Next months, these posts deal with the challenges of Earthlings of bringing humane cities closer. These posts represent the most important findings of my e-book Humane cities. Always humane. Smart if helpful, updates and supplements included. The English version of this book can be downloaded for free here and the Dutch version here.
Cities can make the difference
Firstly, by bringing parties together, developing inspiring goals, removing barriers arising from existing regulations, facilitating sharing, stimulating innovative research, supporting start-ups that contribute to circular solutions and providing financial incentives, for example, by differentiating tax rates.
Secondly, by making circular plans in areas where the city government is primarily responsible. Local authorities have a large and direct influence through legislation and investments related to urban planning, issuing building permits, mobility systems, urban infrastructure, district heating, energy production and distribution, waste collection, municipal taxes and the local labour market.
For instance: Amsterdam
The city of Amsterdam is a shining example. It has committed itself to the circular economy as an important pillar of its sustainability policy. The city wants to be a forerunner and has a good starting position because many citizens, businesses, start-ups, and (knowledge) institutions are convinced by the necessity of a circular economy.
The municipality applies the following principles:
- All materials are part of an infinite physical or biological cycle.
- All energy comes from renewable sources.
- Modular and flexible design of production chains to increase the adaptability of systems.
- New activities that enable the shift from possession of goods to use of services.
- Logistical systems that switch to more region-oriented services.
- Human activities that contribute to the regeneration of “natural capital”.
Together with external parties, such as TNO and Circle, the city has evaluated existing value chains with respect to ecological impact, economic importance, value retention and transition potential. This resulted in a selection of two fields (‘chains’) in which the greatest circular impact can be achieved, namely the construction chain and the organic residual chain.
By organizing the construction chain in a circular fashion and at the same time realizing 70.000 new homes by 2040, a 3% productivity gain is feasible representing a worth of € 85 million per year. This is the result of reusing material and efficiency improvements. The table below is mentioning the main activities to be developed in the next years.
Organic residual streams chain
High-value processing of organic residual flows over a period of five to seven years, will result in an added value of 150 million euro per year. This is the result of source separation of organic waste in all households and in the food processing industry. The organic residual flow is used to produce proteins for animal feed, biogas and building blocks for the production of bioplastics.
Is a circular city also a humane city?
There is no doubt that in the long run everyone benefits from a circular economy. However, in the short term it can weaken the purchasing power of the poor. Poor people around the world have already created an informal circular economy by buying or exchanging worn-out goods such as cars, refrigerators, furniture, and clothing. Goods that are available at flea markets, thrift stores or through family and friends. As soon as these goods become part of a regular circular process, their availability will decrease and their prices rise. Not to mention a ban on selling these goods for environmental or safety reasons.
This problem is not inherent in the circular economy, but arises from the growing gap between the rich and poor part of humanity. Consequently, policies aimed at the development of a circular society must also create the conditions for a more just and egalitarian society.