.P. (2015). Assessment of wheat variety distinctness using SSR markers. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(10), 1923-1935.
Wang, S.X., Zhu, Y.L., Zhang, D.X., Shao, H., Liu, P., Hu, J.B. & Xia, X.C. (2017). Genome-wide association study for grain yield and related traits in elite wheat varieties and advanced lines using SNP markers. PloS one, 12(11).
Xin, Ye-Yun, Zhan, Z., Yi-Ping, X. & Long-Ping, Y. (2005). Identification and purity test of super hybrid rice with SSR molecular markers. Rice Science,12(1), 7-12.
Yong, Fu, B., Yang, M.H., Zeng, F. & Biligetu, B. (2017). Searching for an accurate marker-based prediction of an individual quantitative trait in molecular plant breeding. Frontiers in plant science,8, 1182.
Zhao, J., Abdelsalam, N.R., Khalaf, L., Chuang, W.P., Zhao, L., Smith, C.M. & Bai, G. (2019). Development of Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Markers for the Wheat Curl Mite Resistance Gene Cmc4. Crop Science, 59(4), 1567-1575.
Zhu, Z.W., Xu, D.A., Cheng, S.H., Gao, C.B., Xia, X.C. & Hao, Y.F. (2018). HE Zhong-Hu. Characterization of Fusarium Head Blight Resistance Gene Fhb1 and Its Putative Ancestor in Chinese Wheat Germplasm [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 4, 473-482.
***Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2009). How to feed the world in 2050. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy. Retrieved from:www.fao.org/fileadmin/.../How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf.
***Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2010), Feeding the world, Retrieved from: www.fao.org/3/i2490e/i2490e03a.pdf.
***Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2017). The future of food and agriculture – Trends and challenges. Annual Report. Retrieved from: www.fao.org/3/a-i6583e.pdf.
***Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2018). The future of food and agriculture – Alternative pathways to 2050. Rome. 224 pp. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
***International Rules for Seed Testing (ISTA) (2019). Species and variety testing. Chapter 8, i-8-28 (36), Zurich, Switzerland.
***International Wheat Genome Sequencing Consortium (IWGSC) (2014). A chromosome-based draft sequence of the hexaploid bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) genome. Science 345.6194 (2014): 1251788.
***Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MADR) (2010). ORDIN Nr. 149 din 21 iunie 2010 privind comercializarea seminţelor de cereale.Bucuresti, România.
***Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MADR) (2011). Procedura privind cerințele specifice pentru producerea, certificarea și comercializarea semințelor de cereale în România din 16.03.2011, MONITORUL OFICIAL nr. 207 din 25 martie 2011.Bucuresti, România.
***Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MADR) (2018). Date INS - Producția vegetală la principalele culturi. Retrieved from:https://www.madr.ro/culturi-de camp/cereale/grau.html.
***OECD (2012). Schemes for the varietal certification or the control of seed moving in international trade. Guidelines for control plot tests and field inspection of seed crops, Paris, France.
***The State Institute for Testing and Registration of Varieties. (ISTIS). (2010). Metodologia privind determinarea purităţii varietale a seminţelor de soi şi material săditor. Bucharest, Romania.
***UPOV (2011). Possible use of biochemical and molecular markers in the examination of Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS), International Union For The Protection Of New Varieties Of Plants, Geneva.UPOV/INF/18/1,from:http://www.upov.int/edocs/infdocs/en/upov_inf_18.pdf.
***UPOV (2014). The use of molecular markers (SNP) for maize DUS testing. International Union For The Protection Of New Varieties Of Plants. Geneva, BMT/14/10,from:https://studylib.net/doc/6738942/ the-use-of molecular-markers–snp–for-maize-dus-testing.
