Search

The Circular Economy (CE) has recently become a popular concept in sustainability discourses for both the public and private sectors. The proponents of this idea often espouse many social, economic, and environmental benefits from the application of CE practices. However, the CE faces many limitations to deliver on those expectations. The CE is very much a contested concept in the sustainability discourse, with many actors proposing different visions of a circular future based on their particular socio-economic interests. Moreover, the economic, social, political, and environmental implications of different circular discourses and policies remain poorly researched and understood. This thesis addresses this research gap by answering the following question: what are the main societal discourses and policies on the CE, how can they be critically analysed, compared, and understood, and what are their sustainability implications? To answer this question, this thesis uses an interdisciplinary mixed-method approach, including critical literature review, content analysis, text-mining, and Q-method survey. The case studies are European Union CE policies, Dutch CE policies for plastics and tyres, as well as the CE action plans of Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Glasgow. Results demonstrate the existence of a plurality of circularity discourses through history, which can be divided based on two main criteria. First, whether they are sceptical or optimist regarding the possibility of eco-economic decoupling, and second, whether they are holistic by including social justice concerns or have a segmented focus on resource efficiency alone. This leads to 4 core discourse types: Reformist Circular Society (optimist and holistic), Technocentric Circular Economy (optimist and segmented), Transformational Circular Society (sceptical and holistic), and Fortress Circular Economy (sceptical and segmented). Results from the selected case studies conclude that, although the CE discursive landscape is quite diverse, current policies focus on technical solutions and business innovations which do not address the manyfold social and political implications of a circular future. A technocentric CE approach is thus prevalent in the policies of the EU, the Dutch Government, and the city of Copenhagen. Results also find that the cities of Amsterdam and Glasgow have a more holistic approach to CE by acknowledging many social justice considerations. Yet the policies of these two cities remain limited in both their redistributive nature and their transformative potential. Moreover, results demonstrate that all the above case studies follow a growth-optimist approach, seeking to improve economic competitiveness and innovation to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation. However, this approach has key scientific limitations, as research has shown that absolute eco-economic decoupling is neither happening nor likely to happen on a relevant scale to prevent climate change and biodiversity collapse. This thesis’s research has also found that academics and social movements from the Global North and South alike have developed a wide range of alternatives to the growth-centric approach to circularity, such as steady state economics, degrowth, voluntary simplicity, ecological swaraj, economy for the common good, permacircular economy, doughnut economics, buen vivir, and ubuntu. All these alternative discourses can be grouped under the umbrella concept of a circular society. Circular society discourses are united in their objective to create a democratic, fair and sustainable socio-ecological system, which works in harmony with the natural cycles of the biosphere to improve human and planetary wellbeing for current and future generations. More pluralism and inclusiveness of these alternative approaches in the debate surrounding circularity could help co-design and implement sustainable circularity policies, which subordinate economic growth to planetary boundaries, resource limits, and social imperatives. This is key to ensure the political legitimacy, social relevance and scientific validity of the circularity policies that are implemented to create a fair, sustainable, and democratic circular society.

