“There is no alternative to the ecological transition, that is, to the decarbonization of our production model and consequently of consumption. We have no alternative”.

Antonio Pergolizzi’s new book opens with this statement, eliminating any uncertainty about the direction to follow. However, this path was undertaken with great difficulty, between hesitations and second thoughts, and is cyclically called into question. The contradictions that emerge along the way are numerous, and it is precisely on these that the heart of the narrative focuses. We met the author to delve deeper into these issues.

• “The title of your book refers to the ‘contradictions’ of the circular economy: what are the most evident ones that today threaten its credibility and implementation?”

There are many, but the most important one, in my view, is the dogmatic belief that the usual free-market recipes are enough: more market, more investments, and more technology. From my perspective, although these three elements are essential ingredients for the ecological transition, they are not sufficient on their own to support a real shift and, above all, to make sustainability a driver for greater social justice.

• Circular economy is often described as the “panacea” for environmental problems. How can this enthusiasm become counterproductive?

It is always necessary to have a comprehensive, holistic vision, starting from the assumption that the laws of thermodynamics determine socio-environmental costs that cannot be pretended do not exist. For example, it is not enough to support separate waste collection and recycling – as some of the main protagonists in waste management convincingly argue – on the contrary, we need to change production and consumption models to produce less waste, not to recycle more. This is a classic cognitive bias that fuels a narrative that is too convenient for those who simply do business with waste management.

• 3) In the book you also talk about “opportunities”: can you tell us a concrete example in which a company or a territory has been able to transform contradictions into value?

The ecological transition is certainly a great opportunity for the community. Just think of the birth of energy communities or environmental districts or the many industrial osmosis initiatives in which synergy is generated where, in the past, only competitive logics existed. The basic problem is knowing how to govern the economic forces that naturally push in one’s direction, making sure that the paradigm shift is not discharged only on some segments of society, obviously the most fragile ones, for example with an increase in consumer prices. For this reason, we need a public direction capable of correcting, for example, the recurring market failures that can push towards linear approaches, as is also happening today. We need adequate policies for a challenge of historic proportions, otherwise we risk producing the usual business-as-usual model, albeit under false pretenses.

• What, in your opinion, distinguishes a truly sustainable approach from one that is just “greenwashing”?

A truly sustainable approach is one that, starting from the complexity and an exact qualitative/quantitative evaluation of all the elements involved, is able to develop a model capable of having the smallest possible ecological footprint, while ensuring collective benefits. On the contrary, a classic greenwashing approach can have an infinite number of nuances, for example it can originate from data that is initially flawed and only consider the elements in its favor in the evaluation, excluding the rest. It is not enough to have an electric car, for example, if it is then powered by energy produced from fossil fuels and if its manufacturing itself has had little attention to the life cycle of the materials used.

• Which actors (public or private) today have the greatest responsibility in guiding the transition towards an authentic circular economy?

On the public side, certainly the Ministry of the Environment and Energy Security (MASE), therefore the government, together with the Regions and local public bodies, very important in adopting practices and policies to encourage sustainability. On the private side, certainly companies and their associations can play an important role in pushing towards green policies. Without forgetting the consortia within the respective extended producer responsibility schemes, which are also crucial in using public resources to support concretely sustainable policies.

• The concept of circular economy also requires a cultural change. What are, in your opinion, the biggest obstacles in terms of mentality or habits?

Change is always tiring, especially when the final goal is not clear. Today, unfortunately, there is too much communication and too little information. Information bulimia in fact leaves the individual at the mercy of a storytelling that develops little critical sense. It would be useful to explain, instead, what the conflicts are in the field and what is, case by case, the real stake. Faced with such complexity, the space for an informed vision by the majority of citizens has dramatically narrowed.

• If you had to summarize in a practical piece of advice what a citizen can do today to contribute to this sustainable revolution, what would you say?

Get seriously informed, always use an open and critical approach and participate in public decisions. Your private commitment must be accompanied by a similar civic commitment. The ecological transition, to be truly democratic, needs transparency, awareness and participation. Only in this way can it reach, that is, when done well, the highest point of democracy.

The post “The Contradictions of the Circular Economy” in Antonio Pergolizzi’s New Book appeared first on Raptech.