Latest / Unfolding: a circular economy podcast / Episode 11 - Dr Jack Barrie

Transcript

Episode 11 - Dr Jack Barrie · Unfolding: a circular economy podcast

• Iain Gulland: So for this episode, we're delighted to welcome Jack Barry, who is a global advisor on the circular economy. And you've held positions with the World Economic Forum, Chatham House, as well as I worked with you at Zero Way Scotland. And you were also with Wayne on the UK government's Circle Economy Task Force. That was more recently. So welcome, Jack. Great to have you on board. So maybe just to kind of kick things off, there's an opportunity for you to talk a little bit more about yourself and a bit more about your journey perhaps on the circular economy and yeah, pick out maybe some of that work that you've been involved in, particularly at the World Economic Forum and the Chatham House. Over to you, Jack. So welcome. Jack Barrie: Yeah. Well, thanks for having me and thanks for having me on the podcast. I've listened to a few episodes now and I think it's really pertinent timing to have this discussion and build up to COP. So yeah, good effort and the energy that you're bringing to the subject. Yeah. Some of the work that I've done, like a lot of my focus over the past 15 years has been looking at how we can transition to a circular economy. at the global scale, particularly through the lens of just transition and equitable transition. So a lot of work in emerging and developing economies. More recently at the World Economic Forum, I was looking at the fragmentation of the global geopolitical system and what that means for circularity writ large and how we, whether that's the business community, NGOs, governments. can navigate that rupture and keep progress going in uncertain times? And it's a very big question. There's no simple answers, but we did publish quite a big report this year on the topic, which maybe we can dive into in more detail in this chat. But I think just in a nutshell, yeah, how do we keep progress going at the global scale within geopolitical? tensions and I think that's what my core focus has been so far. Iain Gulland: Yeah, so why don't we, if that's okay, Jack, just jump straight into that report that you did for the World Economic Forum, the future of material systems. before we actually talk a little bit about the detail, what I thought was really pertinent about it was, and you released it earlier this year, was you were interviewing, you're surveying businesses, over 150 businesses around the world. and 90 % of them, you know, roughly are really concerned about, you know, future accessibility and supply of materials in terms of their business. know, business, you know, access to materials becoming much more strategically important to their businesses. And yeah, it paints a very compelling picture about the need to really take this more seriously, I guess. And I guess my quick question is, how did that report go down? Because why aren't we hearing more of this? This is the type of thing that we've been talking about for years again. The reason behind the circular economy was this isn't just a climate thing. This is an economic thing. This is a resilience thing. We are now facing real challenges around the access and the sustainability of resources at a global level. It's not just something pertinent to the UK or to Europe. it's at a global level for all the reasons you've just said around supply chains. I guess I'm just interested how did that go down? Jack Barrie: Yeah, perhaps it's worth just giving the listeners a bit of context to that report. people who are listening might remember Davos this year, which is hosted by the World Economic Forum, where Mark Carney made quite a famous speech about the kind of geopolitical rupture that's happened. we need to band together more plurilaterally to keep progress going and it's kind of a new world order. And that was quite a big outcome of Davos. And so off the back of that, we started looking more into what this means from a material sense, material value chains. And what we saw is this... geopolitical rupture has imprinted itself on global material value chains where we're seeing regions, powerful countries start to treat materials in a much more protectionist manner, nearshoring their value chains to close allies and stockpiling within country and naturally circular economies. been adopted within that framing as a form of competition rather than cooperation. And we've seen that in trade restrictions, the number of trade restrictions in 2025. There was 226 trade restrictions on critical minerals enforced compared to the year before, which is only 82. So the number of kind of unilateral restrictions on the flow of materials has skyrocketed. And companies, multinationals operating in multiple regions are really feeling the pinch of these kind political actions. They're also feeling the pinch of collapse and variability of value chains through environmental breakdown, through the Strait of Hormuz closing, through Ukraine, all sorts of different factors now culminating into a kind of boiling pot of chaos. And so we surveyed executives of the world's biggest multinational companies dealing specifically in material value chains. And as you said, Ian, was essentially unanimous in terms of their fears, their concerns around these choke points in value chains, these protectionist measures causing all sorts of issues, but also them looking forward, even greater fears of what's to come in the next three to five years. They think it's going to get worse. And so there's, you know, that also naturally leads them to thinking, well, how can circularity build more resilience and safety within our value chains and make us kind of insulated from these issues? So circularity is kind of really bubbling now to the surface, as a almost means and necessity rather than an optional potential business benefit. It's now an underlying security approach. So that was the context to the report. And you're asking how, once we delivered it, because the kind of findings of the report basically said, and it was nuanced, but we basically said, you know, the multilateral system's failing at the moment. It's declined by 20 % over the past five years. So, and we've seen that in the Plastics Treaty, you know, grinding to a halt basically. And so can we keep butting our heads against trying to do the same thing altogether with universal consensus? Or is there another way right now where we can still make progress and that's through plurilateral kind of alliances, coalitions the willing, coalitions of the doing I've also heard. to try and make progress in very particular areas. So rather than trying to do everything like a plastics treaty, which is an over encompassing governance of everything to do with plastics, you say, well, in this particular area around say data traceability and transparency protocols, can 15, 20 companies or countries come together, develop those standards, and then start to work them back into the UN system to be adopted by others. There's lots of stuff there. How it was picked up. You never really know when you put reports out how people pick them up, but I do know it's had 2 million hits in the past six months. Wayne Hubbard: Wow. Iain Gulland: Huh? Jack Barrie: So it's got, I think it's hit a nerve and struck on a pulse. And the question is, how do you translate these recommendations into actual action? And I think. Wayne Hubbard: That's quite that's quite a setup for the podcast, isn't it? Because the all of a sudden a million questions have opened up. Jack Barrie: Yeah. Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: in and I now compete and so you can get the first one in. But Iain Gulland: Ha ha ha. Wayne Hubbard: I ca I knew you had your you were you you were signalling that you wanted to dive in there first, so I'll let you in. Iain Gulland: No, no, no, but I guess I'm just, because of the COP thing, know, we are on the run on the COP, that felt, I was earlier in the year, but it felt a bit like the kind of Canadian coal mine. We need to do something about it. And I just was wondering, is COP the place for this now, for that type of, these types of discussions, whether they're forming coalitions of the willing to come together on some of these really... know, pertinent topics that came out of the report, whether it's specific materials or specific regions that are there, or I guess the other side, but the cops tend to be multilateral discussions where everybody has to kind of come together and agree on something, whether it's a target, whether it's an approach. So I guess it feels like there's a potential for it not to go anywhere to some extent, you know, because cops, cops, cops. has its own approach to these sort of things, or rather, because this report, because it's such a key moment, you know, in terms of highlighting the impact, the current situation, but more importantly, as you said, the next three to five years, it's gonna get a lot worse. So here's the chance, here's the chance for a different type of dialogue, a different type of approach. And surely, that's how we saw it, you the fact that it's on the agenda, zero waste, circular economy is on the agenda at COP. you've set a blueprint, the report sets a blueprint of how we could actually take this forward, how we could actually come together and start to collaborate perhaps in a different way, as you said, not looking at multilateralism per se, but looking at other ways of collaborating across the globe. But here's the chance because we have to act. So I've just felt really pertinent to this podcast in terms of what we're trying to do in the run up to COP. There's probably no question in there other than, you know. Jack Barrie: No, no, think there is a question because I don't think is COP, is it the right place for it? I don't think it's a binary yes or no. I what we're all learning with circular economy when you're talking about system transformation is that it has to be done everywhere all at the same time in Iain Gulland: time. Jack Barrie: many museums. whether it's at COP, whether it's the UN Global Environmental Outlook, which had for this year the first first time ever, dedicated chapter on circularity, whether that's more in kind plurilateral forms, whether that's at regional levels, EU Circular Economy Action Plan, the ASEAN framework on circular economy. You know, it's happening at all levels in every areas. And I think the opportunity at COP is that it's connecting more to the kind of climate agenda, which, you know, has been building over the past few years, but not really institutionalized or formalized in any way. And the big problem with the circular economy is there's no global agreement on circular economy. There's not even a unified definition. There's no agreement on targets or metrics. So pretty much every government is just making it up as it goes along, doing it unilaterally, and everyone's doing loads of different things all in parallel. So I think when you have things at COP, it helps align us on at least certain elements that we can work more together on. Now, saying that, will we have real progress off the back of COP 31 on circularity? I think that's going to take years for the climate community to, for the complexity of circularity. and real ambitious circularity action to percolate through these experts in this arena, whether that's the negotiators, the policymakers, that whole community. It's quite a bit of learning and handholding to get them to understand that circularity is not just waste and recycling. It's much more than that. Systemic transformation of the production consumption models. That takes time. That takes a lot of time. Wayne Hubbard: There I I was just you we were talking about some of this before the podcast actually, Jack, and it's funny that our conversation foreshadowed really a lot of what you've just said. And I I do I do agree with you, like the glacial progress of co of COP is glacial and complicated enough as it is, and they're only talking about I don't know, territorial emissions. And not talking about the impact that your emit your consumption might have in terms of emissions outside. They're not even thinking about that really in the global negotiations. And that part, that that kind of treaty part, that requires unanimity. Right? When you when you when you have a statement at the end of COP, that statement has to be unanimous. And it that that's a blocker. And the antithesis really, as I understand it, to what you're saying, which is if we can get on and do it, these people, why don't we just Go and go get on and do it. But my optimism for the outcome is really because the circular economy is contained within the other part of COP, within the kind of multi level, multi-actor part of COP, the action agenda. So there might just be an opportunity for something to be set up that can then ultimately bleed across to the treaty part. But in in the absence of that. can just get off and and get going. And so maybe maybe that maybe that does lend itself more to the to what you're suggesting. Jack Barrie: Yeah, possibly. Possibly. I think I'm a little bit more cynical at the moment purely because actually, and I think what the Turkish government is doing, holding the presidency for COP, integrating circularity in, aiming for this 50 % circular material use targets, voluntary, of course, is It's great. It's a great start. But actually, two years ago, I with with United Nations Industrial Development Organization, I did a big global study where I read 101 of every single every single government's national circuit economy plan. And even the worst ones from those were far more ambitious and far better understanding of the systemic transformation opportunity there. economic