CIRCULAR ECONOMY OPPORTUNITIES IN THE FURNITURE SECTOR - The European ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
CIRCULAR ECONOMY OPPORTUNITIES IN THE FURNITURE SECTOR
This report was produced for the European Environment Bureau (EEB) by Eunomia Research & Consulting Ltd
Eunomia Research & Consulting Ltd is an Authored by: Alex Forrest, Mark Hilton, Ann Ballinger and
independent consultancy, dedicated to helping Daniel Whittaker.
our clients to achieve better environmental
and commercial outcomes. With offices in the
UK, Brussels, Auckland and New York, Eunomia
works throughout Europe and beyond.
EUROPE’S LARGEST NETWORK Editor responsible: Stephane Arditi
OF ENVIRONMENTAL CITIZENS European Environmental Bureau (EEB)
ORGANISATIONS
Boulevard de Waterloo 34 | B-1000 Brussels | Belgium
Tel.: +32 (0)2 289 1090 |E-mail: eeb@eeb.org
Website:
www.eeb.org
Publishing date :
September 2017
An International non-profit Association
Association Internationale sans but lucratif
The EEB is a member of Accountable Now
The EEB’s EC transparency register number as on
business cards
The EEB gratefully acknowledges the financial support
received from MAVA: Foundation (Fondation pour la
Nature), and the LIFE Programme of the European
Union.
This communication reflects the authors’ views and does not commit the donors.
Executive Summary
Around a quarter of the world’s furniture is
manufactured within the European Union –
representing a €84 billion market that equates
to an EU28 consumption of ~10.5 million
tonnes of furniture per annum while employing
approximately 1 million European workers and
consisting of, predominantly, SMEs1.
The European furniture industry counter these trends, with repair,
faces a variety of economic and refurbishment and remanufacture
regulatory challenges – including allowing value recovery, economic
manufacturing growth in emerging growth and job creation within
markets, improved logistics the European furniture industry,
(reducing export costs from India, while saving on resources and
China etc.), declined tariffs on the environment. Yet realising
foreign trade, increased demand these economic, environmental
for low-cost items within the EU, and social benefits will require the
increased raw material, labour and adoption of appropriate demand
energy costs within the EU2 and and supply chain levers, to support
consumer demand for sustainable a significant step change across
products. the industry.
10 million tonnes of furniture Whilst recycling rates in the EU
are discarded by businesses and have improved through the
consumers in EU Member States introduction of policy mechanisms
each year, the majority of which such as the Landfill Directive and
is destined for either landfill or its diversion objectives, there is
incineration. This report was minimal activity in higher-value
commissioned by the European circular resource flows, with
Environmental Bureau (EEB) to remanufacturing accounting
contribute towards the debate for less than 2% of the EU
around the benefits of expanded manufacturing turnover3. In terms
policy options to support the of furniture in particular, whilst
transition towards circularity reuse of furniture is common,
across the European furniture this tends to be on a small scale
sector. and with local social goals in
mind rather than larger scale
Circular economy interventions environmental and economic
have the potential to help ones.
-3-
Barriers to a circular furniture sector are wide furniture, is not significant enough to drive
ranging and have been identified through the more sustainable purchasing behaviour.
course of this research, informed through This is coupled with poor awareness of
stakeholder consultation and literature review, the availability and benefits of sustainable
and include: furniture options, for both domestic and
commercial purposes.
• Lower quality materials and poor
design – the move away from solid wood • Poor demand for recycled materials -
and metal furniture to cheaper materials, end markets for recycled materials, post
which restricts the potential for a successful deconstruction, are underdeveloped, and in
second life. Weak product design and some cases, already saturated, with these
specification drivers – in relation to recycled associated market failures restricting further
content, reuse of components, product investment in recovery.
durability, and design for disassembly/
• Weak over-arching policy drivers
reassembly, repair, reuse, remanufacture
– typically furniture is not managed in
and recycling, the drivers for improvement
accordance with the waste hierarchy, with
are weak or absent.
reuse failing to be prioritised over recycling,
• REACH Regulation (on Registration, incineration and landfill. Underinvestment
Evaluation, Authorisation and in reuse, repair and remanufacturing
Restriction of Chemicals) – legacy infrastructure limits the potential for
hazardous substances pose challenges and furniture being managed in accordance with
additional costs for recyclers, together with the principles of the waste hierarchy or the
a lack of information on chemicals contained circular economy.
in products and on ways how to deal with
them appropriately. This report presents a range of scenarios
including policy measures which offer potential
• Poor consumer information and
options addressing barriers and advancing
availability of spares – consumers are
circularity across the European furniture sector.
rarely given guidance on how to maintain
It describes potential packages - some which
and repair furniture, in order to prolong
have the potential to work more quickly than
and extend the product lifespan. A lack of
others and with varying degrees of certainty.
availability of spare parts encourages the
In consideration of the suggested policy and
purchase of new furniture over circular
intervention measures referenced here, it is
consumer patterns.
acknowledged that the European furniture
• Limited collection and reverse logistics sector is not homogeneous, with differing
infrastructure – currently there are consumer patterns and waste infrastructure
weak drivers and underinvestment in the types and capacities demonstrated across
collection and logistics for furniture take- Member States.
back. Producer responsibility mechanisms
are not widely used in the furniture sector. It is further acknowledged that adoption and
implementation of some of the policy measures
• High cost of repair and refurbishment
presented poses greater challenges for
– in many parts of the EU, transport and
those Member States where waste recovery,
labour costs are high, making any significant
recycling and waste treatment technology is
repair and refurbishment costly, particularly
underdeveloped. In recognition of these facts,
where re-upholstery is required. In
it is our view that this should not limit the level
general, economies of scale and economic
of ambition, in the setting of policy instruments
incentives are needed to make repair and
which offers the potential to deliver significant
refurbishment viable.
economic, environment and social contributions
• Weak demand for second-hand for the EU furniture sector and wider economy.
furniture - the price differential between
new furniture against the cost of second-life A move towards circular economy models
-4-
within the European furniture sector would Green Public Procurement (GPP), eco-design
benefit from a variety of complimentary policy requirements or labelling schemes. Criteria
instruments to deal with market failures would cover a variety of CE criteria across
on the supply side (i.e. ensuring return of durability, the use of recycled material content
items and creating durable, refurbished and and reused components (i.e. remanufacture),
remanufactured items) and the demand side hazardous substance content, and design to
(creating demand for these products). facilitate repair, remanufacture and recycling.
