CAT Africa

Business case

Impact on the availability of resources as well as their effect on living organisms, ecosystems, and components of the environment.

Ecological Impact

Impacts on the social fabric of the community and well-being of the individuals and families.

Social Impact

Impacts on the financial condition of a company, as well as the the economicconditions of its stakeholders and on economic systems at local, national, andglobal levels.

Economic Impact

Impact on the health and happiness of human populations

Well-being

Minimise waste through diversion: Instead of sending waste to landfill, it is redirected into other industrial processes for handling, treatment, recycling, recovery, or reuse in various forms. 

Minimise waste through design: At the outset of a process of project, plan and design such that there is zero waste or minimal waste during production, use, and at end of life. 

Minimise Waste (SDG12)

Extracting resources and processing them to produce materials for use bysociety

Materials and Fuels

Producing basic and specialty chemicals, inks, agricultural chemical such as fertilisers and pesticides, plastics including packaging, and rubber

Chemical and Plastic

Account for the systems perspective during the design process, to use the right materials, to design for appropriate lifetime and to design for extended future use

Design for the future

Designing to enable multiple uses and lifecycles of a product and its materials

Design for cyclability

Designing products to remove any barriers to recycling and enable easy recyclability

Design for recycling

Slow strategies aim to keep materials in use for as long as possible, for example through design for durability and repairability. A more circular economy is also a slower one: materials, components, and products—and even buildings and infrastructure—that we lock in stocks are made to last. This will lower material demand in the long run, in essence also serving to narrow resource flows.

Slow

Archetypes

CE Materials

Impacts

small_climate-4803653_640.jpg

thumbnail_climate-4803653_640.jpg

climate-4803653_640.jpg

Industries

small_coast-wind-turbine-sea-sky.jpg

thumbnail_coast-wind-turbine-sea-sky.jpg

coast-wind-turbine-sea-sky.jpg

Materials

Nace Sectors

The principles of a circular economy concern designing out waste, regenerating ecosystems and keeping items in use. Decoupling the economy from material flows—improving the rate of resource productivity faster than the economic growth rate—is also a consistent guide. By evolving with the growing number of applications of circular economy principles, and consolidating these strategies across thematic areas, Circle Economy’s Key Elements Framework (KE) renders the elements of the circular economy salient and serves as a basis to derive contextual strategies and interventions. 


The Framework consists of:
- Core Elements: Activities directly handling product or material flows; and uniquely,
- Enabling Elements: those that remove obstacles for core actors.


Key elements of the circular economy

large_photo-1515534238346-fb9ae3e399d0.jpg

medium_photo-1515534238346-fb9ae3e399d0.jpg

small_photo-1515534238346-fb9ae3e399d0.jpg

thumbnail_photo-1515534238346-fb9ae3e399d0.jpg

photo-1515534238346-fb9ae3e399d0.jpg

Circle Economy's framework of strategies and activities that define the circular economy

Whilst no two countries are the same, there are still obvious similarities between some of them, with discernible development patterns and parallels in evidence. Common problems and shared solutions help place unique country identities and individual issues in context.

Whilst this classification is far from clear-cut and exhibits some overlap, it does underline how the discourse on transitioning to a circular economy needs to account for both differences and commonalities, if we are to arrive at a more strategic and instructive analysis. It also allows to highlight a set of key themes that are likely to be central to the countries that fall under the respective profiles. 

Country profiles (Build, Grow, Shift)

thumbnail_bgsimage 14.png

bgsimage 14.png

A framework to distinguish between different country profiles and their circular transition needs.

Browse case studies by type of implementing stakeholder.

Implementing stakeholders

It is 2050.  Full systems change has taken place. This wouldn’t have been possible without the immediate action and radical steps taken from 2020 onwards. Many targets had to be identified in the early 2020s and achieved by 2030 to ensure that the 2050 goal happened in full. A sense of urgency, turbo stakeholder collaboration, supportive government regulation and clear, data driven targets enabled the mindsets and systems change needed to transform to a fully circular textiles ecosystem.

A circular economics model underpins what we have created. It reflects and supports a living organism made up of makers, users and restorers, interacting across vibrant and interconnected networks. Checks and balances, alongside transparency and accountability, ensure a healthy system. Financial, environmental, and social metrics have the purpose of serving communities and the planet. There is shared ownership of profit and loss – across all three metrics – throughout the value chain.

This is what we’ve achieved over the last 30 years:

WCTD Themes

thumbnail_wctd.jpg

wctd.jpg

The Circular City Actions Framework provides urban changemakers with five complementary strategies they can use to start working towards a more circular system. 

The framework is action-based to provide users with concrete strategic directions and showcase the desired outcomes of each strategy. 
The framework consists of five complementary **strategies**, under which **sub-strategies** provide further detail. Finally, each sub-strategy consists of a diversity of tangible **solutions** which are framed in relation to key thematic areas. 

Note: solutions are currently focused on:
- 🍏 **Food systems**
- 🏢  **Built environment**
- 👕📱  **Consumer goods**
- ⚡ **Energy Systems**
- 🚌 **Mobility Systems**
- 💧 **Water Systems**

More thematic areas are coming soon...

'Click through each of the five strategy cards below to explore the framework and circular economy case studies in more depth!'



This framework was developed in collaboration with ICLEI, Metabolic and Ellen MacArthur Foundation with support from the MAVA Foundation. Read more about it [here]( https://circulars.iclei.org/action-framework/). 



Circular City Actions Framework

large_Circular-City-Actions-Framework-infographic-scaled_gray background.jpeg

medium_Circular-City-Actions-Framework-infographic-scaled_gray background.jpeg

small_Circular-City-Actions-Framework-infographic-scaled_gray background.jpeg

thumbnail_Circular-City-Actions-Framework-infographic-scaled_gray background.jpeg

Circular-City-Actions-Framework-infographic-scaled_gray background.jpeg

An action-based framework for local governments working towards circular cities

![Screen Shot 2024-10-21 at 16.53.12.png](https://goldilocks-images.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/Screen_Shot_2024_10_21_at_16_53_12_12858da6aa.png)

Based on the work of [Bocken et al. (2016)](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309699661_Product_design_and_business_model_strategies_for_a_circular_economy), the Four Flows Framework serves as a simple framework for managing resource flows in a circular economy by using less (Narrow), using for longer (Slow), using again (Cycle), and using clean, regenerative materials and energy (Regenerate).

These different principles of circular economy can be applied to our socioeconomic metabolism: we can design stocks like buildings, infrastructure, machinery, and vehicles to be rich resource mines for the future, and design manufactured goods and consumables to be cycled and made regenerative. Furthermore, the focus must also centre on getting more value out of fewer materials. Achieving the aims of a circular economy—minimising material use, regenerating the Earth, and preventing material losses—can be done through these four key strategies mentioned above.

Source: Circle Economy. (2023). *[The circularity gap report 2023](https://www.circularity-gap.world/2023)* (p.22). Amsterdam: Circle Economy. 