The Circular Economy (CE) has recently become a popular concept in sustainability discourses for both the public and private sectors. The proponents of this idea often espouse many social, economic, and environmental benefits from the application of CE practices. However, the CE faces many limitations to deliver on those expectations. The CE is very much a contested concept in the sustainability discourse, with many actors proposing different visions of a circular future based on their particular socio-economic interests. Moreover, the economic, social, political, and environmental implications of different circular discourses and policies remain poorly researched and understood. This thesis addresses this research gap by answering the following question: what are the main societal discourses and policies on the CE, how can they be critically analysed, compared, and understood, and what are their sustainability implications? To answer this question, this thesis uses an interdisciplinary mixed-method approach, including critical literature review, content analysis, text-mining, and Q-method survey. The case studies are European Union CE policies, Dutch CE policies for plastics and tyres, as well as the CE action plans of Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Glasgow. Results demonstrate the existence of a plurality of circularity discourses through history, which can be divided based on two main criteria. First, whether they are sceptical or optimist regarding the possibility of eco-economic decoupling, and second, whether they are holistic by including social justice concerns or have a segmented focus on resource efficiency alone. This leads to 4 core discourse types: Reformist Circular Society (optimist and holistic), Technocentric Circular Economy (optimist and segmented), Transformational Circular Society (sceptical and holistic), and Fortress Circular Economy (sceptical and segmented). Results from the selected case studies conclude that, although the CE discursive landscape is quite diverse, current policies focus on technical solutions and business innovations which do not address the manyfold social and political implications of a circular future. A technocentric CE approach is thus prevalent in the policies of the EU, the Dutch Government, and the city of Copenhagen. Results also find that the cities of Amsterdam and Glasgow have a more holistic approach to CE by acknowledging many social justice considerations. Yet the policies of these two cities remain limited in both their redistributive nature and their transformative potential. Moreover, results demonstrate that all the above case studies follow a growth-optimist approach, seeking to improve economic competitiveness and innovation to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation. However, this approach has key scientific limitations, as research has shown that absolute eco-economic decoupling is neither happening nor likely to happen on a relevant scale to prevent climate change and biodiversity collapse. This thesis’s research has also found that academics and social movements from the Global North and South alike have developed a wide range of alternatives to the growth-centric approach to circularity, such as steady state economics, degrowth, voluntary simplicity, ecological swaraj, economy for the common good, permacircular economy, doughnut economics, buen vivir, and ubuntu. All these alternative discourses can be grouped under the umbrella concept of a circular society. Circular society discourses are united in their objective to create a democratic, fair and sustainable socio-ecological system, which works in harmony with the natural cycles of the biosphere to improve human and planetary wellbeing for current and future generations. More pluralism and inclusiveness of these alternative approaches in the debate surrounding circularity could help co-design and implement sustainable circularity policies, which subordinate economic growth to planetary boundaries, resource limits, and social imperatives. This is key to ensure the political legitimacy, social relevance and scientific validity of the circularity policies that are implemented to create a fair, sustainable, and democratic circular society.

This Policy Brief presents the main messages from the Agency’s 2021 Key Principles – Supporting policy development and implementation for inclusive education publication. It outlines the 14 key principles identified in the main report, which support the implementation of the Agency’s vision of high-quality education for all learners. The key principles set out the necessary elements for an overall system for inclusive education, aiming to support countries that wish to further develop their inclusive provision in education. PLEASE NOTE: This record contains only the English version. Translated versions in all the Agency's languages, including English, are available in this record., This publication has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein., {"references":["European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2021. Key Principles – Supporting policy development and implementation for inclusive education: Policy Brief. (V. J. Donnelly and A. Watkins, eds.). Odense, Denmark"]}

Audit Quality Indicators (AQI’s) zijn een hot topic in binnen- en buitenland. In Nederland volgt de recente aandacht voor AQI’s uit de aanbevelingen van de Commissie toekomst accountancysector (CTA) en de werkzaamheden van de kwartiermakers op dit vlak. In het buitenland – in het bijzonder in Canada, Singapore en Zuid-Afrika – bestaat ervaring met de ontwikkeling en praktische toepassing van AQI’s. In deze bijdrage staan de ervaringen met AQI’s uit deze drie landen centraal en volgt een vergelijking op enkele belangrijke onderdelen. Deze bijdrage behandelt de kijk van de toezichthouders op het concept AQI’s, de belangrijkste doelgroepen van AQI’s, de benadering ten aanzien van (de selectie van) relevante AQI’s, de rol van de toezichthouder, en de wijze van communicatie over AQI’s. Ook schenkt deze bijdrage aandacht aan overige relevante ontwikkelingen elders in het buitenland en wordt de Nederlandse praktijk op basis van een quick scan op hoofdlijnen afgezet tegen deze internationale ontwikkelingen en ervaringen. De bijdrage eindigt met de aanbevelingen om de ontwikkelingen in het buitenland te blijven volgen en om de afsluitende observaties als lessen of relevante achtergrond mee te nemen voor een duurzame ontwikkeling en bestendiging van AQI’s in Nederland.