DEALING WITH THE TRANSITION FROM IN LINE ECONOMY TO CIRCULAR ECONOMY - PUBLIC AWARENESS INVESTIGATION
IN BUCHAREST
Ana VÎRSTA, Mirela Alina SANDU, Ana Elisabeta DARABAN
University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest, 59 Mărăști Blvd, District 1, Bucharest, Romania
Corresponding author email: [email protected]
Abstract The Circular Economy (CE) concept is an emerging topic. In 2015 European Commission has adopted a circular economy package on waste management. The targets include achieving a recycling rate of 50% by 31 December 2020. The aim of this study is to create a better understanding of public awareness in the promotion of a circular economy in Bucharest, Romania. Under the frame of ERASMUS+ program, in the project entitled “Waste Education Initiative”, we developed with EU partners a Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students. To assess if the Bucharest citizens support and adopt a “Circular Economy behavior”, workshops were carried out amongst Bucharest population, yielding more than 300 voluntarily participants (67% of the total responses were provided by students). Key words: circular economy, public awareness, reducing, recycling, waste generation. INTRODUCTION United Nations forecast suggests that the global population is likely to exceed 11 billion by the end of the 21st century (United Nation, 2016). The economies of the countries have developed a linear model, a “take-make-consume-dispose” pattern of growth (Figure 1). The linear model is based on the assumption that resources are abundant, available, easy to source and cheap to dispose of (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:aa88c66d-4553-11e4-a0cb-01aa75ed71a1.0022.03/ DOC_1&format=PDF).
While growing resources use has increased the welfare of people, resulting in environmental degradation, climate change, and pollution that violate human rights (OHCHR and UNEP, 2012; Velenturf et al., 2018). A growing population impact the demand of production and consumption and that lead to waste overload (Euromonitor International, 2016; Dobbs et al., 2011; Fischer-Kowalski et al., 2011; Morgan et al., 2014; UNEP, 2015; Neligan, 2016; Velenturf, 2018). In order to meet the new economic, social and environmental requirements, one of the main solutions is to adopt circular economy (Lakatos et al., 2018).
Figure 1. Linear economy scheme - within the “take-make-consume-dispose” approach (Thibaut Wautelet, 2018)
According to the definition used by the Ellen Mac Arthur Foundation, a circular economy is an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design and aims to keep products,
components and materials at their highest utility and value at all times (https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/what-is-the-circular-economy).
AgroLife Scientific Journal - Volume 9, Number 1, 2020ISSN 2285-5718; ISSN CD-ROM 2285-5726; ISSN ONLINE 2286-0126; ISSN-L 2285-5718
356
Figure 2. Conceptual diagram of Circular Economy
(COM 398 final/2, 2014) Ellen McArthur Foundation sees the circular economy inspired by nature, where everything is used and nothing is wasted. In December 2015 European Commission published an action plan for the circular economy implementation, Closing the loop EU action plan. This plan aims to support the EU transition from linear to circular economy (https://www.eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/com-2015-0614-final).
The Circular Economy is a system built on reduction, reuse and recycling approach. In the circular economy model, material cycles are closed, because waste is considered as valuable resource. Used and broken products can be repaired and reused many times, though some products can be easily reused directly and only residual streams are recycled. For a circular economy correct implementation it is essential to recycle all materials from waste streams in order to close the loop during the whole life cycle of a product (Figure 2). The waste management is one of sector indi-cated by the Commission in the communication of 2015. An effective waste management programme would result in an improved quality of life, reducing the impact on human health and the environment (Olaru, 2016). The quality of a country’s waste management improves by moving up the waste hierarchy (Figure 3). As a first priority, waste should be avoided. Waste disposal should be phased out and, where it is unavoidable, it must be adequately controlled to be safe for human health and the environment (https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/research-topic/waste-and-recycling).
Figure 3. Waste hierarchy as stated by Directive 2008/98/EC on waste
According to Directive 2008/98/EC waste is defined as “any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard”. European Union has a main objective: by 31 of December 2020, EU countries will have a level
of preparedness for re-use and recycling of at least 50% of the total amount of waste generated (Cecere and Corrocher, 2016). Figure 4 show the amount of municipal solid waste produced by the EU member states in 2017. Romania generated the smallest amount
of waste per capita, 272 kg. The largest amount of waste per capita was generated by Denmark, 781 kg (Eurostat, 2017). However, according to Eurostat, Romania recorded a very low recycling rate of municipal waste of only 14% in 2017. Romania’s recycling rate is one of the lowest in the EU with most of the waste going to landfill so, there is a risk of missing the EU 2020 recycling targets. Unfortunately, Romania is even a
negative example in terms of waste management (Feodorov, 2018). In Figure 5 is relevant highlighted the low quantity of municipal solid waste that Romania recycles, compared to EU average. Other states manage to recycle around one third of municipal waste - Poland 34%, Bulgaria and Hungary - 35%. Germany is the European Union champion for recycling with a 68% recycling rate.
Figure 4. The amount of municipal solid waste generated in EU Member States in year 2017, kg per person (Eurostat)
Figure 5. Country comparison - Municipal waste recycled in Europe, % (Eurostat)
Circular economy systems keep the added value in products for as long as possible and eliminate waste generation (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circulareconomy/index_en.htm). Turning waste into a resource is an essential part of increasing resource efficiency and closing the loop in a circular economy vision.
MATERIALS AND METHODS In line with these notions and since Circular Economy is a relatively new concept in Romania, a research plan was designed and carried out amongst Bucharest population, to assess their views and support of CE practices. Under the frame of ERASMUS+ program, in
357
Figure 2. Conceptual diagram of Circular Economy
(COM 398 final/2, 2014) Ellen McArthur Foundation sees the circular economy inspired by nature, where everything is used and nothing is wasted. In December 2015 European Commission published an action plan for the circular economy implementation, Closing the loop EU action plan. This plan aims to support the EU transition from linear to circular economy (https://www.eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/com-2015-0614-final).
The Circular Economy is a system built on reduction, reuse and recycling approach. In the circular economy model, material cycles are closed, because waste is considered as valuable resource. Used and broken products can be repaired and reused many times, though some products can be easily reused directly and only residual streams are recycled. For a circular economy correct implementation it is essential to recycle all materials from waste streams in order to close the loop during the whole life cycle of a product (Figure 2). The waste management is one of sector indi-cated by the Commission in the communication of 2015. An effective waste management programme would result in an improved quality of life, reducing the impact on human health and the environment (Olaru, 2016). The quality of a country’s waste management improves by moving up the waste hierarchy (Figure 3). As a first priority, waste should be avoided. Waste disposal should be phased out and, where it is unavoidable, it must be adequately controlled to be safe for human health and the environment (https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/research-topic/waste-and-recycling).
Figure 3. Waste hierarchy as stated by Directive 2008/98/EC on waste
According to Directive 2008/98/EC waste is defined as “any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard”. European Union has a main objective: by 31 of December 2020, EU countries will have a level
of preparedness for re-use and recycling of at least 50% of the total amount of waste generated (Cecere and Corrocher, 2016). Figure 4 show the amount of municipal solid waste produced by the EU member states in 2017. Romania generated the smallest amount
of waste per capita, 272 kg. The largest amount of waste per capita was generated by Denmark, 781 kg (Eurostat, 2017). However, according to Eurostat, Romania recorded a very low recycling rate of municipal waste of only 14% in 2017. Romania’s recycling rate is one of the lowest in the EU with most of the waste going to landfill so, there is a risk of missing the EU 2020 recycling targets. Unfortunately, Romania is even a
negative example in terms of waste management (Feodorov, 2018). In Figure 5 is relevant highlighted the low quantity of municipal solid waste that Romania recycles, compared to EU average. Other states manage to recycle around one third of municipal waste - Poland 34%, Bulgaria and Hungary - 35%. Germany is the European Union champion for recycling with a 68% recycling rate.
Figure 4. The amount of municipal solid waste generated in EU Member States in year 2017, kg per person (Eurostat)
Figure 5. Country comparison - Municipal waste recycled in Europe, % (Eurostat)
Circular economy systems keep the added value in products for as long as possible and eliminate waste generation (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circulareconomy/index_en.htm). Turning waste into a resource is an essential part of increasing resource efficiency and closing the loop in a circular economy vision.