Four Flows Framework

medium_Screen Shot 2024-10-21 at 16.53.12.png

small_Screen Shot 2024-10-21 at 16.53.12.png

thumbnail_Screen Shot 2024-10-21 at 16.53.12.png

Screen Shot 2024-10-21 at 16.53.12.png

The Nigerian company Onward Paper Mill, which specialises in the manufacture and marketing of paper, now wants to use beverage cartons (juice and beer) as raw material. It will benefit from the expertise of Tetra Pak, with whom it has just signed a partnership. “We have helped to increase the number of cardboard recycling facilities worldwide from 40 in 2002 to 170 today,” says Aruna Oshiokamele, managing director of Tetra Pak West Africa.
Currently, Onward Paper Mill uses wood to manufacture its paper, board and other tissue products. Its annual production capacity is 20,000 tonnes. Through its partnership with Tetra Pak, the Nigerian company hopes to increase its production. Onward Paper Mill will thus contribute to the achievement of sustainable development objectives (SDO) in Nigeria by reducing deforestation. According to AARC (Action Alliance for Recycling Beverage Cartons), recycling one tonne of waste beverage cartons saves 17 trees, 1060 litres of oil, 4000 kW of electricity and more than 25 m3 of water.
The used beverage cartons that will be used as raw material in the Onward Paper Mill will come from landfills and other waste disposal sites in Nigeria. They will be recycled at Tetra Pak facilities. “We will conduct awareness campaigns in communities and schools for targeted waste collection, including beverage cartons,” says Kunle Obagun, Executive Resident of Onward Paper Mill.
A difficult product to recycle
According to Véolia, a French company specialising in water and waste treatment, beverage cartons are made up of around 75% cardboard, 20% plastic and 5% aluminium foil. This makes it a difficult product to recycle, but very special. The pulp of beverage cartons offers long, high quality fibres, which can replace primary paper pulp. “More than 70% of our boards are made from long, strong paper fibres that can be recycled several times. Through our network of production facilities, we also supply packaging material to more than 8,800 packaging machines worldwide. Our ambition is to provide packaging that contributes to a low carbon circular economy, without ever compromising on food safety requirements. ”says Tetra Pak.
Inès Magoum


The first trial maize crop was planted in December and benefited strongly from organic fertilizers including chicken litter, green waste and biochar, which improved yield and soil quality. Using sophisticated IoT technology-enabled weather stations, soil probes, time lapse cameras and drone flyovers, researchers monitored crop performance both above and below the ground. AgBioEn Executive Director Lubey Lozevski said early indicators for the project were very promising. “The organic fertilizers have already improved soil yield, reduced water use, and increased the amount of carbon captured in the soil – which is exactly what we hoped to achieve with these trials,” said Lozevski. “Importantly, the quality and amount of the agricultural waste also improved, which is vital for the next stage of the project.” AgBioEn will now buy, lease or share farms that will be part of a supply chain for growing food crops, such as maize, oaten hay, barley and wheat. The grains will be sold as food, while the crop residue will be used to produce renewable energy and fuels at the Katunga facility. La Trobe researchers will analyze data from the trials, and three industry PhD students will work closely with AgBioEn over the next four years. La Trobe University Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research Capability), Professor Ashley Franks said he was pleased that the project was already on the right track to delivering tangible outcomes for consumers across regional Victoria, and globally. “We are excited to utilize the University’s strong industry partnerships, and expertise in regenerative agriculture, to not only provide a better return on production for farmers, but to also maintain soil health and sustainability in the long term,” Franks said. “Most importantly, our research will happen in the field, to ensure the project directly benefits farmers.” LAB3 Director of Data and AI, Alain Blanchette, said the project was a strong example of how the agricultural industry is forging ahead in terms of technological maturity. "To collect data, LAB3 has harnessed the power of the cloud to deploy Internet of Things devices – such as soil probes, weather stations and multi spectral imagery drones – to measure everything that is happening in real time above and below ground. "Once in the cloud, we apply data science techniques to deliver the collected data in a way that is clearly set out and makes sense, for the La Trobe University researchers to analyze," Blanchette said. AgBioEn is Australia’s first fully integrated, carbon negative, renewable energy and fuels project. The Katunga facility is the first of its kind in Australia. Image: Professor Ashley Franks, Dr. Jen Wood, Lubey Lozevski, The Honorable Damian Drum MP and Cr Libro Mustica

Europe

Sweden

Africa

Nigeria

large_blob

medium_blob

small_blob

thumbnail_blob

blob

Tetra Pak

Onward Paper Mill

Forests are crucial for carbon storage and the production of oxygen, both of which are essential for human survival on the planet. They also aid in the management of the hydrological cycle, the purification of water, the provision of wildlife habitats, and the reduction of global warming by absorbing greenhouse gases, containing waste, and, most importantly, conserving soil. In Nigeria, deforestation became a huge problem in the last decades due to heavy land use and the illegal burning of forests. To help to decrease deforestation the Nigerian company Onward Paper Mill teamed up with Tetra Pak to recycle beverage cartons from juice and beer in Nigeria.

