Accelerating the transition to a circular economy in Africa

Abstract

In the Global North, there are well-documented circular economy case studies in multinational organisations, particularly new business models and waste management but with less emphasis on social impacts. In emerging economies, such as India and South America, there are many small-scale examples of circular practices such as waste collection, recycling, repair, and refurbishment. In Africa there is a greater emphasis on job creation and maximising the use of resources. However, the circular economy as a concept is still vague in Africa, although case studies exist they have, so far, remained largely hidden. The legal and regulatory frameworks needed to foster circularity are still in their infancy in most African countries as mechanisms to realise the transition towards green economies are often not in place. This chapter considers circular economy policies and practices in an African context, drawing on case studies from Kenya and South Africa. It explores how the transition towards a circular economy in Africa can contribute towards the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals through the creation of national and regional roadmaps. Opportunities are explored to apply sustainable principles and strategies in a various contexts to benefit economies, livelihoods and the environment.

Full text

Chapter 9
Accelerating the Transition to a Circular Economy in Africa - case studies from Kenya
and South Africa
Peter Desmond and Milcah Asamba
Abstract
In the Global North, there are well-documented circular economy case studies in multinational
organisations, particularly new business models and waste management but with less emphasis on social
impacts. In emerging economies, such as India and South America, there are many small-scale
examples of circular practices such as waste collection, recycling, repair, and refurbishment. In Africa
there is a greater emphasis on job creation and maximising the use of resources. However, the circular
economy as a concept is still vague in Africa, although case studies exist they have, so far, remained
largely hidden. The legal and regulatory frameworks needed to foster circularity are still in their infancy
in most African countries as mechanisms to realise the transition towards green economies are often
not in place. This chapter considers circular economy policies and practices in an African context,
drawing on case studies from Kenya and South Africa. It explores how the transition towards a circular
economy in Africa can contribute towards the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals
through the creation of national and regional roadmaps. Opportunities are explored to apply sustainable
principles and strategies in a various contexts to benefit economies, livelihoods and the environment.
Introduction
The Circular Economy (CE) involves the redesign of products so they are repairable and longer-lasting
and re-used, failed components are replaced, core elements refurbished, precious metals and rare earths
extracted and remanufactured into new products. This approach can keep waste away from landfill
while recovering high value resources. There are many definitions of CE; 114 were studied by
Kirchherr, Reike and Hekkert (2017). The authors proposed a definition bringing together the many
strands of their research:
“CE is an economic system that replaces the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing,
alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and
consumption processes. It operates…with the aim of accomplishing sustainable development,
thus simultaneously creating environmental quality, economic prosperity and social equity, to
the benefit of current and future generations. It is enabled by novel business models and
responsible consumers” (Kirchherr, Reike and Hekkert, 2017, p. 229).
In the Global North, particularly Europe, there is a greater understanding of circular practices in
multinational organisations with well-documented case studies. Examples include Philips (“Pay Per
Lux”), Desso and Interface (renting carpet tiles) and Renault (Remanufacturing) (Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, 2013a). In the Global North the CE narrative is primarily focussed on waste management
through reuse and recycling. The narrative in the EU and Global North is generally focussed around
waste reduction and cost savings; the redesign of products and systems as well as new business models
such as remanufacturing are only recently emerging.
In the Global South, particularly India, China and South America there are many small-scale examples
of circular practices e.g. waste collection and recycling, repair, refurbishment and biomass as a fertiliser
in agriculture (Gower and Schroder, 2016). In Africa there is a greater emphasis on job creation, income
generation and environmental impacts and maximising use of resources. For decades circular activities
have provided new and different kinds of skills and jobs e.g. the vehicle repair and remanufacturing
cluster in Kumasi in the Ashanti district of Ghana (Schmitz, 2015). In contrast, African case studies
stay ‘hidden’ as they have yet to be documented through academic research. There is also a gap in
research into how multinational businesses with global value chains (GVC) are engaged with small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and entrepreneurs in Africa.

Several African countries are currently focusing on developing green economies which will feed into
CE. UNEP defines Green Economy (GE) as one that ‘results in improved human well-being and social
equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities’. In short, an economy
that is low carbon, resource efficient and socially inclusive. However, the concept and its implications
are still vague when it comes to the African context (Klein, et al., 2013). Different countries in Africa
are at different stages of implementing GE with some countries only integrating aspects of it and others,
like Ethiopia, Kenya and Rwanda, have put in place an overarching GE strategy. The legal and
regulatory framework to foster GE is still in its infancy stage in most African countries and mechanisms
to realise the transition to GE are not yet in place. The most promising markets tend to be those related
to agriculture such as bio-trade, sustainable tourism and renewable energies (Klein, et al., 2013).
By moving towards a CE strategy, emerging economies may be able to leapfrog to more a sustainable
development approach by learning lessons and avoiding pitfalls of resource-intensive practices of the
linear economy (Preston and Lehne, 2017). This chapter considers CE in an African context through
policies and practices with a specific focus on Kenya and South Africa.
The Circular Economy in Africa
The current and projected increase of resource consumption in a globalised linear economy exceeds
planetary boundaries (IRP, 2017). In additional redistribution of wealth from North to South continues
to be essential for the 300 million people who live in poverty in countries still classified as low-income,
mainly in sub-Saharan Africa (Raworth, 2017). CE has the potential of producing cost savings and
reducing exposure to market price fluctuations, increasing renewable energy and releasing valuable
materials and energy in existing products (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013b). Yet this can be viewed
by some actors as a risk and a threat. For example, governments which have become dependent on the
export of natural resources are often reluctant to distribute revenue generated more equally. Civil society
has raised concerns about the health and environmental impacts of secondary materials such as e-waste
that are imported into the country.
CE strategies in the North risk concentrating power and wealth amongst a few actors in global supply
chains to the detriment of poor nations. For example, the European Commission’s Circular Economy
Action Plan (European Commission, 2017) identifies setting eco-design standards for electronic and
electrical equipment, addressing hazardous chemicals in material cycles, and improving circularity of
plastics, as priorities for Europe’s transition to CE. Much of this plan focuses upon the benefits to
Europe through greater resource efficiency. However, a more circular economy in Europe can also
deliver benefits for people in low-income countries if their needs are better considered when creating
inclusive CE policies. The more complex elements of restorative design and systemic change in CE are
discussed (Webster, 2015) but generally only put into practice by businesses who can afford the cost
impact of such changes.
In the past many GVCs have relied upon Africa to provide virgin resources for the manufacture of
products in the North (e.g. rare earths and minerals from DRC for production of smartphones in China).
CE may be a means by which greater value can be created in the South such as the remanufacturing of
end of life products for re-export to customers in the North e.g. Barloworld’s refurbishment of
Caterpillar parts in South Africa. The Green Alliance (Morgan and Mitchell, 2015) has postulated that
CE will generate higher level of jobs in the industrialised countries, but there is no strong evidence that
this will be the case in Africa. As a result, the inequality that exists between the very poor without
employment and those with permanent jobs may well continue in the CE.
Power Relations and Inequality
Power relations and institutional relationships impact the ability of actors in African countries to
implement CE policies and business models. In the past GVCs of companies in the Global North have
reflected an imbalance of power relations with producers in the South which favours buyers in wealthier
economies. Schroeder et al. (2018) highlight the power imbalances that exist in GVCs under a linear
economy as transnational corporations and governments have greater access to resources and capital.
Developing countries are now looking to create closed loop value chains to reduce inequalities and
generate fairer access to necessary material inputs. The result of these power imbalances is often
inequality: income, gender and employment. Electronic and plastic waste are two examples where such