MATERIALS AND METHODS In line with these notions and since Circular Economy is a relatively new concept in Romania, a research plan was designed and carried out amongst Bucharest population, to assess their views and support of CE practices. Under the frame of ERASMUS+ program, in
358
the project entitled “Waste Education Initiative”, we developed and propose together with the EU project partners a Circular Economy Guide for Residents and Students (https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/environmental-science-research/waste-to-resource-innovation-network/activity/erasmusplus-waste-education-initiative/waste-education-teaching-guide-and-resources/) The guide provides general
information about the principles of the Circular Economy (Figure 6) and why is the Circular Economy so important. In the end, the guide provides examples of Circular Economy in Bucharest, Romania (https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/content/documents/w2rin/5756-R4GM-IO4-Romanian-v3.pdf).
Figure 6. Circular economy versus linear economy (https://thercollective.com/blogs/r-stories/circular-economy-vs-
linear-economy) In November and December 2019, we had organized six workshops participating 122 voluntarily residents from Bucharest. The workshops were organized in different locations: in residential communities, in cafes destined for such meetings and in the University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest (Figures 7 and 8). The necessity of a circular economy has been highlighted by The Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students in a flyer form. We also create a second flyer Selective waste collection in Romania which provide information on how to properly do the selective/separate collection of municipal waste on 4 fractions: plastic/metal, paper/cardboard, glass and mixed waste (Figure 9).
Figure 7. Residents workshops in a coffee house
Figure 8. Residents workshops in USAMVB sport gym
Figure 9. Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students and Selective waste collection in Romania
(flyer form)
Currently the selective collection of municipal waste system is implemented very slowly due to the difficulties in setting up logistics and infrastructure, as well as for the lack of continuous educational activities. In this context for student’s acknowledgement we organized three workshops in University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest with a total of 245 voluntarily participants (Figures 10 and 11).
Figure 10. Students workshops
Figure 11. Students workshops
Finally, the research data from residents and students were collected through a feedback form which included 4 questions: 1. Has this guide increased your knowledge
about the Circular Economy? 2. Do you think this guide will have an impact
on how do you recycle? 3. How do you think the CE guide could be
improved? 4. Any other comments? RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In total, a number of 367 citizens from Bucharest attended to the workshops organized to promote waste education and CE (Figure 12).
Figure 12. Workshops participants
33%
67%
Participants
Residents Students
359
the project entitled “Waste Education Initiative”, we developed and propose together with the EU project partners a Circular Economy Guide for Residents and Students (https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/environmental-science-research/waste-to-resource-innovation-network/activity/erasmusplus-waste-education-initiative/waste-education-teaching-guide-and-resources/) The guide provides general
information about the principles of the Circular Economy (Figure 6) and why is the Circular Economy so important. In the end, the guide provides examples of Circular Economy in Bucharest, Romania (https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/content/documents/w2rin/5756-R4GM-IO4-Romanian-v3.pdf).
Figure 6. Circular economy versus linear economy (https://thercollective.com/blogs/r-stories/circular-economy-vs-
linear-economy) In November and December 2019, we had organized six workshops participating 122 voluntarily residents from Bucharest. The workshops were organized in different locations: in residential communities, in cafes destined for such meetings and in the University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest (Figures 7 and 8). The necessity of a circular economy has been highlighted by The Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students in a flyer form. We also create a second flyer Selective waste collection in Romania which provide information on how to properly do the selective/separate collection of municipal waste on 4 fractions: plastic/metal, paper/cardboard, glass and mixed waste (Figure 9).
Figure 7. Residents workshops in a coffee house
Figure 8. Residents workshops in USAMVB sport gym
Figure 9. Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students and Selective waste collection in Romania
(flyer form)
Currently the selective collection of municipal waste system is implemented very slowly due to the difficulties in setting up logistics and infrastructure, as well as for the lack of continuous educational activities. In this context for student’s acknowledgement we organized three workshops in University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest with a total of 245 voluntarily participants (Figures 10 and 11).
