Starting from April 2, 2022, Lithuania will no longer import natural gas from Russia for the nation’s energy supply. As quoted from ABC News, Dainius Kreivys, the Lithuanian Minister of Energy, stated that Lithuania is the first European Union country out of 27 other countries to completely stop importing gas from Russia. The President of Lithuania, Gitanas Nauseda, posted a statement via his official Twitter account that he confirmed the fact and stated that Lithuania had decided to stop cooperation in the energy sector with an 'aggressor'. This statement refers to their form of solidarity with Ukraine, which has been a victim of Russia’s invasion since late February 2022. In the statement, the President of Lithuania invited other European Union countries to take the same steps.

What Underlies the Decision

Reported by PBS, Lithuania was a country with a 100% dependence on Russian natural gas imports. In fact, it was noted that before 2014, Lithuania was always on the list of countries with the highest amount of natural gas transactions in the European Union. After 2014, they started to establish their own gas production terminal at the Klaipeda port, despite the fact that they were still dependent on Russian gas supply by 26% in 2021.

The gas trade cooperation relationship between Russia and Lithuania resumed decently until early 2022, when Russia started an attack on Ukraine. Bloomberg reported that President Vladimir Putin suspended gas exports to countries that showed no support to Russia in the attack, which includes Lithuania. Starting on April 1, 2022, according to President Putin's edict, Russia also urges EU countries to pay the cost of gas imports in rubles if they still wish to continue to import gas. Lithuania strongly condemned the attack and immediately took action by severing gas trade cooperation with Russia.

Forecasts on What Will Happen

Obviously, Lithuania’s actions as their response to the tense relations between Ukraine and Russia will have a huge impact on the country's economy. Based on data from Trading Economics, Lithuania is experiencing inflation of 14.2% since the end of February 2022, the highest inflation rate since 1996. This has led the country to a drastic increase in the price of all sorts of fuel, including natural gas. Gas for household purposes and electricity generated from natural gas experienced a dramatic price increase as the effect.

Reporting from Delfi, at the end of 2021, the price of household gas in Lithuania has increased by 27-36% from its normal price, while the price of electricity has also increased by 10%. Until now, the price has not shown any signs of decrease. It is concerned that this condition will worsen after Lithuania decided to stop gas import cooperation with Russia. In this tense situation, the Lithuanian government cannot remain silent and must ensure the availability of gas supplies in the country considering that Lithuania is one of the countries that are highly dependent on the supply of natural gas as an energy source for electricity and heating fuel for their buildings.

Actions Taken by Lithuanian Government

The Lithuanian government took several steps to maintain the availability of natural gas to anticipate shortages due to the end of natural gas imports from Russia. The following are the efforts made by Lithuania after cutting off gas supplies from Russia as of April 2, 2022.

1. Independent Gas Production

Reporting from Euronews, the Lithuanian Ministry of Energy has stated that from April 1, 2022, they will no longer import Russian gas and will increase the production of liquefied natural gas from their own state-owned gas production terminal as an alternative to gas import activities. Data from transmission system operators specifically show that as of April 2, 2022, Russian gas imports for Lithuania's needs via the Lithuanian-Belarus gas interconnection have reached 0. Currently, they independently rely on natural gas production from their own state-owned gas terminals in Klaipeda. In the future, Lithuania will increase gas production in Klaipeda to achieve complete independence in their domestic gas supply without having to rely on gas imports from other countries, especially Russia.

2. Cooperation with Other Countries

In line with President Nauseda's statement on his Twitter account encouraging other European Union countries to stop importing gas from Russia, the Lithuanian government has also promoted cooperation with neighboring countries in the natural gas trade, one of which is the construction of gas pipelines to Poland natural gas sources. Reported to Reuters, the Gas Interconnection Poland–Lithuania (GIPL) connecting Poland and Lithuania will be officially opened on May 1, 2022, to carry out natural gas trade cooperation by distributing natural gas produced by Lithuania to Poland and vice versa. With the construction of this natural gas pipeline, the two countries will keep each other's natural gas supplies safe. The construction process has started in early 2019 and was hampered by construction in 2021, this facility was inaugurated earlier than scheduled, namely in mid-2022.

3. Exploring Alternative Energy Sources

The possibility of a decrease in Lithuania's natural gas supply after the termination of cooperation in gas imports from Russia has prompted the Lithuanian government to look for other alternative energy sources which is wind energy. Reporting from Offshore Wind Biz, on March 31, 2022, the Lithuanian Parliament established a law for the development of offshore wind energy in the Baltic Sea. The license application process to develop a wind energy harvesting field marks the beginning of the construction of the first offshore wind energy harvesting facility in Lithuania.

Lithuania will soon become an independent country in the production of natural gas and a source of natural gas for other countries with various efforts that have been made. Independent gas production and gas distribution to other countries can also improve diplomatic relations between Lithuania and countries that directly benefit from gas export activities. The alternative resource exploration policy has also become the key to Lithuania's energy dependence after the termination of cooperation in the export and import of Russian gas.

As a system that tries to bridge economic development and sustainability, the circular economy has gained enormous attention from developing countries as in the African continent. In the progression, African nations are fostering cooperation to enhance the implementation of a circular economy, particularly with countries that have implemented a circular economy, such as countries in European Union. Cooperation with European Union nations will not only enhance the capacity in innovation and technology for implementing a circular economy but also can be utilized to forge good public policies and alter African countries' societies to adopt circular economy values in their economic activities.

Since the joint declaration between African Union and European Union was signed in 2017, the government of both regional countries has coincided with the cooperation on accelerating the circular economy in African nations. This commitment has been implemented through various initiatives namely funding, technology advancement, public policy dialogues, and market access to the African circular economy. In 2014, European Union and African countries' cooperation has also been implemented through the SWITCH Africa Green mechanism which is funded by European Union that also involves United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to support green economic development and sustainability in the African region.

