In 2020: On the Circular Economy, Infrastructure, and Sustainability

 The two journal articles at the links below give great insights regarding present and future efforts toward a sustainable world.  [Again, sorry about the copy-and-paste-on-another-page links, but I have no control over that.  As far as I know, that's a Google-Blogger-Blogspot glitch.]

............................

1.  Title - "Circular Futures: What Will They Look Like?"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091931972X

2.  Title - "Infrastructure Is Key to Make Cities Sustainable"

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8308/htm

...........................

I've noticed on Twitter and elsewhere online that some environmental activists don't understand what's taking so long in regard to a shift to sustainability.  They are a bit frustrated.  I'm guessing these are mostly young people.  No offense intended.  As an old man who has been in this and a couple of related fields for many years (starting in 1970), I offer the following.

First, along with many others, I fully recognize that time - relative to the socio-ecological-economic CRISIS we're in - is short.  The pace of research reflects that; the pace of implementation in most areas of the world does not.  There are many reasons as to why.  In my opinion, here are only two of those reasons, as follows.

1.  Changing Spaceship Earth to genuine sustainability requires a major shift in attitudes, ethics, lifestyle, production, and consumption.  Resistance abounds.  Ignorance abounds.  Propaganda abounds.  Overcoming all that requires patience, and most of all, persistence.

2.  One of the biggest obstacles (perhaps THE biggest) is the fact that mega money largely controls politics.  The overwhelming majority of national politicians are selected, groomed, and financed by the Super-Rich Upper Crust.  Surely by now this is common knowledge.  Unfortunately, most of the Super-Rich are faux "Green".  They've more or less been forced to talk the talk, but have little to no interest in anything ecological or sustainable.  They're short-term thinkers.  Until we get big money out of politics, little will change other than the Crisis getting worse and worse.

..................................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well, & Persist

Preventing the Circular Economy (CE) Concept From Disintegrating

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344917302835?dgcid=raven_sd_recommender_email

In the journal article at the link above, the authors maintain that the CE concept may be in danger of collapse due to a lack of agreement among scholars & practitioners as to exactly what it means.  As a result, they say, certain important elements (e.g., social equity, sustainable development) of CE are slighted in planning.  [Keep in mind, this article was published almost three years ago.]

 After a detailed description of the paper's research methods, the article then presents "the first comprehensive and systematic analysis of CE definitions...".  Essentially--- solicited, written, and qualitative definitions of 114 CE terms/elements were coded, analyzed, and quantified.

Section "4. Conclusion" reveals the important results, and should be read by those working with the CE concept.  A few examples of the results follow:

1.  a much needed definition of CE;

2.  the suggestion that some of the authors of the solicited definitions have no idea what CE is really about; and,

3.  some of those authors entirely equate CE with recycling.

.......................................

In my view, the article contributes to reducing the lack of coherence in the CE arena.  I still maintain, though, that CE appears to be solidly wedded to the concept of "unlimited economic growth".  As such, it ignores the role of entropy in the biophysical world, and the common sense observation that Spaceship Earth is finite.  Relying on Julian Simon's contention that human inventiveness and production efficiency will overcome any obstacles is not realistic.  Nevertheless, given current political climates around the world, CE may be a good FIRST STEP (& only that) toward a genuinely sustainable habitat.  But first, CE researchers, policy makers, and practitioners need to cohere on what constitutes the Circular Economy.  If they don't, the concept likely will dissolve, fade away, or become nothing more than circularity for the sake of circularity.

......................................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Social Dimension: "I" and "We"

 At the link below is a book review that is well worth the read.

https://www.sciencemagazinedigital.org/sciencemagazine/23_october_2020/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1631113&app=false#articleId1631113

In terms of racism, for many Caucasian people I don't think it's skin color so much that causes them distaste and fear.  I think it's the (unwarranted) fear of losing their culture.  They don't seem to understand that any particular group culture can be preserved in a multicultural society.  Even within a single "Race" different ethnic groups have done so.  Here in the USA, the Germans, Italians, Jews, Irish, Russians, and others have all done it.

As a former Biology and Ecology teacher, the uproar over the concept of human "races" is odd to me.  In the taxonomy and phylogeny of the human, any subdivision [Kingdom-Phylum-Class-Order-Family-Genus- Species-Variety] below species is pretty much meaningless.  In other words, what matters is the species level; and all of us belong to Homo sapiens.  To any reasonable & rational person, physical differences (e.g., skin color) are of no significance; but often, cultural differences do matter in one way or another.

............................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

The Election Here in the USA

 This election is not about anything the Deceitful Don talks about. Instead, it's about democracy, decency, divisiveness, deceit, the bad side of tribalism, hate, & ignorance. Renowned reporter Risen nails it here---

https://theintercept.com/2020/10/21/trump-presidency-summary/

As a psychological gaslighter, almost everything Trump says is a lie... and a blatant lie.  Whatever he says (99% of the time), the exact opposite is true.  It's a genuine tragedy for us and the world.  What makes it comical as well is that his lies almost always are obvious.  Yet he persists in lying.  He appears to be about as psychologically developed as perhaps an eighth grader.  How can I say that with any authority?