Figure 10. Students workshops
Figure 11. Students workshops
Finally, the research data from residents and students were collected through a feedback form which included 4 questions: 1. Has this guide increased your knowledge
about the Circular Economy? 2. Do you think this guide will have an impact
on how do you recycle? 3. How do you think the CE guide could be
improved? 4. Any other comments? RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In total, a number of 367 citizens from Bucharest attended to the workshops organized to promote waste education and CE (Figure 12).
Figure 12. Workshops participants
33%
67%
Participants
Residents Students
360
After each meeting participants completed the workshop feedback form answering to the fourth questions presented above. Regarding the first question: Has this guide increased your knowledge about the Circular Economy? The results indicate that the participants have limited awareness and a poor understanding about the CE and the guide increased their knowledge about the Circular Economy (Figure 13).
Figure 13. Participants answers diagram to the first
question To the second question: Do you think this guide will have an impact on how you recycle?, the answers were 100% completed with YES and it shows how this guide helped the residents and students to understand the impact of their attitude about consumption, resources and waste generation and why is important recycling for the circular economy growth. To the third question: How do you think the CE guide could be improved? there was a general consensus that the information provided are sufficient. To the fourth question: Any other comments?, approximately 59% of respondents testify, however, that they are confused when it comes to selective waste collection, which is not surprising given the fact that some packages are made from several materials that should be separated. About 62% of all respondents consider that the main barriers on circular economy development are: weakness of public awareness, lack of financial support, the gap between policy-making and practical activities. The resident and students request a sustainable infrastructure for correct collection of waste. All people interviewed observed a necessity for waste management education. Especially students consider useful more practical
information about CE and waste management designed and presented in a way which will include individuals and society’s consumption features apart from being only aware of teaching instructions to respect the natural environment. In this sense, changing individuals and society’s consumption habits is the most important additional target to be made for nature and a safe environment for the next generation. CONCLUSIONS Compared with the EU member states, even if Romania generated the lowest amount of municipal solid waste in 2017 (272 kg per capita), the 14% of recycling rate shows the bizarre situation Romania is facing because of the inconstancies between waste policies, education, infrastructure available and whole waste management system. Given that the target to be reached in December 2020 is 50%, it is indubitable now that implementation of the circular economy enables reduction of generated waste and increase of waste reuse indices, and therefore might actually improve natural environment conditions. Residents and students answers reflect the Romanian waste management system need in terms of information/education, infrastructure and facilities availability. The study demonstrates that a Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students is very useful and provide appropriate information for people to understand the urgent need of the linear economy transition towards CE, from the classic production and consumption model, which is still widely used in Romania to a circular material loop. Consistently, circular economy presents a practical solution to the earth’s resource limitations and to succeed, it is imperative for consumers to engage in circular economy practices by innovating a very different and complex mechanism of materials and energy circuit for required products. REFERENCES Cecere, G., Corrocher, N. (2016). Stringency of
regulation and innovation in waste management: An empirical analysis on EU countries. Industry and Innovation, 23: 625-646.
90%
10%
Yes No
Dobbs, R., Oppenheim, J., Thompson, F., Brinkman, M.,
Zornes, M. (2011). Resource Revolution: Meeting the World’s Energy, Materials, Food, and Water Needs; McKinsey Quarterly and Company: Summit, NJ, USA, 2011.
Feodorov, V. (2018). Biodegradable waste in the current economic context of Romania - challenges and solutions. Scientific Papers. Series E. Land Reclamation, Earth Observation & Surveying, Environmental Engineering, Vol. VII, 2018, 47-52.
Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., Von Weizsacker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F.K., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P. (2011). Decoupling: Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth; A report of the working group on decoupling to the international resource panel. United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2011.
Lakatos, E.S., Bacali, L., Ciomos, A.O., Rosca, M.G., Mateiciuc, C. (2018). The behaviour of new generations consumers related to the circular economy. Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Acta Technica Napocensis, Series: Applied Mathematics, Mechanics, and Engineering, Vol. 61, Issue IV, November, 2018.