Regionally, some African nations have arranged several multilateral cooperation fora to proliferate circular economy implementation in the region. In 2016, African Circular Economy Network (ACEN) is formed by practitioners and experts in order to enhance the technology and innovation capabilities through collaboration between developed and developing nations. In 2017, African Circular Economy Alliances (ACEA) is formed by an agreement between three nations namely; Rwanda, Nigeria, and South Africa. ACEA is aimed as a coordination forum between the nations to implement the projects and programs related to the circular economy. Besides the involvement of government officials, circular economy acceleration is also supported by professionals. Lately, in 2019 African countries through African Ministerial Conference on the Economy (AMCEN) have declared Durban Declaration to ramp up the policy-making efforts to enhance circular economy implementation in the region.

Nationally, African countries have developed several initiatives which could be categorized as circular economy practices, such as waste management, the efficiency of energy and water use, and the re-utilization of second-hand materials in producing products. Several countries in Africa have focused on developing a circular economy, for instance, South Africa which focuses on enhancing circular economy implementation in manufacturing, renewable energy, and waste management (Tahulela & Ballard, 2020) while Ghana and Nigeria have started to focus on e-waste management (Maphosa & Maphosa, 2020). Despite some initiatives, in the public policy aspect, there is impreciseness in categorizing practices as the circular economy. Furthermore, the public policy related to the circular economy has not been comprehensively arranged.

Even though the discussion of African countries and European Union cooperation still revolves around the aspects of technology and financial aid, in several cooperation agreements and discussions, both parties agreed that aspects of public policy-making and society recognizant in African societies are of the utmost importance to develop and enhance the circular economy implementation in the region, especially in doing cooperation with European Union both regionally and nationally.

In public policies, African nations are still unable to compose holistic policies to enhance the circular economy practices and mechanisms. According to Desmond and Asamba, the discussion of policy proposals to accelerate the implementation of a circular economy has been discussed widely in some African countries in recent years yet is still debated to be legalized (Desmond & Asamba, 2019). In South Africa for example, the circular economy in the manufacturing industry has not yet been holistically ruled by the government. The absence of holistic policy, clear standardization, and also rules for manufacturing companies become obstacles for the companies to implementing the circular economy (Ohiomah & Sukdeo, 2022).

Through the international cooperation mechanism with European Union, African nations have the potential to develop a more holistic public policy in order to develop circular economy implementation as some of the European nations have accomplished in their domestic economic system. As Wadee and Tilkanen argue that despite the circular economy is a new terminology within African nations, practices that are considered circular economy have been implemented in African countries. However, circular economy policies in African nations have not been implemented in an inclusive manner by not involving various parties who should have taken part in the policy-making of the circular economy. Hence, the cooperation with European Union may give reference to African nations in shaping public policy to implement a circular economy. Furthermore, the success of the European Union in developing a circular economy system is determined by the mechanism that propels society and companies to adopt circular economy principles in their business enterprises and community activities.

In addition to policy-making cooperation, collaboration with European Union should also be carried out at the stage of implementing the policies in the development of circular economy. According to the Trinomics report,  debilitating implementation of policies and laws still widely occurs despite the existence of policies and laws that propel companies to adhere to circular economy practices.  Even in some African countries, sustainability policies and laws may be eluded through corruption (Forson et al., 2017). Accordingly, this issue should also become a concern between parties in doing cooperation especially to ensure the implementation of circular economy policies that have been shaped. Arguably, African nations should not only focus on the policy-making process but also on the supervision and the implementation of policies, particularly for business companies in Africa. 

In addition to the need for holistic public policy support, the development of a circular economy system in Africa must also pay attention to aspects of changing the behavior of people and businesses in Africa. The practice of circular economy does not merely involve business actors but also consumers who use these products. Unfortunately, the majority of African societies have not recognized circular economy practices well until now. As Zubrugg et al., (2014) argue that well recognition and understanding of circular economy practices are matter since the research reveals that the success of waste management in developing countries not only depend on good policy and state institution but also relies on the acceptance and understanding of society towards circular economy ideas. 

To resolve the problems, by enhancing cooperation with European Union as Denmark and Indonesia have done, African nations may initiate conferences or workshops to discuss the circular economy that includes important stakeholders, particularly society and businesses. Through discussions and conferences that entail European Union, the African nations may ameliorate their understanding and acceptance of the societies of circular economy. Information exchanges and workshops on practicing circular economy may raise societies’ understanding of circular economy. 

Among many complex issues which become challenges in implementing circular economy in African nations, public policy formulation and implementation related to the circular economy have become the major challenges for African countries in enhancing circular economy practices. Furthermore, societies and businesses' familiarization with circular economy principles and practices is crucial in institutionalizing circular economy values in African nations. Hence, despite the regional cooperation that has been underway through African and European Union cooperation, there is still a need to enhance cooperation with European Union countries that have developed circular economy, particularly in the process of public policy-making, and to familiarize the societies with circular economy practices. The existence of holistic public policies and circular economy practices institutionalization in society arguably will accelerate circular economy practices in African countries that can be achieved through cooperation with European countries which are at the forefront of implementing a circular economy worldwide. 

References

Desmond, P., & Asamba, M. (2019). Accelerating the transition to a circular economy in Africa (pp. 152–172). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429434006-9

Forson, J. A., Buracom, P., Chen, G., & Baah-Ennumh, T. Y. (2017). Genuine Wealth Per Capita as a Measure of Sustainability and the Negative Impact of Corruption on Sustainable Growth in Sub-Sahara Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 85(2), 178–195.

Maphosa, V., & Maphosa, M. (2020). E-waste management in Sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic literature review. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1814503. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1814503

Ohiomah, I., & Sukdeo, N. (2022). Challenges of the South African economy to transition to a circular economy: A case of remanufacturing. Journal of Remanufacturing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-021-00108-z

Tahulela, A., & Ballard, H. (2020). Developing the Circular Economy in South Africa: Challenges and Opportunities (pp. 125–133). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7071-7_11

Zurbrügg, C., Caniato, M., & Vaccari, M. (2014). How Assessment Methods Can Support Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries—A Critical Review. Sustainability, 6, 545–570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6020545

Cooperation between countries, both bilaterally and multilaterally, is a crucial step to support the progress and development of countries that cooperate with each other, especially in the field of economic cooperation. Building cooperation with developed countries is often considered more profitable in various sectors. On the other hand, cooperation between developing countries, commonly known as "South-South Cooperation", to support the development of Southern countries with each other is also an important matter. Quoted from the United Nations official website, the term “South-South Cooperation” refers to technical cooperation between developing countries to collaborate and share knowledge, skills, and successful initiatives in certain fields to support the development of certain sectors of the countries that are members of the United Nations. the cooperation.