inequalities are seen. People in low income countries are engaging in waste recovery where local
authorities have inefficient waste management services.
Noble Gonzalez and Schroeder (2017) highlight Brazil and India where informal waste picking is an
essential source of employment for people, often in co-operatives, who are living on low incomes. In
Africa there are many examples of rubbish sites where this is common, for example Olusosun, Lagos,
Nigeria and Agbogbloshie, Accra, Ghana. Yet, informal waste pickers could be one route for circular
practices to develop in countries which have been unable to implement recycling of plastics and
electronic waste at scale. In India waste pickers undertake collecting, recycling and trading waste which
have contributed to the UN SDGs (WBCSD, 2016). This approach is now being seen in Africa where
small businesses and self-employed persons are working to generate an income with little legal
recognition and low capital investment.
As emerging economies look to reduce inequalities, careful sourcing of minerals may be one route. This
is seen in Fairphone’s use of conflict-free materials in their modular smartphones (Fairphone, 2017).
Similar criteria used in the accreditation of gold mines in Africa for the extraction of the metal to the
standards of the Fairtrade Foundation (Faitrade Foundation, 2013).
In Africa the issue of corruption can cause confusion in power relations. In 2017 the South African
government closed tyre recycler REDISA due to unlawful misappropriation of public funds by REDISA
directors (Business Report, 2017). Whilst the business model was demonstrating a positive outcome,
close oversight of the company was lacking. Often closed looped initiatives take longer to implement
and sometimes overlook issues of unequal power relations between producer (Schroeder, Anggraeni
and Weber, 2018).
The full impact CE policies on the Global South is not yet fully understood e.g. EU’s CE Package, Eco-
design Measures, and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation. Furthermore, the negative
impact generated by the Global North exporting waste for disposal to Africa has to be reconsidered
from a health perspective as well as its detrimental effect on the world’s oceans.
Development Issues that the Circular Economy can Address
CE in Africa is focussed primarily on environmental and economic benefits. Yet potentially it could
address the reduction of poverty and inequality. Alex Lemille (2018) has focussed on this element of
CE and proposes that it can provide a route to supporting the human development of African countries
through his CE 2.0 framework. This builds on the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s (2013a) “Butterfly”
diagram by including the “humansphere” between the technical and biological elements. CE in Africa
is often considered a concept which is only relevant to industrialised countries, but this viewpoint may
limit the positive impact that circular approaches could have in creating employment and designing
profitable business models.
In respect of poverty, Tearfund, a UK-based international non-governmental organisation is
undertaking research into the opportunities for CE to improve livelihoods to assess the benefits of CE
for developing countries and emerging economies (Fernandes, 2016). In Brazil the research (Fernandes,
2016) concluded that there are environmental benefits to circular approaches, there are opportunities to
involve those at the base of the pyramid, productivity and employment can be increased and there is a
role for government to create the right enabling environment. Other emerging economy issues can be
addressed by CE such as waste management, disposal of electronic waste, energy needs (including the
use of renewable energy), poverty reduction and job creation (Gower and Schröder, 2016).
Who is Driving the Transformation to a Circular Economy in Africa?
In the Global North one of the key drivers for the transition to CE is the potential economic benefit.
Recent research indicated a global US$4.5 trillion prize for turning what we currently waste into
economic value by 2030 (Lacy and Rutqvist, 2015) e.g. the underutilisation of natural resources,
products and assets. At a high level the authors saw three key drivers of the CE: resource constraints,
technological development and socio-economic opportunity. They proposed 5 new business models
which would provide a strong business case for CE: circular supply chain, recovery & recycling, product
life extension, sharing platform and product as service. Despite most of the global supply chains
engaging producers in the Global South, most of the case studies they include in the book are from the