This is the fourth publication in the Key Principles series. The first report in the Key Principles series (Key Principles in Special Needs Education – Recommendations for Policy-Makers) was based on Agency work published up to 2003. A further review of Agency work was published in 2009 (Key Principles for Promoting Quality in Inclusive Education – Recommendations for Policy-Makers). The third report, published in 2011 (Key Principles for Promoting Quality in Inclusive Education – Recommendations for Practice), focused on key principles for practice that support quality in inclusive education. This fourth report focuses on policy development and implementation in line with a broader view of inclusion in education systems and educational opportunities. It aligns with the Agency’s mission to inform policy development and successful policy implementation at different system levels, most importantly the school level. Highlighting fundamental issues for education systems, the Key Principles series reflects the gradual shift in the Agency’s work over the past 25 years: a shift away from a narrow focus on learners’ special educational needs and special needs education as specific provision, towards extending and improving the quality of support for learning that is generally available to all learners. This focus reflects the Agency’s increasing emphasis on being an active agent for policy change in the field of inclusive education. A Policy Brief presenting the main messages from this report is also available: Key Principles – Supporting policy development and implementation for inclusive education: Policy Brief PLEASE NOTE: This record contains only the English version. Translated versions in all the Agency's languages, including English, are available in this record., This publication has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein., {"references":["European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2021. Key Principles – Supporting policy development and implementation for inclusive education. (V. J. Donnelly and A. Watkins, eds.). Odense, Denmark"]}

This policy brief presents key messages from the Country Policy Review and Analysis (CPRA) activities from 2014 to 2021. During this time, 24 Agency member countries took part in the work, reflecting on their policy for inclusive education. These messages can inform countries’ future policy development work around inclusive education, as well as Agency work with and for its member countries. They are based on the analysis of CPRA findings which is described in the summary report: Key messages for working with and for countries. For more information, visit the CPRA web area. PLEASE NOTE: This record contains only the English version. Translated versions in all the Agency's languages, including English, are available in this record., This publication has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein., {"references":["European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2021. Country Policy Review and Analysis: Key messages for working with and for countries – Policy Brief. Odense, Denmark"]}

The Supporting Inclusive School Leadership (SISL) project investigates how to develop and promote inclusive school-level leadership through national and local-level policy frameworks and support mechanisms. The SISL Self-Reflection Tool aims to stimulate professional dialogue and collaborative policy development within and across schools and at different policy levels. It is intended for: school leaders and leadership teams seeking guidance in adopting and developing inclusive leadership practices; policy-makers responsible for developing and implementing policies for inclusive education at national, regional and/or local levels. This self-reflection tool builds on two issues from the SISL policy framework: aspirational standards for inclusive school leadership and the supportive policy framework. It enables reflection and exchange among the different stakeholders to identify gaps that need to be addressed. The self-reflection tool is open-source, so users may adapt it to their own needs and contexts, provided they include a reference to the original source. It is available for download below as a Word file and as a PDF. PLEASE NOTE: This record contains only the English version. Translated versions in all the Agency's languages, including English, are available in this record., This publication has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein., {"references":["European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2021. Inclusive School Leadership: A Tool for Self-Reflection on Policy and Practice. (M. Turner-Cmuchal, E. Óskarsdóttir and M. Bilgeri, eds.). Odense, Denmark"]}

Rapport met CD-rom. De CD-ROM bevat naast het rapport ook de pdf-files bijlagen 2 en 3 die respectievelijk alle nationale en provinciale kaarten met beschrijvingen omvatten. De bijlagen zijn te vinden op: http://rivm.nl/bibliotheek/digitaaldepot/408651002Bijlage2.pdf en http://rivm.nl/bibliotheek/digitaaldepot/408651002Bijlage3.pdf