Morgan, J. (2014). The Great Resource Price Shock; Green Alliance: London, UK.
Neligan, A. (2016). Moving towards a Circular Economy Europe between Ambitions and Reality. Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln.
Olaru, B.G., Zecheru, V. (2016). The waste recycling in Romania. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, Vol. 16, Issue 3.
Thibaut, W. (2018). Exploring the role of independent retailers in the circular economy: a case study approach. Thesis for: Master of Business Administration. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17085.15847. Advisor: Professor Dr. phil. Christoph Georg Hartmann.
Velenturf, A.P.M., Purnell, P., Tregent, M., Ferguson, J., Holmes, A. (2018). Co-Producing a Vision and Approach for the Transition towards a Circular Economy: Perspectives from Government Partners. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1401.
***Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of
the regions. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. COM (2014) 398 final/2 Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:aa88c66d-4553-11e4-a0cb-01aa75ed71a1.0022.03/DOC_1&format=PDF.
***Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste.
***Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Waste Framework Directive), Official Journal of the European Union, L 312, 3-30.
***Euromonitor International, 2016. Available online: http://blog.euromonitor.com/2016/12/what-drives-demandnatural-resources.html.
***OHCHR and UNEP. Human Rights and the Environment. 2012. Available online: http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/119/JointReportOHCHRandUNEPonHumanRightsandtheEnvironment.pdf.
***Statistical Office of European Union (EUROSTAT), Recycling rate of municipal waste, Eurostat Dissemination Database, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/data/database.
***UNEP. ISWA Global Waste Management Outlook. 2015. Available online: http://apps.unep.org/publications/index.php?option=com_pub&task=download&file=011782_en.
***United Nations, 2016. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/key-issues/population.html.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circulareconomy/index_en.html.
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/research-topic/waste-and-recycling.
https://thercollective.com/blogs/r-stories/circular-economy-vs-linear-economy.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/what-is-the-circular-economy.
https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/content/documents/w2rin/5756-R4GM-IO4-Romanian-v3.pdf.
https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/environmental-science-research/waste-to-resource-innovation-network/activity/erasmusplus-waste-education-initiative/waste-education-teaching-guide-and-resources/.
361
After each meeting participants completed the workshop feedback form answering to the fourth questions presented above. Regarding the first question: Has this guide increased your knowledge about the Circular Economy? The results indicate that the participants have limited awareness and a poor understanding about the CE and the guide increased their knowledge about the Circular Economy (Figure 13).
Figure 13. Participants answers diagram to the first
question To the second question: Do you think this guide will have an impact on how you recycle?, the answers were 100% completed with YES and it shows how this guide helped the residents and students to understand the impact of their attitude about consumption, resources and waste generation and why is important recycling for the circular economy growth. To the third question: How do you think the CE guide could be improved? there was a general consensus that the information provided are sufficient. To the fourth question: Any other comments?, approximately 59% of respondents testify, however, that they are confused when it comes to selective waste collection, which is not surprising given the fact that some packages are made from several materials that should be separated. About 62% of all respondents consider that the main barriers on circular economy development are: weakness of public awareness, lack of financial support, the gap between policy-making and practical activities. The resident and students request a sustainable infrastructure for correct collection of waste. All people interviewed observed a necessity for waste management education. Especially students consider useful more practical
information about CE and waste management designed and presented in a way which will include individuals and society’s consumption features apart from being only aware of teaching instructions to respect the natural environment. In this sense, changing individuals and society’s consumption habits is the most important additional target to be made for nature and a safe environment for the next generation. CONCLUSIONS Compared with the EU member states, even if Romania generated the lowest amount of municipal solid waste in 2017 (272 kg per capita), the 14% of recycling rate shows the bizarre situation Romania is facing because of the inconstancies between waste policies, education, infrastructure available and whole waste management system. Given that the target to be reached in December 2020 is 50%, it is indubitable now that implementation of the circular economy enables reduction of generated waste and increase of waste reuse indices, and therefore might actually improve natural environment conditions. Residents and students answers reflect the Romanian waste management system need in terms of information/education, infrastructure and facilities availability. The study demonstrates that a Circular Economy Guide, for Residents and Students is very useful and provide appropriate information for people to understand the urgent need of the linear economy transition towards CE, from the classic production and consumption model, which is still widely used in Romania to a circular material loop. Consistently, circular economy presents a practical solution to the earth’s resource limitations and to succeed, it is imperative for consumers to engage in circular economy practices by innovating a very different and complex mechanism of materials and energy circuit for required products. REFERENCES Cecere, G., Corrocher, N. (2016). Stringency of
regulation and innovation in waste management: An empirical analysis on EU countries. Industry and Innovation, 23: 625-646.