Global North. Cultural and contextual reasons may mean that application of these principles in
developing countries might take longer than in Europe or North America.
Transitioning to CE in African countries will be a combination of effort by many actors, sometimes in
coalition, but mostly in unstructured form. International organisations are emerging which support the
sharing of good circular practices. One example is the Circular Economy Club (CEC, 2018); this is a
global network of CE professionals which encourages collaboration to achieve a greater impact of
circular practices. In February 2018 a global mapping session was held to record CE initiatives in 67
cities (including Cape Town and Port Harcourt) which is to be shared publicly on an open source basis.
There are numerous actors in Africa building on the effort to create a more sustainable future for the
continent: governments (e.g. The African Circular Economy Alliance – see text box), non-governmental
organisations (e.g. The African Circular Economy Network – see text box), business (both multinational
and smaller entrepreneurs), international development agencies (e.g. Tearfund) and international co-
ordinating bodies (e.g. World Economic Forum).
Box 9.1: Circular economy stakeholder networks in Africa
The African Circular Economy Alliance (ACEA) was announced at COP23 in Bonn in November 2017
as collaboration between the governments of Rwanda, Nigeria and South Africa. “We are looking at
linking up the various projects and programmes on the continent and stimulating momentum towards
the transformation to a CE”, Edna Molewa, Minister of Environmental Affairs, South Africa. ACEA
aims to encourage other African countries to build CE policies such as Nigeria’s Extended Producers
Responsibility Programme which aims to ensure that businesses protect the environment and manage
waste responsibly.
The African Circular Economy Network (ACEN) was formed in Cape Town in June 2016 by a group
of CE professionals. The vision of the ACEN is to build a restorative African economy that generates
well-being and prosperity inclusive of all its people through new forms of economic production and
consumption which maintain and regenerate its environmental resources (www.acen.africa). ACEN has
initiated learning and knowledge sharing events between CE professionals in both developed and
developing countries so lessons learnt from the practical application of CE principles can be applied in
different contexts.
Circular Economy Policies in Africa
Government policy in Africa has a major role to play at both national and local level. There is little CE-
specific legislation and so regulations and policies in operation and policies are generally focussed on
climate change mitigation, the Green Economy (GE), and waste management. Proposals are often
presented but are still awaiting promulgation into government policy and legislation. In Ghana the lack
of an enabling environment, including financial and other incentives, is a major constraint for the
creation of CE, particularly for entrepreneurs to set up informal repair businesses. The power exercised
through EU Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation by Northern manufacturers in the value
chain will become a greater force for change and localised EPR legislation will be less important.
There are few systematic studies of CE policies in Africa and so identification of policies currently
relies on informal research approaches. Table 9.1 summarises some of CE-related policies that are in
existence for a selection of African countries. Further research is required to identify the extent and
impact of sustainability legislation and policies such as waste management, recycling, extended
producer responsibility, repair and renewable energy.
Table 9.1 - CE-related policies, regulations and initiatives in a selection of African countries (Source:
various Internet sources collected by Peter Desmond and Lara Maritano)

Country
Name of policy &
year
Implementing
agencies
Short description
Ethiopia
Climate Resilient
Green Economy
(2011)
Ministry of
Environment
Reduce impact of
climate change through
renewable energy
Ghana
Ghana Goes for Green
Growth (2010)
Ministry of
Environment
Sustainable
development and
equitable low carbon
economic growth
Kenya
Nationally Appropriate
Mitigation Action -
Circular Economy
Municipal Solid Waste
Management
Approach for Urban
Areas (2016)
Ministry of
Environment and
Natural Resources
Diversion of waste
from disposal sites
towards recycling
Namibia
Green Economic
Coalition Dialogue
(2011)
Ministry of Labour and
Social Welfare
Economic
development, job
creation and CO2
reduction
Nigeria
Extended Producer
Responsibility
Programme (2013)
National
Environmental
Standards and
Regulations
Enforcement Agency
Minimisation of
industrial waste and
promotion of recycling
Rwanda
Plastic Bag Law 57
(2008)
Ministry of Natural
Resources
Prohibition of
manufacturing,
importation, use and
sale of polythene bags
South Africa
National
Environmental
Management Act
(1998)
Ministry of
Environment
Minimisation of waste,
pollution and use of
natural resources
The examples above are only a small selection of government policies currently in existence. The major
challenge in the future will be to ensure that legislation is enforced. Furthermore, regulations behind
more complex elements of CE such as designing products as services and remanufacturing are yet to be
created at scale in Africa.
Examples of CE in Africa
In comparison to the shortage of CE policies and legislation in Africa, there are numerous examples of
CE initiatives in Africa; some initiatives are summarised in Table 9.2 below. They have been
categorised based on the Circle Economy 7 Key CE Principles framework (Circle Economy, 2018).

Table 9.2 – Example CE Case Studies in Africa (Source: various Internet sources collected by Peter
Desmond and Lara Maritano)
Circle Economy
Element
Initiative
Benefit
Prioritise regenerative
sources
Biomimicry, South Africa
SPACE Project - water and waste
treatment solutions in Langrug informal
settlement using Biomimicry principles
to clean up the grey water, storm water,
and solid waste challenges.
Design for the future
Mazzi Can, Uganda and
Tanzania
Durable plastic to streamline the
collection, storage, and transport of milk
from smallholder farmers.
Incorporate Digital
Technology
COLIBA, Ivory Coast
Waste management mobile phone
application in five schools in Ghana,
aiming to help users monetise their waste
and satisfy the demand of recycling
companies.
Collaborate to create
joint value
Suame / Kumasi vehicle
repair cluster, Ghana
Government / World Bank,
Tanzania,
Collective efficiency prolonging vehicle
life achieved by the 12,000 small
workshops employing 200,00 workers.
Collaboration to develop more water-
efficient practices among smallholder
farmers.
Use Waste as a
resource
Sustainable Heating, South
Africa and EcoPost, Kenya
HP E-waste recycling, Kenya
Biomass (residual carbon-based waste
such as wood, sawdust, grain husks, sisal,
etc.) is burned in furnaces. The heat from
the combustion is used to feed local
industries with steam, hot water, and hot.
The by-product is ash which farmers can
use to enrich their soils
Approximately 2,000 new jobs created
within four years of launch of the scheme.
Rethink the business
model
Hello Tractor
Small-scale farmers request and pay for
tractor services via SMS and mobile
money