Venezuela and South Africa are the evidence of a successful establishment of South-South Cooperation between developing countries. Cooperation between both countries began with a deal in oil trade back in 2008, when the world was hit by the global financial crisis. As developing countries struggling to survive, Venezuela and South Africa have taken the initiative to build cooperation in the trade sector. Venezuela with its superior oil potential and South Africa’s potential in natural gas offer each other their potential resources and rely on each other in cooperation agreements. Furthermore, this article will discuss thoroughly about the beginning of decently-maintained relations between Venezuela and South Africa through cooperation between countries that has continued until this present day.

Oil Trade Agreement, Circa 2008

Venezuela and South Africa signed a cooperation agreement as a form of alliance from both countries back in 2008. In the bilateral cooperation plan, the two countries agreed to manage the oil and gas stored under the surface of the Orinoco river valley that crosses the Venezuelan territory. As reported by The Economic Times, the President of Venezuela in that period, Hugo Chavez, openly invited South African oil companies to come directly to Venezuela and start cooperation as soon as possible. In this partnership, the South African Oil and Gas company, or PetroSA, works closely with Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PdVSA) on Venezuelan soil.

In return, the President of South Africa on duty, Thabo Mbeki, invited Venezuela to explore the country's natural gas resources. South Africa is also a pioneer in the technology of converting natural gas into liquids, with a stock storage capacity of 45 million barrels. This draws Venezuela’s interest in planning further collaborations with the country. The main objective of establishing bilateral cooperation in the economic field of the two countries is to help reduce the costs incurred for importing oil and natural gas and take the initiative to 'barter' for the resources needed by each country.

The moment of economic cooperation between Venezuela and South Africa marked the beginning of the close relationship between the two. As recorded in the transcript of the press conference between Venezuela and South Africa on September 2, 2008, regarding the establishment of bilateral cooperation in the economic field, President Mbeki called their cooperation a 'strategic partnership' which means that the two countries will learn from each other and take advantage of each other's strengths and weaknesses. This collaboration is expected to have a positive impact on the people of the two countries and support development.

Enhancing the Relations, for the Present and the Future

Although diplomatic relations between Venezuela and South Africa have been running since 1993 when embassies in each country were deployed, the agreement on oil and gas commodities in 2008 was a big milestone for the two countries to strengthen their good relations. Since the 2008 cooperation in the oil trade sector, which is mutually beneficial to both parties, Venezuela and South Africa have continued to intensively build cooperation in various other sectors.

One of the cooperations between the two countries that was established after the success of the oil trade cooperation in 2008 was the diamond mining product trade cooperation in July 2017. As reported from The Diamond Loupe, the cooperation contract was signed by the Deputy Minister of Mineral Resources of South Africa, Godfrey Oliphant, and his Venezuelan associate, Víctor Cano. Still, in the natural resource trade sector, another example of Venezuelan - South African cooperation is the massive export of 200 tons of coffee to coffee products manufacturing companies in South Africa in 2020. Not only in the natural resource trade sector, Venezuela and South Africa also worked together in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic at the beginning of its spread in 2020 ago by sharing an analysis of the evolution of the COVID-19 virus as a reference for building policies in dealing with the pandemic. Even in 2019 when Venezuela was facing a massive political and financial crisis, South Africa helped Venezuela by urging the UN Security Council to step in to help Venezuela return to normalcy.

As quoted from the official DIRCO website, South Africa will continue to forge strong brotherly relations with Venezuela. Venezuela remains South Africa's strategic partner in Latin America, especially in the context of South-South Cooperation and the potential for future economic partnerships considering its abundant oil and gas reserves. The latest development, to strengthen bilateral cooperation between the two countries, Venezuela and South Africa held a meeting to discuss cooperation agreements in September 2021. According to the Venezuelan government's official website, the two sides held a meeting to review the bilateral cooperation agenda and discuss the international geopolitical landscape. During the meeting, the two countries emphasized that they would continue to strengthen their brotherly ties and bilateral cooperation.

Various cooperation agreements related to trade in mining materials such as oil and gas are the main factors behind the resilience of diplomatic relations between the two developing countries. Cooperation in the oil and gas trade sector opens the door to opportunities for both countries to build cooperation in the field of trade in other commodities as well as cooperation in various fields such as security and health. Venezuela and South Africa have proven to have solid cooperation as developing countries that need each other. This cooperative relationship between Venezuela and South Africa can be used as an example for other developing countries to build long-lasting cooperative relationships. With various efforts that have been made, good relations between Venezuela and South Africa are expected to continue in the future and be able to improve the development of each country.

Illustrated By: Marsha

Singapore is a well-known developed country with limited availability of green space due to their narrow territory. This causes Singapore to be extremely vulnerable to environmental damage caused by the slightest activities from their citizens and climate change. Therefore, the Singapore government kept themselves on the qui vive in dealing with the environmental issues to maintain their environmental sustainability in order to enhance the living quality. In developing the economic system, the Singapore government strives to innovate in creating an environmental-friendly economic system. Crafting an integrated circular economy system is one of their strategies to advance their economic activities and environmental sustainability at the same time.

Getting to Know Circular Economy’s Concept

Based on the official website of  UNCTAD, the circular economy can be defined as a restorative or regenerative industrial system that involves the act of regeneration of the used products in its implementation. The circular economy model is different from the dominant linear economic model that is widely implemented nowadays. The linear economy has an 'extraction-use-disposal' pattern, meaning that a product will eventually end up as waste after being used. A different concept is applied on the circular economy model, where all forms of waste from the production process are to be regenerated into other products or to be used more efficiently. The implementation of a circular economy can help the country to utilize the industrial resources in a more mindful manner, leading to the development of new sectors of industries ahead which help to open up more opportunities in the future.

