Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India by GRD Journals

GRD Journals- Global Research and Development Journal for Engineering | Volume 4 | Issue 7 | June 2019 ISSN: 2455-5703

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India Sakshi Gupta Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering Amity School of Engineering & Technology, Amity University Haryana

Abstract Construction sector in India needs circular economy for sustainable future. The industry must move its stress yonder recycling and towards reuse. The 3R’s now include more number of R’s as compared to linear economy. The barriers and the opportunities in circular economy in construction industry have been discussed in details. Also, circular economy opportunities for India in the construction sector are described in the paper to give an insight of the Indian construction industry and the circular economy. Thus, moving towards CE and other sustainability-driven commercial models necessitates a vital change running through the complete organization involving its stakeholders and will prove to be sustainable for the industry. Keywords- Circular Economy, Linear Economy, Sustainability, Indian Construction Industry, Barriers, Opportunities

I. INTRODUCTION Sustainable development necessitates unruly changes and essential innovations, and the ability to carry this with respect to the adaptation of a sustainable development is desired in large industries. Combination of sustainability and business development is required which is offered by the Circular Economy (CE) model. CE is diminutively applied in current practice. The linear means of constructing structures has directed to global challenges and global warming (Bienkowski, 2017). Urban India is now the world’s 3rd largest garbage producer. It has been reported that alone India produces each day more than 1,00,000 metric tonnes of solid waste, which is much more than many countries’ total daily (average) waste generation taken together (TIO, 2017). It has been estimated that between 2000 and 2025 the Indian waste composition will experience the fluctuations as follows (CPCB, 2000; Agarwal, 2001): – Organic Waste will rise from 40% to 60% – Metal from 1% to 4% – Plastic from 4% to 6% – Glass from 2% to 3% – Paper from 5% to 15% – Other materials such as ash, sand, grit, etc. from 47% to 12% Moving towards CE and other sustainability-driven commercial models necessitates a vital change running through the complete organization involving its stakeholders. The combination of sustainability issues and commercial expansion is vital for culture and social gatherings (Lieder and Rashid, 2016; Holton et al., 2010; Ellen McArthur Foundation, 2013). It has been reported that CE can be economically feasible (Liu and Bai, 2014), and it is a model merging sustainability and commercial development. CE is surviving with three tasks: resource insufficiency, environmental impact and rising economic benefits (Holton et al., 2010). CE is constructing on the ideologies of the spiral loop system (European Commission, 2015); the intent is to retain materials in utilization instead of disposing them which necessitates the usage of the 4 R’s i.e. repair, reuse, re-condition and recycle (Ritzen and Sandstroma, 2017).

II. CIRCULAR ECONOMY (CE) Through a few UN’s sustainable development goals; CE is fast advancing internationally (United Nations Sustainable Development, 2018) and has the likelihood of permitting a continual economic growth without disturbing the environment. The CE is a challenging idea (Skene, 2017; Korhonen et al., 2018) and an alternate to traditional linear economy. A current metadefinition of CE based on the analysis of 114 definitions of various term is: “A CE describes an economic system that is based on business models which replace the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, [and] recycling[…]materials in production/distribution and consumption processes, […], with the aim to accomplish sustainable development, which implies creating environmental quality, economic prosperity and social equity, to the benefit of current and future generations” (Kirchherr et al., 2017). A change from the linear economy to CE (Figure 1) is a more sustainable economy model by exploiting the maximum reutilization of resources and keeping the materials in flow (Advisory Board, 2017; Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013). For the same, a shift in paradigm is required. Subsequently, we require rethinking the way we use, generate, and design.