Circle Economy
Element
Initiative
Benefit
Preserve and extend
what’s already made
Agbogbloshie, "Old Fadama"
slum, Accra, Ghana
Imported e-waste, Nigeria
Destination for locally generated
automobile and electronic scrap collected
from across the City of Accra.
Approximately 70% of imported waste is
refurbished, tested and sold on.
Remanufacture
Barloworld, South Africa
Caterpillar parts repaired and refurbished
with new guarantee.
Kenya – CE Case Studies and Policies
Whilst Kenya is yet to transform into CE, it has made progress in transitioning to a Green Economy
(GE). The transformation to a CE has to be seen in the context of the Kenyan governments GE strategy.
The Government of Kenya has taken several steps towards a GE and developed a strategy that seeks to
consolidate, scale up and embed green growth initiatives in national development goals. The Green
Economy Strategy and Implementation Plan (GESIP) provides the overall policy framework to facilitate
a transition to a GE and outlines the need to mainstream and align GE initiatives across the economic,
social and environmental spheres (Gass, 2014). It is expected that a GE will protect the country’s
natural capital, reduce environment and climate footprint, improves competitiveness and spurs
economic growth which in turn would create green and decent jobs.
The Green Economy Strategy is geared towards enabling Kenya to attain a higher economic growth
rate consistent with the Vision 2030, which firmly embeds the principles of sustainable development in
the overall national growth strategy. The policy framework for GE is designed to support a globally
competitive low-carbon development path through promoting economic resilience and resource
efficiency, sustainable management of natural resources, development of sustainable infrastructure and
providing support for social inclusion (Government of Kenya, 2016). It is spearheaded by the Ministry
of Environment and Natural Resources, through an inter-agency steering committee that comprise of
experts representing key government sectors, civil society and development partners.
In identifying the potential drivers for a GE, Klein, et al. (2013) observe that economic use of abundant
natural resources could play a significant role. Effectively used and sustainably managed, these natural
resources could offer great economic potential, which is currently under-exploited. Another important
driver is the need for affordable and sustainable energy sources, as a great part of the population still
lacks access to energy. Economic transformation to a CE and economic growth, necessary to lift people
out of poverty, will require substantial energy resources. The high cost of connecting remote areas and
communities to the grid make the development of decentralized sustainable energy solutions as well as
the use of renewable energies important drivers on the way towards a GE. Kenya is beginning to address
both the CE and GE through different approaches in the priority sectors municipal waste management,
waste electric and electronic equipment and rural electrification.
Municipal Waste Management
Waste management is a major challenge in Kenya. The capital Nairobi produces around 2,400 tons of
waste per day. 93 per cent of this waste is potentially reusable, but only 5 per cent is recycled and
composted and only 33 per cent is collected for disposal at Nairobi’s single official dumpsite in
Dandora. The rest is either disposed on illegal dumpsites, left next to houses or openly burnt. Both the
official and illegal dumpsites are operated in an unsystematic, unplanned and highly unsanitary way.
As a result, poorly managed solid waste pollutes the air, water and soil, causing significant health and
environmental problems. This is especially true in slums and other low-income areas, where high
population density, paired with lack of infrastructure and service provision, aggravates these problems.
(Soezer, 2016). This waste includes plastic shopping bags; according to UN Environment, over 100
million plastic shopping bags are given out every year by supermarkets in Kenya. About 4,000 tons of
single-use plastic bags are produced each month and half of them end up in municipal waste streams

that eventually block drainages and form a large portion of the garbage in major dumpsites. (Kahinga,
2017)
Against this background the Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA) on a Circular Economy
Municipal Solid Waste Management Approach for Urban Areas was proposed. This NAMA promotes
an alternative to the existing waste value chain. Instead of waste being collected for disposal only,
NAMA facilitates the diversion of 90 per cent of collected waste away from disposal sites and towards
various recycling practices. The approach relates multiple links currently missing in the value chain:
recycling points, where waste will be sorted for subsequent recycling, and composting facilities for the
organic waste treatment. Under the NAMA, up to 600 tons of waste will be recycled every day, which
accounts for 25 per cent of Nairobi’s total waste. This will save more than 800,000 tons in CO2
emissions (over the 15 years’ lifetime of NAMA) and add 1,600 jobs to the economy (Soezer, 2016)
The ban on some categories of plastics in the country was the first step towards establishing a well-
functioning recycling sector that would open job opportunities (Kahinga, 2017). In addition, through
many initiatives and with support from development partners, Kenya has made strides in mainstreaming
the CE in small businesses in the country. It is estimated that a shift in investment to green sectors
would lead to an additional 3.1 million people in Kenya being lifted out of poverty by 2030, while also
contributing to a healthy GDP growth in the same period. Currently there are several small-scale traders
and companies that are recycling and processing waste, which has created employment and is
contributing to their livelihoods. They have teams that go round collecting the waste which they later
sort and recycle. The main challenge has been their limited processing capacity.
There are also some recycling companies that are turning plastic waste into building materials, furniture
and other artefacts. EcoPost (www.ecopost.co.ke) is a social enterprise that addresses the challenges of
urban waste management and plastic pollution, chronic youth unemployment, deforestation and climate
change. EcoPost reported to have processed 2.5 tonnes of plastic monthly and plans to triple that output.
It has created 40 direct jobs and 5,000 indirect jobs. Over the next 5 years, it hopes to create at least 150
direct jobs and 20,000 indirect jobs.
Waste electrical and electronic equipment
Kenya has also witnessed exponential growth in the use of mobile phones, with the Communications
Authority of Kenya (CAK) reporting that the number of users as of September 2017 stood at 41.0
million (CAK, 2017). This has mainly been driven by influx of cheap short life products mainly from
Asian countries. In 2016 for example, China’s mobile phone exports to Kenya amounted to Sh2.8 billion
according to data from the Kenya national Bureau of Statistics. Mobile handsets topped the list of items
that local traders ordered from China, underlining the popularity of the low-priced smartphones. Due
to the short life cycles and a growing middle class, mobile phones are bought every 2 – 4 years with the
old or damaged handsets or their accessories being discarded as e-waste.
Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) commonly referred to as e-waste is the fastest
growing waste component in Kenya as well as globally. UNEP estimates that over 17,000 tonnes of
electronic waste are generated in Kenya annually. This is equivalent to 130 million mobile phones. The
high rate of e-waste accumulation in Kenya is caused by short product life-cycles, the increasing
affordability of electronics, and donations of used electronics from other countries. E-waste is
composed of a complex mix of plastics and chemicals, including heavy metals and radioactive elements,
which, when not properly handled, can be harmful to human health and the environment.
The WEEE Centre in Nairobi is one company that offers the service of awareness training and safe
disposal of electrical and electronic waste in accordance with the National Environment Management
Authority (NEMA) waste regulations and WEEE regulations that is protective of both the environment
and public health. The WEEE Centre processed approximately 200 tonnes of e-waste in 2016, which is
only about 1% of Kenya’s total e-waste production. While plastic and metal can be processed in Kenya,
other materials are deemed too hazardous and must be shipped abroad. Recycled e-waste is thus
prepared before being shipped to Europe for processing.
To improve e-waste management, the Government of Kenya through the National Environment
Management Authority (NEMA), has developed the draft Environmental Management and Co-