opportunity, it goes way beyond what's being discussed at COP this year. And so I think it's really lagging behind actually the kind of average ambition of these 101 national roadmaps. So the question is, yeah, this year, COP31, let's go soft. Let's explore what a voluntary 15 % target is, and we can get into more detail on my concerns around this and what would need to be sit under that for it to be of any use. more importantly than setting targets and quantitative numbers, which don't really mean much, is to more put in place the foundations for shared understanding of how to monitor and measure and report on the flow of materials through national economies. Because if every country has a standardized approach to material flow accounting, then we can all at the global level then have a proper data set to start to look at where to set targets, how to do that, what's feasible, what's not. So you just can't change what you can't measure and we're nowhere near measuring at the moment. So setting quantitative targets is putting the cart before the horse in a way. Wayne Hubbard: That that piece on data has just been a consistent line Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: through all of the interviews that we've done for this series, data and then metrics, but data leading to metrics as a big one of the outcomes. But another outcome has been governance, which I I think is is kind of what you're talking about. There there is no there's no governance structure. There's no c current way for anything that's agreed to COP to flow through to the to the national. So you know, but I guess both Ian and I have been involved quite a lot of stuff that happens on the ground. So we know that there are communities and cities all across, you know, the world actually that are doing lots of work, un mostly unconnected, you know, mostly not not networked pilots that are happening all over the place. But that have the potentially will wither because they don't have the support of the top tier because of the, some of the things you just outlined, the lack of understanding, the lack of joined upness. Jack Barrie: Well, actually, let me disentangle your, there's maybe multiple points in that statement. Wayne Hubbard: There it is. I w I rambled there, sorry. Jack Barrie: So there's one around kind of governance, there's one around cities and regions and maybe more localizing. There's one around a whole of government approach across multiple ministries. How do you coordinate? And then your first point, which is going back to the cop. discussion, which is actually an important point that there are precedents there that's already been done within the Paris Agreement that we could copy and paste for materials that they've done for emissions. And, you know, we're talking about data and transparency. So I think, you know, there's precedent in the Paris Agreement's transparency framework. around common reporting rules, technical reviews, support for countries to build a capacity on data and collecting. All of that we can cut and paste for materials. The template's already there and the architecture's there already within the Paris Agreement. So there's nothing to say we couldn't do the same for material flow accounting linked to consumption emissions. And, you know, the UK government's been reporting its carbon footprint, Scottish government's been reporting on its consumption emissions. There are established methodologies there. to start. And so I don't Iain Gulland: you Jack Barrie: think there's, I think there's actually lots of opportunities within COP to integrate materials and circularity already. I think there's a real opportunity there. But as I said, we're not there yet in terms of the negotiators and policymakers understanding the topic well enough to get to that point. So that's going to be a few COPs. The second Iain Gulland: you Jack Barrie: point around local development, cities and regions, yeah, without an overarching global target like the Paris Agreement sets for carbon emissions, it is hard to galvanize everyone. Nonetheless, as you said, I think I mapped when I was at Chatham House, and we were mapping all these national roadmaps, I also mapped all the city roadmaps and strategies. And I found over 40, that was two years ago, 40 cities already published national strategies for circularity. So there's a lot going on in cities, they are, and you can do a lot on like local repair, reverse logistics, value chains, getting access to underserved communities for essential goods and services through circular models. I think that's all brilliant and long may it continue, but. These tend to sit at the end of the value chains and don't tend to control the design of products, the way they're distributed and built and manufactured. That sits minimally at a national level, but ultimately at an international level to have set standards, agreements and processes and infrastructure in place. So we need to coordinate the two and at moment all the cities are doing their own things. governments are doing their own things and then supernationally there's things going on and they're all disconnected. So we need much better connection between them. Iain Gulland: But then, yeah, mean, that does, somebody's saying echo some of the other conversations we've had. Jack, I mean, I'm going back to your point about, you know, government and, you know, other people have said that, you know, know, remember turn up a cop and a lot of the people in the room really don't know what the cycle economy is. They're just, they're really, you know, they're kind of first principles. So, you know, one of the things is how do we get that across? So that's what I'm going back to your reports. know, evidencing there, of the challenges in front of us in terms of resources. we, to some extent, we don't have the time, we don't have the luxury of another 31 cops to get to the circular economy to the same way that we're all understanding decarbonisation and, you know, we in ourselves, fossil fuels and carbon reporting in that sense, you know, we need to, need to, as you say, cut and paste. I like that. I like that. You know, there's probably things that we could really... take from previous discussions or agreements and say, right, just substitute materials. It's the same principles to some extent. So guess I'm interested in how we can, myself and Wayne are going, how can we get that across to people who are not possibly, this is not front and center to them, circular economy materials, but how can we get even that? Well, you had the same challenges possibly. 