9. Monitoring framework

Establishing a monitoring framework for a circular economy is essential to track the progress towards specific targets and goals included in the roadmap for North Macedonia. This framework, using a set of indicators, plays a crucial role in evaluating the overall transition to a circular economy in North Macedonia over time. It will enable the policy makers of North Macedonia to grasp the country’s performance on selected circular economy measures, identifying areas that need further intervention. The monitoring process is not only instrumental in setting new long-term priorities for the circular economy, as emphasised by the European Commission (2018[1]), but also for providing feedback for the development of strategies and planning documents among different economic actors (Alaerts et al., 2019[2]). This approach aligns with the dual purpose of indicators: forward-looking to offer guidance and backward-looking to provide feedback and evaluate performance (Ekins et al., 2019[3]).

A circular economy monitoring framework can take various forms, utilising a broad range of existing indicators and those still in development. These frameworks typically incorporate a comprehensive set of relevant indicators, recognising the complexity of the concept and the difficulty of capturing it with a single metric due to its multifaceted and expansive nature. These frameworks may adopt the structure of distinct, not necessarily interconnected, indicators, or they can be organised employing a multi-tiered approach. This approach may involve a limited number of headline indicators for communication purposes, supplemented by a dashboard featuring specific thematic indicators. Such a multi-layered approach facilitates the inclusion of more detailed information at additional levels, such as regional, city, sectoral or product group levels, and allows focusing on specific strategic objectives and recommendations.

The academic literature strongly recommends a departure from commonly used macro-level indicators. Instead, it advocates the inclusion of indicators that provide direct feedback to policy makers regarding specific products and services. These indicators should also address consumer and business behaviour, as well as societal needs, pertaining to the circular economy (Alaerts et al., 2019[2]; Ekins et al., 2019[3]; Giljum et al., 2011[4]; Potting et al., 2018[5]). Furthermore, there is a recognised necessity for additional indicators to precisely measure the effects and processes of the transition itself. This involves establishing connections between the circular economy and environmental impacts while capturing potential rebound effects (Potting et al., 2018[5]; Alaerts et al., 2019[2]).

The proposed monitoring framework, designed to facilitate the implementation of the roadmap's recommendations (Table 9.1), adopts a two-tier structure.

  1. 1. A set of headline indicators designed to track the broader circular transition of the Macedonian economy (Table 9.2). These draw heavily on the EU Circular Economy Monitoring Framework (European Commission, 2023[6]) and are categorised into five categories: 1) production and consumption; 2) waste management; 3) secondary raw materials; 4) competitiveness and innovation; and 5) global sustainability and resilience.

  2. 2. A set of indicators assigned to each priority area to oversee progress in specific recommendations (Table 9.3). Some of these indicators may take a qualitative form, such as operational metrics monitoring the progress made on a specific recommendation (e.g. the implementation has started, is ongoing or completed). Others are presently in an experimental phase requiring further refinement of the indicator or additional data collection (e.g. monitoring the revenues generated from specific environmental taxes).

The proposed sets of indicators offer a comprehensive overview of relevant metrics for monitoring both the implementation of recommendations and the overall circular economy transition in North Macedonia. During the preparation of the future policy framework or an action plan, North Macedonia may consider reassessing these exhaustive lists of indicators and opt for those for which data are currently, or might become, available. Nevertheless, for effective and evidence-based policy making, there is a need to enhance data collection and co-ordinate the collection process. Priority should be given to addressing existing gaps in the availability and quality of key circular economy-related data, particularly those pertaining to waste generation and waste management. Establishing an impact assessment mechanism is a potential solution to ensure that the monitoring framework is effectively executed and to secure its long-term continuity.

References

[2] Alaerts, L. et al. (2019), “Towards a more direct policy feedback in circular economy monitoring via a societal needs perspective”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 149, pp. 363-371, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.06.004.

[3] Ekins, P. et al. (2019), The Circular Economy: What, Why, How and Where, background paper for an OECD/EC high-level expert workshop on “Managing the Transition to a Circular Economy in Regions and Cities", 5 July 2019, Paris, France, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/Ekins-2019-Circular-Economy-What-Why-How-Where.pdf.

[6] European Commission (2023), “Circular Economy Monitoring Framework”, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/circular-economy/monitoring-framework (accessed on 27 November 2023).

[1] European Commission (2018), Communication on a Monitoring Framework for the Circular Economy, European Commission, Brussels, https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/monitoring-framework.pdf.

[7] Eurostat (2023), “Circular Economy Monitoring Framework”, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/circular-economy/monitoring-framework (accessed on 27 November 2023).

[4] Giljum, S. et al. (2011), “A comprehensive set of resource use indicators from the micro to the macro level”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 55/3, pp. 300-308, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.009.

[8] OECD (2021), The OECD Inventory of Circular Economy Indicators, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/cities/InventoryCircularEconomyIndicators.pdf.

[5] Potting, J. et al. (2018), Circular Economy: What We Want to Know and Can Measure: Framework and Baseline Assessment for Monitoring the Progress of the Circular Economy in the Netherlands, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague, https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2018-circular-economy-what-we-want-to-know-and-can-measure-3217.pdf.

Legal and rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

© OECD 2024

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at https://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.