ordination (E-Waste Management) Regulations 2013 which will provide an appropriate legal and
institutional framework and mechanisms for the management of e-waste handling, collection,
transportation, recycling and safe disposal of e-waste. It also provides for improved legal and
administrative co-ordination of the diverse sectoral initiatives in management of e-waste as a waste
stream in order to improve the national capacity for the management of the e-waste (NEMA, 2017). If
successful, the sustainable and safe management of e-waste can potentially turn hazardous work into
green jobs through collection, repair, recycling and processing of e-waste.
Rural electrification
Electricity in Kenya remains a preserve of a few with national electrification levels remaining below
30% on Kenya. The biggest challenge in effectively connecting rural communities to power grids has
been the high price of an electricity connection. Currently, the price of a household connection is
USD410, which is simply unaffordable for poor, rural households. Electricity connection cost
approximately Ksh 35,000 (Euro 318) and about Euro 0.1145 equivalent per Kwh of electricity service.
In addition, rural households in Kenya tend to be spread apart and there are few straight lines through
which one could easily run a power line. This makes it challenging for electricity planners to build cost-
effective low voltage networks, particularly when they are unable to connect all of the neighbouring
households at the same time (Lee et al, 2015).
The above conditions present an opportunity for the development and adoption of renewable power
generation technologies. Indeed, solar photovoltaic (PV) deployment has grown at unprecedented rates
since the early 2000s. Global installed PV capacity reached 222 gigawatts (GW) at the end of 2015 and
is expected to rise further to 4,500 GW by 2050. Particularly high cumulative deployment rates are
expected by that time in China (1,731 GW), India (600 GW), the United States (600 GW), Japan (350
GW) and Germany (110 GW). As the global PV market increases, so will the volume of
decommissioned PV panels. At the end of 2016, cumulative global PV waste streams are expected to
have reached 43,500-250,000 metric tonnes. This is 0.1%-0.6% of the cumulative mass of all installed
panels (4 million metric tonnes). Meanwhile, PV waste streams are bound to only increase further.
Given an average panel lifetime of 30 years, large amounts of annual waste are anticipated by the early
2030s (IRENA and IEA-PVPS, 2016).
In 2014, new capacity additions of solar PV in Africa exceeded 800 MW, more than doubling the
continent’s cumulative installed PV capacity. This was followed by additions of 750 MW in 2015.
There is also a fast-growing PV market to meet off-grid electricity needs. Technology improvements
and lower costs have spurred local and social entrepreneurs in the solar home system (SHS) market and
in developing stand-alone mini-grids. 2015 and 2016 have been recorded as breakthrough years for
solar PV in Africa. However, ensuring that the right regulatory framework and institutional structures
are in place will be an important pre-condition to maintain this growth. Efforts by development partners
will therefore not only be essential from a capacity building perspective, but also potentially vital in
using programmes to help de-risk solar PV projects (e.g. as is being done by the World Bank’s Scaling
Solar project). If these efforts are successful, the dividend for Africa could be significant. IRENA’s
REmap analysis – indicating a doubling of the share of renewable energy globally by 2030 – shows that
Africa could be home to more than 70GW of solar PV capacity by 2030 (Taylor, 2017).
In the wake of increasing solar power deployment in Africa, the continent is now battling the challenge
of huge economic losses arising from reliance on imported solar power equipment and tools which are
in high demand in Africa, but cannot be made locally. While there are a few businesses involved in
local production, varying from assembly of batteries and PV panels to simpler component
manufacturing, the bulk of the solar products in use within the continent originates from foreign
markets. Both funding as well as, technical capacity for African solar projects are mostly sourced
externally; primarily from Europe, America and Asia. Until power access is sufficiently improved to
support robust local manufacturing in Africa, optimizing solar power’s potential and scaling its adoption
will continue to rely on frameworks that support import trade pattern (Mama, 2018)
The benefits of solar traverse different aspects of consumer’s lives. M-Kopa, a local solar energy
provider estimates that a customer saves about $750 over the first four years by switching to its basic

solar kit. The firm estimates that it has saved $206-million for the 300,000 households and businesses
that use its products, while giving them 34 million hours of kerosene-free lighting a month. Solar
energy eventually can provide clean, renewable power to millions of customers for whom affordable
electricity has remained out of reach. This also benefits the environment while contributing positively
to their customer’s lives health-wise and economically showing how solar lighting can start a virtuous
cycle of development and progress (Faris, 2015). With about 46% of the population living below the
poverty line, the adoption of solar energy can combat poverty and provide new livelihoods
opportunities.
The initiatives discussed above, if implemented well, are bound to impact positively on poverty in the
country. High poverty levels result in a significant dependence on non-traded traditional biomass fuels
due to the inaccessibility of other energy options both financially and in terms of infrastructure
development. As of 2007, traditional biomass energy resources in Kenya such as firewood, charcoal
and agricultural wastes contributed approximately up to 70% of Kenya’s final energy demand and
provided for almost 90% of rural household energy needs; about one third in the form of charcoal and
the rest from firewood.
South Africa – CE and Mobile Phones
1
The experience in South Africa (SA) is set in a different economic, cultural and development context
to Kenya. Mobile phones are quite ubiquitous in the modern world and the number of mobile phones in
the world is understood to be greater than the number of traditional landlines. In 2014 there were
estimated to be 4.5bn mobile phone users in the world compared to 1.2bn traditional fixed landlines
(Mobiforge, 2015). Globally this is generating significant amounts of under-utilised scarce resources
where significant numbers of phones are left in drawers when upgraded.
Data on the number of mobile phones sent to landfill globally each year is difficult to isolate as records
are not kept by landfill operators to this level of detail. It is therefore not currently known how many
mobile phones are sent to landfill or incineration each year in SA. Even though mobile phones form a
small part of the e-waste stream in SA, they possess greater amounts of valuable materials in comparison
to other types of e-waste, such as computers, photocopiers and printers (Ramirez, A. et al., 2013). The
constraints to adopting more circular approaches are wide-ranging and some relate to mobile phone
design, manufacture, use and disposal processes. A co-ordinated effort is required by government,
regulators, manufacturers, network operators, retailers and consumers is required to ensure that
constraints to recycling are identified and strategies developed to overcome them.
During the research several solutions were identified. The key theme which emerged was the need to
recognise the complexity of designing, manufacturing, and recycling mobile phones and the extent of
the global value chains that result. The constraints identified from primary and secondary sources and
an example of a possible solution are summarised in Table 9.3 below.
Table 9.3 - Summary of findings and circular economy solutions to mobile phones (Desmond, 2016)
Constraint
Category
Secondary Sources
(Literature)
Primary Sources
(Interviews)
Example
Solution
Political
•Lack of enabling environment
and incentives
•Poor implementation of policy
•Manufacturer bearing the cost
of disposal
•Lack of recycling infrastructure
•Definition of e-waste includes both
electric and electronic
•Lack of government support to
formal and informal businesses
involved in recycling
SA metropolitan
city council
partnering with
European city to
share learning
of implementing
1
. This section is based on research for an MA dissertation (Desmond, 2016) into the constraints and
solutions to recycling mobile phone in the Western Cape, South Africa.

Constraint
Category
Secondary Sources
(Literature)
Primary Sources
(Interviews)
Example
Solution
•Informal sector not encouraged
to engage with formal systems
•Lack of co-ordinated national
waste strategy
•Manufacturers not being held to
account for disposal costs
•E-waste management is complex
process
•No separation of recyclable
materials in domestic waste
collection
•Silo working in government
departments
recycling
initiatives.
Economic
•Poor return rate of phones for
recycling
•Lack of formal recycling
schemes
•Insufficient financial support
from banks and other funders
•Landfill is still a cheap option
for disposal
•Few incentives to develop CE
initiatives
•Lack of economically viable take-
back schemes
•Few financial incentives for
consumers to return end-of-life
devices
•Informal economy does not have
access to funding for parts
•Raw material prices still too low to
encourage reclaiming
•Manufacturers focus on profit from
selling new rather than second hand
phones
•No current business case for
investing in CE technologies
•Informal economy not involved in
collection and e-waste recycling
Take-back
scheme
established in
UK through
collaboration
between retailer
and
environmental
consultancy
Social
•Repair not seen as a viable
option by consumers
•Culture of retaining handsets in
drawers
•Collection systems not placed
in convenient locations
•Informal sector not suitably
skilled to handle e-waste
•Lack of trusted take-back scheme
re personal privacy
•End-of-use devices kept in drawers
not available for recycling
•Manufacturers not accepting EPR
•Consumers still in ownership
mindset rather than ‘use’
•Informal workers reluctant to
register to participate in activities
Informal sector
working with
other
stakeholders to
collect and
process disposal
of mobile phones
in Ghana
Technological
•Mobile phones not designed to
be repaired
•Treatment of hazardous waste
in limited locations
•Lack of data on waste limits
strategic planning
•No government support for
equipping informal sector with
appropriate technology
•Incompatibility of phone
chargers
•Mobile phones not built to last and
barriers to repair
•Complexity of components hinders
full recycling in SA
•Lack of technical capability in SA
for beneficiation work
•Low tech approach to recycling
missing out of higher value
Creation of
secure process
to wipe
confidential
personal data
from devices
which have been
returned under
take-back
schemes
Legal
•Non-transferability of Western
models to developing countries
•Manufacturers resisted EPR
legislation
•Illegal importation of e-waste
limited options for improving
standards of recycling
•No co-ordinated legislation for
e-waste management
•Some of waste legislation is
complex and lacks guidance on
interpretation
•Confusion over whether EPR
legislation is enforceable
•Lack of capability to draft and
enforce e-waste regulations
EPR legislation
has been
successfully
implemented in
EU under the
WEEE directive
Environmental
•Poor control over informal
workers polluting land with toxic
materials
•Lack of local waste plans reduce
efficiency of handling
Lessons learnt
from REDISA,
tyre recycling

Constraint
Category
Secondary Sources
(Literature)
Primary Sources
(Interviews)
Example
Solution
•Air pollution from industrial
processes limiting options
•Little separation of domestic
recyclable waste
•Phone design is non-
environmentally friendly
•No man-made alternatives to virgin
raw materials in phone
initiative in SA,
applied to
mobile phone
recycling
Manufacturers have a role to play in facilitating retailers and network operators to launch ‘take-back’
schemes to overcome the constraint of low return rates by consumers. Lessons can be learnt from
successful CE applications in different sectors. An alternative ‘servitisation’ model would involve a
consumer paying for the use of the phone (rather than owning it) and at the end of the contract the old
handset would be taken back by the seller in return for a new phone and a new contract. This would
replace the popular current system of free upgrades which creates stocks of useable but unused handsets.
One element of CE for mobile phones involves the recycling of their component parts, as well as
reducing the amount of e-waste that ultimately goes to landfill and incineration, at the same time as
recovering high value metals, minerals and rare earths. Whilst the amounts in each phone is small, the
large volumes that can potentially be processed could make this commercially viable. Yet, given the
amount of energy and materials contained within a smartphone, the most efficient circular approach is
to keep the handset in use for the longest possible time through circular activities such as:
a) Reuse – a phone is passed onto another person to use with its original specification intact
without major refurbishment from its original specification, often to friends and family.
b) Resell – the current market value of the phone is realised from a third party for cash or
equivalent; these phones are either refurbished by the buyer or sent in bulk for auction.
c) Repair – when a device is broken and its useful life can be extended through the refurbishment
and replacement of failed components.
d) Refurbish - new parts are added to the device to restore it to working order.
e) Remanufacture - the device is brought back to its original condition with some form of quality
guarantee attached.
These interlinkage of options is summarised in the Figure 9.1 below.