Recycling paper to decrease deforestation in Nigeria
 

This collection is being created to regroup all case studies related to the packaging industry (CAT purpose)

large_agenlaku-indonesia-SRFOOdORhKw-unsplash.jpg

medium_agenlaku-indonesia-SRFOOdORhKw-unsplash.jpg

small_agenlaku-indonesia-SRFOOdORhKw-unsplash.jpg

thumbnail_agenlaku-indonesia-SRFOOdORhKw-unsplash.jpg

agenlaku-indonesia-SRFOOdORhKw-unsplash.jpg

Packaging collection

thumbnail_Starter kit image.JPG

Starter kit image.JPG

Starter Kit collection

Reduced green house gas emissions released into the biosphere

Reduce Emissions (SDG13)

Extracting and gathering wood through forestry and producing wood and paper products

Wood and Paper

Utilise waste streams as a source of secondary resources and recover waste for reuse and recycling

Use waste as a resource

Recover waste energy or generate fuels and energy from waste streams

Energy recovery from waste

Recovering and reusing waste heat, gas, etc. for energy

Recovery and reuse of waste energy

Cycle strategies aim to cycle and reuse materials at their highest value: they maximise the volume of secondary materials re-entering the economy, ultimately minimising the need for virgin material inputs and therefore also narrowing flows. Of course, virgin materials will always be needed to a degree: all materials degrade and can’t be cycled infinitely, use energy, and require blending with virgin materials to maintain strength and functionality.

Cycle

            TETRA PAK® UPGRADES  Reduce energy consumption        
    To reduce carbon footprint, Energy Recovery Upgrade allows you to recover heat during pasteurization process that can be subsequently used to heat hot water used during the mixing/batching process.
Under normal circumstances, these two process will operate separately and consume energy to both heat and cool.   

        
    Energy recovery from
 heating and cooling processes 
Using heat transfer methods, energy can be channeled to other purposes  

         
          
        
1. In a food processing plant warm and cold water are used to heat and cool liquids during various phases.
 
2. Heat exchangers allow the energy to be recovered and used in other applications.
 
3. There is no standard solution for this. The heat recovery water system has to be customised for each case.

          
        
1. Enable the use of hot water as a complement to steam in pasteurizers and in the CIP central. 
 
2. Steam consumption is reduced, but still needed as hot water is not sufficient to cover for the heat demand.
 
3. This is method is applicable if there is hot water available {e.g., heat pump)  
4. Reduce usage of chemicals

          
        
1. Save energy when heating the incoming feed of cold water to mixing tanks and when cooling the outgoing product feed to pasteuriser or UHT.
 
2. Utilize a two section PHE.
 
3. The first section is for regenerative heating the incoming water with outgoing product feed to the pasteuriser or UHT  
4. The second section has ice water for final cooling of the outgoing product feed to the pasteuriser or UHT.

          
   Potential savings from Energy Recovery  

    
Concept
Method
Stage
When to use
Other benefits
Estimated Month of Payback
Example of TCO*
Hot and cold water tanks
Collection and reuse of waste heat
Production
To reduce heating and cooling by using exchangers
 
12
400 000€
Hot water as a complement to steam
Decrease heat usages by steam
Production
To reduce heating by steam
Reduction of Chemicals
25
150 000€
Energy recovery at mixing
Regenerative
Production
When heating product water to mixing
 
12
100 000€

*Annual savings based on 10 years   
      We welcome all food and beverage professionals. Our agenda covers a wide range of aspects and topics of interest. Let us share our expertise to help make your food and beverage operations more efficient and profitable.    Sign up to receive Tetra Pak’s newsletter.     
         

Tetra Pak, a leading food packaging and processing solutions provider, is committed to reducing its environmental footprint. One way it achieves this is by recovering waste heat and gas generated during production to generate energy.

Tetra Pak: Recovering Waste Heat to Reduce Environmental Footprint

Impact on increased knowledge and understanding as a result of the case study

Increase Awareness

Impact on the quantity or quality of jobs, and shifts in the labour market

Jobs

Contribution to social parity, or impact on social disparity

Equality

Producing agricultural products and processing them into food and beverageproducts for consumption

Agri/Food

Processing and producing food and beverages for consumption

Food and Beverage

Work together throughout the supply chain, internally within organisations and with the public sector and communities to increase transparency and create joint value

Team up to create joint value

Engage with the local community where facilities or offices are located

Community collaboration

Initiatives with disadvantaged communities, minorities, people distanced from the labour market

Give-back programmes

Working together with the community and engaging them in the company operations

Joint product development

    Coronavirus: Aktuelle Informationen          Pressekonferenz am 14. Dezember 2020   Kurt Haider
Abteilung Umweltschutz – Land OÖ  Reparaturbonus – eine Erfolgsgeschichte Reparieren statt Wegwerfen - dieses Prinzip der Kreislaufwirtschaft ist eine große Chance für den Klimaschutz, verursacht viel weniger CO2-Emissionen und wird immer erfolgreicher. So konnte von September 2018 bis Dezember 2019 rund 260 Tonnen Elektroschrott eingespart werden. Nun folgt ein neuer Reparaturbonus des Landes – mit noch größerem ökologischen Steuerungseffekt, so LR Kaineder. 
Quelle: Land OÖ, Verwendung mit Quellenangabe       



Discarded electronic and electrical equipment contains potentially harmful materials that pollute the environment and increase the risks for people involved in recycling e-waste. To counter this problem, the EU has passed legislation to prevent the use of certain chemicals, like lead.

Many rare minerals that are needed in modern technology come from countries that do not respect human rights. To avoid inadvertently supporting armed conflict and human rights abuses, MEPs have adopted rules requiring European importers of rare earth minerals to carry out background checks on their suppliers.
 
In March 2020, the European Commission presented a new  circular economy action plan that has as one of its priorities the reduction of electronic and electrical waste. The proposal specifically outlined immediate goals like creating the right to repair and improving reusability in general, the introduction of a common charger and establishing a rewards system to encourage recycling electronics.USB Type-C will become the common charger for most electronic devices in the EU by the end of 2024. Laptops will have to be equipped with a USB Type-C port by 28 April 2026.In March 2023, the Commission presented a new proposal to promote repairing and reusing goods. Within the legal guarantee It would require sellers to repair products unless it is cheaper to replace them. Beyond the guarantee, it would provide rights to make repairs easier and cheaper.

              Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004  (the CPC Regulation) lays down a cooperation framework to allow national authorities from all countries in the European Economic Area to jointly address breaches of consumer rules when the trader and the consumer are established in different countries.Collectively, the national authorities form a European enforcement network, the "CPC Network".National enforcement authorities have strong powers to address unlawful practices and identify rogue traders. They can request information from domain registrars and banks to detect the identity of the responsible trader, carry out mystery shopping, for example, to check geographical discrimination or after-sales conditions, and to order the immediate take-down of websites hosting scams.The European Commission coordinates the cooperation between these authorities to ensure that consumer rights legislation is applied and enforced in a consistent manner across the Single Market. It can alert the CPC network and coordinate EU-wide enforcement action to tackle practices which harm a large majority of EU consumers. Authorities can accept commitments from the businesses concerned that they will correct their practices, provide remedies and compensation to the consumers affected. With the entry into application of the Directive on enforcement and modernisation of consumer law the sanction could reach at least 4% of the turnover of the businesses in the Member States concerned.The list of CPC authorities, single liaison offices, designated bodies and entities issuing external alerts can be found on the webpage of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network.    Download  
          

