Towards the
Circular Economy in Ukraine
An Exploratory Strategic Foresight Study
FINAL REPORT

Acknowledgements

This draft report has been produced by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
under the general guidance of Tatiana Chernyavskaya. It was drafted by Joe Ravetz, with contributions
from Ozcan Saritas and Andrii Vorfolomeiev, and revised by Ricardo Seidl da Fonseca (foresight issues),
and Edward Clarence-Smith (circular economy issues).
This activity – the ‘Exploratory Strategic Foresight for Circular Economy in Ukraine’ – is managed by
UNIDO, under the EU-funded EU4Environment Action, with additional funding from the German Federal
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).

Disclaimer

This document was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole
responsibility of UNIDO and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.
This document has been produced without formal United Nations editing. The designations employed
and the presentation of the materials in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion
whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization(UNIDO) concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, orconcerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or its economic system or degree ofdevelopment. Designations such as “developed”, “industrialized” or “developing” are intended forstatistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by aparticular country or area in the development process. Mention of firm names or commercial products
does not constitute an endorsement by UNIDO. The opinions, figures, and estimates set forth are theresponsibility of the authors and should not necessarily be considered as reflecting the views or carrying
the endorsement of UNIDO and its Member States.
The responsibility for opinions expressed rests solely with the authors, and the publication does notconstitute any endorsement by UNIDO of the opinions expressed.

Graphic sources

Images with source indicated as ‘JRA’ are provided by Joe Ravetz under Creative Commons License:‘Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share-Alike’ 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). Specific conditions
imposed by this licence are on https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/. Users may
reproduce them, for educational or non-commercial purposes, on condition of full attribution.
Images used under Standard license from Shutterstock.com.

Citation:

UNIDO (2024). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for Circular Economy in Ukraine:
Final Report. Vienna, UNIDO.
(available on http://www.recpc.org/circular-economy/)

Layout and design by Sahora Connect StudioTable of Contents

Summary for policymakers

11

Circular economy

12

The foresight approach

12

Circular economy – scoping and mapping

13

Key product value chains and pathways

13

Socio-technical systems and transformations

15

1. Introduction

16

1.1. Overview of the circular economy

18

1.2. Circular economy transformations

19

1.3. Transformation in practice21

1.4. The foresight approach

21

1.5. About the project23

2. Baselines and futures24

2.1. Context and baseline

26

2.2. Feasibility and capacity of CE-Ukraine27

2.3. Alternative futures: a scenario framework28

2.4. Towards a CE-Ukraine ‘vision statement’30

3. Key product value chains and socio-technical systems

32

3.1. Value chains: selection

34

3.2. Value chains: scope and definition

34

3.3. Socio-technical systems and transformations

36

3.4. Business-finance enablers

36

3.5. Policy-governance enablers

37

3.6. Sociocultural enablers

37

3.7. Design-technology-innovation enablers

38

3.8. Environment-industry enablers

38

3.9. Urban infrastructure enablers

39

3.10. Summary of KPVCs and socio-technical transformations

40

4. Constructions

42

4.1. What is the problem? Scoping the ‘constructions’ system

45

4.2. What if? - scenarios for ‘constructions’.

46

4.3. What is possible? - future visions for ‘constructions’46

4.4. How to achieve? – pathways for ‘constructions’46

4.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers.

48

4.6. When? – 3 horizons for ‘constructions’49

5. Food products

50

5.1. What is the problem? Scoping the food products system

52

5.2. What if? - scenarios for food products

54

5.3. What is possible? - future visions for food products

54

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine65.4. How to achieve? – pathways for food products

55

5.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers

57

5.6. When? - 3 horizons for food products

57

6. Electronics and ICT

58

6.1. What is the problem? Scoping electronics and ICT

60

6.2. What if? Scenario mapping for electronics and ICT

626.3. What is possible? - visions for Electronics and ICT

626.4. How to achieve? – pathways for Electronics and ICT

63

6.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers

64

6.6. When? - 3 horizons for electronics and ICT

65

7. Plastics and packaging

66

7.1. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers

68

7.2. What if? - scenarios for plastics and packaging

70

7.3. What is possible? - future visions for plastics and packaging

70

7.4. How to achieve? – pathways for plastics and packaging

71

7.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers

72

7.6. When? - 3 horizons for plastics and packaging

72

8. Wastes

74

8.1. What is the problem? Scoping ‘wastes’ and waste management76

8.2. What if? - scenarios for ‘wastes’

78

8.3. What is possible? - future visions for ‘wastes'

78

8.4. How to achieve? – pathways for ‘wastes’

79

8.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers

80

8.6. When? - 3 horizons for ‘wastes’81

9. Conclusions and forward agendas

82

9.1. Forward agendas: international cooperation and EU alignment

84

9.2. Forward agendas: national and sectoral cooperation

85

9.3. Recommendations for KPVCs

86

9.4. Recommendations: key systems, stakeholders and institutions

92

9.5. Forward agendas: from foresight to strategic capacity-building

95

9.6. Next steps

96

References98

Summary Tables

102

A.1. KPVC scope and definition

102

A.2. KPVC transformations over 3 horizons...

103

A.3. Stakeholder agendas

103

A.4. Participant feedback

104

A.5. Project methods

106

A.6. Project context

108

7

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

List of figures

Figure 1: Circular economy and Socio-Technical Transformations

12

Figure 2: Circular economy – general scope

19

Figure 3: Circular economy: systems and principles

20

Figure 4: Foresight scope with 3 horizons

22

Figure 5: Priority ‘enablers’ and horizons for CE-Ukraine

27

Figure 6: ‘Capacities’ for transformation for CE-Ukraine

28

Figure 7: Scenario framework

29

Figure 8: ‘Constructions’: circularity mapping

44

Figure 9: ‘Constructions’: pathway mapping48

Figure 10: Food products: circularity mapping

52

Figure 11: Food products: pathway mapping

56

Figure 12: Electronics and ICT: circularity mapping

60

Figure 13: Electronics and ICT: pathway mapping

64

Figure 14: Plastics and packaging: circularity mapping

68

Figure 15: Plastics and packaging: pathway mapping

71

Figure 16: ‘Wastes’: circularity mapping

76

Figure 17: ‘Wastes’ – Ukraine generation by source

77

Figure 18: ‘Wastes’: pathway mapping

80

Figure 19: Exploratory Foresight: Method & Process

108

List of tables
Table 1: Sector group analysis of priority KPVC

35

Table 2: KPVC transformations in ‘social systems

40

Table 3: KPVC transformations in ‘technical systems’

41

Table 4: ‘Constructions’ - recommendations

87

Table 5: Food products - recommendations

88

Table 6: Electronics and ICT recommendations

89

Table 7: Plastics and packaging - recommendations

90

Table 8: ‘Wastes’ - recommendations

91

Table A.1: Classification of KPVCs in terms of products and sectors

102

Table A.2: Key product value chains transformations over 3 horizons

103

Table A.3: Stakeholder roles, challenges and opportunities

103

Table A.4: Feasibility of CE development in Ukraine: survey responses

104

Table A.5: Collaboration for CE policies in Ukraine: survey responses

106

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine8

List of abbreviations
AI/AGI

Artificial Intelligence/Artificial General Intelligence

B2B / B2C

Business to business / Business to Consumer Trading

BMZ

The German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development

CBAM

Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism of the EU

CE

Circular economy

CPC

Common Product Classification

CO2

Carbon dioxide

CSR

Corporate Social Responsibility

EC / EU

European Commission / European Union

EPL / EPR

Extended product life / extended producer responsibility

ESG

Environmental and social governance

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GCI

Global Circular Industry

GDP

Gross domestic product

GSC

Global Circular Security

HDI

Human Development Index

ICT

Information and communications technology

IOT

Internet of Things

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

ISIC

International Standard Industrial Classification

KIBS

Knowledge Intensive Business Services

KPVC

Key product value chain

LCI

Local Circular Industry

LCS

Local Circular Society

LED

Local economic development

NGO

Non-governmental organization

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

P2P

Peer-to-Peer trading

PET

Polyethylene terephthalate

RFID

Radio frequency identification, of products or components

R&I / RTD

Research and Innovation / research and technology development

SDG

Sustainable Development Goals

SMAC

Smart, mobile, AI, cloud-based technology

STI / S&T

Science, technology, innovation systems / ‘science and technology’‘STEEPCU’

Futures/foresight domains & systems (‘socio-technical-economic-ecological-political-cultural-urban’): with many variations

STEM

Science, technology, engineering, mathematics (in education and training)

WEEE

Waste electrical and electronic equipment

WEF

World Economic Forum

UN-DESA

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

UNECE

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

UNIDO

United Nations Industrial Development Organization

UNEP

United Nations Environment Programme

9

Towards the Circular Economy UkraineGlossary of key terms
Circular Economy – UNIDO defines circular economy

as an industrial economy that routes materials, partsand products back into use several times and creates
more value and less waste. It is an alternative, in which
value is maintained for as long as possible, products
are designed to last, and the generation of waste isminimized.

Context scenarios – The addressee of a scenario

analysis – for instance, a firm or a country – can nevercontrol the entire range of factors influencing future
development. Context scenarios capture in a systematic
way the space of possible combinations of factors thatwill shape the future but are beyond the influence of theaddressee. In other words, context scenarios represent
possible future environments that addressees may haveto face and for which they have to prepare strategies.

Foresight (as in ‘Technology Foresight’) - theprocess involved in systematically attempting to look
into the longer-term future of science, technology, theeconomy and society, with the aim of identifying theareas of strategic research and the emerging generictechnologies likely to yield the greatest economic andsocial benefits.1
Future vision – ‘Future vision’ is the description of adesirable prospect with regard to a particular context
scenario.

Key product value chain – a connected series of

production and products, from design, to raw materials,
intermediate inputs, final production, marketing,
distribution, and support to the final consumer.

Key technologies, and key technology
innovation systems – Key technologies is aconcept to describe technological developmentsthat could be of use for a wide range of economicallyimportant applications. The concept of key technology
innovation systems combines the notion of key
technologies with that of technological innovation
systems in order to capture the institutional and otherrequirements necessary to realize key technologies andtheir economic impact.

Pathway mapping – This is effective where risks,
goals and resources are ‘volatile, uncertain, conflicted

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

and ambiguous’. The pathway-mapping method isbased on the Pathways Toolkit, which works with a wider
community of stakeholders, deeper layers of value andmeaning, and further horizons of transformation.

Roadmap – A sequence of steps or events necessary

to realize a scenario. These steps can be technological,
economic, social or political in nature. In its most simple
form, a roadmap distinguishes present state, futurestate(s) and actions to be taken in between, but it canalso take the form of series of actions ordered along atimeline.

Science, technology and innovation (STI)systems – Developed as a concept between thelate 1980s and early 1990s, the notion of “systems”
to capture the nature of research and innovation has
exerted a strong influence on research, technology
and innovation policy during the past two decades. In
most systems approaches to STI, emphasis is put on
the importance of interactions between different typesof actors, and of the institutions guiding and framing
these interactions. Developed initially as a synthesis ofprevious actor-centred approaches, more recently thenotion of functions of (research and) innovation systems
has been introduced. Depending on the respectiveemphasis put on different driving forces, authors speakof innovation systems, research and innovation systems,
or science, technology and innovation systems.

Success scenario – This is a desirable future that ischallenging, but that must also be possible to achieve.

Triple helix – A concept developed to understand theclose relation of governance, innovation and production
in a development process. The triple helix model ofinnovation refers to a set of interactions between
academia (the university), business and government, tofoster economic and social development, as describedin concepts such as the knowledge-based economy
and knowledge-based society. Depending on theavailability of empirical evidence and data, the model
could incorporate public or civil society as the fourth
helix (quadruple helix model), the natural environmentof society and ecological issues (quintuple helix model)
or even extended algorithmically more generally to a
multiple or n-tuple helix model.
UNIDO 2005

110

Summary for Policymakers

11

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Circular economy
A ‘circular economy’ (CE) is an economy where products,
parts and materials are ‘cycled’ back into the industrial
system, creating additional value – economic, socialand environmental. In a circular economy:a. Products are designed to lastb. Repair and recycling are standard
c. Raw material inputs and waste outputs
are at a minimum

The CE is now the focus of visions and transformationsin progress in many countries around the world.
To look ahead at such visions and turn these into
practical pathways and actions – this is the role of‘foresight’ and strategic thinking.
This project, the ‘Exploratory Strategic Foresightfor Circular Economy in Ukraine’ is managed by theUnited Nations Industrial Development Organization(UNIDO), under the EU-funded EU4Environment Action
programme, with co-financing from the German Federal
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development(BMZ).

This Final Report brings together the results from eachof the four stages of the project: scoping, scenarios,
visions and pathways.
It presents an outline of the potential visions andopportunities for a CE-Ukraine, within the current
uncertainties, with practical pathways to achieve them.

The foresight approach
The general foresight approach is to explore possible
futures, and map practical ways to turn problems into
opportunities. Beyond the scope of mainstream strategicplanning, foresight works with a wider community of
stakeholders: with deeper layers of value – social,ecological and political: and with a further horizon for
longer-term transformation.
The method of this ‘exploratory strategic foresight’works in four main stages (see annex, A.5, for details):
scoping and systems mapping: scenarios for the future:visions and opportunities: pathways and strategies foraction.
Through the stages, panel discussions and online
surveys with several hundred participants, provided
ideas and responses, and visual mapping tools helped
to explore the bigger picture.

Figure 1. Circular economy and Socio-Technical Transformations
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

12

Circular economy – scoping andmapping
The CE principles focus on materials and resources, but
the reality includes a much bigger picture. The scoping
and mapping of such a bigger picture needs a highly
structured approach, as demonstrated in the following
sections:
ࡿ

ࡿ

ࡿ

ࡿ

The ‘Key product value chains’ (KPVCs) are thecentral focus: these are connected chains ofactivity and value creation, from raw materials to
manufacturing, distribution, consumption and postconsumer waste.
The ‘circularity’ of each KPVC can work in many
cycles: from re-use and repair to re-manufacturing
and recycling, to energy recovery.
For the trade agenda, these KPVCs are not only
national but international and global systems, with
imports and exports at every stage along the chain.
‘Socio-technical systems’ are the dynamic forces
which shape the material flows: here defined asbusiness, governance, community, technology,
industry and infrastructure.

This scheme is the basic model for mapping in detaileach of the KPVCs, as in Part II. The first implication isthat the ‘material CE’ can work only if other things work:for example, the ‘economic CE’ for viability of firms andinvestors, the ‘social CE’ of motivation of consumers andworkers, and the ‘technology CE’ of innovation systems.
The graphic in the figure is a non-technical illustrationof these socio-technical systems in each KPVC, andsome key synergies between them.

visions and pathways include:ࡿ ‘Construction resources’ pathway: this works on the
supply side, for transformation of materials resource
efficiency, waste minimization and recycling on
construction sites: and for post-life buildings andcomponents, re-use, and recycling. This depends
on upskilling and co-production across the wholeconstruction industry.
ࡿ ‘Construction innovation’ pathway: advanced
technology
andinfrastructures:
with
full
digitalization, product identity, alignment with EU
research ecosystems. This promotes innovations
such as bio-material structures, with design for
re-use, dis-assembly and re-manufacturing ofmaterials, components, fittings, and furnishings.
ࡿ ‘Construction procurement’ pathway: on the
demand side, this sees government leading
strategic partnerships of real estate clients,
construction firms, RTD bodies, and civil society, todrive up standards and mobilize investment for the
infrastructure needed.

Food ProductsThis KPVC works from primary inputs to agriculture,
to manufacturing and distribution, to consumption
by households and catering, to post consumer biomaterials and packaging. The KPVC visions and pathways
include:ࡿ

Key product value chains and pathways
This CE-Ukraine foresight explores five main priority
KPVCs. These were first based on the EU Circular
Economy Action Plan2, and then further developed
through consultations. Some pathways are presented
with non-technical titles for communication with ageneral readership.

Constructions
This KPVC ranges from primary materials to completedbuildings, fittings, and components: and then includes
for life-time operation, maintenance, conversion,
renovation and end-of-life demolitions. The KPVCࡿࡿ

‘Food efficiency’ pathway: On the supply side, with
innovation in crop production and technology,
efficiency can be greatly increased, chemical inputs
reduced, farm waste recycled into farm inputs. In
manufacturing, there is huge potential for foodand drink processing waste to achieve near 100%
recycling and recovery.
‘Food health’ pathway: On the demand side, there
are multiple priorities: reducing food waste andpackaging, increasing healthy food and drink,
reducing food poverty, and strengthening the socialand economic role of many kinds of food businessin retail, catering and public services.
‘Food livelihood’ pathway: On the community
dimension, food is a livelihood issue, for ruralvillage production, marginalized communities,
and urban neighbourhoods. Land reform, housing
reconstruction and spatial planning policy can all
help to promote food enterprises based on local
social capital.

13

Towards the Circular Economy UkraineElectronics and ICTThis KPVC is a typical industrial chain, from primary
raw materials (many of them ‘critical’), to manufactureand distribution. Electronics and ICT is a particularly
globalized value chain driven by very rapid innovationand obsolescence. The KPVC visions and pathways
include:ࡿࡿࡿ‘Technology for life’ pathway: On the production
and market supply side: this combines trade
regulation with market development for re-use andrecycling. The hyper-rapid innovation cycle can besteered towards extended product life, producer
responsibility, take-back policies, leasing models,
reverse logistics, design for repair and dis-assembly,
etc.
‘Device literacy’ pathway: on the consumer anddemand side, there is an agenda for social innovationand local skills / enterprises, in the repair, re-use,
recycling and recovery of electronics / ICT devices
and installations.
‘Industry 5.0’ pathway: for the whole economy
agenda, this starts with the aspiration for full
digitalization, for a future ‘smart-wise’ whole
economy and society3. It then includes the planned
circularity of e-waste as an essential part of thetransition towards 100% re-use and recycling.

Plastic and packaging

ࡿ

WastesWastes are defined as materials with zero or negativevalue: this KPVC covers a wide range of inter-connected
systems and material flows, which are embedded in
all KPVCs, To support a rapid transition from ‘wastes’
towards ‘resource management’,
the visions andpathways include:ࡿࡿThis covers two closely connected product types.
Plastics are used in every part of a modern economy:
and especially in packaging, where plastics are essential
to KPVCs such as food or electronics. The visions andpathways include:ࡿࡿ‘What goes around comes around’ pathway: thisworks on the packaging industry supply side. It
starts with extended manufacturer’s responsibility
and new kinds of valuation of plastic recycling
services: this depends on strategic partnerships incircular procurement between manufacturer andbuyer, and ‘B2B’ firm exchange.
‘Packaging for life’ pathway: this works on the social/ demand side of re-use and recycling. It sets up
programmes for public awareness and education,practical incentives, and local scale urban

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

14

infrastructure, with a 100% shift from disposable
packaging towards fully re-usable, repair-able, andrecycle-able packaging.
‘Plastics for life’ pathway: this works on theindustrial materials supply side: with combinationsof eco-industrial management, business-financemodels, and advanced technology innovation
systems. Overall, this points towards industrial
symbiosis, where materials can be shared between
different sectors, i.e. one firm’s waste is another’s
raw material.

ࡿ‘Waste not want not’ pathway: this takes a household/ municipal waste focus. It starts with the domestic
economy of households and communities, wherere-use repair and recycling can grow, in kitchens,
gardens, local shops and local workplaces. It
also creates infrastructure at the local level, both
physical logistics and material exchanges, and local
business activity and investment.
‘Resources for life’ pathway: this focuses on with
bio-materials, firstly from food and then from othersectors. Simple household composting of kitchen
and garden waste can provide valuable inputs:
for retail and catering operations, managementof food product quality and sharing of surplus
via food banks, are the practical starting points.
For agricultural and forestry waste bio-methane
technologies can be set up.
‘Symbiosis for growth’ pathway: for all kinds ofmanufacturing and non-household waste, industrial
symbiosis is the guiding principle for circularity inresources, primary materials, components, semifinished and final products. Full digitalization is
the key to logistics for resource management, withtechnologies such as robotic separation, component
RFID tracking, smart AI-driven logistics and energy /materials platforms.
European Commission (2015).
European Commission, 2021.

2

3

Socio-technical systems andtransformations
The circular economy transformation in material flows,then depends on transformations in each of the main‘socio-technical systems’. These transformations areapplied to the KPVC pathways in various combinations.
➡ Business-finance transformations
from ‘product’ to ‘service’: (includes finance,
investment, enterprise models and marketplaces). Thistransformation moves from a free-standing product ‘on
the shelf’, towards a wider system and value constellationof technology, finance, leasing, maintenance, repair, etc.
➡ Policy-governance transformations
from ‘regulation’ to ‘partnership’: (includes governanceand regulation, public services, public procurement).
This shifts from the former model of government as topdown law-makers, to a more pro-active partnership role
which brings together government with business, civilsociety, academics and innovators.
➡ Social-community transformations
from ‘consumers’ to ‘citizens’: (includes household
economy, education and skills, local livelihoods). This
broad transformation sees the potential for society tomove beyond the narrow materialist role of ‘consumers’,
towards a more integrated and inclusive role as citizens,based on full participation and co-production.
➡ Design-technology-innovation transformations
from ‘products’ to ‘value chains’: (includes digital
economy, innovation systems and design systems). This
paradigm shift reflects the above bigger picture, where
product design is one part of a wider and deeper ‘systems
innovation’ for whole value chains / constellations.
➡ Environment-industry transformations
from ‘efficiency’ to ‘circularity’: (includes productionlines, materials handling, environmental assessmentand management). Looking beyond current programmes
for resource efficiency and cleaner production, this isabout very practical changes in industrial processes,
materials management, and logistics.
➡ Urban infrastructure transformations
from ‘waste’ to ‘resources’: (includes material logistics,
local economies, spaces, land, and buildings). Thistransformation starts with spaces and buildings at the
local level, and over time creates capacity for ‘reverse
logistics’, exchange hubs and storage zones, all the way
to urban / regional scale facilities.

Recommendations and next steps
The single most important agenda for the CE-Ukraine
is for EU alignment, with the EU CE Action Plan as
the starting point. Following this, many CE-related
applications such as EU Taxonomy, EU Characterization,
EU Carbon Border Adjustment mechanism and similar
schemes, cover a wide range of trade agreements,
product standards, material classifications, corporate
compliance, credit-worthiness, consumer standards,
environmental objectives and others4.
In practical terms this can build on the UNIDO Ukraine
Industrial Diagnostic Report5, with a ‘wider-deeperfurther’ approach:
ࡿ

ࡿ

ࡿ

›
›
›

Set up a wider “CE ecosystem”
of actors /stakeholders, for co-innovation and co-production.
For Ukraine this suggests a connected set of
networks, hubs, forums, skills sharing, technology
transfer and knowledge exchange.
Build capacity for a deeper ‘CE value-system’: theCE is not only a functional-material agenda, but one
which integrates technologies and markets withother social, cultural, and ecological values, suchas in cooperative enterprise, regenerative farming,
civil society renewal, and active citizenship.
Explore the further ‘CE transformation’ whichconnects short-term problems with longer termhorizon 3 agendas. For Ukraine, this may start withthe most ‘mission critical’ and urgent issues, forinstance:
How to increase Ukraine’s energy security in times of
disruption and shortage?
How to ensure a viable future for Ukrainian farmingin times of water crisis?
How to turn the problem of Ukraine’s waste into a
new business opportunity?

Ukraine in its current context and uncertainties, hasgreat challenges and potentials. The potential is not
only the agenda of ‘catching up’ with the EU and others– it sees the opportunity for Ukraine as a leader andforerunner in the circular economy transformations
ahead.

European Commission, 2015 and 2020.
UNIDO, 2023.

4
5

15

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine16

PART I
Overview and context
The following sections provide an introduction
and context to this project: an overview of thebaseline conditions and alternative futures: andan overview of the selected ‘key product value
chains’ and socio-technical transformations.

1. Introduction
17

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

1. Introduction
A ‘circular economy’ (CE) is an economic system wherethe value of products, components and packaging ismaintained for as long as possible. This brings many
benefits – social, economic and environmental.
The CE is now a transformation in progress in many
countries around the world. Ukraine has great potential
to be a forerunner in the field.
To explore such potential and turn it into action – thisis the role of ‘Foresight’. This project, the Exploratory
Strategic Foresight for Circular Economy in Ukraine, has
worked with stakeholders on future visions for the CEUkraine, and the ‘transformation pathways’ to turn theminto action.
The project was managed by the United Nations
Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), under
the EU-funded EU4Environment Action, with cofinancing from the German Federal Ministry of Economic
Cooperation and Development (BMZ).
This Final Report brings together the results from thefour stages of the project: scoping, scenarios, visions
and pathways.

1.1 Overview of the circular economy
A circular economy is an economic system wherethe value of all material products, components andpackaging is maintained for as long as possible. To
ensure this outcome, these are all designed to last,
maintained and repaired, reused and shared, and at theend of the useful lives their components and materials

UNIDO, 2019 & 2020: Circle Economy Foundation (2023a & 2023b): OECD 2020

6

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine18

are circled back into the agricultural and industrial
systems to create additional value. In addition, in acircular economy renewable energy is used as much as
possible. All these actions mean that the extraction ofvirgin raw materials from the environment and leakageof materials back into the environment, in the form ofwaste, emissions, and pollution, are minimized6.
The CE transformation is now in progress in many
countries around the world. Such transformation is
not only about materials: it depends on synergies
between many ‘social systems’ of business, government,
and civil society: and many ‘technical systems’ of
design, innovation, environmental management, andinfrastructure.
The general scope is shown in Figure 1. Here, a typical
KPVC (‘key product value chain’) starts with raw
materials on the left, which come through manufacture,
distribution, purchase, usage, and out as surplus
material on the right-hand side. As far as possible thematerials can be segregated for re-use, recycling andother ‘re’- loops from repair to recovery.

Figure 2. Circular economy – general scope
For Ukraine, as with other countries, there are manypotential benefits:ࡿࡿࡿࡿIncreased income for business and the wider
economy;Reduced dependence on external resources;
Minimized waste and pollution;
Reduced environmental footprint.

In addition, for Ukraine the CE transformation will beessential at a strategic level:ࡿࡿࡿModernize the economy and increase productivity;
Enhance investment, trade flows, incomes and skills;
Strengthen cooperation with the EU andinternationally.

Such transformation can be far-reaching, with many
sectors of business and society, many material streams,
and many locations being involved. While there aresome costs and some risks, the potential benefits arehuge and of national importance.

1.2 Circular economy transformation
The CE is not only about materials and resources: it
represents a transformation towards new systems of
production and consumption. This means firstly atransformation in economic systems across the board,
with new synergies between many sectors of businessand finance, and many material streams, in many
locations.
It is also a governance transformation, calling fora more active role by the Government in setting up
partnerships and strategic programmes of innovationand procurement. Similar thinking applies in eachof the main ‘socio-technical systems’, here definedas‘business-finance’, ‘governance-policy’, ‘socialcommunity’, ‘design-technology’, ‘eco-industrial’, and‘urban-infrastructure’.
These new synergies will require new thinking on the newopportunities which will be generated, and pathways

19

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

to achieve them. A summary of the transformations
includes, in each of these socio-technical systems:
Business-Finance – from ‘product’ to ‘service’
Governance-policy – from ‘regulation’ to ‘partnership’Social-community – from ‘consumers’ to ‘citizens’
Design-technology – from ‘gadgets’ to ‘value chains’
Eco-industrial – from ‘efficiency’ to ‘circularity’
Urban infrastructure – from ‘waste’ to ‘resources’

Following through, this ‘exploratory foresight’ hasmapped the wider landscape of CE transformationin Ukraine. The diagram in Figure 2 shows this bigger
picture:➡ A typical ‘Key Product Value Chain’ is shown in thecentre (this includes various infrastructures, which
support the main value chain);.

Figure 3: Circular economy: systems and principles
Circle Economy Foundation, 2024 and 2023.

7

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

20➡ The material ‘circularity’ can be seen above invarious loops and layers, from repair to recycling torecovery;➡ This involves imports and exports, and global tradeat every stage, in different patterns in each KPVC, as
shown below;.
➡ Socio-technical systems are shown on the left side– business, governance, community, technology,
industry and infrastructure. For each system there
is a short list of ‘enablers’, i.e. common practicalactions or ways forward. The basic CE material flow
principles are shown on the right side – ‘regenerate– cycle – slow – narrow’7.
This diagram is the basic templates for each of the KPVC
mappings in Part II.
The implication is that the material flow CE can work
only if other things work: the economic viability of firms
and investors, the social motivation of consumers andworkers, the technology innovation ‘eco-systems’, andso on.

1.3 Transformation in practice
For Ukraine as for any other country, there is no fixedmodel for what the CE will look like, in 5, 10, or 20
years from now. Fortunately, Ukraine can benefit fromthe research and innovation and policy development,
around the EU and beyond, and learn from theexperience so far. Some strategic innovation agendas
are crucial to success:➡ CE-Ukraine will involve economic innovation: inbusiness models, value chains, financial models,market and logistics models.
➡ CE-Ukraine will depend on social enterprise, so that
consumers, citizens and workers have awarenessand motivation to re-purpose, re-use and recycle.
➡ The CE-Ukraine also depends on policy andgovernance innovation, beyond the conventional‘policy versus business divide’. This calls for newmodels of policy and governance: supply chain
partnerships, strategic innovation/procurement,
industrial
standards
forums,regulatory
collaborations, etc.
➡ The over-arching agenda is for EU alignment, as
the largest and most advanced trading bloc in theregion. The EU-CE action plan, EU Taxonomy, EU
Characterization, EU Carbon Border Adjustment
mechanism, and many other schemes, serve the CE
agenda for trade movements, product standards,
material classifications, corporate compliance,
credit-worthiness and others.8
Overall, many national governments, cities and regions,firms and enterprises, institutes and associations, NGOs
and universities are promoting the circular economy.
There are countless reports, policies, manuals, bestpractice examples and platforms. All these are inspiring
examples of positive thinking.
However, in reality there are many hidden barriers,
gaps and challenges – some of which are shown inthe baseline profiles below, and in the KPVC chapters.
Feedback from the project participants (as in the Annex)
suggests that new business models are seen as risky toenterprises. New product designs or service models
need to find new markets, which can take time, andnew systems for re-use or recycling need to be ‘learned’
together, by producers, retailers, and consumers.

European Commission (2020 & 2023).
European Court of Auditors, 2018.
UNIDO 2005: Miles et al 2016: Saritas 2020: Ravetz & Miles 2016

On the demand side, many households may nothave interest or opportunity for recycling and otherlifestyle changes. In public procurement the principleof lowest cost generally comes before any other goals,
environmental or otherwise. And then, barriers exist in
the deeper layers of the system.
The political power of most large firms is based onconventional business models of ‘take-make-dump’,and many investors steer away from the perceived riskof ‘green new deal’ businesses. The ‘old networks’ ofindustrial production may not work in a new businessenvironment, and so there may be resistance, economic
and political.
In summary, the transformations to CE are not always
simple or easy, and this will be true for CE-Ukraine as
elsewhere. For instance, the EU has been promoting thecircular economy for nearly 10 years, with large inputs offunds, but so far it seems that progress so far is a longway behind expectations.9
Ukraine being a very special case – at present thedisruption and destruction of the war, has increased
risks, displaced large populations, taken out vital
infrastructure, destroyed local markets, and increased
risk for investors – the question to be explored is, what
is to be done for the future?

1.4 The foresight approach
The foresight approach works to explore and mobilize
such transformations.10 It looks not only for idealistic
visions, but for practical opportunities, which arealso ‘game-changers’. It looks beyond the short term
‘problem-fix’ (‘horizon 1’), towards systems change
in the longer term (‘horizon 3’). It looks for synergies
between stakeholders, right across the innovation
ecosystem, and along the value chains from supply todemand sides. It explores not only the positives but also
the negatives – the many gaps and barriers which keep
the industrial ‘take-make-dump’ system resistant tochange – and then looks for the catalysts, enablers andopportunities for transformation.
The overall goal of this ‘exploratory foresight’ project isto help mobilize Ukraine’s shift towards the policies andpractices of the EU CE action plan. The result is a set

8
9

10

21

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

of ‘transformation pathways’, which connect the future
visions to practical actions.

change, the foresight approach can be very relevant. As
shown in the diagram below:

In that context, the special role and contribution of thisproject can be seen with an extended scope – ‘further,
wider, and deeper’:➡ In the short term on the left, the main agenda is forࡿ

Looking further beyond the short term, to wholetransformation: with a ‘horizon 1’ of 1-5 years:‘horizon 2’ of 5-10 years: and a ‘horizon 3’ of 10-25
years.11
Looking wider to all stakeholders and communities,
from business leaders to the poor and displaced:
the CE depends not only on economic ‘winners’,
but in the motivation for change of all citizens andcommunities and cultures.
Looking deeper for the synergies of CE material
flows with other systems – economic, social,technological, governance and cultural.

ࡿࡿ

These foresight methods are well suited to situations ofhigh uncertainty and rapid change. As Ukraine’s current
situation is one of very high uncertainty and rapid

Figure 4: Foresight scope with 3 horizons
Sharpe and Williams, 201311

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

22

management of the war situation: with huge costs,
risks, and uncertainties.
➡ The post-war recovery plan is highly dependenton (a): this is already in detailed planning, butsurrounded by major uncertainties on the future ofaid, investment, demographic change etc.
➡ For horizon 2, the ‘green agenda’ is not always
seen as a priority in post-war recovery amongst
other urgent priorities – but the direction is clear,
towards EU alignment, along with other bilateraland multilateral frameworks.
➡ For horizon 3, systemic ‘transformation pathways’
point towards future visions and new opportunities,
and this is the first creative contribution of theforesight approach. These longer-term pathways
can also help to address and resolve the mediumterm challenges and barriers of the ‘green post-war
recovery’ plan.

This ‘further-wider-deeper’ scope has been exploredthrough many programmes on CE and related agendas– net-zero, sustainable food, adaptive governance andso on12. It can be framed as a ‘collective circularity
intelligence’ – the capacity for shared learning,
innovation and collaboration – with further horizonsof transformation, wider communities of interest, anddeeper layers of value.
In summary, Ukraine is a very special case: currently on
the front line of war – but also with a unique potential
for post-war transformation. Project participants havediscussed how Ukraine could provide leadership forthe whole EU and beyond. This project with its ‘furtherwider-deeper’ scope aims to contribute to that agenda.

1.5 About the project
The project ‘Exploratory Strategic Foresight for Circular
Economy in Ukraine’ was managed by UNIDO, under
the Component 2 ‘Circular Economy and New Growth
Opportunities’ of the EU-funded EU4Environment
Action, with additional funding from the German Federal
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development(BMZ).
This Final Report is a synthesis of the working papers
from each stage of the project: Scoping, Scenarios,
Visions and Pathways, together with the side-reports onpanels and surveys.
The primary evidence comes from three main panel
meetings held online, with representatives of ministries,
academia, business and civil society (108 experts intotal). A preliminary in-person meeting was held in
Warsaw, together with a series of stakeholder interviews
and technical consultations. Two online surveys wereconducted for the visions and pathway mapping stages(155 participants). The realization of all those events
counted on the support of the RECP Centre. The list ofrepresentatives of Ministries, academia, business andcivil society who contributed to the Exercise is available
on http://www.recpc.org/circular-economy/.
The foresight project also reviews the desk study
evidence so far coming from Ukraine, the European
Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation& Development (OECD) and UNIDO. It fits this withinternational developments in CE thinking, fromorganizations such as the Circle Economy Foundationand the Ellen McArthur Foundation. It provides a novel
synthesis of CE thinking, not only for the mainstream CE
definition and application to Ukraine, but for a bigger
picture of systems change and transformation.
The report is set out in three parts:

Part I

Part II

Part III

General context
and method:
introduction,baseline, andcontext

Outline of key
product value
chainsAnnex withsupporting
material

Overall, this synthesis report aims to contribute to thelarger ‘Circular Economy Ukraine’ programme, as on
http://www.recpc.org/circular-economy/. This programme
includes baseline assessment of the situation in the
country, online training program for decision-makers,
compilation of business cases of available circular
practices as well as a set of project proposals to further
advancing the Circular Economy practices and principles
in the country.

Ravetz 2020

1223

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine24

2. Baselines and futures
25

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

2. Baselines and futures

The absence of State-supported mechanisms totransition to a circular economy, including availabilityof funding, capital investments in environmental
protection, acquisitions for collaborative businessprojects with the EU, green lending, and preferential
loans for SMEs is a major obstacle. Additionally, many
enterprises lack the financial resources to restructure
and modernize their production facilities. Lastly, there isa notable lack of information and consulting activities in
the field of circular economy.

The starting point for the CE-Ukraine transformation ischallenging – and yet brings many opportunities. Thissection gives a brief review of the national context andbaseline: an outline of the framework for alternative
future scenarios: and the formation of a national visionstatement.

2.1 Context and baseline
Ukraine is a large country with many regions andlandscapes: an emerging economy with around 50% of
the EU average of GDP per person (as of 2023).

Focusing more on waste management and the CE agenda,
this assessment from the Circle Economy Foundation
includes the following considerations:16

The Russian invasion of 2022 has caused massive damage
and disruption, both physical and socioeconomic, andthe outcome is still very uncertain. This catastrophe
has given rise to around 6 million refugees, veteransand internally displaced persons, with widespread
disruption of labour and skills, infrastructure, andconsumer markets.

…Since the war, a number of policy developments
have taken place. These have been largely inspired andsupported by the European framework for a circular
economy and the European Green Deal, conditioning
Ukraine-EU integration. The earlier Association
Agreement of 2014 between the European Union andUkraine already supported the adaptation of Ukraine’s
regulatory body to the EU models.

The economy has up to now centred on primary resourcebased production of minerals, metals, agriculture andforestry. Ukraine’s international food exports accountfor 41% of export value (now returning to pre-war levels).

The most relevant piece of legislation for the circular
economy is the adopted June 2022 Law of Ukraine on“National waste management”, regulating the relations
in connection with the management of waste generated
in Ukraine, transported through the territory of Ukraine,
exported abroad and imported into Ukraine for the
purpose of recovery or recycling. The National Waste
Management Plan 2030, adopted in 2019, identifies tasks
and practical measures designed to enable Ukraine by2030 to switch to a new model of waste management
existing in the European Union. Now that the June 2022
law on a national waste management architecture has
been voted, regional administrations are in the processof developing regional plans for waste management, up
to 2025, as demonstrated by the Zaporizhzhia oblast andthe regulation for regional waste management as well
as local waste management plans.

For the environment and sustainability agenda,
this general assessment from the UNIDO Industrial
Diagnostic Study is pertinent:15“…Ukraine still lags the EU and other comparators
in terms of CO2 emissions, with total emissions intensity
still significantly higher than those of many comparator
countries.
Ukraine’s material efficiency is currently low, andpolicymakers should therefore prioritize measures toenhance material efficiency and promote recirculation
into the economy to promote reuse. As part of thecountry’s sustainable industrial development agenda,
the improvement of material efficiency may result in
triple dividends:

According to our research, some of the persistentproblems relating to the proper implementation of
circular economy policy include:➡ No comprehensive strategy for transitioning to acircular economy in Ukraine➡ reducing dependence on the supply of raw materials➡ lowering environmental pressure➡ Limited or non-existent sectoral circularity objectives➡ improving industry’s competitiveness.
or regulation, particularly for the construction

National Recovery Council, 2022.
USDA, 2014.
With reference to Landell Mills et al., 2023.
16
Circle Economy Foundation, 2024.
13

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

14

26

15

sector➡ Fragmented
inter-ministerial/agency/municipal
communication➡ Lack of a coordinated approach for monitoring
waste statistics.