25, 30 years ago when COP started, people were wondering, scratching their head about measurement of emissions and having standard approaches and stuff like that. So how can we really get them to think about it on that level that we could fast track some of this by just adopting strategies that you've already deployed. Jack Barrie: I mean, can obviously talk about, can pinpoint on a few key sectors, whether that's renewables. I I dare say that what we were seeing a lot in our study was also a lot of, unfortunately, military stuff coming up around the security of critical minerals, defense sector, which, you know, Wherever you stand on that, agreeing or disagreeing about military use of materials, it's a genuine concern for governments and that's the reality. So I'm not suggesting you use military as your hanging point. What I'm saying is you need to find the pain points that governments and businesses are facing right now in terms of material crunches and obviously critical minerals. is the key one. I think you can hang everything on, particularly its link to renewables. So I think that's where the talking point has to go. And that's what gained a lot of traction in our reports. But I think there's another area that I think you get a lot of support from several of the kind of negotiating regional blocs within COP representing emerging economies around the Just Transition Agenda. And obviously, there's the Just Transition Agenda within It's quite well established now within the COP process. Where is the discussion of materials within that? It's Iain Gulland: Yeah. Jack Barrie: absolutely crazy. It's missing. And in fact, when you break it down, energy is material value chains, and material value chains is where the just transition issues happen. So I think there needs to be a real push there to bring circularity into it. It's missed. Every just transition discussion around the world on energy misses the material element. I've seen it in Scotland, even the Just Transition Commission, they failed to understand that materials underpin energy transition. So I think that's a real area that you could push an open door with certain regional blocks to start really calling for that. Wayne Hubbard: Can we just unp unpack that? So again, j during this series we've heard people tell us that the the transition from the fossil fuel to the to the renewables, from phosphorus to electricity and therefore renewables is dependent on the transition from oil to metals and minerals, I think is how Jani Petoch Petochnik put it. And and that lends itself to circularity. But the the k the the counterpoint to that is it also lends itself, as you said right at the start, to stockpiling and looking internally. And it seems to me that that that there are there there are three ways to get materi this material. There's mining it from your existing kind of supply, which is not going to give you everything, but it will give you some. There's collaborating internationally. And then there's getting it forcefully. So it it seems to me, it seems to me in everyone's self-interest that we do a bit of the circularity and then collaborate for the stuff that we need to access for our transition. But he but but but we're not seeing that, are we? So how do we, you know, how do we use the existing international system to to move towards that? Because the th the third option is we we compete aggressively for it, which is going to lead to conflict. Jack Barrie: I don't think you can stop the major powers competing aggressively and stockpiling. I think that's just an unfortunate reality right now. Wayne Hubbard: But the middle powers bit that you you talked about. So Jack Barrie: Well, yeah, that's where I was going is there is a real opportunity for the international community, not multilateral, internationally some of the middle powers, but not just the middle powers. Like I was talking about the regional kind of negotiating blocks, they have a real opportunity to try and come together and build systems of traceability and transparency around resource governance that can form a kind of best practice. yeah, I'm a little bit, I'm concerned that the major powers, we all know who they are. control the fully control the upstream part of the value chain. And also are, and some of them are the major consumers and therefore control the downstream stockpiling Iain Gulland: Yeah. Jack Barrie: and all the middle powers are stuck in the middle. And in the middle of the value chain, traditionally you don't tend to hold much power or sway, at least individually. And so there's a real question there and I don't actually have an answer yet. I think plurilateral activities can get you quite far as long as you band together. even, Wayne Hubbard: Mm. Jack Barrie: for example, look at the ASEAN framework on circular economy. So this is a regional framework agreement between the ASEAN countries. to work much more closely on the circular economy. That's reducing trade barriers in the region, working together on standards, having a common definition of remanufacturing, for example, all these kind of things. It's a really excellent actual framework and one to point towards for regional integration. But there's also a lot of geopolitics within that region going on where some countries are major producers of nickel and major mining companies, countries, summer. middle producers like Vietnam who have soft manufacturing, mid-tier manufacturing. And so they're all, there's a lot of geopolitics already just in that Iain Gulland: you Jack Barrie: cohort Wayne Hubbard: Right. Jack Barrie: of the willing to get any sort of coherence to take on the major powers. So I think I don't have an easy solution or simple answer. I think it's worthwhile doing. How far it's going to take us, I honestly don't know. Iain Gulland: Despite your slight, what's word, pragmatism there, Jack, I mean, it does sound really, to me, I still sound very positive that the circular economy is on the agenda. And as you said, your global stock take, numerous countries now have a strategy, an action plan or call to action. Yeah, I get what you're saying. some challenges and some of those strategies around the deliverability of all, progress being made. But it is on the agenda. There is a there's a sense that, circular economy is a necessity, is becoming more of a necessity for individual nations as opposed to the kind of global perspective. It's on the agenda. We recognize multilateralism as it is, as its current challenges. This feels like it's now about how do we navigate this? How do we navigate this, as you say, the complexity of international diplomacy stroke collaboration? maybe there are just, said that there's examples now of some sort of like regions of the world looking at this, but you're right, you've identified some challenges with either of that. just, feels, yeah, it feels positive in the sense that there is a bit of momentum here, but we haven't got, we haven't got a route map. success yet. don't actually, Jack Barrie: Yeah. Iain Gulland: how are we going to get there? We don't have an international target, you we don't have an international set of frameworks in terms of how we monitor, how we measure. I get all that. mean, these are Jack Barrie: Yeah. Iain Gulland: significantly important, but yeah, it feels Jack Barrie: Well, let me move away from my pragmatism here and then give you some willful optimism. And I think there is, although we don't have a universal agreement on the circular economy, I think there's some pretty clear areas where, whether that's a regional or you can have all the middle powers come together. There's Iain Gulland: Yeah. Jack Barrie: one, which I said, which is super, I think, and you had Janice Potosna on your call, so. He was on the advisory group for this report that we did at the Iain Gulland: Alright, okay. Jack Barrie: forum. So I think it mimics a lot probably what he said. I haven't listened to the episode. But one thing that can be done right now with this international community who want to go further is to set up some sort of international materials data hub, right? Wayne Hubbard: Yeah, yeah. Jack Barrie: Janice will have covered that. But the obvious thing about an international data hub, it doesn't need all countries to join. You could start building a data set. And then the powers that haven't joined yet will start to realize how valuable it is to be in that club and to have more transparency on material choke points and risks and flows of things. So that's I think that can be started today and we should be campaigning for that pretty quickly. Wayne Hubbard: And just tell me what that looks like. What is it? What is a what is a materials data? What does it do? Jack Barrie: Well, it attempts to collect all data from many different sources on material flows. So whether that's from national material flow accounts that governments have already published, know, 2025 governments around the world already publish their national material flow accounts, through to taking data sets from multilateral institutions such as the International Energy Agency, UN... kind of data hubs, UN Comtrade, has all the of materials trade data, and trying to bring it all into one place and synthesize it all in a way that is where we can see what do we know about all the different material fractions flowing around the world, and what are the black boxes that we don't know where we can work together to start to pull assumptions together on what these flows are. Wayne Hubbard: So it's a consistent understanding of global material flow basically. Yeah. Jack Barrie: Exactly, and once we have that data set, we can then start to do really interesting things around much more accurately monitoring the impact of these material flows on biodiversity loss or climate or all sorts of other issues. We can see which materials in particular are most threatened by certain value chain disruptions and then start to form communities around that to build resilience around these elements. Wayne Hubbard: Because I I I wonder, it's been put to me, and I've mentioned it before, that do we have a clear understanding of the materials that we need in order to make that move from the fossil economy to the renewable metals and material economy? The fossils economy is that easier, you just extract and extract and extract and you burn it. you need access to oil fields and that generates conflict. The materials economy, you have materials from all over the globe that you have to try and conglomerate and then build into stuff. And then you've got a challenge about what you do with the stuff at the end of its life. So does it do we have a understanding about what materials we'll need to make that transition? Jack Barrie: Well, we do for the energy transition, yes, but the problem is those materials, particularly critical minerals, are also in competition with other sectors. like I mentioned, military, telecoms, various other, data center and AI, all pooling, all competing for those critical minerals. And so if we can't map those complex flows through the world, then really we are just walking blind trying to guess what the risks are in certain material supplies to the energy sector. Wayne Hubbard: Right. And the and the point is, as you've just, you just articulated the point is that we are effectively without that, we are walking blind. Because you've got these all of these all of these interests and sectors demanding access to limited material. Yeah. Jack Barrie: Yeah, exactly. And it's in, you know, that's just general material flows, but it's also really important for circularity and trying to open up the black boxes circularity in terms of reverse logistics flows of materials around the world. All these reverse value chains that exist, but are not really picked up in trade statistics. You know, the harmonized system of codes developed to where every single product has a code when it's shipped. was designed way back when no one ever thought Iain Gulland: You Jack Barrie: a laptop would be shipped back to be refurbished or remanufactured. Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Jack Barrie: So there's no codes to measure any of these flows. like the whole trade architecture is not designed for circularity to monitor it. So there's a lot of work we need to do to start building these data sets. Wayne Hubbard: And we're dependent on trade, aren't we? To to to to get those materials back, remanufactured, disassembled down to their component parts or whatever, that re that requires a a a healthy and active global trade system. Jack Barrie: Yeah, I've, I think my most commonly said phrase now is no country can transition to a circular economy in isolation. And what I've seen in these 101 national roadmaps is policymakers very quickly forget that their economy is deeply integrated into global material value chains and any domestic policy they try to do on circulating materials domestically. it really has to take account of that whole value chain extending out with their national borders. Iain Gulland: Yeah, so I did pick that up as well from the global stock take. I think you said less than 10 % almost of the strategies kind of reference that. But is that, I mean, this is a bit unfair, but isn't that more about where the circular economy strategies have been written from? They've been written, with respect, from the environmental department, the waste department. You know, that's the... the starting point for lot of circularity in quite a lot of countries. I'm not going to name names, but that's the starting point. So it does feel that it's very, what can we do here with materials at the end of life, a bit of the input, what these materials could then substitute in terms of input to the economy. But it's not actually being written from that wider economic framework in terms of resilient supply chain. thinking about trade. So I'm not saying they've ignored trade. It's almost like that's not, that's not where their Jack Barrie: Yeah, traditionally no. Iain Gulland: capability or capacity is at that moment in time. And I think, you know, I can always think that's, that's not, I'm not saying it should be the starting point, but it is part of it. But it comes back to a point, I think you and Wayne were mentioned earlier about the whole, whole government approach. You know, sometimes I still think we're not thinking about circular economy as a whole government approach. It's still either embedded, it might be embedded in environment, might be environment and economic, but it's from a local economic development perspective in terms of jobs and opportunities, not thinking about that global thing, global trade and even resilience. mean, yeah, you could go into defence and security, you could throw that in as much as anywhere else. I just wonder whether that's, again, part of the journey that we need to go on with everyone as well, that we need to get other Jack Barrie: Yeah, Iain Gulland: people in governments involved in this. Jack Barrie: Traditionally, yes, it was the environment ministries that led it, now, you know, more recent kind of developments of roadmaps, particularly in Africa, Southeast Asia, is a much more whole government approach, actually five or Iain Gulland: Alright. Jack Barrie: six ministries being involved from the outset. Obviously you have one lead ministry, which still tends to be the environment ministry, which unfortunately still skews it quite a lot. that there is not seen a an amazing example of whole of government approach because it always starts out that way and then the politics gets involved. there does need to be some sort of mechanism there. But I just want to clarify to the listeners why trade is so important, because what governments tend to think is that it's like, let's onshore our activities and then we'll just make everything circular within our national borders and that will boost jobs and you know what. To a certain extent, that's true, but in certain industries where you don't have a lot of leverage or you're definitely not leading in the field, that can actually lead to you on-shoring activities which create massive price inflation because you're not doing it at scale or it's good enough compared to others. And that gets a huge kind of populist backlash when you start inflating prices and then the whole circular agenda collapses. So the real thinking that needs to go on is what industries within our borders really could we promote on-shoring and localizing circular value chains? And which actually do we need to work much more closely with our trade partners so that we can do that properly? And that's in the trade of like trade in secondary raw materials, the trade in refurbished and remanufactured goods, in used goods, in services, something the UK is extremely good at, services sector. there's loads of different types of trade flows where we need to think individually and very carefully about whether we keep that as a global cooperative effort and which ones we want to localise. And there's no, no one's really doing that well yet that I've seen. Wayne Hubbard: That makes amazing and perfect sense. we we're bizarrely and strangely we've run out of time. And I and I could we could we could carry on talking for hours, to be honest, but we have to kind of be a bit disciplined and and try and run to a a certain amount of time. But I guess Jack, it'd be really good to know from you if if you could wave your your policy magic wand in the direction of Antalya, what what kind of what would you what would you be your ideal outcome from from COP realistically? And maybe you could put your optimistic, wildly optimistic hat back on. Jack Barrie: Yeah, Well, yeah, I'll try not to repeat what I said before, but I think there's 15 % circular material use target needs something substantial underpinning it. It just makes no sense as a quantitative target in my mind. Some countries, high-consuming countries need to be way more ambitious than... reducing the consumption, emerging economies need to increase their consumption. And circularity materialites will come, but they're not there yet. having this kind of universal metric doesn't really make sense to me. Rather, let's get a coalition off the back of COP to come together to say, how can we measure material flows best and build the foundations for over the next few years for an actual sensible set of metrics and guidelines to be put in place to help countries actually tie their consumption to emissions better and their policies together. I think that's a real alarm bell for me, but also like we can do this. I think there's real optimism there and there's real potential to start making real progress quickly on that. Iain Gulland: Excellent, really good, really good. that's, yeah, that. I that's one of the challenges, isn't it? We just have a global target of 15%. Then everybody just takes that away. I've just got to do 50%. I know. Jack Barrie: Well, what does circular material use even mean? It Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. No one's defined it. Yeah. Jack Barrie: means nothing to everyone. Iain Gulland: Well, exactly, exactly. but even if it was. Wayne Hubbard: It's a great it's a great target then, isn't it? Iain Gulland: But then even if we did agree, everybody agreed what it meant, then everybody breaks it down and says, I've just got to go and get 15 percent. But as you said, there's possibly the more developed countries have to do a lot more than 15 percent. Jack Barrie: Exactly. Iain Gulland: So it's that's a negotiation in itself, is how do you break that 15 percent target down. So I think that's. Jack Barrie: So I've got full faith in the two of you. Bulldozing in there and calling Wayne Hubbard: Well, Iain Gulland: Okay. Jack Barrie: for some change. Wayne Hubbard: we we I I tell you what, I mean, we've certainly spoken to a lot of people. So we've got a lot of we've got a lot of ideas. I don't know how we're gonna articulate them with the clarity that you've articulated yours today, Jack. But yeah. Jack Barrie: Got full faith in you. Wayne Hubbard: Right, what did you make of that? Iain Gulland: Well, so I thought, yeah, I thought it was really fascinating. And I think, yeah, I still think from a circular economy point of view, it still feels pretty positive. The fact that there's these reports coming out that people are beginning to really understand the kind of global dimension to this and the need for international collaboration. So it's not just about doing interesting circular economy activity in your own region or country. So think that's all very positive. And the importance of it and even, know, okay, we might not understand the exact route to delivery at that international level, but there's signs that ASEAN sort of agreement, you know, is a kind of, yeah, it's an interesting, it's like a, you know, leading idea. regions coming together to sign some sort of agreement. And then we obviously have got the European dimension to this EU. So I think that's all very positive. I guess you could argue is COP the place for this? As he said, I mean, it might be eventually, but is COP 31 actually going to be the place where some of these big, big strategic discussions take place? Because A. it's a cop, it's about climate change and a lot of the climate people around there will just be getting their heads around the circular economy and, you know, you know, in all aspects of that and they might not be as up to speed on some of these big challenges and opportunities as we just discussed. I absolutely hear what he said and two, as we know, as others have said, there is a chance that the conversation might just get defaulted to talk about waste management and... better recycling and better waste practices across, you know, across the world, particularly the global space, Wayne Hubbard: I can't work. Iain Gulland: which needs to happen. you know, as we've said, it's Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Iain Gulland: not to knock that. So, I guess, but it feels like the circular economy is beginning to get the profile and the traction at the global level in terms of the big picture stuff that we've always, you know, we've always been pushing for. Wayne Hubbard: I there's, well, on cop, think, you know, going back to what I asked, what I was trying to kind of get at, maybe I clumsily didn't, but was that there's the glacial pace of Iain Gulland: Yeah, yes. Wayne Hubbard: the parties and the agreement, the actual framework agreement. And then there's the kind of sexy action agenda where you can have a bit more kind of. can be a bit more dynamic. Well, you'd be a lot more dynamic and the hope is there's some kind of bridge back across to the parties. So from that perspective, Jack's absolutely right. There's no chance, not a cat in house chance, that anything circular is going to find its way with, if it does at all, in any meaningful way to action in the treaty stuff that I can't imagine there'll be a comment on. know, the final whatever they call it, communique, will reference, it might do, it might reference waste. I hope it does, but it will reference waste, not the circular economy in the way that we understand it. Let's see. But the sexy stuff is going to happen in the action agenda and stuff will happen there that will have, as Jose's told us, will have lasted impact and will create legacy for future cops. So a platform, the established platform, but I mean a platform will be established to talk about this. So I am more positive about COP. And what we've got to do is help whoever to understand that it needs to be upstream and not downstream. And I think that's our role. And then Iain Gulland: Yeah, yeah, no. Wayne Hubbard: there's a list of other kind of bullet points like on data and governance and stuff that we can also take with us. Iain Gulland: I think that's the opportunity today is just you can see what you know somebody said exactly what you've said they could this could just become too complex at one one half of the agenda so to speak where do we focus our energies to to move this on. But there is enough, I feel there's enough now being profiled around the circular economy, the need for action, the need for global collaboration on standards for measurements, you know, the international data hub. It seems Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Yeah. Iain Gulland: to be a lot more happening in that space that, you know, you're going to feel, yeah, yeah, let's get behind that. Let's get. there's obviously people in those spaces beginning to think we need to be talking about that and COP is the opportunity because everybody's there, all the countries are there. Wayne Hubbard: Well, I feel there's a list of things we would like as an object of outcomes from Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: this. There's a common list now that I think we could, you know, we'll have to see how it marries across to, you know, the communique that other people have issued. But I Iain Gulland: Yeah. Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: think there'd be a lot of common agreement in the circular economy community about what needs to happen. It would be an ideal outcome. we've got a good read across of that and we'll put that in the public domain somehow. Iain Gulland: Yeah, I said I would encouraging things you could list because even that you the global stock take of countries and he talked about you mentioned your more countries are now coming up with strategies and action plans and call to action, particularly in the developing countries and he mentioned some in Africa on their thinking more cross government. It's not specifically just about the environment. Wayne Hubbard: Yeah, that was a surprise to me. Yeah. Iain Gulland: I know exactly, it's like, I go on? So there's more people coming to the table on this, you know, and okay, they might all be exploring it in different spaces and, you know, a more internalizing it to some extent, but they're all in there, they're all thinking about it and that, yeah, that kind of whole government approach. Yeah, I did, yeah, that's how I really positive. Excuse me. Wayne Hubbard: I feel that by and large policymakers and the public do recognize the term circular economy. What Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: they don't do is have the nuanced and sophisticated view that it's, to put it bluntly, it's not just about recycling. So Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: this upstream downstream dichotomy, they don't have that. So that's part of the challenge. And then there's Jack's kind of the darker, I guess, points that Jack was talking about, which for me is about the competition for the limited amount, the really limited amount of raw materials. You know, They're called rare earth, aren't they? They're critical raw materials. These materials are, you know, they're special. They're localized. They require processing. Iain Gulland: Yeah, I mean, I know, that's, I mean, even that, though, we don't know. I mean, guess that's the point. Probably no one really knows how much of each of these minerals there are. And, you know, we're acting as if, you know, infinite and we'll just carry on. So even that materials data hub or sorry, international materials hub would start to unpick that, would start to expose exactly what we're needing. what's happening, where it's flowing from, then start to dig in, excuse the pun, to try and understand exactly. what's available. And it would also drive, I for me, the point that we talked about in previous podcasts, it's about whole innovation. How do you think about material substitutions and think where are the critical products for a better world that we need to really think about longevity so we're not continuing to replace them. that's why I think that material hubs, if we start to measure it, I that was the point I think that we were trying to make in Scotland was unless we really understand that in detail, then we're not really thinking about what are the interventions. that we actually need to make, whether that's material specific or sector specific, you know, because that's ultimately that information that's required. Wayne Hubbard: Yeah, and we don't, mean, it's quite shocking that Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: we don't have that. And so people are going around the world doing deals with, you know, negotiations and threats and Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: all of that to access minerals, And it's obviously, with some kind of knowing that that's what we need. These are the materials. But if know, if we don't have that understanding, then the circular economy could become, I think as Jack alluded to, a darker thing, an inward looking thing, an isolationist movement Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: as opposed to what we regard it as a collaborative. It could only work through collaboration, it seems to me, otherwise you're into, you're into aggression and opposition and conflict. So you have these two very clear paths. So I think we're starting to see this view, this movement from fossil to material, and need to understand how much material we need to make that switch from oil to renewables, and then working together as a global community in whatever coalition of willing we can to properly understand and access those materials. Iain Gulland: Yeah, I know I'm repeating what I've said in previous podcasts, but I still think that is a very different framing of the dialogue, different from decarbonisation and electrification. That Wayne Hubbard: What the? Iain Gulland: point about the target was, you could set a target, right, we all have to achieve something by 2050 or something, and everybody goes off and delivers it. But having a target is a global target for all the reasons you've said. This is about us all working together on a Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Iain Gulland: finite set of resources and materials. So we need almost a global strategy around which are the where are the stress points and otherwise and think about that kind of global community and that just transition not just at a local level but at a global level and that's I think and absolutely we should be doing that right. I think COPPS have probably got a different approach whereas every country agreeing to do something and then going off and doing it. Wayne Hubbard: It requires a bit more thinking about actually, you're right. It's kind Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: of blow my mind a bit because we started out down this journey thinking we need to get circular economy on the agenda because it is, you know, by definition, it reduces carbon emissions, albeit your scope three or your consumption emissions primarily, but also, you know, by reducing waste to landfowl incineration, direct emissions to air, etc, etc. And that's where I started from. But the position I seem to have, well, we seem to have got talking to the people we've talked to, is much more nuanced, which is in order to do the thing that COP is doing, i.e. stop using fossil fuel, you need to have a circular economy in order to be able to participate properly in the materials and metals economy for that to work. So it's almost like, you know, the destination is a low carbon metals and materials economy. And the pathway to achieve that is the circular economy. And that's a different destination than I'd originally thought. And so your proposition that, maybe COP is, I know, I'll blame my mind because you need almost a separate thing to manage that materials transition, a separate governance structure, but maybe it is the Istanbul platform, who knows? But we've ended up quite surprisingly, a different place to where we started out. Iain Gulland: yeah, definitely, You keep saying that. It's been bit of a journey, but we were just going to work. Wayne Hubbard: I didn't know any of this. mean, Joss was talking about it quite early on with him. So Joss kind of, you know, Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: he was talking about the impacts of the materials economy and Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: electrification. And, you know, we've just kind of come on this journey ever since. Iain Gulland: Yeah, I know. And so I guess, I still have a niggle, about is cop the place for this? Or should there be a materials cop? mean, I think we talked about that. Wayne Hubbard: Mmm. Mmm. You did say that early on actually, to be fair. You did say that. Iain Gulland: But then this is the play, you know, the fact that they're all together, all the big, big brains are there. Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Iain Gulland: You think, well, OK, we don't need to go and build another event somewhere else. Let's just do it in the one that's already there. Because as you just said, that intersection is clear and visible to us all now. But let's Wayne Hubbard: Yeah. Iain Gulland: reduce something about the materials and the circular economy, then that decarbonisation, weak fossil fuels, it can't happen. Wayne Hubbard: Yeah, it can't happen. So it does work. It does work, but it becomes an enabler of the fossil to renewables Iain Gulland: Yeah. Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: transition. That's what it becomes. And I think when I see lots of people talking about the circular economy, I still always ask, well, why is it important to you? What's your objective? What are you trying to get out of it? Because you do still find people kind of really talking the circular economy mantra. And it's almost as if we want to be circular. for the sake of being circular. And there's Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: literally a circular logic to that. Iain Gulland: Yeah. Wayne Hubbard: what is it that you want? What's your outcome? And when people have their outcome well-defined and it's compelling, then everyone can get behind it. And I feel we've arrived at a very compelling and somewhat surprising outcome, which is what I never expected, which is much more grounded in geopolitics and the need to move away from oil and the acquisition of the correct materials in order to do that. Much more complicated and complex than I in my simplistic way had envisaged. So yeah, I hope we've managed to convey that to people in some way. Iain Gulland: So thank you for listening. That's the end of this episode. You have been listening to Unfolding, a Circular Economy podcast. I've been Ian Gulland. He's been Wayne Hubbard. Thank you to our guest today, who was Jack Barry. hope you will all be able to listen to the next episode which will be coming very soon. Thank you. Wayne Hubbard: Like and subscribe.