ESCP Europe

Langue

English

Publication year

20/10/2024

Achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12.3, aimed at halving food loss and waste by 2030, requires private firms to adopt circular economy practices, which may include different types of circular business models (CBMs). This study examines four interchangeable CBMs—in-house (IH), third party (TP), joint venture (JV), and focal company (FC) models—focusing on the Australian cheese manufacturing sector and its liquid by-product, ‘whey’. Through semi-structured interviews with 43 participants from 42 firms, we analysed how barriers differ across CBMs. Some barriers are consistent across all CBMs, such as economies of scale and operational costs. Others are absent in one or two CBMs (e.g., capital costs in JV and competing priorities in TP), while some are unique (e.g., low or inconsistent demand in IH, payment expectations in TP, conflicting values or personalities in JV, and upstream product specifications in FC). Findings indicate that while IH models are feasible for all production scales with sufficient time and resources. TP models are suitable for firms with time constraints, provided there is agreement on compensation with the recipient. JV could work for firms lacking volumes or capital but require local collaboration and transparent business plans. Utilising existing infrastructure of firms already repurposing by-products can be effective but requires upstream firms meeting product specifications. By exploring multiple CBM options, the willingness to explore circular economy approaches increases markedly when considering multiple CBMs (79%) versus IH approaches alone (33%). This highlights the necessity for diverse strategies to achieve SDG 12.3, as a one-size-fits-all approach is insufficient. Firms may need to partner with others for repurposing, and those already repurposing can enhance efforts by enabling others to repurpose waste, though multiple pathways also increase potential barriers.