A wise man once said:  you don't have to be a master carpenter to recognize a shack.  Trump is a psychological shack.  Anyone who isn't one of his cult members can see that.  Vote accordingly.

Reminder:  I'm not a Republican or a Democrat.  I don't care much for Biden, but he's orders of magnitude better for the world than is Trump.

.......................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"A Life on Our Planet"

 https://steadystate.org/a-life-on-our-planet-a-tentative-step-toward-mainstream-steady-statesmanship/

Attenborough, biodiversity, and the Steady State Economy - how they're all linked.  Even at 93 years of age, this man is a warrior for the ecosphere.  What a life well spent... and not done yet.

............................

Be Well

Breaking Monopolies, Reducing Rentier Power re Rent Extraction, and the Connections to Resource Use & "Growth"

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919304203

    Title - "The Threat of Rent Extraction in a Resource-constrained Future"

.............................

There are many different types of "rents".  Don't think only in terms of living space rent.  For example, there's the renting of your labor.  There's the renting of land for purposes other than residential housing, and there are a number of other types.

The author of the above journal article proposes that private rent extraction is "a barrier to the goal of transforming economic institutions so that society can flourish within planetary boundaries [limitations]".  She maintains that concentrations of private rentier power create an imperative for unlimited growth.

For the most part, I believe that's correct.  I also believe such thoughts would be rejected outright by many people here in the USA, but not as much in Europe and elsewhere.  Why?  People here rightly would view it as democratic socialism, and they seem to have a completely black/white view of socialism v. capitalism.  To them, any form of socialism is evil (so to speak).  They tend to ignore the fact that public roads, public water systems, public parks, the VA Health Care system, USPS, public art museums, and a plethora of other public institutions are all examples of democratic socialism in action.  In short, we have a mixed economy, as do most countries of the world.

Via Edward Bernays style molding of the public mind, private and public Oligarchs in the USA have convinced too many people that Monopoly-Casino-Crony Capitalism is the same as the capitalism of Adam Smith, their economic hero.  It's not even close.  Except in the realm of very small business, Smith's capitalism no longer exists.  He did not favor monopolies, mega biz, or any kind of Oligarchy.  Rather than praising so-called "Masters of the Universe", he viewed them unfavorably.  Today's Oligarchs claim the opposite; they're wrong.

People in the EU (& Norway and Iceland, which are not formally in the EU), tend to be much more open-minded regarding economic/political ideology.  [Example: in Europe there's a political/economic philosophy known as Libertarian Socialism.  In the USA, that would be considered an oxymoron.]  Even though all those countries have enclaves of narrow-mindedness in that regard, overall they're much more flexible than the USA.  Point being:  transforming society from neoliberalism to some form of ecological economics is a tough row to hoe, but especially so in the USA.

............................

The article cited above deserves sincere consideration in the effort to create a world more equitable, more ecological, and more in line with the needs of all people, instead of only the privileged few.

............................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

Various Considerations in Ecological Economics and Sustainability

 1.  Increased efficiency and curtailing the expansion of material stocks in the UK:

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344920302780#bib0035

    Title - "Stock-flow relations in the socio-economic metabolism of the United Kingdom 1800–2017".

Socio-economic metabolism refers to a society's use of biophysical resources (i.e., energy and materials), a key factor in the sustainability arena.

................................

2.  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629615300827

    Title - "How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions".

When I last taught Ecology (at the college level, in the 1990's), the conventional wisdom was:  it takes about forty years for a society to change from one primary energy source to another.  That is being re-evaluated.

...............................

3.  The term, "economic growth", sounds really great, but is it?  When thinking about the topic, too many people have faulty assumptions and tend to ignore two of the main effects of econ growth:  income inequality, and gross pollution of our biosphere.

    

    https://steadystate.org/who-does-economic-growth-serve/

    The author, Brian F. Snyder, is an assistant professor of environmental science at Louisiana State University.

................................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

Sustainability re: transport industry, decarbonization, lithium, magnesium, energy, & a decent living, Plus commentary on world efforts

 2020 research - Two important views---

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211467X20300961

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378020307512

At least read the Abstracts and Conclusions.

Commentary on world efforts---

Public officials, researchers, the business community, & others in the EU (in general) - especially in Germany, Ireland, Denmark, The Netherlands, Austria, & Portugal (mea culpa if I left out a country) - AND in other parts of the world are working hard to develop & implement sustainable policies geared toward saving organized human existence on this planet.  Kudos to all of them.