Figure 9.1 - Circular Economy Flow Diagram for a Mobile Phone
The ability to repair a phone requires manufacturers to design them so that components (such as camera,
battery and Wi-Fi) can be replaced or upgraded with assistance from online manuals such as ifixit.com.
For example, consideration is now being given to the need for the redesign of mobile phones by the
manufacturers using modular principles so that parts can be repaired and upgraded; the only currently
commercially available phone is made by Fairphone (Fairphone, 2018).
One route to overcoming the constraints to efficiently recycling mobile phones in SA is the creation of
a broader CE manifesto or roadmap, on a country, regional or city basis, as has been created for a few
countries and cities in the Global North e.g. Finland (SITRA, 2016) and London in the UK. A focus of
possible future research is an evaluation of the EU Circular Economy Package (European Commission,
2017) and the BSI BS8001 CE standard (BSI, 2017) in an African context particularly waste creation
and resource utilisation. The role of the informal sector will need to become an additional dimension
for SA as it has not have been covered in detail in CE roadmaps in European countries.
These constraints can be overcome through changes to legislation, policy, infrastructure, financial
incentives and consumer behaviour which would require all key stakeholders in collaboration
participating in a globalised economy to recover valuable resources and reduce waste.
Moving Africa towards a Circular Economy - Conclusions and Next Steps
The transition towards CE in Africa can contribute towards the achievement of SDGs. Gower and
Schröder (2016) identify several as potential impact areas, particularly Goal 12 “Sustainable Production
and Consumption”. The opportunities for accelerating CE principles in Africa are increasing and
African case studies are emerging which reflect the local cultural context e.g. Rwanda’s new e-waste
recycling facility which was opened in December 2017.
In Northern countries, the CE narrative is focussed on economic and environmental issues with less
emphasis on social impacts. In comparison, CE activities in the Global South focus on social and
environmental matters, with economic considerations only recently emerging. Circular practices have
been in use in Africa for many years, yet case studies of good practice have remained largely hidden.
This chapter has suggested that, whilst the transition towards CE in Africa will build on lessons learnt
and principles developed in northern countries, there will also be distinct differences in design, strategy
and implementation of the CE in Africa.
Examples of current CE policies and practices have been considered in Kenya (renewable energy) and
South Africa (e-waste) which, with others, can be shared throughout the continent. The main countries

in Africa which are driving CE are Nigeria, South Africa, Rwanda and Kenya. Networks such as the
African Circular Economy Alliance (development of national and local government policy) and the
Africa Circular Economy Network (strategic application in business) working in collaboration will be
able to facilitate this transition process. For Africa to transition from a linear to a circular economy,
barriers need to be overcome through extensive collaboration between the various actors who each have
a specific role to play.
Further research is required into how standards and CE policies decided in the Global North will be
impacting African countries and how African countries are implementing circular policies and business
principles in their own context. The development of national, regional and city CE roadmaps,
considering the views and experience of a wide variety of actors, will be an opportunity to co-ordinate
action plans in individual countries. The potential benefits from a CE in Africa can then start to be
realised with a positive impact on livelihoods, environment and job creation as well as working towards
achieving SDGs.
REFERENCES
African Circular Economy Network, 2018. Available at: <https://www.acen.africa/> [Accessed 11
August 2018].
BSI, 2017. BS 8001:2017 - Framework for implementing the principles of the circular economy in
organizations. London: British Standards Institution.
Business Report, 2017, Redisa waste tyre plan placed in final liquidation. Available at:
<https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/redisa-waste-tyre-plan-placed-in-final-liquidation-11397738>
[Accessed 11 August 2018].
CAK, 2017. First Quarter Sector Statistics Report for the Financial Year 2017/2018. Communications
Authority of Kenya.
Circle Economy, 2018. 7 Key Principles. Available at: <https://www.circle-economy.com/the-7-key-
elements-of-the-circular-economy> [Accessed 31 May 2018].
Circular Economy Club, 2018. Available at: https://circulareconomyclub.com [Accessed 12 August
2018]
Desmond, P., 2016. Towards a circular economy in South Africa - what are the constraints to recycling
mobile phones? MA Dissertation, Institute of Development Studies
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013a. Towards the Circular Economy Volume 1 - Economic and
business rationale for an accelerated transition. Isle of Wight: Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013b. Towards the Circular Economy Volume 2 - Opportunities for the
consumer goods sector. Isle of Wight: Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2018. Building Blocks of a Circular Economy. Available at:
<https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/building-blocks> [Accessed 18 May
2018]
European Commission, 2017. Report on the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan.
Brussels: European Commission
Fernandes, A.G., 2016. Closing the Loop - the benefits of the circular economy for developing countries
and emerging economies. London: Tearfund