   DIRECTIVE (EU) 2019/771 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL  of 20 May 2019  on certain aspects concerning contracts for the sale of goods, amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 and Directive 2009/22/EC, and repealing Directive 1999/44/EC (Text with EEA relevance)   (1)   OJ C 264, 20.7.2016, p. 57.  (2)  Position of the European Parliament of 26 March 2019 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and decision of the Council of 15 April 2019.  (3)  Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64).  (4)  Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (OJ L 171, 7.7.1999, p. 12).  (5)  Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) (OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6).  (6)  Directive (EU) 2019/770 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content and digital services (see page 1 of this Official Journal).  (7)  Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 351, 20.12.2012, p. 1).  (8)  Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1).  (9)  Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers' interests (OJ L 110, 1.5.2009, p. 30).  (10)   OJ C 369, 17.12.2011, p. 14.   ANNEX CORRELATION TABLE       Directive 1999/44/EC   This Directive     Article 1(1)   Article 1     Article 1(2)(a)   Article 2, point (2)     Article 1(2)(b), first indent   Article 3(4)(b)     Article 1(2)(b), second and third indents   Article 2, point (5)(a)     Article 1(2)(c)   Article 2, point (3)     Article 1(2)(d)   Article 2, point (4)     Article 1(2)(e)   Article 2, point (12)     Article 1(3)   Article 2, point (15) and Article 3(5)(a)     Article 1(4)   Article 3(2)     Article 2(1)   Article 5     Article 2(2)(a)   Article 6, point (a) and Article 7(1)(b)     Article 2(2)(b)   Article 6, point (b)     Article 2(2)(c)   Article 7(1)(a)     Article 2(2)(d)   Article 7(1)(d)     Article 2(3)   Article 7(5)     Article 2(4)   Article 7(2)     Article 2(5)   Article 8     Article 3(1)   Article 10(1)     Article 3(2)   Article 13(1)     Article 3(3), first subparagraph   Article 13(2) and Article 14(1)(a)     Article 3(3), second subparagraph   Article 13(2)     Article 3(3), third subparagraph   Article 14(1)(b) and (c)     Article 3(4)   Article 2, point (14)     Article 3(5)   Article 13(4)     Article 3(6)   Article 13(5)     Article 4   Article 18     Article 5(1)   Article 10(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5)     Article 5(2)   Article 12     Article 5(3)   Article 11     Article 6(1)   Article 17(1)     Article 6(2)   Article 17(2)     Article 6(3)   Article 17(2)     Article 6(4)   Article 17(4)     Article 6(5)   Article 17(3)     Article 7(1), first subparagraph   Article 21(1)     Article 7(1), second subparagraph   Article 10(6)     Article 7(2)   —     Article 8(1)   Article 3(6) and (7)     Article 8(2)   Article 4     Article 9   Articles 19 and 20     Article 10   Article 22     Article 11(1), first subparagraph   Article 24(1), first subparagraph     Article 11(1), second subparagraph   Article 24(1), third subparagraph     Article 11(2)   Article 24(1), fourth subparagraph     Article 12   Article 25     Article 13   Article 26     Article 14   Article 27      

 Skip to content        This article was co-authored by Right to Repair Europe’s national members, including  Markus Piringer from Repair Network Vienna, Katrin Meyer from Runder Tisch Reparatur, Ronan Groussier from Halte à l’Obsolescence Programmée and Jessika Richter from Lund University, Sweden. Visual: own canva design, illustration by Macrovector While we wait for the proposal of new consumer legislation to promote repair from the EU Commission, success stories from member states provide wonderful examples of far-reaching measures on repair that we’d like to see at EU level.  Despite some legislative progress, none of the EU legislation currently in the pipeline tackles the unfair cost of repair. Requiring manufacturers to make spare parts available (for example through the new ecodesign rules on smartphones and tablets) is a very good step, but this doesn’t mean that these parts will be affordable.  To tackle this, financial incentives are needed to ensure affordability of repair. Let’s look at national policy examples such as the repair bonuses in Austria and Germany, the newly implemented French repair fund, and tax breaks on repair in Sweden as inspiration for EU level policies that could lead to eventually preventing large amounts of waste. Repair bonuses in Austria and Germany The repair bonus was first piloted in the city of Graz in Austria in 2017. Citizens could be refunded up to 50% of the total cost of a repair, up to a maximum of €100. The system initially only applied to very few electrical appliances. After the success of the repair bonus in Graz, the system was later extended to 3 Austrian federal states (Styria, Upper Austria, Lower Austria) and to the city of Salzburg, resulting in approximately 260 tons of e-waste avoided between September 2018 and December 2019.  In the autumn of 2020, a repair funding scheme was also introduced in the city of Vienna, resulting in 90% of the claimed items being successfully repaired, thereby saving 540 tons of CO2 and supporting 83 local businesses. In contrast to other regions, the repair bonus in Vienna was introduced as a voucher. This more customer-friendly version proved to be very successful and was consequently adopted as an Austrian-wide scheme which was introduced in April 2022.  In practice, under the Austrian “Reparaturbonus”, each voucher covers 50% of the repair cost, up to €200 per product repair. It also subsidises 50% of the price of a cost estimate of a repair, up to a maximum of €30. The bonus can be redeemed when the invoice is paid and must be valid at this point in time, regardless of when the order was placed. The bonus, redeemable at 3,153 repair shops around Austria, is financed by €130 million from the EU Covid-19 recovery fund, and has already subsidized 353.196 repairs from April to December 2022.  Another success story involves the repair bonus in the German state of Thuringia. The system, which was introduced in 2021 with an initial funding amount of €500,000, soon had to be expanded due to high demand for repairs! Meanwhile, the second funding period has also been exhausted, almost 12,000 repairs were funded in 2022. In 2023, phase three will kick off.  The basic principle is simple: the Thuringian Ministry of the Environment covers 50% of the repair bill, up to a maximum of €100. During the first funding phase in 2021, for which an evaluation is now available, an average of around €75 per repair was subsidised. Settlement takes place via the consumers: they submit their bill online and apply for reimbursement.  What was proven in Thuringia is that people want to repair things. Previously, repairs failed not necessarily due to lack of options, but simply because the repair costs were too high. Accordingly, the bonus was used extensively in both urban and rural areas. Smartphone repair shops in particular have seen a real boom in business since the introduction of the bonus. Accordingly, the rest of the German states are closely observing developments in Thuringia. Following a limited but successful pilot project in the city of Leipzig, the state of Saxony has now also decided to follow suit by introducing a repair bonus. In December, the State Parliament made a total of €2.5 million available for the years 2023 and 2024. The possibility of further repair subsidies is currently being discussed in many other of the 16 German states. Proposals are currently being considered in Bremen, Hesse and Saarland. In Berlin, a repair bonus has been announced in the government programme (Koalitionsvertrag). This being said, implementation is not yet in sight. The French repair fund  The newly launched repair fund in France also provides a good example of how governments can help to make repair more affordable. Through this fund, a reduction is directly discounted from the consumer’s repair bill. The scheme is financed through Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) fees paid by producers and managed by French eco-organisations. Consumers receive a significant reduction of their repair bill (around 20%), which applies to all out-of-warranty repairs for eligible products.  