2.2 Feasibility and capacity of CE-Ukraine
The CE transition depends very much on the presence of‘enablers’ – practical combinations of policy, business,

technology, and others. A preliminary list of enablers
was compiled from international experience, expert
consultation and literature (details in Section 3). Thiswas supplied to the panel participants and survey
respondents (Survey A of this project), who selected themost critical and relevant priorities and enablers for
Ukraine, in the short, medium, and long term horizons.
The chart in Figure 4 illustrates the list of the enablers
for successful CE transition in Ukraine, ranked by thepriorities of survey participants.

Figure 5: Priority ‘enablers’ and horizons for CE-Ukraine
In the short-term horizon, zero-waste emerges as animportant concept: zero-waste construction materials
and zero-wastewater systems are among the top
five enablers within five years. Collaborative circular
standards and regulations, reverse logistic hubs for
re-use and recycling, and circular literacy in homes
and workplaces are other top critical enablers. In themedium-term horizon, the critical enablers in the shortterm remain as high priority. In addition, extended
producer responsibility becomes one of the top criticalenablers, along with digital supply chain integration, andsocio-eco-innovation systems. In the long-term horizon,

extended producer responsibility becomes the top
critical enabler for CE in Ukraine. Industrial symbiosis
and innovation for lifetime products are also mentioned
as the critical enablers for the long run.
Ukraine’s current position for successful CE
transformation was analysed through the Survey A ofthis project (conducted at the end of 2023) in four areasof capacity: Science and Technology (S&T), innovation,industrial and service delivery, and exploitation /implementation. Figure 5 shows the results.

27

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Figure 6: ‘Capacities’ for transformation for CE-Ukraine
Most of the respondents consider Ukraine’s current
capacity for CE transformation in all four areas to be
low or medium. Current S&T capacity of the country
is medium according to the largest number of
respondents. This is promising, considering that Ukraine
has historically a well-established S&T system. However,when the innovation capacity is considered, it isrelatively low. Moving to industrial and service delivery
the respondents highlight more the lack of capacity inthe country. Finally, more than half of the respondents
considered the country’s exploitation and practicalimplementation capacity low. There is a clear need toextend the S&T capacity into other domains to achieve
successful CE transformation in the country.

2.3 Alternative futures: a scenario framework
The CE-Ukraine forward agenda depends on what kindof future context may exist in 5, 10 or 25 years. There areprofound uncertainties – will the war end, and if so, on
what terms? Will the migrants and internally displaced
persons return? Can Ukraine align with or join the EU,
and what other options are relevant? Will government
partners and international investors return and help tofund the reconstruction?
And while such national-level questions are being
examined, what is the context for the CE-Ukraine?

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

28

Will the CE work with friendly or hostile partners andneighbours? Will the changes be ‘pushed’ by industrial
supply sides, or ‘pulled’ by consumer demand?
The scenario planning approach is central to theforesight approach: and so the second state of thisproject created and explored alternative futures for the
CE-Ukraine transition. These are framed as ‘context’,
being conditions and forces beyond the immediate
control.
In this way the CE-Ukraine scenario framework created a
two-by-two matrix, with main axes as follows (Figure 6):

X axis: Circular Economy scope and application:ࡿࡿ

Whole society CE value chain and demand side
focus - versus Narrow CE production focus and industrial change.

Y axis: National development path:ࡿࡿ

Ukraine is globally integrated, economically andpolitically: full resources are available for CE, withfocus on full reconstruction - versus Ukraine CE is isolated economically and politically:
limited CE resources, and only for some regions,with focus on partial reconstruction.

Figure 7: Scenario framework
The x-axis of the scenario framework focuses on thescope of the circular economy and its application. On
the right hand side the CE strategy will have a wholesociety focus: on the left, the CE has a narrower focus
just on production and industrial change.
The y-axis considers the national CE development
path. On the upper side of the axis Ukraine restores its
economy fully, and develops strategies for the adoptionof the EU CE framework and integration into global value
chains. General economic prosperity allows the country
to dedicate a substantial amount of resources to a
CE transition. On the lower side of the axis there is apartial recovery of the economy, where an isolated anddefensive country concentrates a substantial amountof its resources to maintain basic infrastructures andservices. This leaves limited resources available for a
CE transition with partial recovery of the industrial baseand infrastructure.
The combination of x and y axes yields four scenarios,
focusing on the broad context for the development of a
CE in Ukraine:

Scenario 1

Full scale circular society and globally
integrated circular economy(Global Circular Society - GSC)

Scenario 2

Circular society in a local and isolated
circular economy(Local Circular Society - LCS)

Scenario 3

Basic circular industry in a local andisolated circular economy(Local Circular Industry - LCI)

Scenario 4

Advanced circular industry in globally
integrated value chains(Global Circular Industry - GCI)

29

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

These scenarios offer alternative perspectives on the
CE-Ukraine and its path toward green industrial recovery
over a 10- to 25-year timeframe. These scenarios outlinea range of favourable and unfavourable conditions that
may emerge, based on the uncertainties in the broader
context. The implications of the scenarios for each of
the KPVCs are summarized in Part II of this report.

2.4 Towards a CE-Ukraine ‘vision statement’
The exploration of alternative future scenarios thenled stakeholders to the formation of a national ‘visionstatement’ for CE-Ukraine, in the third horizon of 10-25
years. This can be summarized as follows:
TOWARDS A NATIONAL CIRCULAR ECONOMY VISIONSTATEMENT“

Ukraine fully embraces a full circular economy
approach, on both the production and consumption
sides. The country successfully transitions to aprosperous state with a restored high-value economy.
The Government provides all resources needed tosupport the circular economy transformation in businessand civil society, moving towards full alignment with the
EU framework and integration with global value chains.
The full circular economy approach helps Ukraine tofollow the principles of using fewer materials, extending
the lifespan of products, regenerating resources, andmaximizing material reuse.

“

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

30

31

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine32

3. Key product value chains
and socio-technical systems

33

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

3. Key product value chains and sociotechnical systems
This section provides an overview of the selected KPCVs(‘key product value chains’, and the socio-technicalsystems, in scope and definition, and in application
through the enablers.

3.1. Value chains: selection
This CE-Ukraine foresight explores a range of KPVCs.
These were based on the EU circular economy action
plan, with some recent developments. In principle,
each KPVC is defined as a complete value chain, fromraw materials to finished consumer products and postconsumer waste. However, the reality is not so simple:›‘Constructions’: from primary materials tocompleted buildings, fittings and components: andthen maintenance, conversion, renovation and endof-life demolitions: the circularity is a question
where the ‘product’ has a very long life.

›

Food products: from primary inputs toagriculture, to manufacturing and distribution, toconsumption by households and catering activities.

›

Electronics and ICT: from primary critical raw
materials, to manufacture and distribution: thisis mainly a globalized value chain with very rapid
innovation.

›

Plastic and packaging: two inter-connectedmaterial systems, which are embedded in all the
KPVCs, with potential for re-use and recycling.

›‘Wastes’: a variety of inter-connected material
systems, which are embedded in all KPVCs,
with potential for transition towards ‘resource
management’.

The last two on this list are not full value chains, in thesense of raw materials leading to finished products:
each is more of a material-intensive component andinfrastructure system. Also, other KPVCs were coveredin outline at various points in the project, and someinterim results are shown in the other project reports.

›

Textiles articles, and a highly globalized
production-consumption chain.

›

Domestic appliances: design for repair, re-use,
and resource efficiency.

›

Motor vehicles, batteries: design for repair, reuse, and resource efficiency.

›

Energy systems:
low-impact
zero-waste
infrastructure, from supply to demand to ‘energy
services’.

3.2. Value chains: scope and definition
There are many definitions of value chains: some are
more focused on the production process17: “…the fulllife cycle of a product or process, including material
sourcing, production, consumption and disposal/
recycling processes.”. Others look at the bigger picture18:“…‘value chain’ also encompasses thinking about thevalue created by the chain for end-use customers… anda range of other stakeholders, including communities
and governments”.
The ‘food products’ KPVC, for instance, includes primary
inputs of energy, water etc: a supply chain of production
and distribution: a global chain of imports and exports:
and the ‘demand chain’ of households and catering. Eachof these sectors and products then has its own wider
network of inputs and outputs: it also has deeper layersof value - economic, social, political and ecological19.
Based on the United Nations official classificationof ‘products’ and ‘sectors’, Table A.1. in the Annexsummarizes each of the KPVCs, as a starting point for
more detailed analysis.20
The service sectors may have less direct material flow or
CO2 emissions in their activities, however as drivers ofthe demand side, they may be equally or more significant
in the circularity of the whole value chain. In the foodproducts KPVC for example, each of the service sectorsof catering / accommodation, education, health, andpublic administration are important drivers of change,
all the way from primary inputs to finished products,
together with the many inter-connected services asabove.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2011.
SustainAbility, UNEP and the Global Compact (2008)
Allee, 2003
20
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2015.
17

18

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

1934

Each of the KPVCs can be analysed in this way: fromprimary sectors to secondary, tertiary, government,households and post-consumer waste. Table 1 outlines

the five selected KPVCs with key points in each sector
group, as a starting point for more detailed analysis.

Table 1: Sector group analysis of priority KPVCs

PRIMARY

SECONDARYTERTIARY

GOVERNMENTCONSUMERWASTE/
MATERIALS

Resource
sectors

Industrial
sectors

Servicesectors‘Public user’sectors‘End-user’sectors‘Post-user’sectors

Constructions

Sand, aggregatesetc

Building
components
manufacture

Design,maintenance,
rental, sale

Public building
procurement

Accommodation in use andmaintenanceConstruction anddemolition waste

Food products

Agriculture,
forestry, farm
inputsFood and drink
processing andpackagingFood retail andcatering

Public service
catering

household diet,cooking

Food andpackaging waste

Electronics and
ICT(Many global
trade flows)

Advancedmanufacture forrecycling anddisassemblyServiceinnovation as
driver of change

Publicprocurement

Consumerawareness andinfrastructure

Infrastructure forreuse, recycling

Plastics andpackaging

New biodegradable
materials

Production model
for recycling andrecoveryService model
for recycling andrecovery

Publicprocurement

Consumerawareness andinfrastructure

Infrastructure
for recycling andrecovery

Waste recovery as
raw material

Industrial design
for re-cycling anddisassemblyService models
for EPR etc

Infrastructure
for recycling andrecoveryHousehold reuse
and waste sorting

Sustainable waste
management

Wastes35

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine3.3. Socio-technical systems and transformations
The CE transformation aims at circular material flows:
but this depends on innovations and transformations ineach of the main ‘socio-technical’ systems – businessfinance, policy-governance, etc. These transformations
are not fixed items to be achieved with a ‘policy lever’:
they are more like directions of travel, with many
uncertainties and complexities.21 So, a list such as
below is just the starting point for exploration anddialogue, to be applied to the KPVC pathways in various
combinations.

➡ Business-finance – from ‘product’ to ‘service’:(includes finance, investment, enterprise models
and marketplaces). This transformation moves froma free-standing product ‘on the shelf’, towards a
wider system and value constellation of technology,
finance, leasing, maintenance, repair, etc.

➡ Policy-governance–from‘regulation’to‘partnership’: (includes governance and regulation,
public services, public procurement). This shifts
from the former model of government as a topdown law-maker / regulator, to a more pro-active
partnership role which brings together government
with business, civil society, academics andinnovators.

➡ Social-community – from ‘consumers’ to ‘citizens’:(includes household economy, education and skills,
local livelihoods). This broad transformation sees
the potential for society to move beyond the narrow
materialist role of ‘consumers’, towards a more
integrated and inclusive role as citizens, based on
full participation and co-production.

➡ Design-technology-innovation – from ‘products’ to‘value chains’: (includes digital economy, innovation
systems and design systems). This paradigm shiftreflects the above bigger picture, where productdesign is one part of a wider and deeper ‘systems
innovation’ for whole value chains.

practical changes in industrial processes, materials
management and logistics.

➡ Urban infrastructure – from ‘waste’ to ‘resources’:(includes material logistics, local economies,
spaces, land and buildings). This transformation
starts with spaces and buildings at the local level,
and over time creates capacity for ‘reverse logistics’,
exchange hubs and storage zones, all the way
from the household level to urban / regional scale
facilities.

These transformation principles provide a visionary
agenda for the CE in terms of material flows. However,the positive combinations of material systems withthese other ‘socio-technical’ systems –economic,
environmental, technology, social, urban and governance– is not a simple task.
The following sections explore each of the six systems,with an outline of typical challenges in Ukraine, drawn
from the baseline reports and survey participants. Therefollows an outline of potential transformations, and amenu of the most likely ‘enablers’, to help mobilize them.
These were developed from international literature andexpert advice, and then explored by stakeholders in the
project panel meetings and surveys.

3.4. Business-finance enablers
Corporates and investment vehicles are understandably
risk averse in the Ukraine situation, and supply chains areheavily disrupted. Most businesses follow conventionalmodels for volume production, and the shift to servicebased models is challenging, especially for SMEs withfew assets. Where CE activity is making progress, ‘greenwashing’ type PR is difficult to call out.
The transformation agenda involves not only better
resource efficiency (see below), but also a rethinking of
how supply or value chains work, new forms of businessand finance models, and new forms of economic synergy.
Possible enablers are:

➡ Eco-industry – from ‘efficiency’ to ‘circularity’: ➡ Use of service and leasing models: manufacturers(includes production lines, materials handling,
environmental assessment and management).
Looking beyond current programmes for resource
efficiency and cleaner production, this is about very

do not sell products but instead rent / lease them,
together with ancillary parts, on long services
contracts, with payments being based on services
delivered. (Example: a complete lighting package

21

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

36

Potting et al, 2017

is provided by Signify (ex-Philips Lighting) on anannual contract basis, with payment being based on
the amount of lighting provided (the service)).

of stakeholders, deeper layers of value, and further
horizons of change.23➡ Adoption of extended producer responsibility

government has a vital partnership role in setting
standards, targeting ‘smart’ regulation, and leadinga strategic approach to sector transformation.
(Example: single-use plastic shopping bags aretaxed in many EU countries, and both usage andwastage has dropped rapidly).

(‘EPR’) policies: producers (and/or importers) of
certain products are made responsible for the
management of those products once they become
waste. As part of this, manufacturers may aim for
an Extended Product Life (EPL) for their products,
by providing longer warranties, designing to avoid
obsolescence, and designing for diss-assembly andrecycling. (Example: some mobile phone producers,
such as Fairphone, design for longer life and retrofit).

➡ Circularsocio-ecological investment: banking
and venture funds are designed to support whole
supply-demand-value chains, not only individual
products / markets. (Example: waste management
which supports reverse logistics, such as ‘take-back’
bottles or plastic containers).

➡ Service value constellations: a whole economy

approach, looking beyond individual value
chains towards whole circles, where most of
the value added is in services (Example: theUK ‘Market Transformation’ programme worked
with the ‘constellation’ of household appliancemanufacturers,
distributors,
managers
andconsumers, for a major increase in efficiency andcircularity).

3.5. Policy-governance enablers
Challenges in CE governance start with the divisionof competencies into ‘economy’, ‘environment’,‘digitalization’ etc. CE principles call for integration ofwhole supply-demand-value chains, but this is difficult
within current structures. The EU’s attempts to promote
the circular economy with large funding programmes
have so far not been very successful.22 Much of thegovernment machinery is separated from business, andconnecting them is not easy.
In response, the circular economy calls for a ‘circulargovernance’ transformation, with new ways ofworking which are collaborative, adaptive, strategic
and synergistic. This can be summed as a ‘collective
governance intelligence’, based on a wider community➡ Collaborative circular standards and regulations:➡ Strategic

circular procurement partnerships:
government as manager of public services also has amajor role as buyer and consumer of CE-compatible
products and services. (Example: the municipality of
Milan set up a local sustainable food procurement
programme for all education and health services,which helped to transform the food system in that
region).

➡ Adaptive-collaborative governance communities

of interest: a forward-looking government works
with a whole industrial community or sector in a colearning and capacity-building process. (Example:
the UK National Industrial Symbiosis Programme(NISP) set up a platform for exchange of wastematerials: along with a public-private partnershipfor industrial skills and capacity-building (Lombardi
and Laybourn 2012).

3.6. Sociocultural enablers
The challenges and barriers in Ukraine have been
analysed, as a reluctance for behaviour change, ecoscepticism, blame and displacement, illegal dumpingof pollution and waste, added to the disruption andtrauma of war. While inequality in Ukraine is less thanthe EU average, there are inbuilt barriers and exclusions
which block the ideal of collaborative efforts. Meanwhile
the desire for economic growth comes with a culture of
consumption and affluence is very powerful, as in any
typical capitalist economy.
In response, there are forward pathways which aim
at resonance with everyday lifestyles, and capacitybuilding for positive change.

➡ Circular literacy in homes and workplaces: this may

start with public services in education, health, social

European Court of Auditors, 2021.
Ravetz, 2020.

22

23

37

Towards the Circular Economy Ukrainecare, and cultural activities. (Example: the UK ‘carbon
literacy’ programme / platform is very successful for
public education and awareness: similar ventures
are in discussion for ‘circular literacy’).

➡ Social welfare circular platforms: many areas

encourage creation of business and formal
employment opportunities to collect dumped
material for recycling, and this can be extended into
different material streams such as construction.
(Example: the growing number of recycling plants
for waste separation, now working in partnershipwith food banks, furniture and bathroom banks).

➡ Community / local circular platforms: some local
areas now have social networks for sharing ofneeds and surplus items, which can be extended
and mobilized for other areas with less cohesion
and more transient populations. (Example: many
sharing / re-use platforms such as Freecycle, withgreat scope to scale up and go mainstream).

➡ Collaborative socio-eco-economy systems:

themove from ‘take-make-sell-dump’ systems to amore integrated model can bring environmental
benefits if firms can adapt rapidly. (Example: therise of the ‘pre-loved’ fashion business, enabled byonline platforms, can greatly reduce the material
impact of clothing value chains, if social and cultural
conditions are right).

3.7. Design-technology-innovation enablers
Ukraine has immense resources in science andtechnology, but the challenges for innovation systems,
R&D programmes, and industrial design are many.
Generally, innovation ecosystems are still geared toindividual products rather than to whole value chains
and the CE principles. New technologies or designsfor ‘partial circularity’ may not be quickly profitable,
especially where the infrastructure is lacking. The EU
experience so far shows major gaps between sciencetechnology-innovation (STI) policies, and market
deployment at scale.
The transformation agenda here is about deploying
enablers, which turn around the conventional modelof ‘technology innovation’ for new products, towards a‘socio-eco-innovation’ for whole circular systems.24

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

38➡ Innovation for ‘Extended Product Life’ (EPL): thisaims towards the transformation of products in use,
and the ‘socio-technical interface’ in households
or workplaces. (Example: IT equipment can be
standardized with modular design and production
to avoid waste and obsolescence).

➡ Digital supply chain integration: the use of IOT for

supply chain management is well known, but thepotential of AI is just taking off. (Example: following
the smart meter systems for electricity or water,
smart kitchens, or catering aims to reduce foodwaste and increase positive reuse of surplus).

➡ Socio-ecological-innovation systems: this turns

around the innovation frame, from the benefit-cost
ratios of individual products or producers to a more
integrated assessment of social and ecologicalvalue. (Example: automotive design to support low
maintenance shared use facilities).

3.8. Environment-industry enablers
In Ukraine, as elsewhere, the mainstream industrial
firm and business model is focused on ‘quantity’ andproduction of volume: environmental management,
resource efficiency and cleaner production generally
work to improve rather than to transform the supply
chain. A re-focusing on ‘quality’ means not only newmonitoring but new systems, and a transformation from‘product’ to ‘service’ value added. In primary materials,
chemicals, heavy or light engineering, advanced
manufacture, etc, similar principles apply. In the crucial
defence and military sectors, the needs are especially
urgent, but similar principles apply, for high value
products as part of high value systems.

➡ Resource efficiency and cleaner production: thisagenda has a long history but is still urgent in manyindustries. With some notable exceptions, indicatorsand diagnostics on Ukraine show generally low
levels of ‘RECP’ across many industries.