These efforts include switching to the use of renewable energy, eliminating the use of toxic chemicals, and minimizing production waste. Circular economy can also be carried out by reusing, recycling, converting functions, donating or selling used products to people in need. Product restoration by extending its life and service life aims to reduce waste from manufacturing activities from products to keep the environment sustainable and avoid damage.

E-waste Management in Singapore

Reporting from the Center for Liveable Cities Singapore, Singapore began implementing the Zero Waste Nation master plan in 2019. This master plan aims Singapore to eliminate all waste that has accumulated in the Semakau landfill, which is predicted to reach its holding capacity by 2035. To eliminate all the waste that accumulates in these landfills, the government puts extra effort on reducing the amount of waste input which can increase to 2000 tons per year. One of the strategies that can reduce the amount of waste input into the capacity-deprived landfills is to promote a circular economy program that is considered effective in doing so.

As one of the efforts to achieve this vision, the National Environmental Agency (NEA) of Singapore has implemented an electronic waste (e-waste) management work program to improve the quality of the environment in Singapore. NEA defines e-waste as the various forms of electronic equipment that have been disposed by their user, including almost any item powered by electrical sources. Most commonly encountered forms of e-wastes consists of communication technology (ICT) equipment, household appliances, sports equipment, lighting equipment, and so on. E-waste mostly consists of metal and plastic components, yet also contains small amounts of heavy metals and substances that are considered as potential pollutants. The wide range of variety of e-waste composing materials requires them to undergo a different unconventional disposal procedure, making them almost impossible to only dispose them in normal landfills just like other forms of waste.

E-waste management is a crucial step to revitalize the quality of the environment, considering the fact that e-waste is one of the major contributing factors to environmental damage. As written in the official Elytus blog, e-waste contains hazardous chemical compounds such as mercury, lithium, and copper which can cause serious contamination of water, soil, and air that can heavily impact the health of living beings when disposed perfunctorily. Meanwhile, based on data from the NEA, a country with a small territory like Singapore can already produce 60,000 tons of e-waste per year, and only 20% or around 8.9 tons of the total e-waste has been recycled.

Seeing the inadequate condition of e-waste management in Singapore, NEA also invites Singaporeans to participate in reducing the amount of e-waste in Singapore in their freshly launched "Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) System for E-waste Management System" program back in July 2021. Through this program, the public can easily distribute their electronic waste to an e-waste processing site so that the handling of this waste no longer needs to go through the incineration process in public landfills that are not environmentally friendly. In order to reach their goal of eradicating e-waste, NEA collaborated with ALBA Group, a private company engaged in the environment, to launch a new innovation in the form of special e-waste bins.

As reported by Channel News Asia, 300 units of special e-waste bins were distributed to numerous public places in Singapore on July 1, 2021. The creation of the e-waste bins from NEA became one of the spotlighted programs considering their user-friendly nature that can engage people to participate in the program. The procedure of use starts with the e-waste donors who can simply dispose of their electronic waste based on separated categories, such as small used electronic goods (printers, keyboards, monitors, tablets, etc.), batteries (of all sizes), and light bulbs (except long fluorescent lamps). What's even more interesting is that e-waste donors can get monetary rewards after disposing of their e-waste by downloading the ALBA Step Up application and scanning the QR code on the trash can unit to confirm the collection of e-waste and later they will receive the money from the e-waste donations.

Furthermore, the electronic waste that has been collected will be distributed to domestic electronic waste processing facilities. Through its official Youtube channel, NEA elaborated the process of processing electronic waste by Cimelia, one of the electronic waste processing facilities in Singapore. It is explained that the process of processing electronic waste is an extremely complicated process, involving the processes of material sorting, disassembling, and classifying based on their main ingredients. The final outcome of the whole process will be in the form of ready-to-process raw materials and will be distributed to other industrial manufacturers, such as the technology industry, automotive, construction, and even for the production of luxury goods.

The Impact on Society

The EPR System for E-waste Management System work program can significantly increase public awareness of the impact of electronic waste on the environment. The citizens can possess enhanced knowledge on managing their owned electronics and what to do when they become an e-waste. However, in reality, there are still many obstacles faced by NEA in increasing the awareness of the people who participate in donating their e-waste for the success of the work program.

As reported by The Straits Times, some citizens are not fully aware about the types of electronic waste that can be accepted by the e-waste collection bins. E-waste sorters from ALBA admitted that they still found a lot of other types of waste, such as breastfeeding equipment, children's toys, and massagers that were thrown into a special e-waste bin. They also still found the original packaging made out of plastics and cardboards that is still encasing the electronic waste inside some bins.

What is more concerning is that the trash bins have provided instructions on how to properly dispose e-waste into the bin, as well as information on what items can still be accepted by the trash can. This can increase the level of difficulty in the waste sorting process and will eventually slow the whole recycling process. Therefore, education regarding the management of electronic waste by the NEA should be further encouraged in the future in order to avoid misperceptions by the society.

The Singapore government has carried out an outstanding effort to reduce e-waste through their variative programs in order to maintain environmental sustainability. This program can indeed provide great benefits to society, especially in the economic field, where this program is a milestone for Singapore to implement an environmentally friendly circular economy. In the future, Singapore Government needs to promote socialization and education to the community regarding their contribution towards this program to increase the effectiveness of this work program with maximum community participation. Through a more integrated system that involves many parties and the community, Singapore will become an epitome for other countries to implement a circular economy, particularly in a better e-waste management system

Ilustrated by: Marsha

Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) carry a serious amount of crucial roles for the stability of the national economy. Based on data from the Ministry of Cooperative Spaces and Small-to-Medium Enterprises, the number of MSMEs in Indonesia has reached the number of 64.2 million growing businesses in the first quarter of 2021 and had made contributions to the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 61.07 percent or Rp. 8,573 trillion. Acknowledging the potential for economic improvement, the government pays special attention to MSMEs in Indonesia and continues to strive to empower them in various government policies in order to encourage economic growth. This is reflected in the involvement of MSMEs in the development of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in various regions in Indonesia.

