Circular Economy for Food: A Systemic Interpretation of 40 Case Histories in the Food System in Their Relationships with SDGs^†

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 A great paper! EXCEPT there is little or no explanation about what was actually carried out in order arrive at the CE for food word / SDG cloud.

This is effectively a literature review / meta-analysis paper that is devoid of explanation or detailed information / data on how the synthesis and analysis was carried out.

This needs to be rectified before acceptance.

I also think there needs to be better layout / typesetting as it is difficult to read blocks of paragraph text.

Author Response

A great paper! EXCEPT there is little or no explanation about what was actually carried out in order arrive at the CE for food word / SDG cloud. This is effectively a literature review / meta-analysis paper that is devoid of explanation or detailed information / data on how the synthesis and analysis was carried out. This needs to be rectified before acceptance.

Thanks for the precious comments. We had a major revision of the methodology and results in order to explain how we realize the SDGs cloud. We have explained how we have systematized the information collected by the realization of a check list based on OECD Guidelines. We had also changed the graphic display of the results, by using the wedding cake model (used as a starting point in the methodology).

I also think there needs to be better layout / typesetting as it is difficult to read blocks of paragraph text.

We have improved the layout and typesetting across all the paragraphs.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a well thought out and conceived paper, based on an intriguing methodological approach, with useful illustrations and graphical representations of the circular economy and the SDGs. However, as a social scientist led by empirical concerns, I found the results section of the paper very unsatisfactory.  Where is the evidence of the primary data collection, interviews with businesses? To reach its full and undoubted potential this paper needs to demonstrate insight from the these interviewee and integrate the results through some further analysis.

Author Response

This is a well thought out and conceived paper, based on an intriguing methodological approach, with useful illustrations and graphical representations of the circular economy and the SDGs. However, as a social scientist led by empirical concerns, I found the results section of the paper very unsatisfactory.  Where is the evidence of the primary data collection, interviews with businesses? To reach its full and undoubted potential this paper needs to demonstrate insight from these interviewee and integrate the results through some further analysis.

Thanks for comments. We have substantially revised and integrated the methodology and results paragraphs. We have provided wider detail about the research definition and construction of the sample of 40 case histories. We have inserted Table 1 with more info for each case history. We have explained how we carried out the analysis to display the results. We have changed the representation of the results. From the SDGs word cloud we move from a representation of the contribution of the various SDGs on the different dimension of sustainability of the wedding cake. We believe that this option improve the consistency of the paper with the special issue.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper addresses a topic of wider interest to the community of food researchers. How to apply the concepts of a circular economy in the food context is defintely something of a growing importance to researchers and practitioners alike. Thus understanding historic cases in this area should offer a lot of important lessons. 

While I find the introduction on what the circular economics concepts are and why they are important for the food and agriculture sector very well developed I think they should be shortened. Particular the section on the circular economy for food states a lot of arguments that can be found else. The space should rather be used to expand on sec 2 on the methodology as well on sec 3 on results. 

The methods section needs a good re-write to give more information for example on the sampling strategy for the cases, selection criteria, a more detailed description of the cases and their differences, how they were analyzed etc. Fig 2 does not add to explaining what was done (esp the use of teh scenario terminolgy is confusing here as not scenarios were done) and how and why and should be either deleted or re-thought. It might also be good to present any kind of summary statistics done on the cases to understand the differences between the investigated companies. It would be good to explain also what was done concretely in terms of macro-econ analysis, how the effects on the SDGs were evaluated etc (see l 254 to 263).

In the results section I am missing examples or 'proofs' for the findings made. Furthermore being more systematic about how the principles of teh Circular economy were applied (or not) one by one might help the reader to understand the findings and their implications. Fig 3 does not really explain how a circular food system might be different from the current value chain models. It need to show where circularity elements could be introduced in order to understand what the circular model would really do different and how. Explaining this with examples from the investigated companies in the text would help to illuminate the concrete changes to the current system. 

Overall I find the writing very dense and it would be easier for the reader to have more paragraphs and shorter sentences to improve readability. 

Author Response

The paper addresses a topic of wider interest to the community of food researchers. How to apply the concepts of a circular economy in the food context is defintely something of a growing importance to researchers and practitioners alike. Thus understanding historic cases in this area should offer a lot of important lessons. 

While I find the introduction on what the circular economics concepts are and why they are important for the food and agriculture sector very well developed I think they should be shortened. Particular the section on the circular economy for food states a lot of arguments that can be found else. The space should rather be used to expand on sec 2 on the methodology as well on sec 3 on results. 

    Thanks for the careful reading and constructive comments. They really help us to understand how to improve the paper.