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India (GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 7 / 006)

Fig. 1: Transition from linear economy to circular economy

The following definitions have been found in the literatures studied (Kalmykova et al., 2018): 1) “A general term for reducing, reusing and recycling activities conducted in the process of production, circulation and consumption” (Govt. of People's Republic of China, 2008). 2) “Circular economy focuses on stock optimization” (Bastein et al., 2013; Stahel, 2013). 3) “An industrial economy in which material flows keeps circulating at a high rate without entering the biosphere unless they are biological nutrients” (EMF, 2013; Kalmykova et al., 2018). 4) “An alternative to a traditional linear economy in which we keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from them whilst in use, then recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of each service life” (WRAP, 2016). 5) “Circular economy is an approach that breaks with the linear economy approach where we incorporate the social and the physical resources through a (sustainable) business approach. This can be accomplished by slowing, closing, and narrowing of resource loops” (Ramboll, 2018). Thus, A CE is uplifting and reformative by design which has the goal to keep materials, components, and products at their peak usefulness and value all the time. It is, therefore, a non-stop cycle that conserves and improves natural wealth, optimises source profits, and diminishes system risks.

III. CIRCULAR ECONOMY (CE) IN INDIA A CE development in India could generate annual worth US$ 218 billion in 2030 and US$ 624 billion in 2050 as compared with the existing growth situation. By implementing CE approaches, trades and industries could attain material cost savings and rise in their profits. The crucial drivers of value creation comprises of improved product design, innovative commercial models, and reverse logistics (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013; Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2016).There are various R’s in CE apart from the 3 R’s of linear economy: reduce, reuse and recycle (Figure 2). – Circular economy would be beneficial for the Indian economy in various ways such as: – Construction companies can revolutionize by smearing design methods for modular buildings. Salvaging materials after C&D work could capture their value by keeping them moving in the cycles and decreasing the total construction costs. – A CE could lessen the negative impact of the environment. For instance, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be 23% lower in 2030 whereas 44% lower in 2050 in comparison to the current data. – A CE could bring profits for the Indian population, like inexpensive materials, products and services and diminished overcrowding and pollution. – Leveraging digital technology to allow the CE to strengthen India’s position as a technological and innovative hub. The seven dogmas of CE as given by Advisory board (2017) are Circular design, healthy materials, dismantlable designs, horizontal collaboration, material passport, framework conditions and better information. CE has its backgrounds in several concepts such as general system theory, cradle-to-cradle, laws of ecology, looped economy, performance economy, regenerative design, industrial ecology, industrial symbiosis, eco-city, biomimicry, and the blue economy (Geissdoerfer et al., 2016; Winans et al., 2017; Ghisellini et al., 2015). The diverse theories have affected CE in how it is professed at present.

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India (GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 7 / 006)

Fig. 2: All R’s- Parts of Circular Economy (CE)

IV. CE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIA IN THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR In the construction sector, the main focus is on liveable cities that are sustainable with India’s growing population (Figure 3). It has been seen through various studies that by 2050, 60% of India’s population will live in urban areas which would be 30% more than today (TOI, 2016).The urbanisation and the growth is so rapid that 70% of the buildings that would be used in 2030, yet to be built (NRDC-ASCI, 2012). Applying CE principles and methodologies for developing huge amount of construction projects could create annual profits of US$ 76 billion in 2050 in comparison to the current scenario along with social as well as environmental benefits (TOI, 2016; McKinsey Global Institute, 2010). India is investing in long-term infrastructure for improving citizens’ quality of life. For instance through the Smart Cities Mission (Government initiative), it could incorporate CE philosophies into the design of the infrastructure required for providing water, sanitation, and waste services at scale. This will help in generating active urban nutrient and material cycles. Added systemic and complete planning of cities and construction, combined with circular mobility solutions, can lead to better air quality, lesser congestion, and decreased urban sprawl. Use of digital applications for the flexible use of infrastructure and building spaces could utilize the rate of usage to get more value of the same asset. CE could also bring in more efficiency and reducing the overall building and infrastructure costs, thereby, helping to meet the dwelling requirements of the poor residing in the urban areas without conceding the safety and quality. Three key opportunities have been acknowledged for the Indian construction industry.

Fig. 3: Circular economy in India - cities and construction (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013)

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India (GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 7 / 006)

A. Materials Consumption India’s per capita material consumption has been increasing slowly because of the growing population (UNEP, 2013; IGEP, 2013).India’s material productivity which is defined as GDP per used tonne of material is comparatively small, notwithstanding enhancements over the last decade, and is anticipated to remain behind that of high income nations by 2030 (IGEP, 2013). It is predicted that if India preserves the economic development leap of the past few decades, it will require more than triple of its demand for resources by 2030 (UNEP, 2013; IGEP, 2013). According to the present growth rate, it is suggested that by 2020, the Indian construction industry will be the greatest material-consuming sector in India (GIZ, 2016).CE philosophies could alleviate against supply disruptions and unpredictable resource price fluctuations by decoupling the construction from GHG emissions, use of non-renewable energy sources, and finite consumption of resources. B. Energy and Water Efficiency The noteworthy construction task yet to occur in India offers an opportunity to design buildings for energy and water efficiency. This will help in avoiding getting trapped into exhaustive long-term use of energy and water resources. Some of the opportunities are as follows: – Passive heating and cooling, use of insulation, optimisation of natural light, and efficient and effective lighting systems offer solutions for comfort that are adaptable to local climate conditions. When these solutions are coupled with renewable sources, they could generate net zero or even energy-positive buildings. One such fine example is the Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, New Delhi, India. – Integrating the renewable energy solutions into buildings makes some innovations in the industry. For instance, roof tiles being developed by Tesla Solar roof can produce solar electricity. Another fine example is Arup SolarLeaf panels used for building cladding and as shading devices which utilizes nutrients from wastewater supporting the cultivation of micro-algae for food (Solarleaf, 2019). – The utilization of the Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) and the implementation of green rating systems like the Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA) mark some progress toward resource-efficient buildings in India. – The Torrent Centre in Ahmedabad has maximised natural ventilation with passive downdraft cooling systems. It has provided a comfortable indoor temperature without extensive use of air conditioning in a hot and dry climate, thereby, achieving energy savings of nearly 64% (Ford et al., 1998; UNEP, 2010). – Considering India’s five varied climatic zones at the design stage could optimise the use of water and energy in buildings for local conditions (Schlüter, 2015). C. Modular Construction Industrialised manufacturing, modularisation, and components’ standardisation can decrease the time, cost, and materials consumption of construction, permitting swift building of reasonable and inexpensive dwellings. Constructing modular buildings in layers permits the reconfiguration of spaces and decreases functional undesirability and maintenance costs. Digital technologies like building information modelling (BIM) can support the revolution of construction techniques. WorldHaus in India is using components which are modular and prefabricated for the manufacturing of reasonable dwellings solutions. In Chennai (2011), they built their 1st prototype house which utilizes 20% less cement, sand and 80% less construction steel than the conventional masonry construction (www.worldhaus.com). Utilization of BIM and RFID (radio frequency identification) could help in predicting the performance and efficiency of the materials, carry design of disassembly and facilitate preventive maintenance. These technologies sustain the utilization of buildings as materials banks, thereby identifying materials for reuse after buildings’ useful life and capturing value by keeping the materials in very tight loops. Cement industry in India is alone responsible for about 7% of the nation’s GHG emissions (GIZ, 2016). The increase in demand for the buildings leads to replacement of the conventional materials such as cement, bricks, aggregates, etc with those of the materials locally available or exhibiting similar properties or are recycled or renewed for the use so as to reduce the GHG emissions, energy utilization and consumption of the materials. For example, bamboo is fast-growing being grown in diverse conditions and is readily available almost everywhere in India (FSI, 2011) which can be utilized as a replacement of the steel reinforcement in various conditions. Recycling of construction waste reduces the consumption of conventional materials (Centre for Science and Environment India, 2014).

V. BARRIERS OF MOVING TOWARDS CE There are many barriers which can be summarized: 1) Financial - computing financial profits of CE, financial profitability. 2) Structural - exchange of information absent, responsibility distribution not clear. 3) Operational-infrastructure/ supply chain management, lacking proper waste infrastructure, wrong business models. 4) Attitudinal - awareness of sustainability, risk aversion. 5) Technological- product design, integration into production processes, deficient technologies to implement CE, large-scale demonstration projects are too few, deficit data (Example:- on impacts).