We would note that as a first key option These core criteria could be used to define
(compatible with several policy packages a ‘Green Furniture Mark’ (GFM) - a new A to
described in this report), it would be desirable G rating instrument similar to the EU energy
to develop an agreed common set of core label, with the intention of providing consumers
criteria that could work across different and procurement professionals with clearer
instruments such as Extended Producer information on the environmental and
Responsibility (EPR), circularity features of furniture products. This
rating could be determined by a points style
system (similar to the BREEAM approach4 for
buildings) using a self-assessment approach but
with third party oversight.
Opportunities for a Circular European Furniture Sector
Additional
reused/recycled Eco-Design
Extra jobs CO2 eq.
avoided -Low Carbon Materials
-Landfill Restriction created -Durability
-Take Back
3.3—5.7mt -Repair and Reuse
-Preparation for 3.3-5.7mt -Dissassembly
reuse and -Recyclability
recyling 160,000 Potential increase
in EU GVA
MA
€4.9b
NUFA URE
RETURN
CT
els
New
€
od
Bu
sin e s s M
Circular GPP
criteria
€
PU
SE
SME
RC
H ASE & IN-U
funding for
innovation
Tax incentives Mandatory
for repair and warranty
remanufacture -5- labelling
Package 1 - Fully Mandatory Demand Side
Supply Side • Voluntary GPP as now, but with reference to
• Mandatory Extended Producer Responsibi- a minimum standard under GFM (e.g. B rated).
lity (EPR) for take back, with preparing for reuse
and recycling targets, and with a modulated fee
• Promotion of the GFM label for which the
highest rating class A corresponds to what is
(that takes account of the different treatment
also required by the more comprehensive EU
costs and environmental impacts of different
Ecolabel scheme.
products and materials) or an Individual Produ-
cer Responsibility (IPR) approach, to encourage Package 4 - Incentives Only
better design for repair and recycling5.
Supply Side
• Mandatory eco-design measures on dura- • EU-wide SME support initiative for CE inno-
bility, repair and recyclability or a mandatory vation in the sector, combined with tax incen-
warranty period of five years to drive durability tives, grants and/or low interest loans for CE
and reparability. This could be associated with furniture companies.
a GFM label approach to reinforce and extend
good practice. • Deposit-refund incentive for consumers to
Demand Side return furniture for reuse and recycling, i.e. a re-
fundable levy on new furniture, or a modulated
Mandatory Green Public Procurement (GPP) to ‘bulky waste’ collection charge – free where the
drive demand for reuse and remanufactured item is reusable.
items (other aspects taken care of by mandato- Demand Side
ry eco-design).
• Mandatory labelling of warranty period; to
clearly display the ‘free’ manufacturers/retailer
Package 2 - Part Mandatory
warranty in a large format next to the product.
Supply Side
• Tax incentives for refurbished/remanufac-
• Mandatory EPR for take back, with prepa- tured items; e.g. lower rates of VAT.
ring for reuse and recycling targets, and with a
modulated fee based upon the ‘Green Furniture Package 5 - Information Only
Mark’ (GFM) criteria, or an IPR approach, to en- Supply Side
courage better design for repair and recycling6.
• Mandatory EU harmonised information sys-
• EU-wide GFM approach, with an A to G rating tem from the OEMs to drive repair and remanu-
for furniture, with mandatory labelling but no facture.
mandatory eco-design standard.
• Voluntary use of the GFM, but driven by GPP.
Demand Side Demand Side
Mandatory GPP for the public sector, with • Mandatory labelling of warranty period; to
common criteria to the GFM or a set GFM level clearly display the ‘free’ manufacturers/retailer
required (e.g. B rating). warranty in a large format next to the product.
• Voluntary GPP as now, but with reference to
Package 3 - Full Voluntary a minimum standard under GFM (e.g. B rated).
Supply Side • Promotion of the GFM label for which the
highest rating class A corresponds to what is
• EU-wide voluntary agreement (Self-Regula-
also required by the more comprehensive EU
tory Initiative) on take back, preparing for reuse
Ecolabel scheme.
and recycling as an alternative to mandatory
EPR. Package 6 - Waste Management Only
• Voluntary use of the GFM (industry led vo- • EU wide landfill ban on furniture disposal.
luntary initiative), but driven by GPP.
• Clearer regulation/guidance from the EU
around end of waste and use of recycled mate-
rials.
-6-
The deployment of such a GFM scheme Analysis of the economic impacts of increasing
could be either voluntary, with take up by circularity in the furniture sector is similarly
manufacturers but in part driven by GPP (e.g. sparse. Eunomia has previously considered
a minimum requirement of an A or B rating this in the UK context in a report published for
for example) or mandatory, requiring all SUEZ in 2017.9 The analysis undertaken within
furniture to be assessed and labelled under the report considered increases that may
the GFM scheme. This could be an alternative arise in the Gross Value Added (GVA) resulting
to mandatory eco-design requirements or as from increases in the recycling and reuse of
a compliment; the eco-design requirements furniture. The GVA is - in economics - a measure
setting the minimum legal standard (i.e. a G of the value of goods and services produced in
rating) and the GFM rating showing levels of a given area, industry or sector of an economy.
performance above that legal minimum (up to A
which could align with Eco-label requirements). The analysis estimated that the potential
increase in GVA from improved circularity in
Estimates of the potential impact of each of
the furniture sector was in the order of £500
the above policy packages have been modelled
million for the UK under the most ambitious
through the application of available data and
scenario, by 2030. Based on extrapolation of
use of key assumptions referenced within this
EU28 Member State population against UK
report, with a summary of the key headlines
population alone, this provides an estimate in
presented in Table A, with respect to impact
on additional tonnage reuse and recycling, net the order of £3.8 billion10 in increased GVA from
carbon reduction and job creation. improved circularity under the most ambitious
scenario.
