Comparison of Circulytics & Circular Transition Indicators

In 2021, GeSI released a paper focused on circular economy frameworks, delving into a comparison between Circulytics 2.0 from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) V1.0 developed by WBCSD.

Both frameworks aim to guide businesses and organizations in transitioning from a linear economy to a more sustainable, circular model. Circulytics 2.0 provides a comprehensive assessment of circularity by examining a company’s entire operations, offering insights into enablers (such as strategy and culture) and outcomes (like material flows). On the other hand, the CTI framework takes a more structured approach by providing specific metrics to track material flows, resource efficiency, and circular performance. It is particularly focused on quantifiable indicators, helping businesses measure their progress toward circularity with more precision.

The paper highlights key differences in the focus and application of these frameworks. Circulytics 2.0 is designed to support businesses of all sectors by embedding circular economy principles into their core, offering detailed qualitative insights. It emphasizes leadership and decision-making that prioritize circularity at every level. CTI V1.0, however, centers on the measurement of circular performance in supply chains and operations, making it particularly useful for sectors that require concrete, data-driven outcomes to assess their transition efforts.

Both frameworks offer unique benefits, and the paper concludes that businesses aiming for circularity should consider using these tools in a complementary manner. While Circulytics 2.0 serves as a holistic guide for embedding circularity into business culture, CTI V1.0 allows companies to track and measure their progress through defined indicators, driving clear and accountable results.

For Members:  

• You can access the full version by clicking below.