SEZ has been declared by the government since 2009 with the issuance of Law of The Republic of Indonesia Number 39 of 2009 concerning Special Economic Zones (Law No. 39/2009) and its implementation is further regulated in Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 40 of 2021 concerning the Implementation of Special Economic Zones (Government Regulation 40/2021). Based on the Law No. 39/2009, SEZ is an area with certain boundaries within the jurisdiction of the Indonesian Republic which is determined to carry out economic functions and obtain certain facilities. SEZs are developed through the preparation of areas that have geoeconomic and regional geostrategic advantages and functions to accommodate various high-value economic activities with the potential for international competitiveness. Sorong’s SEZ in Papua and Arun Lhokseumawe’s SEZ in Aceh are some of the industrial SEZ in Indonesia, while Mandalika's SEZ is one of the tourism SEZ in Indonesia. To support the development of economic activities in the area, the government provides special facilities and incentives to business owners who are members of the SEZ as an attraction for investment from outsiders.

SEZ's Contribution to MSMEs

The development of the national economy which is carried out with the principle of economic democracy encourages the government to take sides in economic politics that provides opportunities and support for MSMEs and domestic industries. Therefore, as regulated in Law No. 39/2009 a quo, in the development of SEZs, the government provides locations for MSMEs to encourage linkages and synergies with enterprises, both as business actors and as supporters of other business actors. The involvement of MSMEs in SEZ development is expected to increase the competitiveness and quality of the human resources in it contributing to economic growth in the area. Thus, equitable development in Indonesia is not only centered on big cities, but also on the surrounding areas that require more attention.

As a special area, SEZ is equipped with fiscal and non-fiscal facilities for actors and business entities that carry out their business activities in SEZ intending to increase competitiveness to attract investors. In this case, MSMEs as a business segment that participates in economic activities in the SEZ can also feel the benefits from the SEZ development. As stated on the National SEZ Council which based on Law No. 39/2009 and Government Regulation No. 40/2021, some of the benefits that can be felt by MSME owners, business actors, and other business entities in the SEZ include:

1.Remissions in all Tax Obligations

The tax obligations for all MSME actors in the SEZ area will be reconsidered in order to appreciate their contribution to the country's economy. The government imposes a reduction in collecting Income Tax (PPh) for affiliated investors and remissions for business entities inland and/or acquisition transactions for SEZs. Waived Added Value Tax (PPN) and/or Sales Tax on Luxury Goods (PPnBM) payments also apply to business actors in the SEZ area. Moreover, the local government provides reductions, remissions, and exemption from regional taxes and/or regional levies to business entities/business actors in the SEZ, with the reduction in acquisition fees on land and buildings and a reduction in land and building taxes as the bare minimum privilege they can receive.

2.Infrastructure Upgrade

MSMEs and other business actors in SEZ areas will be able to enjoy the ease of access for the infrastructures built inside. In order to improve the accessibility for all SEZ areas, the government built numerous supporting infrastructures. Roads, highways, train stations, harbors, and airports are provided to facilitate mobility for the residents and all visiting external parties. As a result, the number of visitors to the SEZ area will increase and also have the potential to increase the number of local MSME customers.

3. Ease of Business Licensing

MSMEs and other businesses that are established within the SEZ area will be granted convenience in obtaining permits and licenses to set up a business. The business license application will be given by the SEZ Administrators as the middleman. MSMEs will be granted risk-based business licensing which they can obtain through the Online Single Submission (OSS) system, without having to experience all the exhausting stages of proposal approvals. This privilege includes the exemption of proposing building approvals to establish a place of business. Meanwhile, SEZ no longer requires designation as an industrial area, due to the stipulation of an SEZ that carries out industrial-related activities as well as an industrial zone designation.

Reflecting from Mandalika’s SEZ

Stipulated through Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 52 of 2014, Mandalika’s SEZ is one of the tourism SEZs that can be considered a great success. The development of the SEZ was life-changing for all citizens who can enjoy the rapid economic growth and improvement of welfare distribution. Their concept as a world-class tourist destination with all the included local pearls of wisdom became the SEZ’s main success factor. The SEZ itself includes all breathtaking tourism sites such as Saleh Bay Area, Moyo, and Tambora Islands (Samota), Mount Rinjani Geopark, Senggigi Beach, and many which contain unique and potential traditions, arts and culture, history, and folk craft industries.

The future projections predicted that more local MSMEs will be involved in supporting Mandalika's tourism, such as providers of transportation, accommodation and lodging, camping ground, and others. As reported by Media Indonesia, Deputy III of the Presidential Chief of Staff, Panutan Sulendrakusuma, stated that the 2021 World Superbike Championship (WSBK) and the 2022 MotoGP at the Mandalika SEZ were the events that highlighted all the attractions and managed to increase NTB's economic growth by 1.7 percent through the participating MSMEs in the region. He also said that the estimated multiplier effect of economic development in the Mandalika SEZ could reach Rp. 4.8 trillion and of the total profits, 45.8 percent will flow to MSMEs, with a value equivalent to Rp. 2.2 trillion. Moreover, business actors are expected to receive a financial boost of Rp. 28.6 trillion in the future and is projected to be able to contribute foreign exchange per year of Rp. 7.5 trillion and contributed to the GDP of the tourism sector of Rp. 16.96 trillion.

Facing the Obstacles in Empowering MSMEs in SEZs

Aside from the various opportunities in the form of convenience and facilities offered to MSMEs in SEZs, there are several challenges to ensure that MSME empowerment in SEZs can be more optimal in the future, including:

1.Producing and Marketing Superior Products

Superior products are products that have the potential to be developed in an area by utilizing local natural resources and human resources. These products are market-oriented and environmentally friendly so that they have a competitive advantage and can compete globally. Even in the famously successful Mandalika’s SEZ, the production and marketing of superior products that are used as Mandalika's trademark as a tourist spot is still a challenge, as it is reported by NTB’s Regional Development Council. Within the area, there are indeed MSMEs that sell souvenirs typical of NTB such as textiles, jewelry, and snacks, but both in type and quality, the products they offer are still widely found in other areas of NTB. If the price of MSME products in the Mandalika SEZ is higher than other products, it is feared that MSME owners in Mandalika will lose competitiveness. This case can also be a lesson for MSMEs in other areas, especially those in the SEZ area to continue to innovate to create quality and more prominent regional specialties and have unique selling points. In addition, product quality and price must also be paid more attention to and adjusted to existing standards to increase competitiveness.

