DECEMBER 23 — For decades, we’ve operated under the industrial era’s guiding principle: take, make, dispose.
This linear economy has delivered immense wealth, but at a catastrophic cost, leaving us buried in waste and choking on our own emissions.
The alternative, the circular economy, has often been dismissed as a niche concept for idealists—a fancy term for recycling.
But a pivotal new analysis by researchers Rashid and Malik, published in Springer’s Renewable Energy in Circular Economy, shatters this misconception.
Their findings reveal that the transition to a circular economy is not a peripheral environmental goal; it is the core of the next great economic transformation, and it is powered by a fundamental alliance with renewable energy.
The most compelling finding is that this is a systemic overhaul, not a procedural tweak.
We’ve been fixated on the “end-of-life” recycling bin, patting ourselves on the back for tossing a plastic bottle into the right bin.
Rashid and Malik argue this is missing the point entirely.
True circularity starts at the drawing board.
It’s about designing products—from smartphones to solar panels—to be repaired, refurbished, and disassembled from the very beginning.
It’s about creating industrial systems where one factory’s waste heat becomes another’s power source.
This isn’t just waste management; it’s a trillion-dollar opportunity for innovation in design, manufacturing, and logistics.
Many still do not understand the true calling of a circular economy.
This is where their second critical insight comes in: renewable energy is the indispensable engine of a true circular economy.
You cannot power a circular system with fossil fuels.
The logic is devastatingly simple.
A circular model aims to keep materials in a continuous loop of use.
If you use dirty, extractive energy to recycle a material or remanufacture a product, you are simply trading a waste problem for a carbon emissions problem.
You are circular in material, but remain linear and polluting in energy.
Rashid and Malik position renewables as the “bloodstream” of the circular body—without this clean energy source, the system cannot live.
Solar, wind, and geothermal provide the clean power needed to close material loops without undermining the climate goals that make the transition necessary in the first place.
Finally, the review highlights that this transition is being turbocharged by the digital revolution.
Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things are the “central nervous system” that makes this complex, interconnected system manageable.
Smart sensors can track materials through the economy, AI can optimise reverse logistics to bring used products back to factories, and blockchain can verify the recycled content of materials.
This isn’t a distant future; it’s happening now, making circular models not just philosophically desirable but economically viable and efficient.
Clearly, investing in the right technology is key.
This is where any plan to transition to circular must include appropriate investment in R&D.
The aim is not only to develop in-house technology but to also undertake due dilligence on imported technology.
The takeaway is clear: The work of Rashid, Malik, and others in the field signals a profound shift.
The conversation is moving from the environmental department to the boardroom.
The businesses and nations that thrive in the coming decades will be those that see this not as a constraint, but as the ultimate innovation challenge.
They will be the ones designing products for perpetuity, powering their industries with clean energy, and leveraging data to create value from what was once considered waste.
The linear economy is a relic.
The future is circular, and it’s powered by the sun, the wind, and our own ingenuity.
The review makes it undeniably clear: this is no longer a question of if we will make this transition, but who will lead it and reap the monumental rewards.
As Malaysia strives to embrace the circular economy, it must put in place the right governance structure.
The initiative must have ownership of the policy to drive and monitor progress.
There must be a dedicated unit to move the needle towards circularity.
This is because the change from linear to circular is an enormous economic exercise.
Financing alone will not deliver the shift.
The greatest challenge is to change the mindset of the key stakeholders, especially business and consumers.
Aggressive communication is critical to achieve buy-in.
Unless there is a dedicated driver and owner of the circular economy framework, the plan is again destined to fail.
*The author is affiliated with the Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies at UCSI University and is an Adjunct Professor at the Ungku Aziz Centre for Development Studies, Universiti Malaya. He can be reached at [email protected].
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