➡ Industrial symbiosis: technically, it is the use of

the wastes of one factory as raw material input byanother factory. In a wider sense, the principle thatevery product is part of a circle, not only of material/ energy, but of value added, not only economic butsocial and ecological. (Example: the UK National
Industrial Symbiosis Project, enabled packaging
producers to be integrated to a social economy ofreverse logistics).25➡ Industrial cross-integration: this looks for new

ways to integrate material and energy flows
between different industrial sectors. (Example: newelectrostatic technologies enable circularity acrosssectors – shrimp-farming, hydrogen generation, rareearth extraction, wastewater treatment and wetland
remediation.

3.9. Urban infrastructure enablers
The Ukraine urban environment could be a barrier inthe circularity transformation: if space is lacking in
the household or workplace for recycling / re-use,
or if systems for returning packaging are too costly,
then such actions will be more difficult. Ukraine has a
special opportunity here in the post-war reconstruction
programme, and urgently needs practical designs,

logistics systems and resource infrastructure at every
level.26➡ Reverse logistic hubs for re-use and recycling:

common products such as containers and packaging
can be standardized with ‘reverse supply chains’back to manufacturers, and space / facilities tosupport that. (Example: food or cleaning productcontainers returned to suppliers).

➡ Zero-waste

construction materials: buildings
can be designed for diss-assembly, with modular
construction for low/zero-waste in the material
chain. (Example: engineered timber frame, insulated
panel construction).

➡ Zero-wastewater systems:

as climate change
impacts grow, intelligent water management willbe essential. (Example: water harvesting, storage,
separation of grey / drinking and surface / sanitation
systems).

Lombardi and Laybourn, 2012.
OECD, (2020b).

25

26

39

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine3.10. Summary of KPVCs and socio-technical transformations
The following tables summarize the CE transformation agenda in the social and technical systems of Ukraine foreach selected KPVC.

Table 2: KPVC transformations in ‘social systems’

BUSINESS-FINANCE

POLICY- GOVERNANCE

SOCIAL-COMMUNITY

KPVCs

Constructions

System-wide green credit andfinance in construction and realestateCircular construction strategic
procurement programmes

Skills training for wholecommunity - designers,
installers, building managers andresidents

Food products

Whole industry cooperation forfarmers / agri-business, food /beverage producers, distributors/ retailers.

Coordination of regulationand standards, industrial
partnerships, procurement
programmes, innovation clusters

Local economic development,
food health awareness, andcultural value of local foodsystems

Electronics and ICTElectronics supply chaintransparency, product passports,
and design for reuse / reengineering

Coordination of standards,
compatibility, regulation, withforward finance for EPR andservice models.

Wider social motivation forreuse / re-engineering, sharing
platforms

Plastics and packaging

Transformation in businessmodels and logistic systems for
packaging reduction / re-use /recycling

Plastic packaging tax / subsidy /regulation: capacity-building foralternative logistics

Social innovation andcommunity enterprise for
packaging reduction, re-use, redistribution, recycling

Wastes

New investment channels for
integrated supply chain businessmodelsOverall coordination andpromotion of integrated zerowaste supply-demand chain
partnerships

Coordination of social
enterprise, price incentives,
product innovation and urban
infrastructures

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine40

Table 3: KPVC transformations in ‘technical systems’

DESIGN and TECHNOLOGY

ECO-INDUSTRYURBAN and INFRASTRUCTURE

KPVCs

Constructions

Construction design for disassembly, modular fabrication,
resource efficient innovation

Construction symbiosis –collective innovation hubs forexchange of materials andprocesses

Urban re-engineering withstrategic hubs and transfer
stations, for re-use of materials
and components

Food products

Product design and innovation
shifts from individual ‘items’ tointegrated 'food chain’ models

Agri-food environmental
management can follow theindustrial symbiosis model forrecycling and exchange

Systems for reverse logistics andbio-material management, fromhousehold level to regional hubs

Electronics and ICT

Standardized design for reuse /re-engineering

Coordination of UA minerals
sector with EU critical materials
platform

Product and component re-use/ re-engineering / recycling –hub locations and exchange
platforms

Plastics and packaging

Product design and supply chain
innovation, for dis-assembly,
re-use of plastics, reduce andrecycling of packaging

Technical standardizationand industrial symbiosis for
packaging re-use, recycling andrecoveryInfrastructure hubs andresource exchange platforms
for symbiosis and materials
management

WastesIntegrated supply chain design,
innovation programmes,
materials management systems,
import / export rules

Re-thinking industrial processes
and components for waste
minimization, re-use, recycling

Retrofit of housing andworkplaces for sharing, reuse and recycling of common
materials and products

41

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

PART IIKEY PRODUCT VALUE CHAINSThis section provides an overview of the selected Key Product Value
Chains* (KPVCs), the socio-technical systems which drive them, andthe ‘enablers’ for a circular economy in Ukraine: constructions; foodproducts; electronics and ICT; plastics and packaging; and wastes.
Each is described in six main subsections:
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ

What is the problem? Scope and baseline (with key diagram)
What if? Alternative future scenarios
What is possible? Future visions
How to achieve? Pathways for transformation (with key diagram)Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers
When? - 3 horizons and next steps*Some KPVCs have titles based on the UN Common Product Classification system (UN-DESA, 2015).
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine42

4. Constructions

43

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

4. Constructions
At present Ukraine has a massive challenge in war damage, with over 10 million tonnes of construction / demolition
waste generated since 2022. With this as the starting point, this value chain foresight explores the potential fortransformation in construction and buildings, sets out visions, and provides a mapping of pathways to achieve
them.

Figure 8: ‘Constructions’: circularity mapping
Most constructions are designed for a very long period of useful life: and so questions come up - what is ‘circular’
about construction’? Three principles can help to guide the changes needed for the very large impacts and footprintof construction:27➡ Resource recirculation: re-use, recycling, recovery etc. of the materials used in existing construction.
➡ Resource efficiencies: design for optimum performance of a construction’s materials and components.
➡ Resource utilization: building / accommodation re-use and extended product life.

27

World Economic Forum, 2023.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine444.1. What is the problem? Scoping the ‘constructions’ system
The ‘constructions’ KPVC as in the figure above, includes many types and markets: housing new / retrofit, commercial
and public buildings new / retrofit, landscape / external works, infrastructure / civil engineering. In each of these
there is an extended life cycle: initial construction, maintenance and rehabilitation, energy management andservicing during the building life, demolition and management of the end-of-life remains.
Key ‘upstream’ activities include minerals, agriculture, forestry, energy and water, manufacturing, transport
etc. Key ‘downstream’ activities include transport, real estate, professional, public administration, education andhealth, and the use of housing / other buildings by the population.
(Classification notes: key sectors are defined in the ISIC as ‘Construction’ – F, and ‘Real estate activities – L. Key
products are defined in the CPC as ‘Constructions’ - 53.)

Summary of baseline conditions and challenges: construction and buildings(Source: CE Foundation 2024, UNIDO 2023)➡ Supply side
ࡿ Over 10 million tonnes of post-conflict construction wasteࡿ Need for international investors to rebuild real estateࡿ Heavy damage to basic infrastructure➡ Demand side
ࡿ Major renewal of housing and building stock needed, with modern standards
ࡿ Market disruption, with over 6 million persons displaced / migrated / veteransࡿ Public organizations lack access to capital funding➡ Barriers and gaps
ࡿ Fragmentation of industry, skills, technologies, etc.
ࡿ Building design is complex, risky, and not aligned with circularity
ࡿ Low-cost materials versus high-cost labour
ࡿ Lowest cost / short term profit business models

Circular economy issues:‘The construction sector has a high material import dependency, suggesting that there is potential to start
using alternative materials in the sector, notably to lower the dependency on non-metallic minerals. The CO2
efficiency is also very low, suggesting that production methods are outdated and inefficient. The sector reports
no waste data which is also problematic. Accurate monitoring of waste, prevention strategies and the proper
management of flows for toxic and non-toxic waste should be a priority.

45

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

4.2. What if? - scenarios for ‘constructions’Much depends on the future of the national economy, its relation with the EU and others, the level of technology
innovation and development, and the level of population change, urbanization and reconstruction.
The scenario framework described in section 2.1 provides an overview of alternative future possibilities:

Alternative future scenarios for ‘constructions’➡ ‘Globalized Circular Society’: The post-war construction waste of over 10 million tonnes presents anopportunity for resource recovery. Reuse and recycling of construction materials, will be prioritized in therebuilding. “Lifetime design for disassembly” will see nearly all components reused or recycled at the endof their life cycles, both within Ukraine and internationally.
➡ ‘Local Circular Society’: Socio-eco-innovation in construction components, such as modular andsustainable building materials, will be more concentrated in the demonstration regions.
➡

‘Local Circular Industry’: Utilizing the 10 million tonnes of post-conflict construction waste may
struggle with resource limitations. The combined public procurement programme will focus on essential
infrastructure repair, with limited capacity for socio-eco-innovation and lifetime design for disassembly.

➡

‘Global Circular Industry’: The combined public procurement programme may become a catalyst forsocio-eco-innovation in construction components, with a focus on designing products for disassembly andrecycling to promote a strategic sector transformation.

4.3. What is possible? - future visions for‘constructions’
The following three ‘visions for transformation’ weredeveloped in the panel workshop. Each panel started
with a general goal, responded to challenges, and thenformed the direction of travel to the three broad visions.
The general timescale is a ‘Horizon 3’ of 10-25 years.
ࡿInnovation for materials, designs, building
management, re-use and recycling: for both shortterm functionality, and for long term transformation.

ࡿProcurement:
circularhubs,
demonstratorsand strategic partnerships: with value chain
partnerships, circular hubs and demonstrators,
strategic
procurement
programmes.

ࡿMaterials and markets: the construction sector will
set up strategic markets and infrastructures formaterial sorting and processing for re-use, recycling
and recovery.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

46

4.4. How to achieve? – pathways for ‘constructions’
The diagram below shows an outline of three systemslevel pathways to meet the KPVC ‘visions’. At this stagethese are directions for exploration and development,
which need to respond to future challenges andopportunities.
4.4.1. Construction resources pathway(Supply-side focus: mobilized by combinations of ecoindustrial-technology-infrastructure systems)
The huge volumes of materials and components inconstruction are a challenge but also an opportunity
for the adoption of CE principles. Also, in practice there
are difficult trade-offs, e.g. between more efficient newbuild or material saving retrofit.
For bulk materials such as cement or glass there are
new technologies for resource efficiency and low-waste
production. For engineering systems and fittings, one
can look towards design for disassembly, extended

producer responsibility, and service/leasing models.
With partnerships of designers, producers, installers
and building managers, these value chain models canapply to a wide range of items, such as light fittings,
bathrooms, security, carpets, and furnishings.
For post-demolition waste the way forward would
be in setting up coordinated markets, logistics andinfrastructures, for re-use, recycling, and recovery.
This is a key opportunity for the Government to workin partnership with design, construction, technology
innovation bodies.
4.4.2. Construction innovation pathway(Whole value chain focus: mobilized by combinations ofbusiness-technology-infrastructure systems)
This pathway is about advanced products, materials,
technologies and building systems. It follows a generaldevelopment of ‘innovation culture’ and best practice,across whole chains of supply-demand, from raw
materials to building users. It tests and develops ‘reverse
logistics’ infrastructure, laboratories for construction
materials, market development for used / recoveredmaterials.
Such innovation programmes would address not
only the hard technology and materials, but also thehuman side – users, installers, designers and building

managers. There is a range of options for government tolead in partnership with industry, such as experimental‘beacons’, ‘lighthouses’, innovation hubs and bestpractice learning. This combines with public awarenessand information support, on household energy
efficiency, and circularity management.
4.4.3. Construction procurement pathway(Demand-side focus: mobilized by a combination of
government-industry-infrastructure systems)
For building users and managers responsible for
procurement and investment, this pathway focuseson performance of materials, components, and wholebuildings. This can be led firstly by government, witha combination of regulations, advice, incentives, skills
development, and partnership building for circularconstruction.
Procurement of buildings, by government, private /public clients and by real estate developers, is the key
to the transition. Financial models can be accelerated
by the public sector, with combinations of subsidies,
levies, and preferential loans for projects with re-use
and recycling of construction waste. These can workin combination with the development of national CE
terminology, capacity-building, data platforms, andinnovation hubs.

47

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Figure 9: ‘Constructions’: pathway mapping

4.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders andenablers
For business and finance, common service and leasing
models, combined with EPR (extended producer
responsibility) and EPL (extended product life), cancover a large proportion of construction fittings andservices. This can be aligned with EU frameworks forcorporate reporting and investment appraisal. Circularbuilding finance models aim to overcome the barriersof short-term cost / profit calculation and mobilize
investment in longer term circular solutions.
For government and policy, the key role is to supportand mobilize the above by legislation / regulation, by
promotion of innovation culture and advanced products/ materials, and especially by setting up integrated
value chain partnerships, with material producers,
manufacturers, designers, construction, and a wide
range of building users. There may be a special role fora governmental finance initiative for leverage on private
sector investment. The government role covers bothnational and regional / local administrations, and forthese there may be added potential for collaboration
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine48

on the ground.
For social-community issues, there is a priority for job
creation and local economic development, especiallyfor primary sectors such as minerals and aggregates,
which may need to transition rapidly towards material
re-use, recycling and recovery. Similar points apply tovulnerable and marginalized communities, where theurgent need for accommodation can be integral tocircular construction and building partnerships.
Design, technology and innovation systems canbe mobilized to transition from ‘product’ design /innovation, to ‘whole supply chain’ models. This thenapplies to eco-industrial management systems, where
the principle of industrial symbiosis can be applied tomaterials recovery and exchange.
Urban infrastructure is also needed at various scales,from local hubs / exchanges for re-used materials
and fittings, to national resources for material energy
recovery, centred on the post-war demolition waste
volume.

4.6. When? – 3 horizons for ‘constructions’This then fits into the longer view with the 3-horizon perspective:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Post-war materials
management: sector andsupply chain innovation

Horizon 2 (2035)

Strategic steps forindustrial change

Horizon 3 (2050)
Full transformation to nearzero-waste and energy material
production: zero-waste site
operations: mainstreaming of
dis-assembly and circular flows ofconstruction waste.

For the next steps, an example project proposal is under discussion:

Example project idea: construction and buildings“(Source: CE Foundation)

The lack of a streamlined method to sort and separate concrete and repurpose war debris has further
complicated the process of recycling, as well as the dangerous and toxic materials, such as asbestos, that risk
trickling into the environment and damaging both human and environmental health.
The objectives of this proposal are to design and implement comprehensive policies to streamline constructionwaste management, including effective sorting and recycling methods, and provide mentoring and training
programmes to stakeholders involved in construction waste management, enhancing their skills and knowledge
to improve recycling processes and mitigate environmental risks. This would be led by local municipalities,
construction companies, and waste companies.

49

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine505. Food products
51

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

5. Food products
As the primary land-based product type, food is the most exposed to events, natural disasters, climate change,and human catastrophes such as war. It is also highly dependent on the policies and institutions of landowning,markets, and subsidies.
On the production side, Ukraine is one of the largest food exporters in the world, and this export market raises thequestion ‘what is circular?’On the demand side, food and diet is the most embedded in the human side - communities, cultures, and lifestyles– and perhaps the most difficult to change.
The foresight approach here explores the potential for transformation in the system of food and farming, sets out
visions, and proposes outline pathways to achieve them.

Figure 10: Food products: circularity mapping
5.1. What is the problem? Scoping the food products
systemThe ‘Food products’ KPVC, as in the mapping, includes
many types and sectors: inputs of energy, water,
fertilizer and pesticide and machinery: the supply chainof production, processing, distribution and retail: withlarge volumes of imports and exports, and consumption
by households, catering and public services. Thereis a wide range between centralized / industrialized

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

52

systems, and small-scale local production.
Key ‘upstream’ activities include minerals, agriculture,
forestry, energy and water, manufacturing (‘food andbeverages’ sub-sector), transport etc.
Key‘downstream’
activities
includeretail,accommodation / catering, education, health, andentertainment sub-sectors in the service sector.

(Classifications: key sectors are defined in the ISIC as
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing – A, and ‘Accommodationand food service activities’ - I. Key products are definedin the CPC as ‘Agriculture, forestry and fishery products- 0 (01-04): Food products and beverages 2 (21-24).

towards organic / regenerativeࡿ UA land reform – potential foreign investment
and elite captureࡿ Policy context – gradual alignment to EU
markets, CAP, climate / nature goals etc
ࡿ Growth of large corporate food retailers alongwith unregistered food imports
ࡿ Financial conditions and loan rates are difficult
for new enterprises, technologies etc.
ࡿ Innovation clusters and techno-parks in agrifood are expanding

Each part of this picture applies in various ways to thekey issues and challenges, on both supply and demandsides:➡ Supply / production / export systemࡿUkraine is one of the world’s top agricultural
producers and exporters and plays a critical role insupplying oilseeds and grains to the global market.
More than 55 percent of the country is arable land
and agriculture provides employment for 14 percent
of Ukraine’s population. 28
ࡿ Agricultural products are Ukraine’s mostimportant exports. In 2021 they totaled $27.8 billion,
accounting for 41 percent of the country’s $68 billion
in overall exports.
ࡿ The invasion of 2022 caused a sudden reductionin production / exports, but as of early 2024, thepre-war levels have returned.
ࡿ Regeneration of soil, water, eco-systems,
following EU policy at some distanceࡿ Circularity of bio-materials and phase shift➡

Demand / consumption / import system

ࡿGeneral gradual shift towards food quality, local
food and healthy diet
ࡿ However, sustainable food demand is yet asmall part of total
ࡿ Policy priority is generally for lowest cost andlowest pricesࡿ Markets are unstable, with exodus of 5 million
refugees, many internally displaced persons
ࡿ Conditions unstable in occupied territories, for
producers and consumers
ࡿ Food health and security: food waste reduction
programmes, consumer protection labelling, school
food improvements, and food bank draft laws, areeach in progress.

Summary of food products issues(Source: Based on interviews and CE Foundation 2024)➡ Circular food issues
ࡿ Ongoing changes to crop patterns: war damage e.g. the Kakhovka dam destruction: climate change andwater shortage in southern Ukraine: some production already going to bio-methane: but lack of skills andlabour is a problem.
ࡿ Alternative energy sources are increasing due to national infrastructure problems
ࡿ 1/3 farm production is by small-holder households with plots of 2-7 hectares, generally with less inputs
and waste, but labour intensive methods.
ࡿ Organic production is already developed, with 450,000 hectares in production, not so much national
demand, 90% is exported – mainly to EU, UK and Japan.
ࡿ EU integration: EUBRD moving towards ESG and CBAM regulations, but progress slow.

➡ Circular economy profile(Source: CE Foundation)“

The agricultural, forestry and fishing sector appears in second place as a priority sector for circularsolutions. The prioritised subsectors include the production of grain, wheat, maize as well as ruminants. The

28

USDA 2024

53

Towards the Circular Economy Ukrainesector boasts a large number of workers and has a particularly heavy material footprint as it imports such animportant part of its raw materials.
The sector is still far too dependent on unsustainable, outdated and inefficient production methods. It needs
to boost alternative energy sources, notably by tapping into its huge biomass potential, but also turn todeveloping local, organic fertiliser to reduce its dependence on imports.

5.2. What if? - scenarios for food products
Much depends on the future of the national economy, its relation with the EU and others, the level of technology
innovation and development, and the level of population change, urbanization and reconstruction. The scenario
framework described in section 2.1 provides an overview of alternative future possibilities:

Alternative future scenarios for food products➡ ‘Globalized Circular Society’ࡿ farm production in Ukraine is mainly for export markets, with high standards of resource efficiency
and circularity. The food Ukrainians consume is largely imported from the global system, with postconsumer circularity of unused and waste food.

➡ ‘Local Circular Society’ࡿ the country’s production is mainly consumed within national borders: but with similar high standards
for production and circularity of resources.

➡ ‘Local Circular Industry’ࡿ national production is more resource efficient and circular, but consumption is wasteful of food andfood-related packaging.

➡ ‘Global Circular Industry’ࡿ the agri-export market is booming with growing efficiency and circularity: but the consumption side isleft with the worst type of imports from the global food system (unhealthy, over-packaged, ecologicallydamaging etc).

5.3. What is possible? - future visions for food products
The following three ‘visions for transformation’ were developed in the expert panel and commented in the survey.
The panel started with a general goal, responded to challenges, and then formed the direction of travel to the threebroad visions. The general timescale is a ‘Horizon 3’ of 10-25 years.
Food efficiency pathway

Food livelihood pathway

Food health pathway(supply-side focus):
farming with advanced methods forregenerative circular production,
not only precision production but
also the maintenance of the healthof soil, water, and ecosystems.

(community focus):
local livelihoods with urban-rural
integration of food systems, tomaintain both rural economies andcommunities, and urban lifestyles.

(demand side focus):
all households / consumers
can access healthy, sustainable,
low-packaging, affordable food,with optimum redistribution andrecycling of bio-waste.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

54

Many participants in the survey and panel contributed valuable comments and feedback:Comments and feedback on the visions for food products(Source: Survey respondents)➡ Restoration of the earth after the war: encourage the development of organic farming.
➡ New alternative food sources are being created based on innovative technologies that combine waste-freefood production and health benefits.
➡ When developing supply chains and introducing local crops, the long-term impact of climate change
is modelled and adaptive and mitigation measures are implemented to counteract these negative
consequences.
➡ Before the war, Ukraine had a strong potential to ensure food security, so focusing on this direction on theprinciples of this in the future will give an impetus to economic recovery and to the growth of national
competitiveness.
➡ Change household approaches to diet and food preferences.
➡ Production enterprises have a clear strategy and plan for its implementation on the ground.
➡ Local human resources have been formed, which makes it possible to implement the existing plan efficiently.
➡ At the household level, there are opportunities to reduce the environmental impact, implement sustainable
farming practices and waste management technologies.
➡ At the infrastructure level, there is a rapid development of sustainable agricultural infrastructure;
modernization of financial infrastructure ensures an influx of investment in sustainable technologies andinnovations, contributes to improving the investment climate.
➡ International integration and cooperation, cooperation with the EU and various international structures forthe exchange of experience and resources are deepening at the international level.
➡ It is necessary to strengthen control over the use of agricultural land and water.

5.4. How to achieve? – pathways for food products
The diagram below shows an outline of three systemslevel pathways to meet the KPVC ‘visions’. At this stagethese are directions for exploration and development,
which can respond to future challenges andopportunities.
5.4.1. ‘Food efficiency’ pathway(Supply-side focus; with a combination of businesstechnology-industrial systems)
This pathway focuses on the production side, where
Ukraine is one of the largest exporters, producing
enough basics for 400 million people. With newtechniques, farm inputs and management technology,
the efficiency can be greatly increased, chemical inputs
reduced, farm waste and food / drink processing waste
can be recycled / recovered. Overall, this fits with thelonger-term EU agenda for greening and modernizationof farming and food / drink processing: this will also
contribute to resilience to energy / water problems, andclimate change.
Generally, the ‘circularity’ principle is yet to be applied inexport-driven production: a more domestic ‘circularity’
agenda looks at material cycles such as bio-gas vscomposting.
Precision agriculture has huge potential, withtechnologies such as Synthetic Aperture Radar, or AIbased crop management systems. However, there arechallenges in bringing new technology to market, andmediating the imbalance between global agro-industrial
producers and local enterprises.
Overarching these are institutional issues of landowning, farm size, and farm subsidy / support systems
for regenerative farming, now very controversial in
the EU. Ukraine may refer to the experience of othercountries, but also may contribute some unique55

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

opportunities and insights. EU alignment can proceedstrategically, via European Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment investment, corporate environmental,social and governance (ESG) schemes and Carbon Border
Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) systems for imports andexports.

culture, for the crucial issue of diet choice, food waste,
packaging and other impacts. The sustainable / circular
combination of low-input, low-meat diets may take timeto emerge, calling for a strategic partnership approachwith government, business, local providers, civil society
organizations.

5.4.2. ‘Food health’ pathway

5.4.3. ‘Food livelihood’ pathway(Demand side focus: with a combination of designtechnology-social-governance systems)(Community focus: with a combination of urban-socialgovernance systems)

On the consumption side, there are multiple priorities
for reducing food waste and packaging and increasing
healthy food and drink. This also includes reducing foodpoverty and strengthening the social and economic roleof many kinds of food business in retail, catering andpublic services. In the short term, social marketing andpolicy incentives can be set up. In the longer term, fully
circular food systems can be developed in the hierarchyof re-distribution / re-use / re-cycle / recovery: healthy
food then combines with low-impact regenerative
farming and low-packaging food / drink processing.
However, in practical terms, different priorities may
require trade-offs, for instance between food shelf lifeand packaging / logistics systems.

Food is also a livelihood issue, where for example theolder generations with family links in rural villages bringsurplus to urban centres. Such localized systems canfocus on food quality, public health, social enterprise,
inclusive of veterans and internally displaced persons,young persons and students. This is then a territorial or
bio-regional focus, on green belt and peri-urban areas
around the cities and towns, together with urban spaces
and infrastructure for growing / exchange / distributionof local food. Land reform, housing reconstruction andspatial planning policy can all help to promote foodenterprises based on local social capital.

In the wider view, food systems are very much in
the human domain of psychology, community, andFigure 11: Food products: pathway mapping
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

56

Food processing, distribution, catering and export, canthen become a focus for local and regional economic
development, along with bio-energy and other non-food
farm products. This also contributes to food security

and equality / justice, with the growth of food banks, food sharing etc, targeted on internally displaced persons,veterans and the unemployed.

5.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers
For business and finance, the integrated value chain approach can mobilize the crucial cooperation between
farmers / agri-business, food / beverage producers, and food distributors / retailers. This can help to unlock whole‘farm to fork’ chains, and rapid transition towards low-input, low-waste, low packaging food systems.
For government and policy, there is a key balance of pushes and pulls: between regulation and common standards
in the agri-food sector, and opportunity building via industrial partnerships, procurement programmes, andinnovation cluster building. On the demand side, education and health programmes can help to move towards
circular food systems, with incentives for sharing of surplus. For local and regional economic development, thecircular food economy can be a counterpart to the conventional capital-intensive agri-business.
For social-community issues, the livelihood pathway can be linked to local economic development, food healthawareness, and the cultural value of local food systems. For vulnerable and marginalized communities, there arebasic principles of food access and quality, which can mobilize more systematic food sharing of the surplusesof retail / catering activities. The social-cooperative enterprise model has potential for enabling stronger links
between producers, retailers, consumers in the wider community.
Design, technology and innovation is already rapid in the food and beverage sector, and can be steered fromindividual ‘products’ to whole integrated ‘food chain’ models. For processing of farm and food industry waste, theeco-industrial management systems can follow the industrial symbiosis model for recovery and exchange, both forfood and non-food products. To enable scaling up, new forms of urban infrastructure can scale up from kitchen
waste containers to street or neighbourhood composting, to urban / regional recovery facilities.

5.6. When? - 3 horizons for food products
The pathways above then fit into the longer view, with the 3-horizon perspective:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Post-war restoration, decontamination of land andwater: first steps in production/ supply chain efficiency andcircularity

Strategic steps for supplyside production innovation:and demand side shift infood markets, logistics,
infrastructures

Transformation to near zero-waste
and low-energy food production,
processing, distribution andpackaging: combined with shift tohealthy affordable food livelihoods
in households and communities.

Next steps for horizon 1: to be discussed as the foresight process moves towards action planning.

57

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine58

6. Electronics and ICT
59

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

6. Electronics and ICT
Ukraine’s electronics and ICT system is dependent on a highly globalized network of production and trade. However,this system is rather different to the previous broad scope value chains: here the main value added is more in thevery rapid innovation (IP and related values), than in material hardware. Meanwhile in practical terms, many producttypes are reducing in size, while increasing in complexity, with built in obsolescence. However, most products are
dependent on ‘critical raw materials’, a topic of high international concern: and the combined impact of central ICT
infrastructure (server farms, etc) is growing exponentially.
The foresight approach focuses here on the potential for positive transformation, i.e. towards circularity. It reviews
possible scenarios, sets out visions, and proposes some outline pathways to achieve them.

Figure 12: Electronics and ICT: circularity mapping

6.1. What is the problem? Scoping electronics and ICT
The electronics and ICT KPVC shows a huge range of products, markets, supply chains, trade patterns, consumer
behaviours, and rapid pace of change. It includes household small electronics (TVs, phones, etc), commercial/ industrial electronics, ICT hardware (computers, monitors etc), and many kinds of systems and peripherals(batteries, leads, drives, etc). The whole KPVC creates most of its value by informational services, more than thephysical products, which are then easily discarded.
Key ‘upstream’ activities include: raw materials, manufacturing, distribution, etc. Key ‘downstream’ activities include
retail and almost all other service activities.
(Classifications: key sectors are defined in the ISIC as Manufacturing (26, computer, electronic and optical products),and ‘Information and communication’ – J. Key products are defined in the CPC as ‘office, accounting and computing
machinery’ - 45 (451, 452).
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine60This applies to the key issues on supply and demand sides, and on waste management in particular:

Summary of baseline issues(Source: Based on survey and panel results, UNIDO 2023, CE Foundation 2024)➡ Supply side and market conditionsࡿࡿࡿMany goods are unregistered / illegal imports, very difficult to regulate.
Critical raw materials are key to ICT production, but shortages are likely to increase.
Ukraine needs to grow its domestic production, subject to global value chains.

➡ Demand and post-consumer sideࡿࡿࡿࡿConsumers struggle to keep up with latest models.
Packaging is a major issue with most product types.
Many devices come with many short life ancillaries (cables, power packs etc).
Re-use and sharing markets (i.e. second hand) are already established.
Many product types are difficult to recycle or recover high value materials from complex combinations ofmetals and plastics.

➡ Waste management and CE issues“

		 The volume of electronic waste (e-waste) is significant in Ukraine, estimated at 300-350 thousand tons
annually. There are no available statistics on the repurposing of this waste, either through refurbishment or
the recycling of parts. The waste management system for WEEE (‘waste electrical and electronic equipment’)consists of a combination of formal and informal collection channels. Formal collection channels operate withina legal framework, often regulated by licensing systems for hazardous waste operations. In contrast, informal
collectors operate outside the legal system, and uncollected WEEE is frequently disposed of in municipal waste.
Additionally, there are voluntary take-back schemes and collection initiatives carried out by the private sector.

61

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

6.2. What if? Scenario mapping for electronics and ICT
The future here seems highly open to uncertainty. This includes the future level of technology innovation anddigitalization: the penetration of global brands: the balance of international trade / domestic production: and thecommitment (public / private / civic) to turning e-waste into valuable resources through re-use and recycling. The
scenario framework described in section 2.1 provides an overview of alternative future possibilities:

Alternative future scenarios for electronics and ICT➡ ‘Globalized Circular Society’ࡿ large global brand markets, with advanced resource efficiency, and national production / distribution:
wide public / consumer awareness and commitment to circularity.

➡ ‘Local Circular Society’ࡿ less global and more national production with rapid tech innovation and sector development: wide
public / consumer awareness and commitment to circularity.

➡ ‘Local Circular Industry’ࡿ less global and more national production with rapid tech innovation and sector development; however,the public / consumers are not engaged and e-waste grows rapidly with no clear destination.

➡ ‘Global Circular Industry’ࡿ large global brand markets, with advanced resource efficiency, and national production / distribution;
however the public / consumers are not engaged and e-waste grows rapidly with no clear destination.

6.3. What is possible? - visions for Electronics and ICT
The following three ‘visions for transformation’ were developed in the expert panel. The panel started with ageneral goal, responded to challenges, and then formed the direction of travel to the three broad visions. The
general timescale is a ‘Horizon 3’ of 10-25 years.

Integrated chain
management

Coordinated producer
responsibility

Production/innovation
systems

The electronics / ICT sector will
work towards integration of policy,
production, retailing and demandside, on the principles of ‘Industry
5.0’. 29

Electronics / ICT productenterprises, markets and supply
chains will be coordinatedby public-private-technicalpartnerships.

The electronics / ICT sector
will work towards diversity inproduction and distribution:with a coordinated package of
SME support, technical training,logistics and infrastructure.

European Commission, 2021.

29

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine626.4. How to achieve? – pathways for Electronics
and ICT

local repair shop economy, as already is the case in lessdeveloped countries.

The diagram below shows an outline of three systemslevel pathways to meet the KPVC ‘visions’. At this stagethese are directions for exploration and development,
which need to respond to future challenges andopportunities.

6.4.3. ‘Industry 5.0’ pathway

6.4.1. ‘Technology for life’ pathway(Production and market supply side: with combinationsof innovation-eco-industrial-business systems)
This pathway focuses on the supply chain, bothinternational and national: it combines trade andimport regulation with market development for reuse and recycling. The hyper-rapid product innovation
cycle can over time be steered towards the familiar
menu for circularity: extended product life, producer
responsibility, take-back policies, leasing models,
reverse logistics, design for repair and dis-assembly, etc.
The full digitalization of the wider economy is also
involved, where in a short time, almost all businesses
will be SMAC (smart, mobile, AI, cloud-based), with large
hard-wired installations becoming obsolete. However,
the growth of centralized infrastructures such as server
farms then changes the focus: while these are currently
located in a very few countries this is likely to change,
with implications for energy and water resources.

(Whole economy agenda: withgovernance and all other systems)

combinationsofThis pathway takes an alternative approach, starting withthe aspiration for full digitalization, for a future ‘smartwise’ whole economy and society (as seen for example
in the Baltic states). This rapidly moving picture canstart with systems of governance and public services,and then cover all branches of economic activity, interconnection with social systems according to publicdemand. It then includes the circularity of e-waste as an
essential transition towards 100% re-use and recycling.
The added contribution here is for government to takethe lead role in defining a future society with near 100%
digitalization: to then set up strategic programmes for
procurement and national industrial development:
and to build in the circularity agenda from the very
beginning.
Note the ‘5.0’ refers to the EU programme ‘Industry 5.0’
which aims to integrate a fully digital industrial economy
with social and ecological values.30

6.4.2. ‘Device literacy’ pathway(Consumer and demand side: with combinations ofsocial-governance-technology-infrastructure systems)
On the demand side there is an equal agenda for social
innovation and local enterprise in the circularity ofelectronics and ICT devices and installations.
A coordinated programme of public infrastructure will
include reverse logistics hubs, local repair / re-purpose
shops, and skills training, which then fits with the
hardware recycling and recovery industry.
The implications of such a shift could be problematic
if this involves large numbers of workers transferringfrom hi-tech production, to a relatively labour-intensive

European Commission, 2021.

30

63

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Figure 13: Electronics and ICT: pathway mapping

6.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers
For business-finance: new models can emerge for electronics supply chain transparency, product passports, andbusiness / finance models to promote product re-use, repair and re-engineering. A fundamental issue is how far
Ukraine can set up national production systems, to overcome import dependency.
For policy-governance: the ministries of economic development and digitalization could further collaborate forjoint coordination of standards, compatibility, regulation, with forward finance for EPR and service models. The
national agenda for full digitalization needs to include CE principles from the beginning, and use the national
agenda to drive them.
For social-community networks, there is urgent need to promote social motivation for product repair, reengineering, and sharing platforms. For design-technology: some ICT innovation systems are beginning to look atstandardized product design for reuse / re-engineering; there is increased attention on the energy consumption ofcentral servers, and the LCA impact of material inputs.
For eco-industry, there is an agenda for coordination of the Ukraine minerals sector with EU critical materials
platforms and policies.
For urban-infrastructure, a new system for reverse logistics can be set up for product and component re-use / reengineering / recycling. Coordination is needed on locations for hubs and exchange platforms.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine646.6. When? - 3 horizons for food products
The pathways above then fit into the longer view, with the 3-horizon perspective:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Service and Leasing
models: Extended producer
responsibility: Collaborative
circular standards andregulations

Circular literacy at home
and workplace: Innovation
for “Extended Product Life”:
Industrial cross-integration

Digital supply chain integration:Reverse logistic hubs for re-use
and recycling

Next steps for horizon 1: to be discussed as the foresight process moves towards action planning.

65

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine66

7. Plastics and packaging
67

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

7. Plastics and packaging
The global plastics challenge – with waste and pollution found in every part of the natural world and the humanbody – has yet to go mainstream in Ukraine, but this may change shortly.
Plastics and packaging is not so much a single value chain but a cross-cutting set of activities, which provides
inputs to all other value chains. In some it appears to be indispensable, for instance, the modern food products.

Figure 14: Plastics and packaging: circularity mapping

7.1. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers‘Plastics and packaging’ is the combination of two distinct agendas, which overlap where a growing proportion of
packaging is plastic-based:
Industrial plastics, including a very wide range of compounds, industrial products and applications; generalplastics, synthetic materials, specialized polymers, with an increasing proportion used in containers and packaging.
ࡿ Packaging may also include a wide variety of materials and forms, for a specific purpose, such as food and drink,
construction materials, household goods etc: material including plastic, paper, organic, glass, metal and other.
ࡿKey ‘upstream’ activities include: minerals, energy and water, agriculture, manufacturing, distribution. Key‘downstream’ activities include: wholesale and retail trade, transportation and storage, and all other types ofservices.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine68(Classifications: key sectors are defined in the ISIC as Manufacturing – C (20- chemicals and chemical products, and22- rubber and plastics products): and ‘Transporting and storage’ – J. Key product types are defined in the CPC as‘Rubber and plastics products’ – 36, and ‘packaging products of plastics’ – 369.
Generally, the endemic problem of plastics in packaging of every variety calls for new levels of synergy between
manufacturers, distributors, retailers, consumers, waste managers and governments. Many countries, regions andcities now have policies against single-use plastic bags or drinks containers, but this problem can go much further
into value chains such as food, where packaging is integral to the whole production and material-management
system. One way forward may be from the household side, with a spread of ‘materials literacy’ which enable muchgreater degrees of waste sorting and recycling, while on the retail side, it could be selling produce in bulk to
consumers using reusable packaging. EPR too can be used to internalize the externalized costs of managing plastic
waste.
An overview of the baseline issues includes the following:

Summary of baseline issues(Source: Based on survey and panel results, UNIDO 2023, CE Foundation 2024)➡ Supply / production side
ࡿ Increasing automation, platform economics, long distance logistics, etc. requires a growing proportionࡿࡿof packaging with increasing complexity.
Increasing performance of industrial components requires continuous innovation in plastics and a
growing catalogue of substances, most being unregulated.
Urgent global concerns on environmental pollution from plastic components, micro-plastics, andnanoparticles, which are found everywhere including in human bodies.

➡ Demand / consumption sideࡿ Consumers and retailers by default prefer to rely on large amounts of packaging to ensure food safety,
ࡿlogistic services, product quality, general convenience etc.
The trend towards plastic packaging and away from glass, paper-based, metal or other materials.

➡ General challenges, gaps and barriers:ࡿ Current lack of investment, legislation, methods and practices
ࡿ Shortage of recycling facilitiesࡿ Lack of business interest, to encourage enterprises to cooperate on re-use and recycling.
➡ Circular economy issues:
The potential for plastic waste recycling remains largely untapped in Ukraine. Currently, Ukrainian enterprises
have the capacity to recycle all types of plastics at a rate exceeding 300,000 tons per year, yet only 180,000
tons of polymer waste are actually recycled. Approximately 20 enterprises across Ukraine are engaged inrecycling polyethylene terephthalate (PET) containers into secondary materials. This reliance underscores theimportance of local plastic waste recycling to mitigate import dependency and enhance the resilience of thedomestic plastic industry.

69

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

7.2. What if? - scenarios for plastics and packaging
Much depends on the future of the national economy, its relation with the EU and others, the level of industrial
innovation, and the level of population change, urbanization and reconstruction. The practical logistics in food anddrink, household goods and many kinds of industrial systems are critical factors.
Alongside this, social and community issues are crucial, with consumer and citizen commitment to sorting, re-use
and recycling.
The scenario framework described in section 2.3 provides an overview of alternative future possibilities:

Alternative future scenarios for plastics and packaging➡ ‘Globalized Circular Society’ࡿ with a more open economy, many goods and products travel further with more packaging: everythingis carefully re-used and recycled: plastics production includes for global best practice in advanced
recyclable and bio-degradable materials.

➡ ‘Local Circular Society’ࡿ a more closed economy looks for whole cycles in containers and packaging with zero-waste. Plastics
production focuses on basic production of recyclable and bio-degradable materials.

➡ ‘Local Circular Industry’ࡿ industrial symbiosis on the production chain helps in the inter-connection of multiple processes,
packaging components, plastic materials - so the public can continue to consume, discard and pollute
their home environment.

➡ ‘Global Circular Industry’ࡿ imports of plastics and packaging are feedstock for the new national industries of recycling andrecovery of plastics and packaging.

7.3. What is possible? - future visions for plastics and packaging
The following three ‘visions for transformation’ were developed in the panel workshop and following discussions.
The following three ‘visions for transformation’ were developed in the panel workshop and following discussions.
Each panel started with a general goal, responded to challenges, and then formed a direction of travel to the threebroad visions. The general timescale is a ‘Horizon 3’ of 10-25 years.
Rethinking packaging

Social resource management

Circular plastics systems

The plastics and packaging
industries will set up a systems
innovation programme, which
combines strategic regulation,
price incentives, and advanceprocurement programmes.

a ‘Packaging-Industry 5.0’
model will emerge from a social
innovation programme of withawareness raising, price incentives,
logistics and infrastructure.

a ’Plastics-Industry 5.0’ programme
will aim for a coordinated shift ofindustrial plastic materials towards
bio-degradable, re-useable, recyclable materials.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine70

7.4. How to achieve? – pathways for plastics andpackaging
The diagram in Figure 14 shows an outline of threesystems-level pathways to meet the KPVC ‘visions’.
At this stage these are directions for explorationand development, which need to respond to futurechallenges and opportunities.
7.4.1. ‘What goes around comes around’ pathway(re-use, upcycling, recycling, recovery: with ecoindustrial, government, business-finance andinfrastructure combinations)This pathway starts with extended manufacturer’s
responsibility and new kinds of valuation of plastic
recycling services, to overcome the current lack ofinvestment and legislation. Creating value in the
production and consumption of recyclable packaging
depends on strategic partnerships in circular
procurement between manufacturer and buyer, and‘B2B’ manufacturer and manufacturer.
An adaptive and participatory management approach

will help to build communities of interest, for the large
scale circular social and environmental investments.
With financial institutions, government/ ministries andinternational organizations, a new regime of common
circular standards and regulations can be developed
and rolled out.
7.4.2. ‘Packaging for life’ pathway(social / demand side re-use and recycling: witha combination of sociocultural-governanceinfrastructure systems)
This pathway starts with ‘circular literacy’ combinationsof education / skills at home and at work, to address thegeneral lack of social responsibility and environmental
education. It supports this with circular platforms and‘resource hubs’ for socially responsible use of the final
product in recyclable packaging containers. This thenpoints towards a transformed pattern of logisticalinfrastructure, with a 100 per cent shift from disposable
packaging towards fully re-usable, repairable andrecyclable packaging. Retail and distribution activities
will be at the front of this transition, with food shops as
the first focal point.

Figure 15: Plastics and packaging: pathway mapping

71

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

7.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers
For business and finance, the agenda focuses on new business models and logistic systems for packaging reduction/ re-use / recycling. Alternatives to plastic may take time to establish along the value chains and need greater
cooperation between firms and tech providers. For government and policy, the public sector can lead the way, withcoordinated systems of packaging transformation, via tax / subsidy / regulation / standards and procurement.
Public private partnerships are needed for the capacity-building and value chain coordination for alternative
logistics systems.
For social-community issues, there is rapid innovation on social awareness, and many forms of socio-ecocommunity enterprise for packaging reduction, re-use, re-distribution, recycling. The agenda then is how to scale
up from the niche to the mainstream.
Design, technology and innovation systems are already moving fast on product design and supply chain innovation,
for dis-assembly, re-use of plastics, reduce and recycling of packaging. Ukraine can aim for alignment with theglobal search for alternatives to plastic, and environmentally friendly forms of plastic.
The eco-industrial systems management and design need to focus on the longer agenda of re-thinking industrial
processes and components for waste minimization, re-use, recycling: with low-zero packaging for common products
and components. Product passports, RFID monitoring systems, and automatic segregation can all gain from thecoming full digitalization. Meanwhile new forms of urban infrastructure are needed for the retrofit of housing,workplaces and industrial areas for sharing, re-use and recycling of common materials and products in packaging.

7.6. When? - 3 horizons for plastics and packaging
The longer view can be summarized with the 3-horizon perspective:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Service and leasing
models: Extended producer
responsibility: Collaborative
circular standards andregulations

Circular literacy at home
and workplace: Innovation
for “Extended Product Life”:
Industrial cross-integration

Social welfare circular
platforms: Digital supply chain
integration: Reverse logistic
hubs for re-use and recycling.

Next steps for horizon 1: to be discussed as the foresight process moves towards action planning.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

72

73

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine74

8. Wastes
75

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

8. Wastes
While the EU has set a target of 50% household waste recycling by 2030, Ukraine is less than 10% currently. Thereis large scale disruption to waste management infrastructure in or near the war zones, and a lack of investment formodernization.
The transformation vision, from ‘waste disposal’ to ‘resource management’ involves a strategic shift in businesspractice, industrial systems, household / consumer practices and more.
This KPVC starts with the practical implementation in Ukraine of the new Law on Waste Management: then it looks
for connections with more strategic and transformative visions for a full industrial symbiosis.

Figure 16: ‘Wastes’: circularity mapping

8.1. What is the problem? Scoping ‘wastes’ and waste management‘Wastes’ covers basically the material flow of all other sectors, with a focus at the downstream or ‘end-fate’ partof the chain. Waste types and sub-sectors include a wide range: industrial and commercial wastes, consumer /municipal wastes, special wastes such as clinical, toxic / hazardous, radioactive, etc. Construction and demolition
waste, and agricultural waste are managed separately, and each are covered in the KPVCs above. Also, Ukraine has
a major challenge in post-conflict contamination, pollution, general debris and wastes of all kinds.
Key ‘upstream’ activities include: all material-based supply chains, from ‘post-extraction’ raw materials to industry.
Key ‘downstream’ activities include: any material flows, post-production or post-consumer, and available forrecycling or recovery.
(Classifications: key sectors are defined in the ISIC as ‘sewerage; waste management and remediation activities’ –E(37-39). Key products (i.e. materials) are defined in the CPC as ‘Wastes or scraps’ – 39.)
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine76Summary of baseline issues(Source: Based on survey and panel results, UNIDO 2023, CE Foundation 2024)
Also see figure below on UA waste generation.

➡ Upstream issues (i.e. material flows into ‘wastes’ systemࡿ Majority of industrial waste and household waste is sent to landfill or abandoned
ࡿ Low rates of landfill tax with little incentive for business➡ Downstream issues (i.e. material flows through and out of ‘wastes’ systemࡿ National Law on Waste Management is adopted, with implementation in progressࡿ Current lack of facilities, technologies, finances etc. for upgrading waste management➡ Circular economy issues
ࡿ Current lack of awareness in business and communities of the CE potential
ࡿ Many manufactured products are repaired and re-used by necessity
ࡿ Some CE-based policies, programmes, enterprises, are taking shape even in war conditions.
➡ Waste management issues
ࡿ “Ukraine had no effective waste management in place before the war. The war has further complicatedࡿ

this situation, with rising levels of construction debris and toxic and hazardous waste. Overall, mostof Ukraine’s domestic waste is either landfilled or incinerated, and its industrial waste is landfilled
or abandoned. In accordance with the Ukrstat data for 2020, only 9% of Municipal Solid Waste wasrecovered, while 3.73% incinerated, and the remaining 87.67% was landfilled. Comparatively in the EU,
nearly half of municipal waste is recycled.
It is important to note that the landfill tax in Ukraine is far below EU levels (0,15 EUR per tonne versus
for instance 107 EUR per tonne in the Netherlands). To increase this tax, however, necessitates caution
so that the burden of the economic handling of waste is not borne by the consumer but rather by thecompanies placing the products/materials on the market.

Figure 17: ‘Wastes’ – Ukraine generation by source

77

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

8.2. What if? - scenarios for ‘wastes’
Much depends on the prospects for the national economy, whether more or less integrated with the EU and others,
the level of technology innovation, infrastructure development, and reconstruction. The human factors are also
crucial – public awareness and the commitment of entrepreneurs and workers to low-waste circular economy
principles. This scenario framework provides an overview of alternative future possibilities:

Alternative future scenarios for ‘wastes’➡ ‘Globalized Circular Society’ࡿ a ‘zero-waste economy’, where all products and materials are re-used, repaired, recycled, as part ofinternational circular trade systems. Both industrial producers and household consumers are fullycommitted to the social-economic ‘circularity potential’.

➡ ‘Local Circular Society’ࡿ a ‘low-waste economy’ with most products and materials re-used, repaired, recycled – mainly within
Ukraine borders. This works for both industry and households.

➡ ‘Local Circular Industry’ࡿ a ‘medium-waste industrial economy’, where industrial production can profit from materials exchange
and symbiosis. One firm’s waste is another’ raw material.

➡ ‘Global Circular Industry’ࡿ a ‘low-waste industrial economy’, where industrial production is now fully integrated into EU andinternational value chains. The industrial symbiosis is more successful by working across borders andsectors.

8.3. What is possible? - future visions for ‘wastes’
These ‘visions for transformation’ were developed in the panel workshop. Each started with a general goal,
responded to challenges, and then formed a broad vision and direction of travel. The general timescale is a ‘Horizon
3’ of 10-25 years.

Rethinking waste and resources

Organic and food waste

Integrated resource economy

The plastics and packaging
industries will set up a systems
innovation programme, which
combines strategic regulation,
price incentives, and advanceprocurement programmes.

A ‘Packaging-Industry 5.0’
model will emerge from a social
innovation programme of withawareness raising, price incentives,
logistics and infrastructure.

A ’Plastics-Industry 5.0’ programme
will aim for a coordinated shift ofindustrial plastic materials towards
bio-degradable, re-useable, recyclable materials.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine78

8.4. How to achieve? – pathways for ‘wastes’
The diagram in Figure 17 shows an outline of threesystems-level pathways to meet the KPVC ‘visions’.
At this stage these are directions for explorationand development, which need to respond to futurechallenges and opportunities.

On the industrial side, agricultural and forestry waste
can be bio-methane: industrial bio-waste can help
to nurture agricultural production and fish farming.
Technology innovation is crucial, with a rapid shift ofmany industrial components and products towards biodegradable materials, which can then enter the bioindustrial system.

8.4.1. ‘Waste not want not’ pathway

8.4.3. ‘Symbiosis for growth’ pathway(household / municipal waste focus: based on
combinationsofsocial-government-infrastructure
systems)
The circular economy starts with the domestic economy
of households and communities, where re-use repair
and recycling can grow, in kitchens, gardens, local shops
and local workplaces. This calls for public education andawareness, which then enables social enterprises for
re-location and re-purposing of items such as clothing,furniture, household equipment.

(industrial waste focus: based on combinations of ecoindustrial-governance-business-infrastructure systems)
Industrial symbiosis is the guiding principle, for an
extended systems and networks of circularity inresources, primary materials, components, semifinished and final products. The ongoing modernizationand digitization of the wider economy will have a keyrole to play in logistics for resource management, withtechnologies such as robotic separation, component
RFID tracking, smart AI-driven logistics and energy/ materials platforms. Over time all new materials
in products and packaging will be designed for easy
separation, recycling and recovery.

This pathway also starts with creating infrastructure
at the local level, both physical logistics and material
exchanges, and the socioeconomics of local businessactivity and investment. Technology will also help via
data management on wastes and resources, platform
marketplaces for exchange, and advanced materials.
This combines with demand-driven innovation for
products which are long-lasting and easily repaired or
recycled.

The key to success is in practical ‘valorization’ of the
CE potential for almost all material-based firms, withbusiness models, financial models, production lines
and extended service systems. This depends on newlevels of cooperation along the value chain, where theopportunities for symbiosis are created and tested ateach stage of production.

8.4.2. ‘Resources for life’ pathway(bio-materials
management
focus:
basedon
combinations of eco-industrial-innovation-businessgovernment systems)
This pathway starts with the results of the ‘food
products’ KPVC. On the household and demand side,
composting of kitchen and garden waste can provide
valuable materials for fertilizers and conditioners
before recovery for the industrial system. For retailand catering operations, food management of productquality and sell-by dates, and then sharing of surplus
via food banks and similar, are the practical starting
points.

79

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Figure 18: ‘Wastes’: pathway mapping

8.5. Who can do this? Key stakeholders and enablers
For business and finance, there is growth potential for a whole new sector of ‘resource management’ – high value,
hi-tech and high-skill. This depends on investment channels for zero-waste integrated supply chain businessmodels.
For government and policy, the lead role is for coordination and promotion of integrated zero-waste supplydemand chain partnerships. This depends on a policy eco-system of regulation, joint investment, managing EUalignment and international import / export rules.
For social-community issues, promotion of public awareness and worker skills combines with support for social/ ecological enterprises, with public services in health and education leading the way. For design, technology andinnovation systems one looks for integrated supply chain design, bio-material innovation programmes, new formsof synthetics and nano-materials, advanced materials management systems.
For eco-industrial management, there is a process of strategic re-thinking of industrial processes and components
for waste minimization, re-use and recycling. And for urban infrastructure, the post-war reconstruction can combinewith retrofit of housing and workplaces for sharing, re-use and recycling of common materials and products.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine80

8.6. When? - 3 horizons for ‘wastes’
These pathways then play out as a strategic transformation programme, as seen with the 3-horizon perspective:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Post-war reconstruction andthe start of circular materials
management: set up initial
innovation systems for key
sectors and supply chains

Mobilize strategic industrialchange in all material-based
sectors: investment andmodernization in wastemanagement facilities

Full transformation from‘waste management’ to‘resource management’, withto near-zero-waste industrial
production, near full circularityof all waste / resource flows on
supply and demand sides.

An initial project proposal is in discussion (from CE Foundation):“

Evaluate Ukraine’s existing monitoring mechanisms related to the Circular Economy to identify strengths,
weaknesses, and areas for improvement, conduct targeted workshops and training sessions for relevant stakeholders
to enhance their understanding of Circular Economy concepts and improve data collection methodologies, andfinally align with EU Standards, fostering compatibility and comparability.”81

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

82

9.

Conclusions andforward agendas

83

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9. Conclusions and forward agendas
This section brings together the previous notes on the value chains, with general conclusions on the CEtransformations, and the roles of key stakeholders, presented as ‘forward agendas’. It concludes withrecommendations for next steps in the CE-Ukraine development process.

9.1. Forward agendas: international cooperation and EU alignment
The over-arching agenda for the Government, business, trade, finance, technology and human resources is forinternational cooperation and, in particular, EU alignment. With the EU as the largest and most effective international
trading bloc in the world, its CE action plan is more advanced (at least in principle) than any other.31 The many CErelated applications such as EU Taxonomy, EU Characterization, EU Carbon Border Adjustment mechanism andsimilar schemes aim to mobilize the CE agenda for Member States and partners. Together these cover a wide
range of trade agreements, product standards, material classifications, corporate compliance, credit-worthiness,consumer standards, environmental objectives and others.32

EU Taxonomy Regulation example(Source: European Commission 2023)

This ‘taxonomy’ sets out 4 overarching conditions that an economic activity must meet in order to qualify asenvironmentally sustainable:33

ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ

Making a substantial contribution to at least one environmental objective.
Doing no significant harm to any of the other five environmental objectives.
Complying with minimum safeguards.
Complying with the technical screening criteria set out in the Taxonomy delegated acts.

The benefits from this are firstly to producers and consumers, and then to wider society:

ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ

Creates a frame of reference for investors and companies.
Supports companies in their efforts to plan and finance their transition.
Protects against greenwashing practices.
Helps accelerate financing of those projects that are already sustainable and those neededin the transition.

This is not to suggest that following the stated policy will make everything simple or easy. As the CE transformation
may bring negative impacts to some firms in some sectors, so it is important to keep a clear view of the goals,
visions, and longer horizons. This “exploratory foresight” aims to contribute to that.

International cooperation: recommendations
Each industrial sector and stakeholder community should investigate in detail the EU alignment agenda for all CErelated activities. This includes:abSector and KPVC-based agendas,
such as food products or
packagingTowards the Circular Economy Ukraine

84

General cross-cutting
conditions, such as on corporate
ESG, financial instruments,
product standards and trade
agreements

European Commission, 2015.
European Commission, 2015 and 2020.
European Commission, 2023.

31

32

33

9.2. Forward agendas: national and sectoral cooperation
Each stakeholder group has a role in the CE transformation, to be explored and developed further. However, suchroles are not simple to organize, and may not follow from any simple plan or policy.
The key question of how to enable and mobilize synergy and cooperation for transformation points to the conceptof a ‘collective circularity intelligence’.34
This is basically the capacity for mutual learning, communication, co-innovation and co-production, between:➡
➡
➡

wider communities of stakeholders (across all sections of society)deeper layers of value (connecting economic with social, ecological, political values)
further horizons of change (from short term problems to longer term transformation).

For ways to mobilize these general principles, there are practical recommendations in the sections below. Each ofthese can be helped and mobilized with a systematic approach to capacity-building for cooperation, as shown byother international experience.35 As an important part of capacity-building for the Ukraine CE transformations, such
‘resources, tools, spaces, and platforms’ would include:
Capacity-building resources and spaces: recommendations
Resources and tools
In each stage of the above, technicalresources need to combine with humanprocesses. Online resources should be set
up for training and skills, information andguidance, project management and public
surveys. On-site resources and tools are
more effective for deliberation, collaborative
thinking, community building, and creative
demonstration.

Spaces and platforms:
The creative thinking of stakeholders generally
works better in a ‘forum’, ‘agora’, symposium
or similar. Physical spaces are important forthe psychology and inter-personal exchange:
online spaces can be more practical for multilocal information exchange. The combinationof online information flow with on-site
discussion may be the most effective.

Some valuable comments on these roles and opportunities came out in the first and second survey (Survey A and
Survey B of this project). Here for example, are comments on the crucial question of industrial cooperation (further
comments are shown in the Annex Table A.4):

Participant feedback on industrial cooperation(Source: Foresight Survey. A report):➡ Question 1: What circular business models (e.g., leasing, sharing, take-back) are applicable to theindustry?

ࡿࡿࡿRavetz, 2020.
SITRA, 2020

To a greater extent, joint use and concession have proven themselves in the world of practice. But it ispossible to develop and implement a new synthetic tool based on benchmarking analysis of positive
world practice.
Sharing, cooperation, outsourcing with transparent reporting.
Repair and restoration; modularity and adaptability; production of products from biodegradable orrenewable materials; partnerships with suppliers and consumers to optimize supply chains.

34
35

85

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine➡ Question 2: How can industries engage with each other and policymakers to create an enabling
environment for circular initiatives?

ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ
ࡿ

Based on associations, platforms, and social agreements.
B2B partnership with further coverage of the benefits received. Organization of joint activities to bring
together a common denominator for policy-making at the State level, taking into account the opinionof the private sector.
Industrial companies can collaborate with research institutions and universities to develop newtechnologies and solutions aimed at the circular economy. The Government can support suchinitiatives through grants, tax breaks, and other financial incentives.
Development and implementation of standards for the circular economy that would promoteinteraction between different industries and ensure their compatibility. The authorities can decide on
the implementation of such standards.
Industries can collaborate to share resources, such as recycled materials, water resources, and energy.
Governments can contribute to this by regulating and stimulating industrial symbiosis.
Different industries can collaborate to effectively manage waste, recycle, and reuse materials. The
Government can support such initiatives through legislation and financial instruments.

9.3 Recommendations for KPVCs
Combining the various points in the KPVC chapters above, this section shows a summary of practical recommendations.
In each of the selected KPVCs, an overview is shown for horizons 1–3, followed by a summary table of actions foreach system / stakeholder type. The tables are colour coded for visibility, in the same scheme as the KPVC chapters(constructions in orange, food products in green, electronics in purple, plastics in yellow, wastes in brown).
The tables show recommendations for each of the three horizons; however, these overlap and inter-connect in thefollowing ways:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Practical action programmes, tobe set up as soon as possible

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Strategic change objectives andplans for the medium term

Full transformation in thelonger view: this provides goals
and also guidance which may
help with short term actions
and medium term plans(The horizon 3 recommendations are shown in italics, as they would be revised and developed as that time period
approaches.)
9.3.1. Constructions- recommendations
These recommendations address both the production of new buildings: the repair / maintenance / upgrading of theexisting stock: and the end of life materials management. The KPVC visions and pathways include a ‘Construction
resources pathway’ for material management: a ‘Construction innovation pathway’ for advanced technologies andmaterials: and a ‘Construction procurement pathway’ on the demand side.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

86Overview of horizons:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Practical action programmes, tobe set up as soon as possible

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Strategic change objectives andplans for the medium term

Full transformation in thelonger view: this provides goals
and also guidance which may
help with short term actions
and medium term plans

Table 4: ‘Constructions’ - recommendations

CONSTRUCTIONS

Horizon 1: 1-5 years

Horizon 2: 5-10 years

Horizon 3: 10-25 years

Business

Support creative micro-startups for circular design

Promote circularconstruction businessmodelsFully align with EU trade andcarbon mechanism: Promote
eco-valuation financial
modelsGovernanceNew building regulations andcircular EPR schemes

Public procurement forcircular materials anddesigns

Set up public finance andloan schemes for reuse /recycling

SocialPromote public CE awarenessand workforce skills

Set up building owners/ users programme forcircularity

New ‘self declaration’standards for circularity

Technology

New digitalization
programme for design andproduction

Set up RTD hubs and labs forcircular materials and design

Complete full digitalizationof building performance:
Innovate for hi-performancebio-materials

Industry

Resource management
programme for post-war
damageInvestigate advanced
materials and components

Set up industrial
symbiosis for materialinterchange. Plan industrial
transformation to zero-waste
LCA

Infrastructure

Coordinate energy andmaterial efficiency systems

Set up logistics andstorage for materials andcomponents

Develop infrastructure for100% circular materials andcomponents

87

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9.3.2. Food products – recommendations
These recommendations address the whole food products value chain: from primary inputs, to agriculture, tomanufacturing and distribution, to consumption by households and catering, and then to post-consumer waste
and surplus. The KPVC visions and pathways include a ‘Food efficiency’ pathway focused on the food manufactureand distribution chain: a ‘Food health’ pathway on the consumer and household side: and a ‘Food livelihood’pathway which addresses the role of food products in both rural and urban economies and communities.
Overview of horizons:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Post-war restoration, decontamination of land andwater: first steps in production/ supply chain efficiency andcircularity

Strategic steps for supplyside production innovation:and demand side shift infood markets, logistics,
infrastructures

Transformation to near zerowaste and low-energy foodproduction, processing,
distribution and packaging:combined with shift to healthyaffordable food livelihoods inhouseholds and communities.

Table 5: Food products - recommendations

FOOD PRODUCTS

Horizon 2: 5-10 years

Horizon 3: 10-25 years

Support local food SMEs withcircular business models

Promote new regenerative
farming business models

Align with EU on tradeand farm / food healthstandards. Plan ahead forwhole industry circulartransformation

GovernanceSet farm regulations for lowinput low-waste production

Public procurement forcircularity in food supply andwaste

Make rural / green belt
policies for circular
livelihoods. Set landownership rules and markets
to support circularity

SocialRealize rural-urban linkages
for food and livelihood

Promote public awarenessfor food health andcircularity

Set up urban / local foodas integral to circular foodsystems

Technology

Promote digitalization ofurban circular food systems

Set up innovation
programmes for low-input
low-waste foodTech innovation for fullcircularity of food system.
Explore new food sources for
global climate futures

Industry

Reclaim war damaged land
and water systems

Agri-food symbiosis for biowaste, bio-methane etc.

Promote advanced precisionand regenerative farming.
Mobilize new methods of
local / urban food symbiosis

Infrastructure

Set up local hubs for foodre-distribution, storage,
recycling

New logistic systems forbio-waste, composting andrecovery

Develop full circularity ofagri-food waste and processmaterials

Business

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Horizon 1: 1-5 years

889.3.3. Electronics and ICT – recommendations
These recommendations address the whole value chain, from primary raw materials (many of them ‘critical’), to
manufacture and distribution. This is a globalized value chain driven by very rapid innovation and high levels of
wastage. The KPVC visions and pathways include: a ‘Technology for life’ pathway on the production and market
supply side: a ‘Device literacy’ pathway’ on the consumer and demand side: and an ‘Industry 5.0’ pathway, for thewhole economy agenda of full digitalization.
Overview of horizons:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Service and leasing
models: Extended producer
responsibility: Collaborative
circular standards andregulations

Circular literacy at home
and workplace: Innovation
for “Extended Product Life”:
Industrial cross-integration

Social welfare circular
platforms: Digital supply chain
integration: Reverse logistic
hubs for re-use and recycling.

Table 6: Electronics and ICT recommendations

ELECTRONICS and ICT

Horizon 1: 1-5 years

Horizon 2: 5-10 years

Horizon 3: 10-25 years

Business

Support micro-start-ups forcircular design, re-use, repair

Set up national industrial
strategy and tech transfer

EU / global trade alignment
for circularity and criticalmaterials

GovernanceSet up EPR and EPL
regulations and incentives

Public procurement forcircular devices and systems

Set up Digitalize-Industry 5.0- public / private partnershipprogrammeSocialPromote awareness andskills for circularity systems

Industry skills programme
and logistics for re-use andrepairTechnology

Support design innovation
for disassembly, repair

Mobilize national CEdigitalization hubs andplatforms

Strategic innovation for fulleconomic digitalization

Industry

Build capacity in tech andskills for industrial CE

Promote advanced materials
and component manufact

Develop industrial symbiosis
for material inter-change

Infrastructure

Set up infrastructure for
e-waste recycling

Advanced Infra structure for
critical materials security

Develop logistics platforms
for circular materials

89

Plan for ‘Smart cities andcommunities’ with embedded
circularity

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9.3.4. Plastics and packaging – recommendations
This combined value chain addresses two interconnected systems which are embedded in all other KPVCs. The
visions and pathways include: ‘What goes around comes around’ pathway, on the packaging industry supply side:a ‘Packaging for life’ pathway, focused on the social / demand side of re-use and recycling: and a ‘Plastics for life’
pathway, for the materials supply side, industrial symbiosis and innovation process.

Overview of horizons:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Service and leasing
models: Extended producer
responsibility: Collaborative
circular standards andregulations

Circular literacy at home
and workplace: Innovation
for “Extended Product Life”:
Industrial cross-integration

Social welfare circular
platforms: Digital supply chain
integration: Reverse logistic
hubs for re-use and recycling

Table 7: Plastics and packaging - recommendations

Plastics & Packaging

Horizon 1: 1-5 years

Horizon 2: 5-10 years

Horizon 3: 10-25 years

Business

Set up extended producer
responsibility regime

Set up national industrial
strategy and tech transfer

EU / global trade alignment
for circularity and criticalmaterials

Governance

EPR and EPL fiscal andregulatory incentives

Set common standards andregulations for recyclability

Strategic partnerships incircular procurement

SocialPromote circular home/work
education and socio-eco
enterprise

Circular platforms forsocially recyclable packaging
containers

Promote household
transformation to near zerowaste

Technology

Subsidize plastic recycling
material innovations

Set up RTD hubs for circular Aim for fully circular ‘plasticsplastic materials and design Industry 5.0’ innovation

Industry

Promote eco-design forrecycling of suitable plastic

Advanced materials andcomponent manufacturing

Set up industrial symbiosis
for material exchange / joint
processing

Infrastructure

Set up reverse logistics hubs
for reuse or recycling

Advanced recycling kiosks
for building and industrial
materials

Set up digitalized logistics
for full circular plastic
management

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine909.3.5. Wastes – recommendations
This addresses a wide variety of inter-connected systems, which are embedded in all KPVCs, and with potential fora rapid transition from ‘wastes’ towards ‘resources’ management. The KPVC visions and pathways include: a ‘Waste
not want not’ pathway, focused on household / municipal waste: a ‘Resources for life’ pathway, working with biomaterials from food and other manufacturing: and a ‘Symbiosis for growth’ pathway, covering all kinds of industry
with potential for materials exchange, enabled by full digitalization.
Overview of horizons:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Horizon 3 (2050)

Post-war reconstruction andthe start of circular materials
management: set up initial
innovation systems for key
sectors and supply chains;

Mobilize strategic industrialchange in all material-based
sectors: investment andmodernization in wastemanagement facilities;

Full transformation from‘waste management’ to‘resource management’, withto near-zero-waste industrial
production, near full circularityof all waste / resource flows on
supply and demand sides.

Table 8: Wastes - recommendations

WastesHorizon 1: 1-5 years

Horizon 2: 5-10 years

Horizon 3: 10-25 years

Business

Create sector-institution
wide networks, forums,
associations

Promote circular socioenvironment investment
modelsFull alignment with EU /global trade and carbon
mechanisms

Governance

Develop legal frameworkfor government - businessinteraction

Set up procurement systems
for circular products

Public finance and loan
incentives for reuse /recycling

SocialCreate social / local waste
infrastructure

Set up public awarenessprogrammes for fullcircularity

Promote public ‘self
declaration’ of full circularity

Technology

Promote innovation forextended product life

Full digitalization of productdesign and manufacture

Aim for fully digital logistics
for CE resource management

Industry

Set up incentives andecosystems for creative SMEs

Establish strategic
partnerships on industrial
waste and special wastes.

Industrial symbiosis systems
for material inter-change

Infrastructure

Coordinate and integrate
waste / energy / resource
programmes

Mobilize joint investment for
CE infrastructure

Develop infrastructure for100% resource circularity

91

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9.4. Recommendations: key systems, stakeholders and institutions
All key stakeholders and institutions in Ukraine have a part to play in the CE transformation process. This overview
of recommendations is based on all results from the panel discussions and survey responses.
Again, these recommendations apply to the three horizons, which overlap and interconnect in the following ways:

Horizon 1 (2030)

Horizon 2 (2035)

Practical action programmes, tobe set up as soon as possible

Strategic change objectives andplans for the medium term

Horizon 3 (2050)
Full transformation in thelonger view: this provides goals
and guidance for the shortterm actions and medium termplans.

9.4.1. Business and financeThis includes finance options: start-up, joint venture, collaterals: and investment options such as green / carbon
markets, and regional banking. In more detail the various market options need to be explored for CE potential, as
trading platforms, aggregators, securitization etc. Meanwhile the market / product innovation pathways are crucial,with bridges, advance options, service agreements. On a practical level the industrial community can develop a
range of logistics options, with hubs, platforms, zones, and networks, at different levels from local to national.

Recommendations

ࡿ Major businesses should set up strategic planning / transformation programmes, looking ahead at their‘value proposition’, innovation systems, productivity and markets in a CE-focused economy of the near
future.

ࡿ Specific CE models such as EPL and EPR, can be investigated and built into strategic product / service
development programmes.

ࡿ Finance also should set up strategic planning / transformation programmes, for CE-focused start-up, joint
venture, collaterals: with investment options in green / carbon markets.

ࡿ Financial-government partnerships can be set up for green / regional banking; finance mechanisms in
trading platforms, aggregators, securitization products etc.

ࡿ Develop CE-focused innovation finance programmes, i.e. bridges, advance options, service agreements,
infrastructure / logistics solutions for hubs, platforms, networks.

ࡿ Set up integrated value-chain industrial forums, networks or hubs, for the coordination of material /resource flows across sectoral boundaries.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine929.4.2. Policy and governanceThis area includes regulation and legal process: strategic planning and coordination: fiscal policy and combinationsof tax, levy, subsidy. Then follow areas of market policy: investment and market support, public-private partnerships:
forums, exchanges, sector clubs and networks. There is an interface with innovation policy: advance commitments,
joint ventures, technology transfer. This then extends to general industrial sector policy: quotas, tariffs, franchise:public procurement policy with bulk discount, strategic purchase: and general support and capacity-building, via
skills, awareness, firm support programmes and agencies.

Recommendations

ࡿ Set up CE-focused strategic planning and coordination mechanisms, via a pilot CE agency / hub / forum,

or similar alternative format. This should be set up to combine a ministerial / departmental mandate, with
open partnership / community building structure. Through this, develop:

»
»
»
»
»

strategic programme of regulation and legal structures, fiscal policy with tax, levy, subsidy: andmarket policy of investment, market support.
public-private partnerships, collaborative agreements, with the main aim of pilot development, foradvance strategic procurement commitments.
capacity-building: programmes for labour skills, consumer awareness, firm support programmes andagencies.
sectoral specific policies for resource flows, resource intensity, via quotas, tariffs, franchise operations,trade agreements.
public-private procurement policy: bulk discount, strategic purchase, innovation prototyping,underwriting of product / service demonstrations.

ࡿ Regional and local administrations can apply the above at various levels, depending on powers andresources.

9.4.3. Social and community
This broad transformation sees the potential for society to move beyond the narrow materialist role of ‘consumers’,
towards a more integrated and inclusive role as citizens, based on full participation and co-production.

Recommendations

ࡿ General CE public awareness and capacity-building, particularly in consumer facing retail and catering
sectors, and in community-facing education and health organizations.

ࡿ Set up support / enabling programmes for social / ecological enterprises at community level, for re-use /recycling, surplus sharing via food banks, furniture banks etc.

ࡿ Explore the potential for local livelihoods, on the United Nations ‘Leave No One Behind’ principle, in value
chains such as food products, or CE-activities in re-use, repair, remanufacturing, etc.

93

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9.4.4. Design and technology
Innovation policy development includes SME support and capacity-building: fiscal incentives / tax break / subsidy:
strategic advance procurement: innovation finance and joint ventures: and strategic STI grants and investment.
They also include international collaborations and exchange: researcher support and mobility; and further moredetailed technology foresight and road-mapping.
The over-arching technology agenda is a strategic program for full digitalization of all sectors of production andconsumption, and its application via product RFID, digital passports, and SMAC based management systems.36(Note: the current report does not cover specific technologies: this important question should be a priority for futurephases of the foresight programme.)

Recommendations

ࡿ Develop strategic CE innovation systems with multi-helix partnerships: national scale with EU andinternational linkages.

ࡿ Develop systems for advanced strategic partnerships, innovation procurement commitment, joint ventures,
innovation finance, technology transfer.

ࡿ Set up incentives for SME support and CE capacity-building in start-ups and social enterprises.
ࡿ Coordinate with the Government on CE fiscal incentives / tax breaks / subsidy regimes.
ࡿ Set up mission-oriented programmes with strategic STI grants, incentives, joint investment.
ࡿ Promote international collaborations and exchange, with researcher support and mobility schemes.
ࡿ Follow up on technology foresight and road-mapping programmes in key sectors and value chains.
ࡿ Set up a strategic program for full digitalization of all sectors of production and consumption.
9.4.5. Industry and environment
This includes production lines, materials handling, environmental assessment and management. Looking beyond
current programmes for resource efficiency and cleaner production, this is about very practical changes in industrial
processes, materials management and logistics.

Recommendations

ࡿ Accelerate current programme development in resource efficiency and cleaner production.
ࡿ Investigate on sector basis and KPVC basis, the potential for industrial symbiosis / resource exchange
schemes.

ࡿ Promote cross-sector innovation for new products and new processes, which enhance overall circularity inthe combinations of materials / energy / water / land etc.

36

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

94

Burmaoglu et al 2021

9.4.6. Urban and infrastructureThis includes material logistics, local economies, spaces, land and buildings. The transformation starts with spaces
and buildings at the local level, and over time creates capacity for ‘reverse logistics’, exchange hubs and storage
zones, all the way to urban / regional scale facilities.

Recommendations

ࡿ Promote retrofit, renovation and new design in housing and commercial buildings, to enable localized reuse, segregation, repair and recycling.

ࡿ Ensure that reverse logistic systems in every sector / KPVC are fully financed, resourced and operational.
ࡿ Strategic programme for conversion of waste management facilities towards ‘resource management’ andrecirculation facilities.

ࡿ Set up larger scale hubs, exchange, and storage zones, coupled with advanced resource management andreprocessing facilities.

9.5. Forward agendas: from foresight to strategic capacity-buildingThis ‘exploratory foresight’ has created so far an outline of challenges and opportunities, as a starting point.
Success then depends on the follow up.
For the CE-transformation, the foresight approach can continue to guide a continuous programme of learning, coinnovation, and co-production, between all stakeholders. Here the longer-term horizon 3 agenda (10-25 years), canhelp to guide practical activities in the shorter horizon 1 (1-5 years), and horizon 2 (5-10 years).
In practical terms this approach can guide the ideas for a CE-Ukraine agency or centre, as suggested in the UNIDO
Industrial Diagnostic Report.37 This or similar ventures would benefit from a systematic ‘wider-deeper-further’approach:

Recommendations on strategic capacity-buildingࡿ Set up a wider ‘CE ecosystem’ of actors / stakeholders, for co-innovation and co-production. For Ukraine
this suggests a connected set of networks, skills sharing, technology transfer and knowledge exchange.

ࡿ Build capacity for a deeper ‘CE value-system’ which integrates technologies and markets with other social,
cultural and ecological values. For Ukraine, follow-on programmes can explore the potential of cooperative
enterprise, regenerative farming, civil society renewal, and active citizenship of many kinds.

ࡿ Explore the further ‘CE transformation’ which connects short-term problems with longer term horizon 3
agendas. For Ukraine, this may start with the most ‘mission critical’ and urgent issues, such as:›››

How to increase Ukraine’s energy security in times of disruption and shortage?
How to ensure a viable future for Ukrainian farming in times of water crisis?
How to turn the problem of Ukraine’s waste, into new business opportunity?

UNIDO, 2023.

37

95

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

9.6. Next steps
The next steps are for Ukraine to decide. However, thisproject can make a practical recommendation, for thenational stakeholder community of public, private, civil,
academic organizations.
The overall recommendation is to follow through thisproject, with a programme of structured discussions, toexplore in more detail the opportunities and pathways
ahead.
This programme can work with the KPVCs, key sectors andtechnologies: and also generally across the Government
and wider governance.
Ukraine in its current context and uncertainties has greatchallenges and great potential. The ‘potential opportunity’
perhaps looks beyond the agenda of ‘catching up’ with the
EU and others – it looks to Ukraine as forerunner in thecircular economy transformations ahead.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

96

97

Towards the Circular Economy UkraineReferences

Allee, V. (2003). The Future of Knowledge: Increasing
Prosperity through Value Networks. Oxford, ButterworthHeinemann.
Burmaoglu, S., Ozdemir, D.G., Kirbac, A., Saritas, O.
(2021). “Future research avenues at the nexus of circular
economy and digitalization”, International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, vol. 72,
issue 8, pp. 2247–2269. DOI 10.1108/IJPPM-01-2021-0026.
Circle Economy Foundation (2023a). Circularity Gap
Report 2023. https://circularity-gap.world/.
Circle Economy Foundation (2023b). The Circularity
Gap Report 2023: Methods (v 1.0). Amsterdam: Circle
Economy.
Circle Economy Foundation (2024). Circular economy
for industrial development in Ukraine: Baseline Study.
Vienna, UNIDO.
European Commission (2015). Closing the loop
- An EU action plan for the Circular Economy.
h t t p s : / /e u r - l e x . e u r o p a . e u / l e g a l - c o n t e n t / E N /TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52015DC0614.
European Commission (2020). Categorisation System
for the Circular Economy, Luxembourg, European
Commission. doi:10.2777/172128.
European Commission (2021). Industry 5.0: A
Transformative Vision for Europe. ESIR Policy Brief
No. 3. Luxembourg, European Commission. https://
op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-law-and-publications/publication-detail/-/publication/38a2fa08-728e-11ec9136-01aa75ed71a1.
European Commission (2023). User guide to navigate
the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities. Luxembourg,
EuropeanCommission.
https://ec.europa.eu/
sustainable-finance-taxonomy/.
European Court of Auditors (2022). Circular economy:
Slow transition by Member States despite EU action.
www.eca.europa.eu/en/news/NEWS-SR-2023-17.