With respect to estimated tonnage and climate
change impacts, results for each package are We hope that this report and its findings
presented on an annual basis net of impacts contribute towards closing the knowledge gap
occurring in the baseline. The table shows that and that it will result in deployment of circular
climate change benefits are the most significant activities across the European furniture sector.
for Policy Package 1 – the Full Mandatory
package.
Table A: Policy Packages - Estimated Potential Impacts
Additional Additional Estimated Additional job
tonnes reused tonnes net carbon creation
recycled impacts for
Policy Package
scenario,
tonnes CO2
eq.
1 Full Mandatory 2,097,962 3,670,289 -5,713,542 157,347
2 Part Mandatory 1,546,538 3,149,566 -4,933,647 115,990
3a Full Voluntary - self-regulatory7 1,069,288 2,392,433 -2,896,593 80,197
3b Full Voluntary - industry-led8 717,278 1,470,269 -2,172,445 53,796
4 Incentives only 440,452 1,053,690 -1,810,371 33,034
5 Information only 227,187 687,853 -1,448,296 17,039
6 Waste management only 168,225 3,185,947 -3,343,633 12,617
-7-
Contents
Introduction.............................................................................. 9
Status of the EU Furniture Sector........................................... 10
Barriers and Potential Policy Approaches............................. 14
Challenges towards More Circularity 15
Potential Policy Instruments and Good Practice 16
Pros and Cons of Potential Policy Instruments 26
Policy Packages and Impact Analysis..................................... 34
Combining Policy Instruments into Packages35
Policy Package Impact Analysis36
Summary and Conclusions..................................................... 41
Appendicies.............................................................................. 45
-8-
Introduction
This report was commissioned by the European
Environmental Bureau (EEB) to contribute
towards the debate in Europe around the
Methodology
challenges and opportunities for transitioning The approach taken in the
towards a circular furniture sector. The production of this report is based on:
intended audience for the study findings
includes policy makers and key actors across • Analysis of established datasets - including
the furniture value chain. The aims of the Eurostat and PRODCOM, to baseline the
project include: current performance of the European
furniture sector - including production,
• Exploration of policy options considered as consumption and waste generation.
needed to support the transition towards
circularity across the European furniture • In-depth literature review – including
sector; and analysis of market research data
and case studies of good practice
• Assessment of the potential impact of highlighting examples of policy instrument
policy instruments explored through this implementation and circular economy
study - in terms of increased stimulus business model intervention in the
across the furniture value chain. This furniture industry; and
includes a presentation of estimated
economic, environmental and social • Stakeholder interviews – the project
outcomes associated with different has benefitted from contributions
scenarios for moving the sector towards a from European furniture trade body
circular economy. representatives, furniture designers,
retailers, and manufacturers, NGOs and
This study has been led by Eunomia Research end of first life operators (repair, reuse,
& Consulting Ltd, with contributions from remanufacture). Interviews have served to
Thomas Matthews. Eunomia is a UK based identify barriers and constraints inhibiting
consultancy with expertise in policy making at circular economy across the sector, and to
an EU/international level, circular economy, and test a number of potential policy measures.
resource efficiency. Key recommendations and
policy shortlisting has been informed through This study has made use of the best available
stakeholder interviews and discussions with the data within the confines of the research.
EEB. The report has sought to make reasonable
assessments of the potential impacts of
increased application of circularity across the
furniture sector, in terms of waste avoidance,
carbon reduction and job creation across the
value chain. A lack of available and robust
data has meant that we have needed to make
conservative estimates, based on the literature
review and assumptions linked to available
reference points. The quantitative analysis
therefore needs to be treated with caution
as it is only intended to indicate the broad
potential scale of opportunity, rather
than precise forecasts.
-9-
STATUS OF THE EU FURNITURE SECTOR
Status of the EU
Furniture Sector
consumption (by value and
weight) at a European level and
This section provides an overview of the for different furniture types13. Due
European furniture sector, with respect to to some data suppression at this level of
production, consumption, waste generation granularity, the study looked in detail at €72
and treatment, together with discussion around billion of furniture production per annum.
some of the key challenges and opportunities
impacting on the sector. Of this, Italy (€17.5 billion), Germany (€14.5
billion), UK (€8.8 billion) and Poland (€7.1 billion)
European Furniture are the most significant furniture producers by
value. Similarly the most significant exporters
Production and were Germany (€9.5 billion), Italy (€9.2 billion)
and Poland (€8.7 billion), whilst the largest
Consumption importers were Germany (€11.8 billion), UK
(€6.6 billion) and France (€6.0 billion).
EU Member States manufacturing 28% of
furniture sold worldwide11 – representing a
European Member States are major consumers
€84 billion market, employing approximately
of furniture15, estimated at €68 billion per year,
1 million European workers and consisting of,
with the EU28 being a net exporter. The largest
predominantly, SMEs. Various data sources12
consumers by value being Germany (€16.8
have been used to estimate production and
billion), UK (€14.2 billion), Italy (€10.2 billion),
Figure 1: Furniture Production, Import and Export Values by Member State 14
30
Imports
25 Sales
Exports
20
Consumption
Billion Euros
15
10
5
Source: Eurostat
0
-5
Status of the EU Furniture Sector
-10
- 11 -Figure 2: EU28 Furniture Consumption by Category
Million Tonnes 3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
Source: Eurostat
1.0
0.5
0.0
Kitchen Mattresses Metal Non Upholstered Other Upholstered Wooden
Furniture furniture seats furniture seats/ sofa beds/ furniture
futons
France (€9.0 billion) and Spain (€4.4 billion). between 2% and 5% of MSW in the EU28.
This equates to a EU28 consumption of ~10.5 Assuming waste generation reflects a similar
million tonnes of furniture per annum. Figure 2 pattern to consumption, waste arising from
summarises that in tonnage terms, a significant commercial sources has been assumed to
proportion of consumption includes wooden contribute 18%21 of total furniture waste
furniture, kitchen units and mattresses. generation across the sector. Assuming an
average composition of 3.75% furniture in MSW,
DG Enterprise and Industry16 estimated that
the total annual EU28 furniture waste22 equates
the domestic sector accounts for 82% of
to 10.78 million tonnes23, reflecting a yearly
furniture consumption, with the remaining
substitution of new versus discarded furniture.
18% associated with B2B (business to
business) consumption. Based on a total EU28 There is limited information on end of life
consumption of €68 billion, and consumption treatment of furniture. Evidence suggests that
of ~10.5 million tonnes of furniture per annum on reaching its end of life, most furniture is
this would be equivalent to: destined for landfill. According to European
Federation of Furniture Manufacturers (UEA)
• €55.8 billion and 8.6 million tonnes of statistics, 80% to 90% of the EU furniture waste
domestic furniture consumption p.a. and in MSW is incinerated or sent to landfill, with
~10% recycled24.
• €12.2 billion and 1.9 million tonnes of
business furniture consumption p.a. Reuse activity in the sector is also low.
Where reuse does occur, it is mostly through
European Furniture Waste commercial second-hand shops, social
enterprise companies or charities. Some
Generation and Treatment
furniture items are also exchanged via free and
Furniture waste generation has been analysed paid exchange platforms, such as eBay and
using a variety of sources17. According Freecycle, though the number of items traded
to European Federation of Furniture in this way is difficult to quantify. In the UK,
Manufacturers (UEA) statistics18, furniture data from the Furniture Reuse Network (FRN)
waste in the EU accounts for more than 4% of indicates that its members delivered 120,000
the total municipal solid waste (MSW) stream. tonnes of reuse24, representing approximately
Comparably, other data sources at Member 6% of total furniture arising as waste26. With
State level estimate furniture waste from respect to remanufacturing, the size of the
European sector is estimated to be €300 million
Status of the EU Furniture Sector
domestic sources accounting for between 2%19
and 5%20 of MSW. Based on these datasets it is turnover, employing 3,400 European workers
estimated that household furniture represents (less than 0.1% of the total furniture industry)27.
- 12 -Figure 3: Furniture Waste by EU Member State
2.5
2
Million Tonnes
1.5
1
Source: Eurostat
0.5
0
field, with competitors from low-cost countries
Challenges and having certain key advantages, for example
Opportunities in regard to labour laws and environmental
standards29.
The European furniture industry faces a variety
Circular economy interventions have the
of economic, regulatory and environmental
potential to help counter these trends, with
challenges – including manufacturing growth in
repair, refurbishment and remanufacture
emerging markets, improved logistics (reducing
allowing value recovery, economic growth and
export costs from India, China etc.), declined
job creation within the European furniture
tariffs on foreign trade, increased demand for
industry. Whilst recycling rates in the EU have
low-cost items within the EU, and increased raw
improved through the introduction of policy
material, labour and energy costs within the
mechanisms such as the Landfill Directive,
EU28.
there is minimal activity in higher-value
While the EU furniture industry has so far circular resource flows, with remanufacturing
managed to remain reasonably competitive accounting for less than 2% of the EU
worldwide, it has increasingly faced problems manufacturing turnover30. In terms of furniture
in signalling the quality and sustainability of its in particular, whilst reuse of furniture is
products in its own domestic market. Whilst EU common, this tends to be on a small scale and
furniture products still represent a considerable with local social goals in mind rather than larger
share of the high-end furniture market scale environmental and economic ones.
worldwide, growing pressure on the lower-
Realising these economic, environmental
Status of the EU Furniture Sector
end segments of the market from cheaper
and social benefits will therefore require the
products from other areas of the world has the
adoption of appropriate demand and supply
potential to erode market share significantly. In
chain levers, to support a significant step
some regards there is no longer a level-playing
change across the industry.
- 13 -BARRIERS AND POTENTIAL POLICY APPROACHES
Barriers and How to
Overcome Them
them being removed
Challenges Towards by consumers, making
More Circularity the subsequent reuse difficult,
if not impossible32. In the public
sector where there is great potential to
This section provides some examples of the
procure and lease better products, Green
specific barriers that hinder the transition
Public Procurement (GPP) criteria is not
towards a more circular economy in the
furniture sector. Discussion here presents mandatory.
key findings of the analysis, informed through • REACH Regulation (on Registration,
stakeholder consultation and literature review. Evaluation, Authorisation and
The key barriers to a circular furniture sector Restriction of Chemicals) – obligations
have been identified as: to deal with legacy hazardous substances
• Lower quality materials and poor design introduces challenges and additional costs
– the move away from solid wood and metal for recyclers, with producers often failing to
furniture to cheaper plastic, chipboard disclose hazardous substances contained in
and medium-density fibreboard (MDF), materials or products. Information on how
particularly in flat-pack furniture, restricts to remove hazardous parts/components
the potential for a successful second life safely is often not disclosed.
since products are often insufficiently robust • Poor consumer information and
to be moved easily. In addition, products availability of spares – assembly
are often not designed for disassembly and information for flat pack furniture can
reassembly, or reconfiguration. be challenging for some consumers, and
• Weak product design and specification they are rarely given guidance on how to
drivers – in relation to recycled content, maintain and repair furniture, in order to
reuse of components, product durability, prolong and extend the product lifespan.
and design for disassembly/reassembly, The importance of not cutting off the fire
repair, reuse, remanufacture and recycling, label is generally not mentioned. Availability
the drivers for improvement are weak of spares is also important, e.g. to replace
or absent. One of the most significant a broken hinge or damaged cupboard door
challenges to product life extension for for example, however a lack of availability
original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of spare parts encourages the purchase of
and retailers includes the potential for new furniture over circular consumption
reduced sales of new products31. Durability, patterns.
and facilitating repair and life extension, • Limited collection and reverse logistics
are not necessarily in the best commercial infrastructure – currently there are
interests of the OEMs or retailers, unless weak drivers and underinvestment in the
they operate in a market niche that collection and logistics for furniture take-
Barriers and Policy Approaches
trades on high quality/longevity or lease, back, with increased investment required
for example. In addition, short product to cover the cost of transport, labour
warranties do not incentivise manufacturers and wider infrastructure associated with
to design for longevity. Even fire proofing the collection and storage of furniture.
labels can be attached in ways that result in Producer responsibility mechanisms are not
- 15 -widely used in the furniture sector. Certain These barriers are discussed in more detail
waste streams, including mattresses, pose in the subsequent sections, presenting key
particular issues for municipalities, with no challenges and opportunities for addressing
incentives to collect these items separately, key areas of market failure across the
and high reprocessing costs: neither landfill furniture value chain, through lessons already
operators, nor providers of treatment learned, and the successful adoption of policy
facilities are especially keen to receive whole instruments elsewhere.
mattresses.
• High cost of repair and refurbishment Potential Policy
– in many part of the EU, transport and
labour costs are high, making any significant Instruments and Good
repair and refurbishment costly, particularly
where re-upholstery is required. Often,
Practice
small social enterprises are given just In light of the barriers presented above,
one or two matching items and it is not potential instruments which offer opportunities
economically viable to constantly make for dealing with market failures on the supply
upholstery patterns unless the item itself is side and the demand side are presented below,
of particularly high value. Volunteer labour with case studies used to illustrate the case,
helps improve the economics, but in general, where possible. Later on in the report some
economies of scale are needed to make of the advantages and disadvantages of these
repair and refurbishment viable. approaches are identified.
• Weak demand for second-hand
furniture - the price differential between Overall Waste Strategy Targets
new furniture against the cost of second-life
furniture, is not significant enough to drive Proposals contained within the EC CE
more sustainable purchasing behaviour. Package include a more ambitious 65% target
This is coupled with poor awareness of for recycling and preparation for reuse of
the availability and benefits of sustainable household and similar waste by 2030, however
furniture options, for both domestic and this reflects a combined target, rather than
commercial purposes, a consumer desire imposing a separate target for (preparation
for new products, and, to a degree, a stigma for) reuse. Where regulation has failed to
attached to second-life furniture - which is adopt separate reuse, or preparation for
often associated with disadvantaged groups reuse targets, Member State tends to focus on
in society. increasing the amount of recycling required
to reach the combined target, rather than
• Poor demand for recycled materials -
focussing on how to improve (preparation for)
end markets for recycled materials, post
reuse rates.
deconstruction, are underdeveloped, and in
some cases, already saturated, with these Proposals contained within the EC CE
associated market failures restricting further Package include a more ambitious 65% target
investment in recovery. for recycling and preparation for reuse of
• Weak over-arching policy drivers household and similar waste by 2030, however
this reflects a combined target, rather than
– typically furniture is not managed in
imposing a separate target for preparation for
accordance with the waste hierarchy, with
reuse. Where regulation has failed to adopt
reuse failing to be prioritised over recycling,
separate preparation for reuse targets, Member
incineration and landfill. Underinvestment
States tend to focus on increasing the amount
in reuse, repair and remanufacturing
of recycling required to reach the combined
Barriers and Policy Approaches
infrastructure limits the potential for
target, rather than focussing on how to improve
furniture being managed in accordance with
preparation for reuse rates.
the principles of the waste hierarchy or the
circular economy.
- 16 -Preparation for reuse targets already exist in hazardous chemicals in the production process.
certain countries at a national/regional level,
in Spain (WEEE), Flanders (household), and Proposed amendments to the Waste
France (furniture). The adoption of separate Framework Directive set out include general
preparation for reuse targets in these countries requirements for EPR schemes – in particular,
has signalled intent to increase the volume financial contributions paid by producers to EPR
of products made available for reuse to the schemes to be modulated based on the costs
necessary to treat their products at end-of-life34.
social sector. A key requirement under the
French EPR law includes fostering preparation
Notable EPR schemes exist in France, Flanders
for reuse, with a target for increasing the total
and Sweden, with France being the only
volume of reused goods being placed back Member State to have implemented EPR
on the market by 50% by 2017. This approach to drive the collection, recycling and reuse
sees the efforts of the operator of the B2C EPR of furniture arising from the domestic and
scheme, Eco-Mobilier, working in partnership commercial waste stream. Flanders is currently
with a range of social economy actors, to exploring the implementation of EPR for
increase the transfer of used and discarded mattresses arising from the domestic stream,
furniture deemed to be in satisfactory working with a view to implementation in 2018.
order and sanitary condition to be prepared for
reuse. The French EPR model has also introduced
economic instruments used to drive eco-design
Case Study – Preparation for and other circular economy aspects in the
furniture manufacturing process.
Reuse Targets, Spain
Spain is the first European country to set a Case Study - EPR for Furniture in
mandatory, national reuse target. The Spanish France
Waste Plan 2016-22 sets a 50% target for
waste to be recycled or prepared for re-use. In France, end-of-life furniture is managed in
Within this target, 2% of all furniture, textiles, line with EPR regulation. Separate schemes are
electricals, and other suitable goods, must be in place for domestic and commercial furniture,
redirected from recycling or landfill and sent for managed and operated by Eco-Mobilier and
repair and resale. Valdelia, respectively. The main objectives of the
French EPR include:
Spain has also shown support for the social
sector, with the Spanish Waste Plan also
• Decreasing waste furniture sent to landfill;
specifying that preferential access should be • Achieving a 45% recycling/reuse target; and
granted to the social sector to access municipal
• Driving eco-design principles within the
waste collection points to source these goods.
furniture manufacturing sector.
Producer Responsibility and Take- €80M was collected via levies in 2013 to
finance the domestic scheme, paid by furniture
back producers, retailers and importers, to cover the
cost of collection, logistics, infrastructure and
Europe already has the producer pays principle
R&D into new markets for recovered materials.
enshrined in various pieces of legislation33, and
In 2015, the domestic EPR scheme collected
yet producer responsibility regulation at the 0.85M tonnes of domestic furniture, achieving a
EU level does not yet encompass furniture. 55% recycling and 86% recovery rate.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for
furniture offers the potential for financing the Under the French EPR scheme, 2016 saw
cost of separate collection, sorting, treatment creation of Eco Modulation Criteria for new
Barriers and Policy Approaches
and recycling of furniture, whilst also offering furniture placed on the market. A lower levy
the possibility of driving waste prevention is charged to manufacturers, where they
and reuse, and driving producers towards met environmental product criteria. This
sustainable sourcing of materials and removing is essentially a simple criteria, in order for
- 17 -the process to be ‘controllable’/not over At a Member State level, voluntary agreements,
burdensome to administer. This covers such as those led by the Waste and Resources
products which are: Action Programme (WRAP), have demonstrated
• Manufactured 95% of metal, no padding, the potential to deliver change through industry
(easy to recycle) led programmes, although with very variable
levels of uptake (in terms of substantive action),
• Manufactured from 95% made of wood, generally well below 80% of the market level
sourced from sustainable forests (easy to noted above. In these cases, there has been no
recycle)
credible regulatory alternative in play, making
• Products designed for babies / children it an entirely voluntary commitment. Some
which can be adapted to the growth of their similar UK agreements have been shown to be
user – e.g. furniture for children (cots which demonstrably weak in the level of commitment
convert to beds/chairs, designed for growth) on the part of signatories, not least the Dairy
Roadmap, where a commitment from the dairy
Eco-modulation criteria had to be designed industry to use 30% recycled HDPE in plastic
so that minimum 3% furniture could be eco- milk bottles was effectively cast aside when
modulated by 2017. If companies comply with primary material prices feel in 2015.
criteria, they pay a lower levy – a fee reduction
of about 20% in order to incentivise design for
recycling. Case Study – Voluntary
Agreements to deliver Producer
Conversely, and in the absence of mandatory
Responsibility, WRAP (UK)
producer responsibility, self-regulation (or
voluntary industry agreements) offers an
WRAP delivers change through voluntary
alternative approach to financing infrastructure
agreements with industry, and which seek to
for increased take-back, reuse and recycling.
increase collection and manage of waste in
The Commission considers well-designed non-
accordance with the waste hierarchy. Examples
regulatory approaches as alternative policy
of current/recent voluntary agreements include:
solutions, where they are likely to deliver policy
objectives more rapidly, or in a more cost- • Courtauld Commitment – aimed at
effective manner. This, however, is most likely improving resource efficiency and reducing
to be achieved where the voluntary approach waste in the UK grocery sector. Supporting
is backed by there being a credible alternative signatories represent 95% of the 2016 UK
regulatory mechanism being actively discussed. food retail market.
• Sustainable Clothing Action Plan (SCAP)
Clearly, the success factors of such voluntary led 2020 – aimed at improving the collection,
initiatives are largely dependent on the uptake, re-use and recycling of clothing and textiles,
and market share, of participating signatories SCAP currently has over 80 signatories and
and supporters, as well as the nature of supporters representing more than 65% of
the commitments under the agreement. UK retail sales by volume.
Furthermore, voluntary commitments can be
• Hospitality and Food Services Agreement
challenging to implement across sectors such
(HAFSA) – aimed at reducing food and
as the furniture sector which are large in scale,
associated packaging waste across the
fragmented and heavily represented by SMEs.
hospitality and food services sector, over
At EU level, self-regulation measures under the 230 leading signatories and supporters
EU Ecodesign Directive require for instance a signed up to support these aims, covering
market coverage of its signatories which covers approximately 25% of the UK sector.
at least 80% of units placed on the Union
market, and/or put into service, of the type of
Barriers and Policy Approaches
products covered by the measure.35
- 18 -Mechanisms to Support within its national waste strategy, ‘Making
Things Last’ (with similar commitments
Infrastructure Development
enshrined within Scotland’s national economic
strategy). Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan has been
Countries typically lack the infrastructure
developed, and is delivered in partnership
capacity needed to take account of the
through Zero Waste Scotland, enterprise
burden of additional collection and treatment
agencies and the environmental regulator,
of products following the introduction of
SEPA, as well as other actors such as local
producer responsibility, as seen in the wake
authorities. Delivery is supported by over £70M
of the challenges experienced by Member
of investment, including a Circular Economy
States, following introduction of EPR for WEEE.