90%
10%
Yes No
Dobbs, R., Oppenheim, J., Thompson, F., Brinkman, M.,
Zornes, M. (2011). Resource Revolution: Meeting the World’s Energy, Materials, Food, and Water Needs; McKinsey Quarterly and Company: Summit, NJ, USA, 2011.
Feodorov, V. (2018). Biodegradable waste in the current economic context of Romania - challenges and solutions. Scientific Papers. Series E. Land Reclamation, Earth Observation & Surveying, Environmental Engineering, Vol. VII, 2018, 47-52.
Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., Von Weizsacker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F.K., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P. (2011). Decoupling: Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth; A report of the working group on decoupling to the international resource panel. United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2011.
Lakatos, E.S., Bacali, L., Ciomos, A.O., Rosca, M.G., Mateiciuc, C. (2018). The behaviour of new generations consumers related to the circular economy. Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Acta Technica Napocensis, Series: Applied Mathematics, Mechanics, and Engineering, Vol. 61, Issue IV, November, 2018.
Morgan, J. (2014). The Great Resource Price Shock; Green Alliance: London, UK.
Neligan, A. (2016). Moving towards a Circular Economy Europe between Ambitions and Reality. Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln.
Olaru, B.G., Zecheru, V. (2016). The waste recycling in Romania. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, Vol. 16, Issue 3.
Thibaut, W. (2018). Exploring the role of independent retailers in the circular economy: a case study approach. Thesis for: Master of Business Administration. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17085.15847. Advisor: Professor Dr. phil. Christoph Georg Hartmann.
Velenturf, A.P.M., Purnell, P., Tregent, M., Ferguson, J., Holmes, A. (2018). Co-Producing a Vision and Approach for the Transition towards a Circular Economy: Perspectives from Government Partners. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1401.
***Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of
the regions. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe. COM (2014) 398 final/2 Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:aa88c66d-4553-11e4-a0cb-01aa75ed71a1.0022.03/DOC_1&format=PDF.
***Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste.
***Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Waste Framework Directive), Official Journal of the European Union, L 312, 3-30.
***Euromonitor International, 2016. Available online: http://blog.euromonitor.com/2016/12/what-drives-demandnatural-resources.html.
***OHCHR and UNEP. Human Rights and the Environment. 2012. Available online: http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/119/JointReportOHCHRandUNEPonHumanRightsandtheEnvironment.pdf.
***Statistical Office of European Union (EUROSTAT), Recycling rate of municipal waste, Eurostat Dissemination Database, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/data/database.
***UNEP. ISWA Global Waste Management Outlook. 2015. Available online: http://apps.unep.org/publications/index.php?option=com_pub&task=download&file=011782_en.
***United Nations, 2016. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/key-issues/population.html.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circulareconomy/index_en.html.
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/research-topic/waste-and-recycling.
https://thercollective.com/blogs/r-stories/circular-economy-vs-linear-economy.
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/what-is-the-circular-economy.
https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/media/mmuacuk/content/documents/w2rin/5756-R4GM-IO4-Romanian-v3.pdf.
https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/environmental-science-research/waste-to-resource-innovation-network/activity/erasmusplus-waste-education-initiative/waste-education-teaching-guide-and-resources/.