IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v3y2014i2p340-361d34420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Status of Industrial Ecology in Australia: Barriers and Enablers

Author

Listed:
  • Glen D. Corder

    (Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, Sustainable Minerals Institute, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia)

  • Artem Golev

    (Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, Sustainable Minerals Institute, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia)

  • Julian Fyfe

    (Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney NSW 2007, Australia)

  • Sarah King

    (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Future Manufacturing Flagship, Geelong, Victoria 3216, Australia)

Abstract

Drawing on current international industrial ecology thinking and experiences with Australian initiatives, this article critically overviews the current status of industrial ecology in Australia and examines the barriers and potential strategies to realise greater uptake and application of the concept. The analysis is conducted across three categories: heavy industrial areas (including Kwinana and Gladstone), mixed industrial parks (Wagga Wagga and Port Melbourne), and waste exchange networks, and identifies the past and future significance of seven different types of barriers—regulation, information, community, economic, technical, cooperation and trust, commitment to sustainable development—for each of the three categories. The outcomes from this analysis highlight that regulation, information, and economic barriers for heavy industrial area and mixed industrial parks, and economic and technical barriers for waste exchange networks are the current and future focus for industrial ecology applications in Australia. These findings appear to be consistent with recently published frameworks and learnings. The authors propose key questions that could enhance greater adoption of industrial ecology applications in Australia and acknowledge that international research and experiences, while partly providing answers to these questions, need to be adapted and refined for the Australian context.

Suggested Citation

  • Glen D. Corder & Artem Golev & Julian Fyfe & Sarah King, 2014. "The Status of Industrial Ecology in Australia: Barriers and Enablers," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:2:p:340-361:d:34420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/2/340/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/2/340/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weslynne S. Ashton, 2009. "The Structure, Function, and Evolution of a Regional Industrial Ecosystem," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 13(2), pages 228-246, April.
    2. Dick van Beers & Albena Bossilkov & Glen Corder & Rene van Berkel, 2007. "Industrial Symbiosis in the Australian Minerals Industry: The Cases of Kwinana and Gladstone," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(1), pages 55-72, January.
    3. D. Rachel Lombardi & Peter Laybourn, 2012. "Redefining Industrial Symbiosis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(1), pages 28-37, February.
    4. Marian Chertow & John Ehrenfeld, 2012. "Organizing Self‐Organizing Systems," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(1), pages 13-27, February.
    5. Peter Laybourn & D. Rachel Lombardi, 2012. "Industrial Symbiosis in European Policy," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(1), pages 11-12, February.
    6. Marian R. Chertow, 2007. "“Uncovering” Industrial Symbiosis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(1), pages 11-30, January.
    7. Jouni Korhonen, 2002. "Two Paths to Industrial Ecology: Applying the Product-based and Geographical Approaches," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 39-57.
    8. René van Berkel, 2009. "Comparability of Industrial Symbioses," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 13(4), pages 483-486, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emilia Faria & Cristiane Barreto & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Jorge Alfredo Cerqueira Streit & Patricia Guarnieri, 2023. "Brazilian Circular Economy Pilot Project: Integrating Local Stakeholders’ Perception and Social Context in Industrial Symbiosis Analyses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Artem Golev & Glen D. Corder, 2015. "Typology of Options for Metal Recycling: Australia’s Perspective," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Angela Neves & Radu Godina & Susana G. Azevedo & Carina Pimentel & João C.O. Matias, 2019. "The Potential of Industrial Symbiosis: Case Analysis and Main Drivers and Barriers to Its Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-68, December.
    2. Emilia Faria & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Cristiane Barreto, 2021. "Social, Economic, and Institutional Configurations of the Industrial Symbiosis Process: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature and a Proposed Theoretical and Analytical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-25, June.
    3. Fraccascia, Luca & Yazan, Devrim Murat & Albino, Vito & Zijm, Henk, 2020. "The role of redundancy in industrial symbiotic business development: A theoretical framework explored by agent-based simulation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    4. Emilia Faria & Cristiane Barreto & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Jorge Alfredo Cerqueira Streit & Patricia Guarnieri, 2023. "Brazilian Circular Economy Pilot Project: Integrating Local Stakeholders’ Perception and Social Context in Industrial Symbiosis Analyses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-28, February.
    5. John Rincón-Moreno & Marta Ormazabal & Maria J. Álvarez & Carmen Jaca, 2020. "Shortcomings of Transforming a Local Circular Economy System through Industrial Symbiosis: A Case Study in Spanish SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Fraccascia, Luca, 2020. "Quantifying the direct network effect for online platforms supporting industrial symbiosis: an agent-based simulation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. Aid, Graham & Eklund, Mats & Anderberg, Stefan & Baas, Leenard, 2017. "Expanding roles for the Swedish waste management sector in inter-organizational resource management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 85-97.
    8. Haiyan Shan & Junliang Yang & Guo Wei, 2019. "Industrial Symbiosis Systems: Promoting Carbon Emission Reduction Activities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-23, March.
    9. Fraccascia, Luca, 2019. "The impact of technical and economic disruptions in industrial symbiosis relationships: An enterprise input-output approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 161-174.
    10. Ilaria Giannoccaro & Valeria Zaza & Luca Fraccascia, 2023. "Designing regional industrial symbiosis networks: The case of Apulia region," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1475-1514, June.
    11. Diogo Ferraz & Fernanda P. S. Falguera & Enzo B. Mariano & Dominik Hartmann, 2021. "Linking Economic Complexity, Diversification, and Industrial Policy with Sustainable Development: A Structured Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-29, January.
    12. João Azevedo & Juan Henriques & Marco Estrela & Rui Dias & Doroteya Vladimirova & Karen Miller & Muriel Iten, 2021. "Guidelines for Industrial Symbiosis—a Systematic Approach for Content Definition and Practical Recommendations for Implementation," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 507-523, September.
    13. Anna Gatzioura & Miquel Sànchez-Marrè & Karina Gibert, 2019. "A Hybrid Recommender System to Improve Circular Economy in Industrial Symbiotic Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    14. Fortuna, Lorena M. & Diyamandoglu, Vasil, 2015. "NYC WasteMatch – An online facilitated materials exchange as a tool for pollution prevention," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 122-131.
    15. João Pinto & Rui Boavida-Dias & Henrique A. Matos & João Azevedo, 2022. "Analysis of the Food Loss and Waste Valorisation of Animal By-Products from the Retail Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-27, February.
    16. Jensen, Paul D., 2016. "The role of geospatial industrial diversity in the facilitation of regional industrial symbiosis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 92-103.
    17. Luca Fraccascia & Vahid Yazdanpanah & Guido Capelleveen & Devrim Murat Yazan, 2021. "Energy-based industrial symbiosis: a literature review for circular energy transition," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 4791-4825, April.
    18. Juan Diego Henriques & João Azevedo & Rui Dias & Marco Estrela & Cristina Ascenço & Doroteya Vladimirova & Karen Miller, 2022. "Implementing Industrial Symbiosis Incentives: an Applied Assessment Framework for Risk Mitigation," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 669-692, June.
    19. Yang Liu & Peng Cheng & Li Hu, 2022. "How do justice and top management beliefs matter in industrial symbiosis collaboration: An exploratory study from China," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 891-906, June.
    20. Rachelle LeBlanc & Carole Tranchant & Yves Gagnon & Raymond Côté, 2016. "Potential for Eco-Industrial Park Development in Moncton, New Brunswick (Canada): A Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:2:p:340-361:d:34420. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.