Capital Investment Fund to drive capacity within
Instruments which seek to deliver producer
the reuse, repair and remanufacturing sector
responsibility (whether mandatory or voluntary)
across Scotland.
cannot be implemented in the absence
of parallel economic activities to expand
Equally, the ability of the social sector to
investment in infrastructure for reuse, recycling,
professionalise and respond to the challenge of
and recovery of post-consumer/business
scaling up activity represents both a significant
furniture.
challenge and opportunity for the sector. The
experience of the Flemish region of Belgium
The experience following introduction of EPR
has demonstrated success in the use of
for furniture in France provides recognition
financial instruments to address shortfalls in
of the operational and capacity challenges in
both physical and professional capacity for
identifying recycling markets for the volumes
reuse, following the introduction of regulation
of materials recovered and processed. An
requiring increased collection of bulky waste.
expansion of furniture collection from domestic
and commercial sources in France has
resulted in a saturation of recycling markets for Case Study – Financial
materials such as particleboard, textiles and
Infrastructure Expansion in the
foam. As part of efforts to counter these market
constraints, a proportion of the levies collected
Social Economy, Flanders
from EPR (approximately 1% of the levy budget)
Over the past 20 years, The Flemish Region of
is reinvested into R&D and capital investment,
Belgium has introduced a series of financial
with a current focus on R&D to develop markets
instruments to support the expansion of
for recovered wood fibres, production of bio-
furniture reuse infrastructure in the social
ethanol from furniture waste, and recycling of
sector. The introduction of the Solid Waste
PU foam.
Management Plan 1991-1995 saw mandatory
In the absence of financial support reinvested door-to-door collection for bulky waste.
through mandatory producer responsibility The Household Waste Implementation Plan
schemes, examples of funding mechanisms to 1997-2001 saw the introduction of re-use
drive increased capacity in the reuse, repair centres in Flanders for the first time, with the
and remanufacturing sectors include capital second instalment of the Plan requiring reuse
funded programmes, such as those which exist centres to increase performance to a reuse
in Scotland. performance of 5kg per inhabitant by 2007.
Requirements for increased collection
Case Study – Circular Economy activities have been matched by the Flemish
Investment Fund, Scotland Government with financial support to enlarge
the social sector, to assist in the scaling up
Barriers and Policy Approaches
The Scottish Government has ambitions to and professionalization of operations. This has
deliver a circular economy for Scotland. The included financial support for start-ups and
Government has set out its commitment investment match/bonuses, with grants of up
to move towards a more circular economy to €25,000 to subsidise the activities of reuse
centres.
- 19 -Eco-design Other examples include Gispen, one of the
largest office furnishers in the Netherlands.
Eco-design initiatives, mandatory and voluntary, Through participation under the Dutch Green
can help significantly in terms of life extension, Deal pilots, the organisation has diversified
both directly, and by enabling repair and its business model to expand its eco-design
remanufacture. Proposals contained within the product range, with circular economy principles
EU CE Package address mainly energy-related now at the heart of the business strategy.
products within the scope of the existing legal
framework directive. But the Circular Economy Case Study – Eco-design, leasing
Action Plan also includes a commitment to and take-back business models –
examine options and actions for a more Gispen36, The Netherlands
coherent policy framework of the different
strands of work of EU product policy in their As a designer and producer of office furniture,
contribution to the circular economy, though Gispen’s business model is built upon circular
this is not eco-design per se and this does not economy principles, with an ethos around
necessarily address furniture. well-designed durable products, long service
life and optimum use. Post installation, Gispen
As noted earlier, life extension might not always
also offers reverse logistics for furniture, and
be in the interests of OEMs and retailers as the
furniture updating and reconfiguring services,
opportunities arising from longer life products
as office furniture requirements for office
generally benefit other sectors, for example, in
spaces evolve.
repair and remanufacturing. In consideration
of this fact, it is perhaps not unsurprising that
Whilst principally focused around design and
for furniture retailers and OEMs, eco-design
manufacturer, Gispen’s business model has
appears to be far from central to their thinking.
shifted towards delivering facility management
services to its customer base. The approach
In the absence of mandatory eco-design
to design and supply of circular furniture
requirements, examples of pioneering
products follows guiding principles, including
companies are present in the marketplace,
sustainable material selection, disassembly
including IKEA, which, under commitments to
potential, maintenance and upgradability, and
expand its range of sustainable products, is due
recyclability.
to launch a range of modular furniture.
Gispen provides a variety of financing models
to its customers which includes pay-per-use.
Case Study – Modular Furniture,
Under this business model, Gispen retains
IKEA ownership of the product, with contracts
structured depending on the deployment, and
IKEA has recently announced proposals to
use, of the furniture. The amount customers
launch a modular furniture range in 2018, as
pay is reflected in the number of workstations
part of its continued commitment to product
required, functional and aesthetic need, and the
life extension. This will see the introduction
period of use / intensity of usage.
of furniture products with the intention of
enabling customers to customise and build
up/add to or extend the function of individual
products. This encompasses standardised Harmonisation of Chemical and
design to enable customers to upgrade or
Waste Policy and Standards
convert furniture items into alternative uses
– including conversion of sofas to a bed,
Traceability and restrictions on the use of
Barriers and Policy Approaches
replacement of arm rests, or the addition of
chemicals of concern as required by REACH
side tables
(EC 1907/2006) is an important regulation
to ensure the protection of human health
and the environment. When a substance has
- 20 -been banned or it is restricted under REACH, example the Substitute It Now List37.
this means that any relevant new product
containing this substance can no longer be There may be a need for (time-bound)
placed on the market - though this may not exemptions on the recycling of certain
be true for all imported products, which often materials that contain restricted substances
creates an un-level playing field for European in some cases where there is a genuine lack
actors. of alternatives and a clear technical need. In
addition it is important for products to come
The problem here is that since most furniture with a full disclosure on what hazardous
items have a significant life span, what may be substances are contained in specific materials
an acceptable chemical when the product is or products, through the introduction of an
made may not be when the item is in need of EU harmonised information system and/ or
remanufacture or recycling, for example ten other type of declaration, so as to allow proper
years’ hence. It should be noted that REACH management of these products and materials
does not prevent direct reuse per se as it does in terms of reuse or as waste. This is important,
not apply to second hand products, but of for example, since brominated flame retardants
course reuse organisations may be hesitant to that go into incineration (e.g. resulting from
resell goods containing hazardous substances. the inclusion of energy from waste in recovery
It can also present a cost increase for preparing targets) can result in brominated dioxins which
for reuse organisations and recyclers, are not currently restricted under the Industrial
particularly as a result of the lack of information Emissions Directive.
