Questionnaire on the SCREEN assessment criteria for circular economy projects

SCREEN (www.screen-lab.eu) is an H2020 coordinating and supporting action participated by 17 European regions, aiming at the definition of a replicable systemic approach towards a transition to Circular Economy in European regions.

The draft table of assessment criteria for circular economy projects (see below) has been prepared after several discussions between the 17 SCREEN regions and other stakeholders: it is intended as a tool for helping the evaluators of circular economy projects asking for regional funds, to be used in addition to the usual evaluation criteria. The table is a draft version and it is not yet completed, because the final step on how to practically proceed with the comparison of projects is still missing. After having processed the questionnaire’s results, the table will be fine-tuned and completed.

Projects are firstly divided into two separate categories:
A) Projects directly addressing waste recycling or avoidance through a change or upgrading of the production process
B) Projects dealing with the promotion of circular economy: training, dissemination of best practices, education of relevant stakeholders, etc.

A) Projects dealing with a production process change or upgrading
The first category of projects is divided in four sub-categories having different “circularity impact” (weight), depending of the destination and the use of the waste recovered; applicant must compulsory select only one of the following cases:
1) Waste recovered is re-used in the same location as a secondary raw material: this is the best ranked case, because there is no need of transport from one place to another place
2) Waste recovered is re-used in another location as a secondary raw material: in this case there is a need of transport, but the recovered waste already has its final destination certified
3) Waste recovered is put on the market as a secondary raw material: there is a need of transport and the recovered waste does not have its final destination yet
4) The new process generates less waste, that is not recovered

After having chosen one of the above criteria, applicants are requested to indicate the energy efficiency of the new process respect to the old one (Criterion 5); these two criteria (the one selected among four and the fifth one) are converted in € per year through the parameters indicated in the table, in order to have a uniform parameter.

Applicant are then requested to provide data for a further environmental criterion and for the socio-economic criteria:

Criterion 6) Reduction of emission (Kg of CO2 per year); reduction of other GHG/pollutants should be reduced to Kg of CO2 equivalent through commonly accepted conversion tables such as the one at https://climatechangeconnection.org/emissions/co2-equivalents/. In the present draft version this criterion is not converted in € per year

Criterion 7) Net balance of jobs (created by the new circular process and lost in the old linear one); In the present draft version this criterion is not converted in € per year

Criterion 8) Increased economic value of the new process respect to the old one (%). This criterion is not transformed in € per year, in order to not penalize small businesses respect to greater ones: therefore only the increasing ratio is considered.

B) Projects dealing with the promotion of circular economy
This category of projects includes promotion, training, education and any other activity dealing with circular economy, but not directly foreseeing a change of a production process from linear to circular.
Due to the wide range of possible projects, this draft version considers 3 generic sub-categories. It is to be underlined that these criteria have been defined as additional ones to be used by the regions, together with the usual ones, in case of projects dealing with circular economy and 3 criteria (respect to the 5 above defined for direct projects) should be enough. An excessive number of additional criteria could have a counterproductive effect

Email address *
You can download a pdf version of this table at: http://www.screen-lab.eu/documents/QUESTIONNAIRE-INTRO.pdf
Your organisation *
Please provide your NACE Code: choose the yours among the ones in the list at http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/index/nace_all.html
Your answer
1 – Definition of two different categories: your agreement about considering in a separate way projects dealing with an effective waste recycling within a specific process and projects promoting circular economy . *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
2 – Projects dealing with a production process change or upgrading: your agreement about the choice of having four sub-categories with different “circularity impact” *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
3 – Projects dealing with a production process change or upgrading: your agreement about the clarity of the description of the four sub-categories (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) and their relevance. *
4 – CRITERION 5- “Net Energy balance respect to the previous system” or “Amount of energy recovered”: your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) and the relevance of the criterion . *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
5 – CRITERION 6 - Reduction of emissions: your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) and the relevance of the criterion . *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
6 – CRITERION 7- Net balance of jobs”: your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) and the relevance of the criterion . *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
7 – CRITERION 8 - Increase of economic value”: your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) your agreement about the clarity of its description (Columns 3 and 4 of the table) and the relevance of the criterion . *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
8 – Projects directly addressing waste recycling (Criteria from 1 to 8): Your agreement about metrics and assessment indicators adopted (Columns 5, 6 and 7 in the table) 1=fully disagree; 9=fully agree *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
10 – Weight: Your agreement about the weight proposed for the different criteria (column 8 in the table) *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
11 – Different weights in different regions: each region, according to its own programmes and policies, may assign different weights to the criteria. *
Fully disagree
Fully agree
12 – Your overall opinion about the table of the assessment criteria. 1=poor: its adoption cannot help in any way the assessment of circular economy projects. 9=very good: its adoption may give a relevant contribution to a more harmonized assessment of circular economy projects *
Poor
Very Good
Optional comments
Your answer
A copy of your responses will be emailed to the address you provided.
Submit
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
reCAPTCHA
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Additional Terms