The first repair fund focused on electric and electronic devices and was launched on 15 December 2022. In order to benefit from the discount, users may simply take their product to a repairer authorised to offer the bonus. A lump sum discount is set per product and deducted from the final cost of the repair. In the table below you can see a list of eligible products:  Source: https://www.label-qualirepar.fr/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/soutiens-financiers-fonds-reparation.pdf To offer the bonus, repairers must obtain the “Qualirepar” label, which has been specifically created in the context of the repair bonus. The label aims to guarantee the quality and reliability of the listed repairers and to give them visibility. At the end of each month, eco-organisations reimburse repairers for bonuses granted to their customers.  So far, the labelling process has been criticised by some as being too cumbersome for independent repairers, and the number of labelled repairers is still too low. To date 1031 repairers have obtained the label and 1800 are in the process of getting it. The French government aims at labelling at least 4000 repairers until the end of 2023.  The launch of this first fund is just the beginning of a broader project, as new funds will be launched progressively throughout 2023, for different product groups such as sporting goods, gardening and DIY products, and textiles.  The VAT reduction on repair in Sweden  For several years now, there has also been another approach to promoting repair in the form of a reduced Value Added Tax (VAT) on repair services.In 2016 Sweden reduced its VAT rate from 25% to 12% for small repairs of bicycles, clothing and shoes. In 2022 this was further reduced to 6%, but will subsequently be reversed back to 12% in 2023. Background The idea is not at all new.  An EU Council Directive from 1999 introduced the option to reduce VAT on labour-intensive repair services such as bicycle or shoe repairs.This was eventually made a permanent option for member states to implement in 2009 through another Council Directive.   Several countries have adopted this measure from the beginning. For instance in Belgium a reduced VAT rate for small repairs (not 12% as in Sweden but only 6% – the minimum allowed by the EU Directive is 5%) was introduced on January 1st 2000, prolonged several times and made permanent as of July 2011. Many other countries have also adopted the measure (an overview of European VAT rates can be found here). In Sweden, the measure is complemented by a system of tax deductibility of labour costs for white goods repair. So, how does it work? This measure falls under the RUT system (‘Rengöring, Underhåll, Tvätt’ which means Cleaning, Maintenance & Laundry) meaning that 50% of the labour expenses for household appliance repair are tax deductible up to a maximum of 25000kr per year (slightly over €2500 euro) or 50000kr for people above 65 years old. The system allows the repair business to immediately deduct this amount from the invoice, so the customer never actually has to pay it.  A full overview of the procedure can be found here.  “You get the reduction through the fact that the provider of the service deducts part of the labor cost on your invoice. After you have paid the invoice, the provider of the service requests payout from the tax agency. When the tax agency grants the payment to the provider of the service, they already fill in the amount in your tax declaration. Keep in mind that you must have paid enough tax during the fiscal year to apply the deduction.” Although the objective of the Swedish initiative was good, and we welcome any measures seeking to tackle the price of repair, the scheme was not without its shortcomings, and the general conclusion was that this specific set of measures did not have a huge effect on promoting repair. For example, the biggest discount only applies to repairs done at the consumer’s home, brown goods are excluded from the scope, and some repairers found the scheme’s paperwork overly burdensome.  It seems indeed that tax reductions are no silver bullet to tackle the price of repair. Fundamentally, tax breaks only apply to citizens who have enough income to pay tax in the first place, leaving behind the people most in need of help. And ultimately, VAT reduction does not deal with the issue of the availability of cheap new products competing with repair, of which the VAT part of the price is only part of the total cost in money and time taken on by the consumer. So, whilst the EU has yet to introduce measures to ensure the affordability of repair, some member states are leading the way with initiatives aimed at ensuring their citizens can always access and afford a repair solution. Many of the schemes are still in their infancy, and so the most effective measure remains to be seen, but we support any measure to encourage the uptake of repair, and so will be monitoring the developments closely.  Interested in reading more about these initiatives? Here are some useful links: 

  Navigation    Study on socioeconomic impacts of increased reparability of increased reparability                                
                      
              
                              

This case study illustrates how Tetra Pak is collaborating with local communities to foster sustainable development and engage them in the company's operations.