Trading radical for incremental change: the politics of a circular economy transition in the German packaging sector

References

• Albrecht, E. (2018). Discursive struggle and agency - updating the Finnish Peatland conservation network. Social Sciences, 7(10), 177. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7100177.
   Google Scholar
• Ampe, K., Paredis, E., Asveld, L., Osseweijer, P., & Block, T. (2019). A transition in the Dutch wastewater system? The struggle between discourses and with lock-ins a transition in the Dutch wastewater system? The struggle between discourses and with lock-ins. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1680275.
   Google Scholar
• Avelino, F., Grin, J., Pel, B., & Jhagroe, S. (2016). The politics of sustainability transitions. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(5), 557–567. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1216782.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J. (2016). Shifting power relations in sustainability transitions: A multi-actor perspective. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(5), 628–649. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2015.1112259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, I. (2003). New environmental policy instruments in the European Union: Politics, economics, and the implementation of the packaging waste directive. Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Baum, H.-G. (2014). Neuausrichtung der Verpackungsentsorgung unter Beachtung einer nachhaltigen Kreislaufwirtschaft. Fulda.
   Google Scholar
• Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information. Sage Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A.T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• de Jesus, A., & Mendonça, S. (2018). Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the eco-innovation road to the circular economy. Ecological Economics, 145, 75–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deutscher Bundestag. (2018). Neuregelungen durch das Verpackungsgesetz gegenüber der Verpackungsverordnung – WD 8 – 3000 – 051/17. Berlin.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duygan, M., Stauffacher, M., & Meylan, G. (2019). A heuristic for conceptualizing and uncovering the determinants of agency in socio-technical transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 33, 13–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000334668.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eichstädt, T., Carius, A., & Kraemer, R. A. (1999). Producer responsibility within policy networks: The case of German packaging policy. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 1(2), 133–153. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/714038530.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2015). Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the circular economy. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Feindt, P. H., & Oels, A. (2005). Does discourse matter? Discourse analysis in environmental policy making. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7(3), 161–173. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339638.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, L.-B., & Newig, J. (2016). Importance of actors and agency in sustainability transitions: A systematic exploration of the literature. Sustainability, 8(5), 476–497. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/su8050476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanderka, F., & Stroetmann, C. (2012). Von der Verpackungsverordnung zum Wertstoffgesetz. AbfallR, 1, 2–11.
   Google Scholar
• Flynn, A., & Hacking, N. (2019). Setting standards for a circular economy: A challenge too far for neoliberal environmental governance? Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 1256–1267. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. (2011). On patterns and agency in transition dynamics: Some key insights from the KSI programme. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 76–81. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.04.008.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M. (2006). Doing discourse analysis: Coalitions, practises, meaning. In M. Van den Brink, & T. Metze (Eds.), Discourse theory and method in the social sciences (pp. 65–76). Netherlands Graduate School of Urban and Regional Research.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M., & Versteeg, W. (2005). A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7(3), 175–184. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15239080500339646
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, K., van Santen, R., & Kirchherr, J. (2020). Policies for transitioning towards a circular economy: Expectations from the European Union (EU). Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 155, 104634. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern, F. (2015). Engaging with the politics, agency and structures in the technological innovation systems approach. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 67–69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirchherr, J., Piscicelli, L., Bour, R., Kostense-Smit, E., Muller, J., Huibrechtse-Truijens, A., & Hekkert, M. (2018). Barriers to the circular economy: Evidence from the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics, 150, 264–272. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Köhler, J., Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Markard, J., Onsongo, E., Wieczorek, A., Alkemade, F., Avelino, F., Bergek, A., Boons, F., Fünfschilling, L., Hess, D., Holtz, G., Hyysalo, S., Jenkins, K., Kivimaa, P., Martiskainen, M., Mcmeekin, A., Mühlemeier, M. S., … Wells, P. (2019). An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 31, 1–32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, S., Blum, M., & Leipold, S. (2019). What future for the voluntary carbon offset market after Paris? An explorative study based on the discursive agency approach. Climate Policy, 19(4), 414–426. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1556152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarevic, D., & Valve, H. (2017). Narrating expectations for the circular economy: Towards a common and contested European transition. Energy Research & Social Science, 31, 60–69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipold, S., Feindt, P. H., Winkel, G., & Keller, R. (2019). Discourse analysis of environmental policy revisited: Traditions, trends, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 21(5), 445–463. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1660462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipold, S., & Petit-Boix, A. (2018). The circular economy and the bio-based sector - perspectives of European and German stakeholders. Journal of Cleaner Production, 201, 1125–1137. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipold, S., Sotirov, M., Frei, T., & Winkel, G. (2016). Protecting “First world” markets and “Third world” nature: The politics of illegal logging in Australia, the European Union and the United States. Global Environmental Change, 39, 294–304. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipold, S., & Winkel, G. (2016). Divide and conquer-discursive agency in the politics of illegal logging in the United States. Global Environmental Change, 36, 35–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipold, S., & Winkel, G. (2017). Discursive Agency: (Re-)conceptualizing actors and practices in the analysis of discursive policymaking. Policy Studies Journal, 45(3), 510–534. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loorbach, D., Frantzeskaki, N., & Avelino, F. (2017). Sustainability transitions research: Transforming science and practise for societal change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 42(1), 599–626. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meadowcroft, J. (2011). Engaging with the politics of sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 70–75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.003.
   Google Scholar
• Mendoza, J. M. F., Sharmina, M., Gallego-Schmid, A., Heyes, G., & Azapagic, A. (2017). Integrating backcasting and eco-design for the circular economy: The BECE framework. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 526–544. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumayer, E. (2000). German packaging waste management: A successful voluntary agreement with less successful environmental effects. European Environment, 10(3), 152–163. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0976(200005/06)10:33.0.CO;2-N
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, J., Schulz, K., Vervoort, J., van der Hel, S., Widerberg, O., Adler, C., Hurlbert, M., Anderton, K., Sethi, M., & Barau, A. (2017). Exploring the governance and politics of transformations towards sustainability. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 24, 1–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.09.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasek, A., & Smuda, F. (2018). Ex-post evaluation of competition law enforcement effects in the German packaging waste compliance scheme market. De Economist, 166, 89–109. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-017-9306-7.
   Google Scholar
• Ritzén, S., & Sandström, GÖ. (2017). Barriers to the circular economy - integration of perspectives and domains. Procedia CIRP, 64, 7–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.005.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C., & Geels, F. W. (2018). Public storylines in the British transition from rail to road transport (1896–2000): Discursive struggles in the multi-level perspective. Science as Culture, 27(4), 513–542. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2018.1519532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbloom, D. (2018). Framing low-carbon pathways: A discursive analysis of contending storylines surrounding the phase-out of coal-fired power in Ontario. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 27, 129–145. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.11.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schüler, K. (2018). Aufkommen und Verwertung von Verpackungsabfällen in Deutschland im Jahr 2016. Dessau-Rosslau: Umweltbundesamt.
   Google Scholar
• Sharp, L., & Richardson, T. (2001). Reflections on Foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental policy research. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jepp.88
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2010). The politics of social-ecological resilience and sustainable socio-technical transitions. Ecology and Society, 15(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03218-150111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tencati, A., Pogutz, S., Moda, B., Brambilla, M., & Cacia, C. (2016). Prevention policies addressing packaging and packaging waste: Some emerging trends. Waste Management, 56, 35–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.06.025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar