The authors regret that the original version of this article contained numerical errors in Figure 2 within the main text and Table A1 of Appendix A. Supplementary data. Corrections that need to be made are presented as follows: • For Figure 2 in the main text, the label “0∼4mm SS (42.5%)” of a flow should be corrected to “0∼4mm SS (44.5%)”, as shown in Fig. C1 below. [Figure presented]• In Table A1 of Appendix A, the electricity usage for the “Wet processing” under the S1 BAU WP scenario should be corrected to “400 kWh” instead of “60,000 kWh”.The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused and state that the changes reported do not affect the scientific results and conclusions of the manuscript.

This chapter provides the background of this book’s topic. It does so by explaining how informal waste picking and urban formal waste infrastructure systems are both relevant to realizing an effective inclusive and circular economy at the urban scale, but that bringing them together does not occur automatically in the policymaking process. It provides a conceptual model that clarifies how the different components of the urban waste management system are connected, clarifies the logic underlying the structuring of the book into the various chapters that follow and then proceeds to present a brief outline of what each of those following chapters will be dealing with.

Rapid urbanization in combination with unsustainable production and consumption patterns leads to the generation of substantial amounts of urban waste. The circular economy promises to bring solutions both with top-down and with bottom-up activities. The former relate to the implementation of policies which are based on the waste hierarchy principles by local governments, whereas the latter are about the adoption of circular business models by urban stakeholders. However, a circular economy does not automatically endow cities with inclusion or resilience against shocks. Consequently, any decision which relates to such a transition is not trivial. This chapter presents an integrative framework to assist urban decision makers in considering inclusion and circularity simultaneously when developing urban waste management systems where urban regeneration has a central role. The framework places explicit attention on improving the accessibility of social groups to various forms of capital and stimulating the development of local economies through improved circulation of resources and information within the urban fabric.

Urban-industrial symbiosis (UIS) is an important system innovation via sectors integration, and has been widely recognized as a novel pathway for achieving regional eco-industrial development. Eco-efficiency, as a mature approach and indicator, offers an effective tool to uncover both the status and trends of such a transformation. However, most studies have focused on the whole industry or city as a whole, which has meant that a view from the sectoral level focusing on UIS was missing. To fill this research gap, this paper applied a modified eco-efficiency approach using integrating input-output analysis (IOA) and carbon footprint (CFP) to identify the eco-efficiency benefits of UIS from a sectoral level. Specifically, sector-level economic data (as economic outputs) and CFP (as environmental impacts) are used to calculate the sectoral eco-efficiency. IOA helps to offer sectoral economic data, and, with integrating process-based inventory analysis, to conduct a CFP calculation at the sectoral level. To test the feasibility of the developed approach, urban industrial symbiosis scenarios in one typical industrial city of China were analyzed. This city is held up as the national pilot of the circular economy, low-carbon city, and ecological civilization in China. Scenarios analysis on a business as usual (no UIS) and with UIS implementation in 2012 were undertaken and compared with the change of sectoral CFP and eco-efficiency. The results highlighted a moderate increase in eco-efficiency and trade-offs in certain sectors, indicating that UIS was moderately effective in increasing the urban resource efficiency from a sectoral level, but a refined design was required. Policy recommendations are made based on the analytical results, to inform decision makers and urban and industrial managers seeking to improve the implementation of UIS as a means of achieving greater urban sustainability.

The increasing volume of Construction and demolition waste (CDW) associated with economic growth is posing challenges to the sustainable management of the built environment. The largest fraction of all the CDW generated in the member states of the European Union (EU) is End-of-life (EOL) concrete. The most widely applied method for EOL concrete recovery in Europe is road base backfilling, which is considered low-grade recovery. The common practice for high-grade recycling is wet process that processes and washes EOL concrete into clean coarse aggregate for concrete manufacturing. It is costly. As a result, a series of EU projects have been launched to advance the technologies for high value-added concrete recycling. A critical environmental and economic evaluation of such technological innovations is important to inform decision making, while there has been a lack of studies in this field. Hence the present study aimed to assess the efficiency of the technical innovations in high-grade concrete recycling, using an improved eco-efficiency analytical approach by integrating life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC). Four systems of high-grade concrete recycling were analyzed for comparison: (i) business-as-usual (BAU) stationary wet processing; (ii) stationary advanced dry recovery (ADR); (iii) mobile ADR; (iv) mobile ADR and Heating Air Classification (A&H). An overarching framework was proposed for LCA/LCC-type eco-efficiency assessment conforming to ISO standards. The study found that technological routes that recycle on-site and produce high-value secondary products are most advantageous. Accordingly, policy recommendations are proposed to support the technological innovations of CDW management.