Circular Economy as a Development Tool

economy practices as the institutional perspective allows the role of conformity, regulatory and social pressures to be the focus in driving change. However, it is no secret that many of the solutions to encourage circular economy in the horticultural sector necessitates a certain amount of financial resources, stressing the importance of private actors, NGOs and governmental resources. Furthermore, it is arguable that many of the mentioned barriers are related to structural issues that will not be changed within a foreseeable future. Thus, a holistic approach might seem unrealistic both in terms of finance and the challenge of changing deep structural problems. Therefore, we argue that it is important to direct focus towards the determinants that realistically can be addressed and the ones that have the capabilities of driving the transition and, ultimately, making a difference. Finally, as pointed out, the interconnectivity of the determinants must be thoroughly analysed to ensure more efficient interventions. Our findings can be used as recommendations for practical interventions at various levels in Kenya within the horticultural sector. Both government, governmental parastatals, county government, NGOs and private actors can use these insights to not only develop policies but also to coordinate initiatives.

transparency and differing views of how circular economy should be implemented. It further results in a lack of focus of intervention points. Nevertheless, it also leaves practitioners more room to assess the given context and whether a certain initiative is suited taking every aspect in to consideration. Thus, the concept appears to have a holistic approach.

As the horticulture sector is constantly exposed to various changes and challenges, we argue that it calls for a more holistic and flexible approach. One example is related to the negative and unforeseen impacts of climate changes, which entail that farmers sometimes have to respond in a way that might not be the most optimal environmentally or socially to for example secure food supply. Climate change is one of the factors that have led to an increase in the amount of pest and diseases and reduced soil fertility. When producing organically, you are usually not allowed to use chemicals, which is obviously a gain for the environment, food safety and for the soil fertility long-term, nevertheless, in order to address the pressing issues of food demand, it can be crucial to use inorganic fertilisers and pesticides to combat the reduced soil fertility and the high levels of pests and diseases experienced in some periods.

Even though circular economy in the agricultural sector aims at minimising and controlling the use of external inputs, it does not ban it. In a situation like this, an assessment of the trade-off between securing food supply versus increasing the use of chemicals is needed, which, from our understanding, is possible applying a circular economy due to its holistic approach.

Throughout our research, we realised that transforming a theoretical concept into practice is not without challenges. We realised that various factors, often context dependent practicalities, impeded the applicability since these are not taken into consideration when coining the term due to their scale and scope compared to the overall picture. These were often related to the economic and political situation in the country. Other context dependent factors such as poor infrastructure in Kenya were also found to impede the adoption of circular economy. Some farmers, even internally, struggled to keep their resources in a loop due to the difficulties of transporting their wastes from one place to another. Nevertheless, this does not mean that circular economy cannot be achieved, instead, it implies that it is important that the given context is taken into account to ensure a successful implementation.

Yet, examples of farmers closing loops with own resources were also present. Some of the examples underpinned that larger systems of circular economy were possible as the farmers would exchange resources if one had surplus of something that someone else needed. This enlargement of the loop clearly had benefits not only for the environment and food supply, by reducing the use of inorganic fertiliser and securing a long-term health of the soil, but it additionally contributed to increased food safety and economic benefits. Despite the challenges of infrastructure, our findings showed that wider loops are possible and should be considered in the development of the concept in the horticultural sector. This will improve its capability to work as a development tool.

The above-mentioned examples illustrate both drivers and barriers of applying circular economy in the horticulture sector. Based on the mentioned barriers, developing an extensive circular economy may require a redesign of production systems, the development of infrastructure and social systems. However, it can be discussed whether this is possible in rural areas mainly characterised by small-scale farmers. This does not mean that circular economy in areas with smallholder farmers should be neglected. Instead, as argued earlier, it needs to be adjusted to the given context. Furthermore, the various benefits that a circular economy might entail when implemented is another reason why it is important not to neglect it.

Ward et al. (2016) and Preston & Lehne (2017) argue that the ‘circular’ thinking is not necessarily always optimal from an environmental or societal perspective. Therefore, it is important to analyse whether the circularisation can cause negative impacts. Ward et al.

(2016) further point out that in some situations it might be better to utilise the agricultural by-products outside the agricultural production to achieve greater environmental benefit.

One way to approach this is by using e.g. the LCA which is a tool that can be used to test impacts of the circular business models, validate their assumptions and get feedback for improvement. Moreover, it can help define targets and indicators that can measure and foster circularity over time (Contreras, n.d.). Ward et al. (2016) however argue that in order to get a more holistic approach that takes both environmental and social aspects into account, a social LCA should be applied. We deem these considerations important to develop the concept as

several trade-offs are often involved when working with development that need to be thoroughly analysed before implementing certain practices.

In conclusion, it can be argued that circular economy in the horticulture sector needs further research and clearer guidelines, however, it has also proved that it can be used as a development tool to address some of the challenges raised. As with any other concept and approach, the importance of taking the context into consideration is key in order to ensure a proper adoption. Due to the scope of this project, we have not been able to extensively evaluate on whether other approaches would have been more applicable as this investigation would have demanded more resources and time. However, we still hold the conviction that circular economy is an important approach within the horticultural sector and that the principles behind circulation is very important for future development strategies.

Nonetheless, as mentioned, it needs to be adjusted to the given context since all practices cannot be implemented equally in every given place. Concluding, we believe that our findings and conceptual considerations can add to the development of the concept.