(e.g. via a detailed product Bill of Materials) on
which part/material contains which hazardous
Sector Innovation Support
substances or not and how this can be dealt
with without unduly restricting circularity.
The role of R&D and innovation funding
represents an important catalyst to stimulate
Consequently the continued presence of
furniture manufacturers to transition from
non-disclosed legacy chemicals will continue
linear production towards closed loop models
to inhibit the preparing for reuse and
– including dematerialisation/sustainable
recycling of end-of-life furniture for many
material selection, design durability, modularity,
years to come unless action is taken. The
reuse/ repair, reassembly and recycling. Yet the
Commission is already seeking to focus efforts
capacity of furniture manufacturers to deliver a
around examining the relationship between
step change and adapt their business models
chemical, product and waste policy, due to
through innovation continues to be limited by
acknowledgment that the current situation
access to financial and technical resources.
challenges delivery of targets set within the EC
With a predominance of SMEs in the furniture
Circular Economy Package.
sector, a lack of access to finance, expertise
A ‘clean furniture economy’ will require and infrastructure will continue to constrain the
significant efforts which focus on ensuring the furniture industry from moving towards take-
continued removal of hazardous substances back, repair, leasing and other service-based
from products and materials, and not only models.
those that are currently restricted. Ideally
The EC launched the Green Action Plan for
there needs to be a ‘forward look’ going
SMEs, together with the European Resource
beyond compliance with current REACH
Efficiency Excellence Centre (EASME), to
restrictions. Ideally this would involve the use
address at least some of the shortfall in
of only genuinely ‘green chemistry’ principles
access to expertise and funding more broadly
in new products although in practice this may
Barriers and Policy Approaches
experienced by SME businesses. At a Member
mean avoidance of REACH Candidate List
State level, sector specific programmes, such
Substances or all substances with hazardous
as the Sustech38 project in Belgium for wood,
properties of very high concern (CMR, PBT, EDC,
textiles and furniture manufacturers, has
neurotoxicants, immunotoxicants, etc.); for
been lauded as a model for accelerating the
- 21 -transition towards resource efficiency within although the second-hand, refurbished or
the sector. Other examples include the Scottish remanufactured furniture products are not
Government/ERDF-funded Circular Economy included within the new scope39,
Programmes and Investment Fund operated by
Zero Waste Scotland, which provides expertise Importantly, the uptake of ecolabels is
and capital support to SMEs across key sectors, intrinsically linked to the awareness and
to advance new business model development. demand from the public and purchasing
organisations, most notably the public sector,
which is, at best, patchy across Europe. The
Case Study – Innovation Support
EU Ecolabel for wooden furniture still only has
for the Furniture Manufacturing three companies as license holders, although
Sector – Sustech, Belgium with 232 products in total (193 with one
Spanish company). Blue Angel in Germany is
The Sustech project was realised through the one of the most well-used labels for furniture
ambition of partners Fedustria, Centexbel and but still only has 24 companies and 72 products
WOOD.BE to support the acceleration from represented. Nobilia has a 29% market share
linear to closed loop models within the textiles, for kitchens in Germany but only has 10
wood and furniture manufacturing sectors in certified products.
Belgium.
Whilst the expansion of Ecolabel criteria for
The focus included supporting participating furniture is warranted, uptake will continue
businesses move forward with a variety of to be hampered in the absence of further
challenges, with a focus on the product design recognition of the ecolabels on the part of
and end-of-life phases. Businesses support buyers, and in particular, through an expanded
challenges launched by the project and application of Green Public Procurement (GPP)
included: criteria (discussed below). Further uptake of
• Development – including dematerialisation, the Ecolabel scheme is also impeded by the
sustainable material selection, design for perception of bureaucracy in the application
recycling, re-assembly, modularity; and procedure, and the perception of high costs of
implementation40.
• End-of-life – including recycling and product
life extension.
Green Public Procurement
Ecolabels Criteria
The EU Furniture Ecolabel scheme also GPP offers significant potential to drive demand
encourages the production of durable products for products with better environmental
that are fit for purpose, easy to repair and easy performance and CE potential. EU studies
to dismantle into separate material streams at indicate that the public sector spend on office
the end-of-life to maximise recycling potential. furniture represents 15% of the market.41
Government procurement (excluding
A new set of EU Ecolabel criteria has been wider public sector) in the UK represents
published by the European Commission under approximately 10% of the office furniture
Commission Decision (EU) 2016/1332. The market.42 The updated EU GPP criteria for
previous scope of the product group (which furniture has recently been published43, a
only permitted wooden furniture ≥90% by process carried out in alignment with the
weight wood or wood-based materials) has revision of the EU Ecolabel criteria for the same
been amended to reflect inclusion of other product group.
Barriers and Policy Approaches
materials, without maximum or minimum
limits. The expanded scope of Ecolabel criteria The voluntary uptake of GPP limits its potential
increases the number of potential products to impact on the sector, with a need for more
covered, and hence offers the greater binding objectives to ensure a more widespread
potential for influencing the furniture market, adoption across the public sector. Overall, the
- 22 -You can also read
