The circular economy (CE) is heralded as reducing material use and emissions while providing more jobs and growth. We explored this narrative in a series of expert workshops, basing ourselves on theories, methods and findings from science fields such as global environmental input-output analysis, business modelling, industrial organisation, innovation sciences and transition studies. Our findings indicate that this dominant narrative suffers from at least three inconvenient truths. First, CE can lead to loss of GDP. Each doubling of product lifetimes will halve the related industrial production, while the required design changes may cost little. Second, the same mechanism can create losses of production jobs. This may not be compensated by extra maintenance, repair or refurbishing activities. Finally, ‘Product-as-a-Service’ business models supported by platform technologies are crucial for a CE transition. But by transforming consumers from owners to users, they lose independence and do not share in any value enhancement of assets (e.g., houses). As shown by Uber and AirBNB, platforms tend to concentrate power and value with providers, dramatically affecting the distribution of wealth. The real win-win potential of circularity is that the same societal welfare may be achieved with less production and fewer working hours, resulting in more leisure time. But it is perfectly possible that powerful platform providers capture most added value and channel that to their elite owners, at the expense of the purchasing power of ordinary people working fewer hours. Similar undesirable distributional effects may occur at the global scale: the service economies in the Global North may benefit from the additional repair and refurbishment activities, while economies in the Global South that are more oriented towards primary production will see these activities shrink. It is essential that CE research comes to grips with such effects. Furthermore, governance approaches mitigating unfair distribution of power and value are hence essential for a successful circularity transition.
LINK
Comparisons of visual perception, response-selection, and response-execution performance were made between Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and a matched nondiabetic control group. 10 well-controlled male patients with Type 2 diabetes without diabetic complications (M age 58 yr.) and an age and IQ-matched non-diabetic control group consisting of 13 male healthy volunteers (M age 57 yr.) were included. Significant differences were found only between the two groups on response-selection performance, which concerns the selection and preparation of an appropriate motor action.
DOCUMENT
The purpose of this literature study is to obtain information about educational approaches to teaching 11 to 12 years old children focusing on how to distinguish between real news and fake news. With this purpose we studied 16 academic papers about learning activities to make primary school children media-literate and able to recognise fake news. What we found is that having children create their own news messages seems to be the most effective approach. News messages that they create can be text messages as well as videos, audios, pictures and animations. Based on this conclusion, students from The Hague University of Applied Sciences Teacher Training Institute (PABO) have been asked to develop a set of learning materials that can be used for instruction in primary schools. The effectiveness of those materials is currently being tested at an elementary school in Rijswijk. The results of the literature and the field study will be shared in the Dutch centre of expertise for media literacy education, Mediawijzer.net.
MULTIFILE
Nederland streeft naar een volledig circulaire economie in 2050 (Rijksoverheid, z.d.). Bedrijven zullen hun activiteiten moeten organiseren in materiële kringlopen die de gehele levenscyclus bestrijken. Van afval is geen sprake meer. Hiervoor zijn nieuwe circulaire businessmodellen nodig die zich richten op samenwerking in de keten en waardebehoud in alle levensfases van producten, van ontwerp en productie tot gebruik en hergebruik. Mkb-bedrijven willen graag bijdragen aan de gewenste transitie naar een klimaatneutrale en circulaire economie. Het realiseren van een circulair businessmodel blijkt in de praktijk vaak lastig. Mkb-bedrijven die groeien hebben moeite met het vinden van bankfinanciering van hun circulaire ambities. Een belangrijke reden betreft de door banken moeilijk in te schatten risico’s die aan circulair ondernemen kleven. De toekenningswijze van financiering door banken is meer op zekerheden (activa) gebaseerd en minder op kasstromen. Dit werkt in het nadeel van mkb-bedrijven met circulaire verdienmodellen zoals Product-as-a-Service (PaaS), omdat hierbij de kasstromen uitgesteld zijn. Ook de ecosystemen waarin circulaire mkb-bedrijven dikwijls met elkaar samenwerken maakt de financiering ingewikkeld omdat samenwerking afhankelijkheid en daarmee risico betekent. Het doel van dit onderzoek is om de toegang tot bancaire financiering van mkb-bedrijven met circulaire businessmodellen met het verdienmodel PaaS te verbeteren door hen te helpen hindernissen weg te nemen. Voor dit project wordt een consortium gevormd onder leiding van het lectoraat businessmodellen van Saxion, met Hogeschool Rotterdam, Inholland en NHL Stenden, met banken ABN-AMRO en Rabobank, met kennisinstellingen Het Groene Brein en Sustainable Finance Lab, met ontwikkelingsmaatschappijen Innovation Quarter, Oost NL en Circulair Friesland en met mkb-bedrijven. Het consortium doet ontwerpgericht onderzoek naar het verbeteren van de financieringsmogelijkheden van circulaire businessmodellen. De resultaten worden breed toegankelijk gemaakt in de vorm van een concreet stappenplan en inspirerende praktijkcases voor mkb-bedrijven om hun bancaire financieringsaanvraag voor een circulair businessmodel tot een succes te maken.
There's a growing recognition that the mainstream economic system contributes to environmental degradation and climate change. This jeopardizes human prosperity and poses existential risks for all life forms. Not waiting for global politics to solve the problems, Regenerative Placemakers show that we can organize ourselves differently. They engage with realigning human systems to work within planetary boundaries as a well-being economy. However, they face challenges, such as incorporating non-human voices and embracing the complexity of co-creation. Our transdisciplinary, exploratory research project aims to incorporate a lifecentric worldview in the collective transformation process when investigating: What tools, methods, and approaches the Stewards of Place could use to embody the ecosystems thinking and be able to integrate the needs and perspectives of nature in a process of decision-making, such that it is understandable and fitting for different types of contexts? Our research focuses on fostering a post-anthropocentric outlook, where human identity merges with broader ecosystems. Through the development of methodologies, we seek pathways to coexist harmoniously within diverse natural habitats, prioritizing ecosystem health. This perspective fundamentally shifts worldviews, placing ecosystem well-being at the forefront. Our goal is to cultivate an integrated approach to living that acknowledges and respects the interconnectedness of all life forms. Consortium Partners: Practice Partners are Regenerative Placemakers, referred to as Stewards of Place: Impact033's, IMPACT024's, and Oosterhout SDG's Local. Together with WEAllNL, they are optimizing conditions for innovative, regenerative leadership in the "Plekathon” pilot project, which will serve as a Living Lab for this participatory research. Changemaker: Stichting Wellbeing Economy Alliance Nederland (WEAllNL)- Bas Poppel leading development of a learning community of practice. Knowledge Partners: Avans’ Economy in Common Research Group: Lector Dr. Godelieve Spaas and researcher Ewelina Schraven, Miranda van Gendt (Plekmakers_), Luea Ritter (World Ethic Forum), and Nature as an Advisor, Inspiration, and Stakeholder.