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India (GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 7 / 006)

6) Cultural - deficient awareness and/or willingness to involve with CE, deficient awareness of the consumer and their interest, doubtful company culture, partial willingness to collaborate in the value chain. 7) Regulatory - deficient policies in support of a CE transition, lacking global consensus, hindering laws and regulations, government regulations creating waste. 8) Market - deficient economic viability of circular business models, low virgin material prices, limited funding for CE models, high upfront investment costs, standardization absent, expectations of the consumers’ for convenience. 9) Environmental- willingness to adopt ‘green’ measures, attitude towards green policies (Bradford and Fraser, 2007; Preston, 2012; IMSA, 2013; Rizos et al., 2015; Shahbazi et al., 2016; Ritzen and Sandstroma, 2017; Pheifer, 2017; Mont et al., 2017). A. Overcoming the Barriers for Moving towards CE Partnership is the key to overcoming the barriers for CE. The barriers listed above avert businesses, governments and customers from resolving waste problem and creating better usage of natural resources. Each of the barriers must be overcome. One cannot depend on only on single unit and must follow a process. Businesses, stakeholders, governments and civil society each offer exclusive economic, rational and operative assets that can be tactically arranged to resolve big problems they couldn't be solved alone. We require government policies providing vital protections while promoting innovation and risk taking by the private sector to advance CE solutions (Stanislaus, 2018).

VI. CONCLUSION Integration is required between a number of diverse perspectives and fields in establishments supporting a more explorative and innovative method. Familiarity with CE has to be keep on growing and a more explorative mode of working would beneficial. This will thus, help to overcome the various barriers to the implementation of CE in Indian construction industry and provide more opportunities for a sustainable development.

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26]

Advisory Board (2017). Advisory Board for circular economy. [online] Denmark: Available At: http://mfvm.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/FVM/Miljoe/Cirkulaer_oekonomi/Advisory_Board_for_cirkulaer_oekonomi_Rapport.pdf Agarwal, R., (2001). Urban Waste: Status, trends and interventions. Srishti, http://indiatogether.org/environment/articles/wastefact.htm. Bastein, T., Roelofs, E., Rietveld, E.andHoogendoorn, A. (2013). Opportunities for a Circular Economy in the Netherlands. https://www.government.nl/documents/reports/2013/10/04/opportunities-for-a-circular-economy-in-the-netherlands Bienkowski, B. (2017). We’re building the equivalent of Paris every week. That’s a problem. [online] The Daily Climate. Available at: http://www.dailyclimate.org/building-industry-climatechange-carbon-footprint-2516418302.html. Bradford, J. and Fraser, E. D.G., (2007). Local Authorities, Climate Change and Small and Medium Enterprises: Identifying Effective Policy Instruments to Reduce Energy Use and Carbon Emissions, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15: 156- 172. Centre for Science and Environment India, (2014). Building sense, 209. CPCB (2000). Status of Municipal Solid Waste: Generation Collection Treatment and Disposal in Class I cities, CPCB April 2000. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015). Potential for Denmark as a Circular Economy - a case study from: Delivering the circular economy - a toolkit for policy makers. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2016). Circular economy in India: rethinking growth for long-term prosperity: 1-86. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2018). [online] Available at: https:// www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/interactive-diagram. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, (2013). Towards the circular economy: Economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 1 (Isle of Wight). EMF (2013). Towards the Circular Economy–Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. European Commission (2015). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/ EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX :52015DC0614. Ford, B., Patel, N., Zaveri, P. and Hewitt, M. (1998). Cooling without air conditioning: The Torrent Research Centre, Ahmedabad, India, Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency, Policy and the Environment, 15: 177-182. FSI (2011). Forest Survey India, India State of Forest Report: 57-66. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. and Hultink, E. (2016). The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143:757-768. Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C. and Ulgiati, S. (2015). A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 114: 11-32. GIZ (2016). Material Consumption Patterns in India, Executive Summary. Government of People's Republic of China (2008). Circular Economy Promotion Law of the People's Republic of China. Adopted at the fourth session of the Standing Committee of the 11th National People's Congress. Holton, I., Glass, J. and Price, A.D.F., (2010). Managing for sustainability: findings from four company case studies in the UK precast concrete industry, Journal of Cleaner Production, 18: 152–160. IGEP (2013). India’s future needs for resources. IMSA (2013). Unleashing the Power of the Circular Economy. Available at: http:// mvonederland.nl/system/files/media/unleashing_the_power_of_the_circular_economycircle_economy.pdf. Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, M. and Rosado, L., (2018). Circular economy – From review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 135: 190–201. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. and Hekkert, M., (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 127: 221– 232. Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., Seppälä, J., (2018). Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecol. Econ. 143: 37–46. Lieder, M. and Rashid, A., (2016). Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production: 36–51.

Barriers and Opportunities in Circular Economy in the Construction Industry in India (GRDJE/ Volume 4 / Issue 7 / 006) [27] Liu, Y. and Bai, Y., (2014). An exploration of firms’ awareness and behaviour of developing circular economy. An empirical research in China. In Resources, Conservation and Recycling: 145– 152. [28] McKinsey Global Institute (2010). India’s Urban Awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining economic growth. [29] Mont, O.; Plepys, A.; Whalen, K. and Nußholz, J.L.K. (2017). Business model innovation for a circular economy drivers and barriers for the Swedish industry – the voice of REES companies. [30] NRDC-ASCI (2012). Constructing Change, p. 1. [31] Pheifer, A.G., (2017). Barriers and Enablers to Circular Business Models. [32] Preston, F., (2012). A global redesign? Shaping the circular economy. Available at: http:// www.ecoconnect.org.uk/download/ShapingtheCircularEconomy.pdf. [33] Rambøll (2018). Life with natural resources - Solution for sustainable growth and resource protection. [online] Denmark: Rambøll. [34] Ritzéna, S., and Sandströma, G.O., (2017) Barriers to the Circular Economy – integration of perspectives and domains,Procedia, 64: 7 – 12. [35] Rizos, V., Behrens, A., Kafyeke, T., Garbers, M.H. and Ioannou, A., (2015). The circular economy: barriers and opportunities for SMEs. No. 412. [36] Schlüter, A. (2015). 3-for-2: Less energy, more space, https://www.ethz.ch/en/newsand-events/eth-news/news/2015/03/3- for-2-less-energy-morespace.html. [37] Shahbazi, S., Wiktorsson, M., Kurdve, M., Jonsson, C., and Bjelkemyr, M., (2016). Material efficiency in manufacturing: Swedish evidence on potential, barriers and strategies. J. Clean. Prod. 127: 438–450. [38] Skene, K.R., (2017). Circles, spirals, pyramids and cubes: why the circular economy cannot work. Sustain. Sci: 1–14. [39] Solarleaf (2019). www.arup.com/projects/ solarleaf. [40] Stahel, W.R. (2013). Policy for material efficiency—sustainable taxation as a departure from the throwaway society. Philosophical transactions of the royal society a: mathematical. Phys. Eng. Sci. 371. [41] Stanislaus, M. (2018). Barriers to a Circular Economy: 5 Reasons the World Wastes So Much Stuff (and Why It's Not Just the Consumer's Fault). [42] TOI (2016). Times of India, 60% of Indians will live in Urban areas by 2050: Government, 27 July 2016. [43] TOI(2017).http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ articleshow/57917862.cms? utm_source=content ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst [44] UNEP (2010). The state of play of sustainable buildings in India, p. 10. [45] UNEP (2013). Recent trends in material flows and resource productivity in Asia and the Pacific. [46] Winans, K., Kendall, A. and Deng, H., (2017). The history and current applications of the circular economy concept. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68: 825-833. [47] WRAP (2016). WRAP and the circular economy. from http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/wrap-and-circular-economy. [48] www.worldhaus.com