Fairphone, 2017. Fairer materials – a list of the 10 we’re focussing on. Available at:
<https://www.fairphone.com/en/2017/02/01/fairer-materials-a-list-of-the-next-10-were-taking-on/>
[Accessed 31 May 2018]
Fairtrade Foundation, 2013. New Marks Unveiled for Fairtrade Gold and Precious Metals. Available
at: <https://www.fairtrade.org.uk/Media-Centre/News/October-2013/New-marks-unveiled-for-
Fairtrade-gold-and-precious-metals> [Accessed 31 May 2018].
Faris, S., 2015 The Solar Company Making a Profit on Poor Africans. M-Kopa plans to be a $1 billion
company by selling solar panels to rural residents—and providing them with credit.
<https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-mkopa-solar-in-africa/> [Accessed on 10 April 2018].
Gaas, P., 2014. Kenya Green Economy Strategy and Implementation Plan. Available at:
<http://www.iisd.org/project/kenya-green-economy-strategy-and-implementation-plan> [Accessed 12
April 2018].
Gardien, P., Rincker, M. and Deckers, E., 2016. Designing for the Knowledge Economy: Accelerating
Breakthrough Innovation Through Co-creation. The Design Journal.
Government of Kenya, 2016. Green Economy Strategy and Implementation Plan 2016 – 2030: A low
carbon, resource efficient, equitable and inclusive socio-economic transformation. Nairobi:
Government of Kenya
Gower, R. and Schröder, P., 2016 Virtuous Circle - how the circular economy can create jobs and save
lives in low and middle-income countries. London: Tearfund.
IRENA and IEA-PVPS, 2016. End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels. International
Renewable Energy Agency and International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems.
IRP, 2017. Assessing global resource use: A systems approach to resource efficiency and
pollution reduction’ A Report of the International Resource Panel. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kahinga, E., 2017. Plastic bags and the circular economy in Kenya. Available at:
<https://www.kenyacic.org/news/plastic-bags-and-circular-economy-kenya> [Accessed 15 April
2018].
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. and Hekkert, M., 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of
114 definitions. Utrecht: Innovation Studies Group, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development,
Utrecht University.
Klein, J., Jochaud, P., Richter, H., Bechmann, R. and Hartmann, S., 2013. Green Economy in Sub-
Saharan Africa Lessons from Benin, Ethiopia, Ghana, Namibia and Nigeria. Bonn: Deutsche
Gesellschaft für internationale Zusammenarbeit Gmbh
Lacy, P. and Rutqvist, J., 2015. Waste to Wealth – Creating Advantage in a Circular Economy.
Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan
Lee, K., 2015 Barriers to Electrification for ‘Under Grid’ Households in in Rural Kenya. National
Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Available at: <http://blumcenter.berkeley.edu/news-
posts/electrification-for-under-grid-households-in-rural-kenya-five-questions-for-ken-lee/> [Accessed
on 12 April 2018].
Lemille, A., 2015. Inserting the Humansphere. Available at: <http://www.alexandrelemille.com/>
[Accessed 31 May 2018].
Lemille, A., 2016. Circular Economy 2.0. Available at: <https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/circular-
economy-20-alex-lemille/> [Accessed 31.5.18].
Mama, C., 2018. Africa Amidst 2018 Global Solar Market Predictions. Available at:
<https://solarmagazine.com> [Accessed 27 May 2018].

Mobiforge, (2015). Global mobile statistics 2014 Part A: Mobile subscribers; handset market share;
mobile operators. Available at: https://mobiforge.com/researchanalysis/global-mobile-statistics-2014-
part-a-mobile-subscribers-handset-market-share-mobileoperators [Accessed 12 August 2018].
Molewa, E., 2017 South African Government Environmental Affairs Minister speech in Bonn, Germany
11th November 2017. Available at:
<https://www.environment.gov.za/speech/molewa_cop23africaalliance_circular_economylaunch>
[Accessed 22 February 2018].
Morgan, J. and Mitchell, P., 2015. Employment and the circular economy. London: Green Alliance
National Environment Management Authority, 2017. Kenya Draft E- Waste regulations. Available at:
<https://www.nema.go.ke/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35&Itemid=177>
[Accessed 28 December 2017].
Noble, P. and Schröder, P., 2017. Closing the Plastic Waste Loop - how do waste pickers contribute?
Institute of Development Studies. Available at: <https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinion/closing-the-plastic-
waste-loop-how-do-waste-pickers-contribute> [Accessed 5 May 2018].
Pantsar, M., Herlevi, K., Jarvinen, L. and Lalta, S., 2016. Leading the cycle – Finnish road map to a
circular economy 2016–2025. Sitra Studies.
Preston, F. and Lehne, J. 2017. A Wider Circle? The Circular Economy in Developing Countries.
Energy, Environment and Resources Department Briefing. London: Chatham House.
Raworth, K., 2017. Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. New
York: Random House.
Schmitz H., 2015. Africa’s biggest recycling hub? Institute of Development Studies Blog. Available at:
<https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinion/africa-s-biggest-recycling-hub> [Accessed 31 May 2018].
Schroeder, P., Anggraeni, K. and Weber, U. 2018. The Relevance of Circular Economy Practices to the
Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Industrial Ecology
Schroeder, P., Dewick, P., Kusi-Sarpong, S. and Hofstetter, J.S., 2018. Circular economy and power
relations in global value chains: Tensions and trade-offs for lower income countries. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling Journal.
Schroeder, P. 2018. Can the circular economy design out inequality as well as waste? Institute of
Development Studies. Available at: <https://www.ids.ac.uk/opinion/can-the-circular-economy-design-
out-inequality-as-well-as-waste> [Accessed 31 May 2018].
Soezer, A., 2016. A Circular Economy Solid Waste Management Approach For Urban Areas In Kenya.
<http://www.undp.org/content/ndc-support-programme/en/home/resources/namas/kenya-solid-waste-
management-nama.html> [Accessed 20 December 2017].
Taylor, M., 2017. Solar PV in Africa: Falling costs driving rapid growth. Available at:
<https://www.esi-africa.com/solar-pv-africa-falling-costs-driving-rapid-growth> [Accessed 15 May
2018].
Webster, K., 2015. The Circular Economy – a wealth of flows. Isle of Wight: Ellen MacArthur
Foundation.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2016. Informal approaches towards a circular
economy. Available at: <https://www.wbcsd.org/Clusters/Circular-Economy-
Factor10/Resources/Informal-approaches-towards-a-circular-economy> [Accessed 18 May 2018].