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

98

Landell Mills International, Linpico SARL, Danish Energy
Management and CIVITTA (2023). Circular Economy –Promotion of sustainable production and consumption
patterns in Ukraine. Contract 300057871: Inception
Report (not public).
Lombardi, D.R. and Laybourn, P. (2012). “Industrial
symbiosis: crossing academic–practitioner boundaries”,
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(1), 28–38.
Miles, I., Saritas, O. and Sokolov, A. (2016). Foresight for
Science, Technology and Innovation. Springer Verlag,
Berlin (a Brazilian-Portuguese edition was published by
Editora Fiocruz in Brazil in 2021).
National Recovery Council (2022). Ukraine’s National
Recovery Plan.
OECD (2020). The OECD Inventory of Circular Economy
indicators.
OECD (2020b). The Circular Economy in Cities andRegions.
Potting, J., Hekkert, M., Worrell, E. and Hanemaaijer,
A. (2017). Circular Economy: measuring innovation in
the product chain: Policy Report. PBL Netherlands
Environment Agency.
Ravetz, J., and Miles, I.D. (2016) Foresight in cities: on thepossibility of a “strategic urban intelligence”, Foresight,
vol. 18, No. 5, pp 469-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/FS06-2015-0037.
Ravetz, J. (2020). Deeper City: Collective Intelligence and
the Pathways from Smart to Wise. New York, Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315765860.
Saritas, O. (2013). “Systemic Foresight Methodology”, in
Science, Technology and Innovation Policy for the Future:
Potentials and Limits of Foresight Studies. D. Meissner,
L. Gokhberg, and A. Sokolov eds. Springer Verlag, Berlin,
pp.83-117.

Saritas, O. (2020). “Systemic Foresight Methodology in
Action”, in Strategic Foresight: Accelerating Technological
Change. De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.
Sharpe, W. and Williams, J. (2013). Three Horizons: The
Patterning of Hope. Edinburgh, Triarchy Press.
SITRA (2020). How to create a national circular economy
road map. SITRA Studies 170, Helsinki www.sitra.fi/
en/publications/how-to-create-a-national-circulareconomy-road-map/.
Sustainability, UNEP and the Global Compact (2008).
Unchaining Value: Innovative approaches to sustainablesupply . https://unglobalcompact.org/library/99.
United Nations (2008). International Standard Industrial
Classification of all economic activities, (Rev.4).
NY, United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/
publication/seriesm/seriesm_4rev4e.pdf.
United Nations (2015). Central Product Classification(CPC). Version 2.1. NY, United Nations. https://unstats.
un.org/unsd/classifications/unsdclassifications/cpcv21.
pdf.
UNIDO (2005). Technology Foresight Manual (Vols I &II). Vienna, UNIDO (http://www.foresight.pl/assets/
downloads/publications/UNIDO-Technology-ForesightManual_vol2.pdf).
UNIDO (2019). Industrial Resource Efficiency Division
and Circular Economy.
UNIDO (2020). Implementation of circular economy
principles and related practices in Ukraine (unpublished).
UNIDO (2023). Ukraine: Industrial Diagnostic Study.
https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/unidop u b l i c a t i o n s /2 0 2 4 - 0 2 / E xe c u t i ve % 2 0 s u m m a r y_industrial%20diagnostic%20study_2023_0.pdf.
USDA (US Department of Agriculture): Ukraine situation:(online briefing) available on https://fas.usda.gov/
topics/ukraine-conflict.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development(2011). Collaboration, innovation, transformation: Ideas
and inspiration to accelerate sustainable growth - Avalue chain approach. Geneva, WBCSD.
World Economic Forum (2023). Circularity in the Built
Environment: Maximizing CO2 Abatement and Business
Opportunities. Geneva, World Economic Forum.
Project working papers:
These interim reports are provided for further detailand background, and are available on http://www.
recpc.org/circular-economy/.
UNIDO (2023a). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: SCOPING REPORT;UNIDO (2023b). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: SURVEY (A) RESULTS;
UNIDO (2023c). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: VISIONS REPORT;UNIDO (2024a). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: FUTURE SCENARIOSREPORT;
UNIDO (2024b). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: SURVEY (B) RESULTS;
UNIDO (2024c). Exploratory Strategic Foresight for
Circular Economy in Ukraine: PATHWAYS REPORT.

99

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine100PART III
Annex
Summary tables
Project background and resources

101

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

SUMMARY TABLES
A.1. KPVC scope and definition
The following table summarizes the United Nations official classification of ‘products’ and ‘sectors’ for each of theselected KPVCs, as a starting point for more detailed analysis. 38
Table A.1: Classification of KPVCs in terms of products and sectors

CE-Ukraine
Foresight terms

EU action plan terms

CPC term

CPC digit

ISIC term and digits

Constructions

Construction andbuildings

Constructions

53, 54‘Construction’ – F: and‘Real estate activities–L

Food products

Food, water andnutrients

Agriculture, forestry
and fishery products

0 (01-04)

Agriculture, forestry
and fishing – A:

2 (21-24)

Manufacturing - C(10-11: food products
and beverages): and‘Accommodation andfood service activities’-I

45 (451, 452)

Manufacturing -C (26:computer, electronic
and optical products):‘Information andcommunication’ – J

Rubber and plastics
products

36

Manufacturing – C(20- chemicals andchemical products:
22- rubber and plastics
products)

Packaging products ofplastics

369‘Transporting andstorage’ – H

39‘sewerage; waste
management andremediation activities’– E37-39

Food products andbeverages“

Electronics and ICT

Plastics andpackagingElectronics and ICT

Plastics + separate
item - Packaging“

WastesWastes or scraps

United Nations, (2008): United Nations, (2015)38

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Office, accounting andcomputing machinery102

A.2. KPVC transformations over 3 horizons
This table is a summary of the ‘3-horizons’ results for each of the KPVCs.
Table A.2: Key product value chains transformations over 3 horizons
HORIZON 1

HORIZON 2

HORIZON 3

KPVCs‘Recovery’‘Transition’‘Transformation’Constructions

10 million tons ofwaste: urgent need forreconstruction.

Transition towards an energy
efficient building stock inphysical-economic terms.

Zero-waste construction
and net-zero buildings inuse, which integrates all
STEEPCUTa systems.

Food products

Land cleaning andreclamation: reconstructionof agri-food industry andtrade.

Transition towards RE foodproduction, CE bio-methane
systems, reduce food waste
and packaging.

Zero-waste farming with
low input / high precision,
for local / organic foodproduction and consumption.

Electronics and ICT

Stabilization andconsolidation of theelectronics / IT sector.

Transition to home-grownproduction and value-added,
with CE recovery built in.

Transformation to circular ICT
production and consumption

Plastics and packaging

Initial clean-up of packaging
systems and plastic waste
streams.

Transition to low-waste highcircularity packaging, lowimpact plastics and recovery
systems.

Fully zero-waste packaging
and reverse logistics,
coordinated and biodegradable plastics systems.

WastesCleaning up / recovery
of local / regional waste
management systems.

Transition to improved
recycling, recovery ofcommon waste streams.

Transformation to fully
circular near-zero-waste
economy.

A.3. Stakeholder agendas
Each stakeholder group has a key role to play in the wider collaboration needed for the CE transformation. This
table summarizes the consultation results from panel discussions and survey responses.
Table A.3: Stakeholder roles, challenges and opportunities
KEY ROLESCHALLENGESOPPORTUNITIES

Government Ministries

As policymakers via
regulation, tax / subsidy,
procurement, infrastructure
and resources.

Often disconnected frombusiness, subject to shortterm politics.

New ways of partnershipgovernance to achieve longer
term goals.

Regional and local
administrations

In CE practices at the local
level, with SMEs, civil society
organizations, landowners,
and citizens.

For example, lack of skills,
resources, infrastructure.

Local CE procurement, andsocial innovation / social
enterprise with households,
communities and interest
groups.

Higher education

In development of skills andqualifications.

The general disconnection
from other stakeholders.

New ways of teaching andknowledge sharing.

Research / technology
organizations

In underpinning CE researchand innovation in manytechnologies and value
chains: as enablers fora circular ‘innovation
ecosystem’.

The mainstream researchand innovation system isgeared to products andtechnologies rather thanwhole circles.

These may come from
exploring such circles.

103

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

KEY ROLESCHALLENGESOPPORTUNITIESIndustrial businesses

As primary producers andsecondary manufacturing.

The most current businessmodels are based on sellingmaterials and products in a
linear economy rather thancircular flows.

In the shift towards circular
integrated supply-demandvalue chains with servicebased business models.

Service / advisorybusinesses

As enablers of the core
CE principles, of extended
product lifetimes and leasing
models.

Individual firms may lack
incentives to take on wholevalue chains.

New markets andpropositions, ahead of thecurve.

Financial institutions

As investors in the CE, forfirms, product innovations,and infrastructures.

From strategic public /Private finance is generally
private investment in whole
short term; public investment
circular systems and strategic
may not respond.
supply chain partnerships.

Civil society organizations

In social innovation forpartnership working, new‘eco-socio-enterprise’models for cooperatives,
non-profits, local hubs, etc.

The general under-funding ofcivil society organizations/non-governmentalorganizations.

In new forms of partnershipgovernance.

Creatives and designers

Not only in new products,
services and value chains
but also in goals, visions,and cultural shifts which areessential.

Much of the design
profession is focused on
short-term novelty.

In new processes ofsocial/ecological design
with citizens, civil society
organizations, enterprises,
etc.

A.4. Participant feedback
The following two tables show a selection of the detailed comments from survey participants, on leading questions
concerning:ࡿࡿThe feasibility of CE in Ukraine, by social and technical systems.
Collaboration for the implementation of the CE policies in Ukraine

Table A.4: Feasibility of CE development in Ukraine: survey responses
BARRIERS and CHALLENGES

GENERAL COMMENTS

Lack of awareness and understanding;economic challenges; policy
implementation challenges; infrastructure
gaps; limited access to technology;
resistance to change; global economic
conditions; inadequate skills and expertise;limited awareness and understandingof the circular economy concept among
businesses and the general public canhinder its adoption.

OPPORTUNITIES and VISIONS

Shift from the traditional linear model of “take,
make, dispose” to a more sustainable and regenerative approach. Several factors can act as enablers or
barriers for this transition in Ukraine:
government policies and regulations, public awareness and education, collaboration and partnerships,
access to finance, technological innovation, waste
management infrastructure.
Harmonize current legislation with the world examples of that are most realistic for Ukraine (given
the gap of 30-40 years). Develop incentives for thetransition to a circular economy that can accelerate
the transition.
Tomorrow, develop the principles of HDD (manufacturer’s responsibility) and clearly define the deadline for its implementation (2-3 years maximum).

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine104

BARRIERS and CHALLENGES

BUSINESS-FINANCE

Concentration of private interests in
the relevant economic sectors, theirinfluence on public policy (including
through officials), as well as the lackof legislation on lobbying, low levelof accountability (legal and social
consequences) for cases of conflicts ofinterest (including non-obvious ones).
Creating new ESG strategies.

OPPORTUNITIES and VISIONSThe level of technological development,
consumer awareness, the availability of
infrastructure for recycling materials, waste
legislation and incentives for companies toimplement circular practices.
Legislative and financial incentives for the useof secondary resources should be introduced.
Especially in road construction and the
production of building materials.

Obstacles: lack of sufficient funding for Value proposition, benefits and benefits forthe implementation of circular economy businesses that integrate circular economy
measures.
practices.
The impact of the legislation of developed
countries.
The openness of the markets of developed
countries for products created within theframework of the requirements of the circular
economy.

GOVERNANCE-POLICY

Joint regulations, mutual control, accountability.
Ukraine’s membership in the EU and relevant
requirements, directives, EU standards, etc.
can help accelerate the transition to a circular
economy.
A shortage of skills and expertisein circular economy practices may
slow down the transition, requiring
investments in training and capacitybuilding.
Acceptance for recycled products in thecommunity.

SOCIAL-COMMUNITY

Lack of education of the population,
including officials.
Lack of management awareness andwill.
Lack of a sufficient number of
specialists and eco-responsibility
among citizens.

DESIGN-TECHNOLOGY

ECO-INDUSTRY

Integrating a course in educational institutions toincrease the social responsibility of citizens.
Teaching CE courses at schools and universities;
providing support (including financial) to private
entrepreneurs with CE components in theiractivities.
Changing the ideology of society: sharing
products and consuming services while
maximizing service life.
Acceptance for recycled products in thecommunity.
Lack of education of the population, including
officials.
Lack of management awareness and will.

Insufficient/lack of resources for
implementation and development.
Unwillingness to allocate funds,
corruption, low environmental
awareness, preference for profit overenvironmental protection.
Interruption of production chains due
to disintegration.

Resource efficiency, availability of funding
and global sustainability initiatives are also
important.
Reducing the use of natural resources throughthe introduction of renewable energy (solar,wind).

105

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Table A.5: Collaboration for CE policies in Ukraine: survey responses

BUSINESS-FINANCE

SPECIFIC and SECTORAL NOTESGENERAL GOVERNANCE NOTESCluster initiatives and collective integrated
solutions, deregulation in the joint
organization of production and derivative(service, auxiliary) processes.

Adoption of legislative acts regarding the opennessof markets for products created within theframework of CE.

Simplification of licensing procedures(product certification, permits) withincreased responsibility for violations(taking into account the negative
consequences caused, rather than aformal approach, so that companies are
not destroyed but supported in the right
direction of development).

Multi-actor collaboration along single industry
value added chains.
In addition to the EU, cooperate with the countriesof America (USA, Canada, etc.), Asia (Japan, Republicof Korea, etc.), Australia, etc. which also haveexperience and relevant developments in the fieldof circular economy.

Cooperation between the EU and the Governmentof Ukraine with the aim of bringing the country’s
legislation closer to European legislation.
Cooperation with government agencies is needed todevelop and implement regulatory requirements forthe use of secondary resources instead of primaryresources.

GOVERNANCE-POLICY

Ukraine needs collaborations with European
countries experienced in CE and can support
Ukraine with a suitable strategy for the future.

SOCIAL-COMMUNITY

First of all, communicating information to
the majority of Ukrainian citizens about
this in a format that is understandable topeople.
Provide internships to gain experience andnew skills, learn best practices, exchange
experts, and provide advice.

Unified technological standards, Best
Available Technologies, Digital standards EU
Data Spaces, etc.

DESIGN-TECHNOLOGY

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Assistance in obtaining modern
technologies in the field of circular
economy and their practicalimplementation.

106

Cooperation between the Government, business andcivil society. It is important to establish an effective
exchange of information and resources between
these sectors to develop and implement circular
economy strategies.
International partnerships, associations/consortia
of businesses and organizations.
Knowledge sharing, coordination between waste
producers and processors-think about it at thedesign stage, study trips, twinning projects,
investment projects.

Cooperation between universities and institutes
with the inclusion of Ukrainian scientists andresearch teams in European programmes withproject financing and acquaintance of specialists
with practices in the field.

SPECIFIC and SECTORAL NOTES

Inclusion of Ukrainian companies/companies
located on the territory of Ukraine in material
supply/processing chains within the CE concept.

ENVIRONMENTINDUSTRYURBAN andINFRASTRUCTURE

GENERAL GOVERNANCE NOTES

already pilots/projects in the field ofachieving CE that can be implemented in
Ukraine: reusable collateral packaging,textile reuse, etc.
Organization of waste sorting andrecycling, support in implementing energy
management measures.

Cooperation of municipalities within the frameworkof programmes to demonstrate achievements in thefield of CE in the most promising sectors for Ukraine(processing of solid household waste, use of wasteenergy flows, use of alternative and renewableenergy resources).
Cooperation between recycling companies todevelop products, materials and services based on
the existing recycling library.

107

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

PROJECT BACKGROUND AND RESOURCES
For a complex project such as the development of a national circular economy (CE), a process involving many
stakeholders and experts needs to draw on a shared framework and pathways.
For this purpose, and in view of the current situation in Ukraine, this ‘exploratory foresight exercise’ has beenlaunched to highlight the most important systemic elements of a functioning circular economy for a horizon of2025-2040. The use of practical foresight methods with selected priority regions, economic sectors and value chains
will help to mobilize the main systemic drivers of the future for the circular economy in the country.

A.5. Project methods
The foresight methods and tools follow the UNIDO experience in promoting, developing and applying the foresightconcept to countries’ and regions’ policy- and strategy-making through guidelines, training and advisory services
in a series of technical assistance programmes. The present project was enriched by considering the synergistic
approach and its Pathways Toolkit developed by Joe Ravetz (Ravetz, 2020: Ravetz & Miles 2016) and the Systemic
Foresight Methodology (SFM) by Ozcan Saritas (Saritas, 2013 and 2020; Miles et al., 2016). This has been drawn
up as a practical way of working with foresight challenges, which look beyond direct ‘problem-fixing’ towards‘transformative innovation’.

Figure 19: Exploratory Foresight: Method & Process
The present project follows a 4-stage work methodology, including (1) scoping and analysis of the challenges
and opportunities of CE development in Ukraine; (2) future scenarios elaboration; (3) future visions; (4) pathwaymapping the transformation for development of CE. The process is composed by evolving desk research, surveys,
interactive workshops and panels of experts. Each of these 4 main stages includes a set of templates for visual
thinking, system mapping, and collaborative thinking. This is proposed in response to the ‘multiplicity’ of the
CE agenda and its many socio-technical systems, which include business, governance, community, technology,
industrial ecology, and infrastructure.
Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

108A.6. Project context
EU4Environment programme
The “European Union for Environment” (EU4Environment – Green Economy) action plan helps the Eastern Partnershipcountries preserve their natural capital and increase people’s environmental well-being, by supporting environmentrelated action, demonstrating and unlocking opportunities for greener growth, and setting mechanisms to better
manage environmental risks and impacts.
The programme is funded by the European Union and implemented by five Partner organizations – OECD, UNECE,
UNEP, UNIDO, and the World Bank – over the 2019-2024 period, with a budget of EUR 20 million.
For more information, please visit: www.eu4environment.org.
Green Recovery of Ukraine programmeThis programme’s objective is to provide technical support to the Government of Ukraine in conceptualizing andoperationalizing a strategic approach towards green industrial reconstruction and development through thecoherent, evidence-based and result-oriented green recovery programme for inclusive and sustainable industrial
development, which is to be led and owned by the Government.
Through the project, UNIDO will work to support the establishment of an enabling environment for the green recoveryof the country’s industry, job creation, resilience building, sustained economic growth and the strengthening of
the productivity and competitiveness of priority industrial sectors with high growth potential and investment
attractiveness. The efforts on promoting circular economy and strengthening of recycling capacities of the country
will focus on capacity-building among civil servants and municipalities’ employees as well as contributing to thestrategy on CE implementation in Ukraine as a whole, and specific supply chains or regions in particular.

109

Towards the Circular Economy Ukraine

Towards the
Circular Economy in Ukraine
Exploratory Strategic Foresight
FINAL REPORTUNIDO deﬁnes circular economy as an industrial economy that routes materials, parts andproducts back into use several times and creates more value and less waste. It is an alternativein which value is maintained for as long as possible, products are designed to last, and thegeneration of waste is minimized.
The CE is now a transformation in progress in many countries around the world. Ukraine has
great potential to be a forerunner in the ﬁeld. To explore such potential and turn it into action– this is the role of ‘Foresight’. This project, the Exploratory Strategic Foresight for Circular
Economy in Ukraine, has worked with stakeholders on future visions for the CE-Ukraine, and the‘transformation pathways’ to turn them into action.
This Final Report brings together the results from the four stages of the project: scoping,scenarios, visions and pathways.
The project was managed by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),
under the EU-funded EU4Environment Action, with co-ﬁnancing from the German Federal
Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).

For more information please contact:
Ms. Tatiana Chernyavskaya
EU4Environment Project Manager
Circular Economy and Resource Efﬁciency Unit
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
Email: t.chernyavskaya@unido.org