With some significant exceptions, the USA is light-years behind in those efforts.  As we all know, that's especially true for the last four years or so, particularly in the national government.  The current Administration is working hard to reverse gains made in the sustainability arena.  That, along with other egregious actions, has made the USA an object of pity - as well as a laughingstock - in the eyes of most of the world.  On top of all that, our "Leader" has some chance of getting re-elected shortly.  It's truly mind-boggling.  His chances of re-election should be extremely close to zero... or ZERO.  Thanks to Edward Bernays style molding of the public mind plus a huge dose of ignorance, those chances are higher.  It's all very Orwellian.  Life is full of paradoxes, eh?

The human dilemma we face consists of a socio-ecological-economic catastrophe which already has started, coupled with an ongoing belief by too many in the practices of unlimited growth, overconsumption, and overexploitation of resources.  In far too many ways, we've become too anthropocentric, as opposed to ecocentric.  Fortunately, that's beginning to change.  Keep in mind, though -

TICK-TOCK.

.............................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Key question in late 2020: what does a review of Circular Economy research show regarding CE's potential performance re the environment, sustainability, & consumers?

"The narrative of sustainability and circular economy - A longitudinal review of two decades of research", December, 2020---https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344920303906

"Circularity for circularity's sake? Scoping review of assessment methods for environmental performance in the circular economy", September, 2020---https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550920305236

The two journal articles at the links above arguably could be called the "Bible" of the current state of Circular Economy (CE) research and CE's potential performance regarding environmental problems, sustainability, and consumers.  At least, the two articles together are the "short form" of that Bible.  ["Short form" only because they are not book-length.]

If your interest in CE is not particularly in-depth, but still significant, at least read both Abstracts and Conclusions in these articles.

In my view, while the CE concept is popular and somewhat "Green", it's not sufficient in terms of its ecological and bioeconomical characteristics.  Those aspects of CE appear to be not totally lacking, but also not sufficient enough to address the overall Socio-Eco-Crisis that is upon us.

The Circular Economy concept is a young field of research, still evolving.  It may be that as it matures, it will serve as a good first step toward a complex solution to the human predicament.  As it stands now, however, it's not enough.  Currently, it's beginning to look like "circularity for circularity's sake", and not much else.

................................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

p.s.  Diagram is from the Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB) at Stanford University.  https://mahb.stanford.edu/

Evolution of a Food Network as Urban Commons in Portugal

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919308262

At the link above, the authors of a journal article dissect and analyze the qualities of an urban food network as a "commons" in Portugal.  A particular group of "prosumers" founded the network, and saw it through until its demise.  Though it eventually ended (for numerous reasons), it gave birth to other new food networks.  Along with Germany and several other European countries, Portugal is front and center in the search for ecological solutions to the human predicament in which we find ourselves.  Kudos!

Our current, globalized food supply system is fragile at best.  Especially during an emergency event such as a pandemic, that supply chain is often broken.  Humanity would benefit greatly from urban food networks... which go way beyond urban gardens.

Decades ago, a popular book by E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful, had the subtitle: a study of economics as if people mattered.  The book stressed the importance of locally based economics, sustainability, and the appropriate use of technology.  In general, it eschewed the very idea of corporate globalization and neoliberal economics.

Unfortunately, after a relatively brief time of popularity (in the 1970's), the ideas presented in that text faded away in the minds of policy makers.  What a shame.

...........................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

RE: Sustainability - Proposed Policies for Correcting the Human Predicament

 https://theconversation.com/limits-to-growth-policies-to-steer-the-economy-away-from-disaster-57721

The essay at the link above covers the following subjects:

1.  measuring progress,

2.  resource caps,

3.  work and time,

4.  public spending,

5.  banking and finance (and the built-in "growth imperative"),

6.  the population question,

7.  poverty (a rising tide will SINK all boats),

8.  hindrances.

Though the discussion is somewhat brief on each item above, many links to related pages are embedded in the article.

The piece is thought-provoking and, in my view, should be considered by all who are interested in mitigating the current human predicament.

......................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

p.s.  Diagram is from the Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB) at Stanford University.  https://mahb.stanford.edu/

In the EU, "Is this the end of end-of-waste?", re the Circular Economy in 2020

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344919305622?dgcid=raven_sd_recommender_email

At the link above, there's a brief review of the status of the end-of-waste policy in the EU.  End-of-waste is a crucial concept in the whole idea of the Circular Economy.  The EU is having a problem with implementation of the concept.  The authors of the article, Johansson and Forsgren, suggest a new approach involving the "space between waste and products".

[NOTE:  I've used this blogger venue for a bit over thirteen years.  Sometimes it allows active links to be posted, and other times the reader (you) has to copy the link here and then manually post it on a new page.  As far as I know, I have no control over which type of link posts here, i.e., an "active" one or a "copy & paste" one.  I suspect that Google only allows active links for those which go to sites owned by Google (e.g., YouTube), but I really don't know.  Point being:  apologies for all the "copy & paste" links in these posts; I can't do anything about it.]

.................................

Happy Trails