2.Lack of Certainty Incentives

The lack of certainty regarding the receipt of incentives to investors threatens the continuity of MSME business activities in the SEZ. The statutory instruments from the Central Government that regulate SEZs do not fully control the provision of incentives and construction of facilities in SEZ areas and leave the task entirely to the local government. This causes differences in policies regarding the acquisition of incentives in various regions so that each region has a different amount of incentives. Without the certainty of incentives for investors, the development and development of SEZs will be disrupted and thus the empowerment of MSMEs in SEZ areas cannot be maximized. For this reason, the government needs to make more definite policies to regulate the amount of incentives for SEZ investors.

3.Insufficient Coordination and Cooperation between Agencies

SEZs in Indonesia are also still lacking in synergy with the surrounding area and coordination with agencies in the government sector. One of the reasons for this is the location of SEZs, which are mostly located far from the center of local government. Weak inter-institutional coordination can also cause problems such as lack of distribution of resources, lack of training for business actors, and limited and inadequate infrastructure development. Adequate cooperation and coordination are needed in order for SEZs to be successful and to contribute a lot to national development.

Illustrated By: Marsha

“Waste reduction to value creation” – the essence of circular economy simply put by Karen Delchet (2020). Current economic model is best described as a linear model where the extraction of raw material is put at the beginning, followed by the production, distribution, then overconsumption which leads to waste. The assumption of the model is that there is an infinite number of resources, thus profit maximization and over production become its main focus. However, as the World Economic Forum (2018) highlights, the fast growth of cities is paramount and inevitable: the ratio of population increases 40% between 1900 and 2015, estimated to 66% in 2050, and affects the increase of natural resources usage 12 times. This increase directly correlates to over consumption of resources, products, constriction of the supply chain and heightened pollution. Due to the finite number of resources available for mankind, it is not practical, sustainable, and economical to use resources and turn them to waste as the world has been doing so with the current linear model of economy. An alternative to these issues can be the Circular Economy model (CE), in which the resources are used to exhaustion, recycled, and reused again with minimal wastage. The shift from linear model to the circular model requires alteration to the current policies and supply chain, way of business and ultimately a shift in the collective approach to our ways of handling resources available to us. This implementation of CE can be challenging for both developing and developed nations. In particularly developed nations where the linear model of economy is so ingrained within the economy, any alteration can prove to be met with resistance. However, there is a certain group of people within a developed nation which has proven to be agents of change – the youth. This article will focus on Australia and its young citizens, their relationship with understanding of the circular economy, and their positions on the subject matter.

According to the article published by Melles (2021), it was left to individual states and other organizations to spell out the details of a circular economy future due to the “absence of strong federal ambition”. Thus, the inability to unite for a main goal resulted in an imperceptive and inadequate response to the transition to CE and implementation of policies across the nation. In addition, it was found that the quality of the “consultations, policy and potential for reform and transition was dependent on the political regime and leadership at the level across the federal and state government”. This also directly correlated to the quality and ability of local government’s actions in dealing with environmental issues and the transition to CE.

However, due to the persistence of the climate change issue and it being an eminent threat to Australia and its coastal cities, there had been a growing support and funding initiatives by the federal and states which had enabled the emergence of national hubs, consultancies, and digital platforms such as ASPIRE online marketplace. In addition, with collaboration of university sector and major retailers and other industries, the government has been able to develop hubs to identify industry specific issues and implement CE strategies. These initiatives indicate that Australia’s CE implementation process is influenced by economic and political factors. These factors range from disruption of the status quo, redistribution of wealth & resources, and political power balance.

Historically, it was understood that youth’s understanding of the circular economy was minimal and only to an extent of consumer behavior. However, recent studies found that youth groups and citizens are viewed as agents of change, first adopters of new reforms, policies, and actions. Youth groups, alongside local/regional governments and community organizations, were also considered more optimistic, acceptable of reform, and acted as agents of change despite having financial, regulatory, or political limitations. As Wallis & Loy (2021) highlights, young people are highly likely to be pro climate change, environmental sustainability and aware of their consumption than other groups of citizens. This behavior is clearly shown by youth mobilization and rallies that began in Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra, and Hobart outside state parliaments building and town halls. In the protests, students and young people have all gathered, skipping school or university, and joining in solidarity to voice their support for more eco-friendly policies and forcing the government to take action.

Moreover, the Fridays for Future (FFF) movement and their ever-increasing intensity, power, and support, has enabled young people to be established as a political force and agents of CE. FFF is a youth-led and organized global strike movement which was started in 2018 after Greta Thunberg’s demand for action. This movement was then morphed into School strike 4 Climate (SS4C) in Australia which follows the principle of FFF. The efficiency and effectiveness of SS4C is yet to be determined due to movement being in its infancy. In addition to such movements, Australia has a eco-friendly focused political party called the Greens Party which is ranked third in the political influence in the government. The Greens Party’s growing supporters are youth groups and young adults ranging from 18 to 34. Furthermore, Dias (2019) highlights that youth may hold some decisive power when casting their vote in some marginal areas during an election. For example, young voters hold power in Immigration minister Peter Dutton’s Queensland seat of Dickson. This enables youth group’s needs to be fulfilled by the political parties in order to gain voters thus giving youth political influence.

Despite the marginal shift of youths position as political actor, Mayes & Hartup (2022) stated that majority of times, youth voice, actions and concerns are still characterized as “ignorant zealots, anxious pawns, rebellious truants, and extraordinary heroes” by media. The research shows that as long as youth are classified and viewed in these terms, their political power is diminished and their actions are merely reduced to emotions and “just a phase”. Counter to such representation, youth have utilized social media platforms to represent a polished and true self-image of themselves. Mimi Elashiry, an Egyptian-Australian who has large followers and become a self-made Instagram star, is an environmental advocate that has been named Adidas Australia's ambassador. She uses the social media platform Instagram to voice her concerns of climate change and promote the principles of circular economy as well as eco-friendly lifestyle. She becomes one of The Oxygen Project’s “Top 10 Favorite Eco-Warriors in Australia”, representing fellow Australian youths in breaking down the stigma through a contemporary approach. Thus, the growing influence of youth are evident within the current society and political arena.

In conclusion, the state and youth are both actors that coexist within the same society. Each has their own power: states have the power to bring changes through reform, policy, or fundings while youth have limited resources and power of decision making. However, as the research highlights, youth may hold more persuasive power which positions them to be great agents of change within a society. Therefore, the government have begun to see youth as a more politically active force with power of making changes across the nation and industries through their consumption power, voting powers, their digital footprint, and influence.

Illustrated By: Marsha

Businesses and governments in Australia are recognising the potential waste materials give and the economic worth they maintain and are working towards a circular economy. This trend can be seen across the world, especially in the European Union, Canada, and Australia's main trading partners, such as China. The 2018 National Waste Policy establishes a framework for corporations, governments, communities, and individuals to work together until 2030. The government has done a commendable job of implementing measures such as phase out of superfluous plastics, increasing recycling through purchasing power, and boosting waste collecting statistics and information sharing to promote transparency. This policy specifically promotes Australia's participation in UN Sustainable Development Goal 12 on responsible consumption and production. It also plays a vital role in ensuring Australia fulfils its international duties. Although The National Waste Policy sets forth an effective, efficient, and achievable action plan, the challenge lies in convincing the private sector to undertake transformation and implement reform. There is a slight reluctance from the private sector because developing a circular business model is difficult and making the incorrect decision can be costly.

The National Waste Policy of 2009 outlined the following goals and strategies: Less waste, more resources have been instrumental in improving waste management, introducing products and resource stewardship, and creating national reporting of national waste and resource recovery statistics to drive policy and choices. The 2018 National Waste Strategy improves on the 2009 policy by emphasising waste prevention, enhanced material recovery, and the reuse of recovered resources. It lays forth a shared view of what should be prioritised in response to shifting worldwide trash markets. It will assist Australia in moving closer to a circular economy, which decreases waste while also improving economic, social, and environmental results. It will aid in the expansion of resource recycling systems and the re-establishment of Australian trust. While Australian businesses recognise the necessity of transitioning to a circular economy, many are hesitant to take the required measures to enact reform.

According to the second edition of the Australian Circular Economy Hub (ACE Hub)'s annual Circularity in Australian Corporate survey, an overwhelming 88 percent of business decision makers think that the circular economy will be crucial for their company's future, with 34% saying it is highly significant. The study, titled Circularity in Australian Business 2021: Awareness, Knowledge, and Perceptions, assesses how well Australian firms understand and apply the circular economy. The report draws on the findings of the first edition of the study, which was published in 2020 and assessed the level of circular economy thinking in Australia's corporate community.

The research demonstrates a disconnect between what people think they know about the circular economy and what they actually know. 81 percent of company decision-makers claimed they were familiar with the circular economy idea. However, when given a selection of possibilities, just 27% were able to properly identify the meaning of circular economy. This points to a knowledge gap that must be filled via education and engagement, which the ACE Hub can help with.

The Circularity in Australian Businesses report of 2021 also conducts in-depth interviews with 14 C-suite executives and surveys of 500 company decision makers from a variety of industries were used to develop insights from the study technique, which combined qualitative and quantitative data. The report finds that:

• Circular economy is something that 92 percent of company decision makers have heard of and are familiar with.
• According to the report, 88 percent of corporate decision makers believe the circular economy will be critical to their company's future success. The 2020 survey yielded the same results.
• From 21 percent in 2020 to 34 percent in 2021, the proportion of company decision makers who felt the circular economy will be "very essential" climbed dramatically.
• 'Reducing expenses' was the most often mentioned benefit of the circular economy (selected by 42 percent of business decision makers).
• 'Lack of information on how to apply circular economy principles' was the most prevalent barrier to the circular economy found (selected by 40 percent of business decision makers). This emphasises the importance of information services like the Internet.

The private sector is concerned with increasing its revenue. The public sector, on the other hand, tries to increase the people's nett social welfare. This misalignment of goals is a fundamental issue that must be resolved if we are to properly adopt this relatively new notion in the future. Many businesses are just not devoting enough resources to figuring out how to create and implement a circular business model.

Despite the general reluctance from most organisations, there are a few key actors who have succeeded in developing and executing a circular business model. They serve as a beacon of hope, paving the path for others to follow in their footsteps. So, who are they?

The first is BINGO. This company transforms waste into a useful resource. Through their advanced recycling centres, they keep garbage out of landfills. To improve recovery rates, they invest in innovative technologies and process materials for re-use and re-sale. This is healthy for the environment as well as for businesses. Much like the 2018 Waste Policy BINGO has matched its sustainability goals with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals. By aligning their approach with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework, they’re dedicated to examining climate risks and possibilities. They are also researching solar energy for our recycling centres and evaluating alternate fuels for our truck fleets, as well as building Recycling Ecology Park in Sydney's Eastern Creek. They want to achieve diversion rates of more than 75%. This will be accomplished by increasing resource recovery by investing in innovative separation technologies (Bingo Industries 2021).

The second major player is Planet Ark Power. This company is a partner of Planet Ark, it is a renewable energy engineering and technology firm. Their mission is “to unite people businesses and governments through positive environmental change”. This is similar to the objectives of the 2018 Waste Policy’s objectives. Planet Ark Power provides innovative technology and large-scale rooftop solar to companies and schools, they are working towards accelerating Australia's shift to renewable energy sources. They have already began transforming IKEA Adelaide into a grid-connected, sustainable energy microgrid with their award-winning “eleXsys” Energy Management System. Planet Ark Power's goal is to provide their clients with the most cost-effective, high-performing, and dependable sustainable energy solutions possible. Clean energy solutions that produce measurable energy and cost savings while also assisting their clients in meeting their sustainability goals during the system's lifetime (Planet Ark 2021).

In Australia, the concept of a circular economy is gaining traction. Florin et al., (2015) found that the advantages of circularising Australia's economy were predicted to be worth AU$26 billion per year, with an overall additional value for Australian businesses of AU$9.3 billion. Despite the benefits, private businesses are hesitant to make the move due to the high degree of risk associated during the implementation phase. The potential of a circular economy has been recognised by the public sector. The government has introduced measures such as the 2018 Waste Policy and has allocated $80 million in the Federal Budget for 2021 to the waste and resource recovery business. Will this, however, be enough for the private sector to overcome their reservations and transform these projections into a circular revolution?

Ilustrasi Oleh: Marsha

The implementation of circular economy principles in countries around the world is as recent as it is varied, with states working alongside international organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to encourage the fulfilment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Circular economy (CE) and its influence on social development is a relatively new area of research, particularly regarding the relationship between CE and gender equity. The OECD has released research and frameworks on areas where the implementation of CE may affect and increase gender equity. The 2019 OECD report on CE and gender highlights areas of environmental degradation, the globalised fashion industry, waste management, and women's consumer patterns as critical components that will be affected where CE policy is implemented. A common trend in the gender analysis applied by organisations of the global North is a lack of differentiation between women from different socio-political and cultural backgrounds. The OECD undertook studies of gendered patterns from developed and developing countries; however, there was little emphasis regarding how women's socio-economic circumstances would reap different results and how this reflects in local governmental policy. The one-size-fits-all approach fails to provide much needed context when seeking to implement policy or commit resource allocation to grassroots initiatives and programs that empower the individual. This article aims to deconstruct how international organisations, such as the OECD, understand the relationship between CE and gender, using Indonesia as a representative case study for CE's application in developing countries and Australia as a case study for developed countries.

The concept of environmental sustainability has been a rapidly growing movement since the 1960s and '70s. However, the Australian government did not integrate the CE framework until the 2018 National Waste Policy. Since then, think tanks such as the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIRO) have been tasked with investigating the benefits of CE in an Australian context. Australia's environmental and economic sustainability journey is seemingly in its research and discovery phase. Without a strong push from policymakers and government ministers, corporations have little incentive to adopt the framework themselves. Even though many international organisations and Australian-led think-tanks have proved CE to benefit business owners and consumers both fiscally and environmentally, corporate hesitation derives from a lack of information, understanding, and 'top-down' incentives. As a result, most efforts toward CE in Australia have been made by investors and consumers.

Women, in particular, have been progressing the CE movement in extraordinary ways. Generally, women as consumers are a powerful influence and statistically inclined to be the group most responsible for small, frequent household purchases, and having a high literacy regarding eco-branded product labels. While women are not the only members of Australian society that are using their purchasing power to direct companies to adopt a CE method of practice, they are further involved in several initiatives to educate consumers and change Australian industries. For example, 2018 saw the inaugural Australia Circular Fashion Conference that covers 'advocacy and awareness towards consumer change management'. Furthermore, the South Australian government have implemented the 'Women in Circular Economy Leadership Awards', selecting one woman each year to represent CE in action through education efforts and environmentally sustainable management practices. According to the OECD report, these examples demonstrate gender-specific consumption patterns and the active promotion of women's role in CE.

In addition to consumer power driving corporations into greener economic practices, the adoption of CE in Indonesia affects women as producers and informal, unpaid workers. This is primarily due to poor working conditions and exposure to toxic pollutants that are the by-product of the work women typically undertake. While Indonesia has gained momentum in its transition into a green economy, policymakers are yet to give necessary weight to women-focused programs and initiatives within the scope of CE. A 2021 report led by Kementerian PPN Bappenas and the Danish Embassy highlighted Indonesia's vital economic sectors that would best suit CE implementation. The OECD report was cited within the analysis, indicating women are the most likely to benefit from CE in Indonesia. Among the reasons for this is greater access for women to formal, green jobs creating financial security, less exposure to dangerous chemicals used in work practices, or from plastic burning in waste management. The report stated that women are likely to fill up to 75 per cent of the potential green jobs available through CE. Similarly to Australia, however, policymakers fail to give appropriate credence to the connection between CE and gender equity. The United Nations (UN) SDGs Roadmap for Indonesia, CE, is listed as a recommendation for Goal 8 (decent work and economic growth), with no mention of the potential impacts CE has on Goal 5 (gender parity and women's empowerment).

Grassroots programs in Indonesia have identified the beneficial relationship between CE and gender. There are several programs that have been identified in the greater Jakarta region by a 2018 study. Examples include the Gerakan Indonesia Kantong Plastik (Indonesia's Plastic Bag Diet Movement), Waste4Change – which provides corporations, communities, and individuals consultancy and support in green waste management, and SiDalang – which provides ‘training on upcycling and business development to local women'. Grassroots organisations and SMEs are ostensibly driving the force behind Indonesia's acceptance and future with a CE through their prioritising waste management and the re/up-cycling of waste resources. Results of women participating in these upcycling training and social enterprise programs demonstrate the benefits the OECD report highlighted. This includes improved life skills and the ability to experience and explore entrepreneurship, thus improving overall welfare.

While the connection between CE and gender equity has been established and investigated by international organisations and states alike, further prioritisation must be placed on supporting organisations and programs that facilitate and encourage the relationship. The contrast between CE influence on women in Australia and Indonesia is evident. The OECD report is comprehensive insofar as it identifies how women are affected by CE and how women globally work, consume, and influence. For example, women in higher socio-economic positions can be involved in CE through their consumer power; by influencing corporations and businesses to implement greener production processes. Equally, women who work in unsafe conditions due to the linear economy will benefit from the incorporation of circular practices that will provide better jobs, financial stability, and enhanced overall wellbeing. The OECD report and consequential research aiming to understand the connection between CE and gender is the first step to a green future. However, further advocacy is needed to establish a specific, local policy that centres on women as crucial actors in CE, considering individuals' strengths and limitations based on socio-economic and cultural standpoints.