    The abstract has been revised and reduced to 199 words. Now it is more focused on the Systems Special Issue (relationship with circular economy applied into the food system and their connections with SDGs) and gives back the full paper development and kind of innovative contribution.

     The introductory paragraph has been reduced and limited to explain:

·                     how the conception of Circular Economy, as a new paradigm, is related with the functioning dynamics of the food system;

·                     why we need circular economy to face the food system challenges (food waste, biodiversity loss, climate change…)

The methods section needs a good re-write to give more information for example on the sampling strategy for the cases, selection criteria, a more detailed description of the cases and their differences, how they were analyzed etc. Fig 2 does not add to explaining what was done (esp the use of teh scenario terminolgy is confusing here as not scenarios were done) and how and why and should be either deleted or re-thought. It might also be good to present any kind of summary statistics done on the cases to understand the differences between the investigated companies. It would be good to explain also what was done concretely in terms of macro-econ analysis, how the effects on the SDGs were evaluated etc (see l 254 to 263).

     We used the saved space to improve the Methodology and Results sections. We have also changed Figures to improve the understanding of the paper.  We added a table (Table 1) with more information about the case history. Table 1 add insight of how circular economy actions can enlarge the traditional food value chain. We explained better how we have selected the 40 case histories and how they are representative of different products, supply chain phases, cascades effect on a wide array of different industry sectors. We have explained how we moved from the collected information to the results on SDGs contribution on the different dimension of the sustainability by developing a check list based on OECD Guide for the implementation of SDGs.

In the results section I am missing examples or 'proofs' for the findings made. Furthermore being more systematic about how the principles of teh Circular economy were applied (or not) one by one might help the reader to understand the findings and their implications. Fig 3 does not really explain how a circular food system might be different from the current value chain models. It need to show where circularity elements could be introduced in order to understand what the circular model would really do different and how. Explaining this with examples from the investigated companies in the text would help to illuminate the concrete changes to the current system. 

    Results were rewritten focusing on the circular economy principle that have been applied in the case histories: upcycling and eco-design. To improve the explanation we provided examples from the case histories. We believe that in the revised version of the paper is possible to see the concrete changes already realized by circular economy actions and the yet untapped potential on the social and environmental dimensions dealing with food system.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Whilst I welcome this revised manuscript, it still lacks enough detail!

I really need to see how the companies are mapped against the SDGs and the elements of the CE to come up with the resulting conclusions.

It is straightforward to do, but I cannot understand how the authors come up with their conclusions and the data that supports it....

Please revise again!

Author Response

We have revised further the article according to your comments. We added into the results section two tables and further explanations/specifications on how we come up to the mapping of CE elements and SDGs and consequently to the conclusions. Accordingly, we have integrated the method section.

We have also tried to further anchor the method and the results to the current debate in the literature.

The first added table (Table 2) is related to the systematization of the 40 case histories according to the 6 business actions depicted by the ReSOLVE framework from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (Table 2). It explains how we come up to say that the case histories are mainly revolved around business models oriented to optimization by closing loops (especially inner loops by adopting an upcycling logic) and to regeneration by product/service redesign.

The second added table (Table 3) explains how we have mapped the case histories against the SDGs and their sub-target. The table is the source for the findings about the connections with SDGs (especially 12, 9 and 17) and represent the input for the construction of the 40 case histories wedding cake. From this representation it emerges how circular economy for food is currently a predominantly economic model that needs to be integrated with a stronger commitment for the achievement of environmental and social SDGs to be really sustainable.

By doing this we have demonstrated that food system, beyond being a field of implementation of CE action, can be used as a litmus test to measure the sustainability of CE.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is much improved.

Author Response

Thanks we have worked hardly to improve it. Following the advices of R1 we have added into the results section two tables and further explanations/specifications on how we come up to the mapping of CE elements and SDGs and consequently to the conclusions.

We have also tried to further anchor the method and the conclusions to the current debate in the literature. We have added some literature .

The first added table (Table 2) is related to the systematization of the 40 case histories according to the 6 business actions depicted by the ReSOLVE framework from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (Table 2). It explains how we come up to say that the case histories are mainly revolved around business models oriented to optimization by closing loops (especially inner loops by adopting an upcycling logic) and to regeneration by product/service redesign.

The second added table (Table 3) explains how we have mapped the case histories against the SDGs and their sub-target. The table is the source for the findings about the connections with SDGs (especially 12, 9 and 17) and represent the input for the construction of the 40 case histories wedding cake. From this representation it emerges how circular economy for food is currently a predominantly economic model that needs to be integrated with a stronger commitment for the achievement of environmental and social SDGs to be really sustainable.

By doing this we have demonstrated that food system, beyond being a field of implementation of CE action, can be used as a litmus test to measure the sustainability of CE and to understand where looking for adjustments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx