Comparative assessment of circular economy performance in the Baltic States using MCDM methods

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63775/pcxj8p61

Keywords:

Circular Economy, Baltic States, COPRAS, Sustainability Indicators, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)

Abstract

Implementation and progress towards circularity are widely recognized characteristics of CE transitions across Europe, and the transition to CE sits firmly at the core of the European Union’s sustainable development strategy. Using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach, this study conducts a comparative evaluation of CE performance in the three Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania). Based on Eurostat data, three related indicators were chosen to represent the multidimensional nature of circularity: waste generation per capita (non-beneficial), recycling rate of municipal waste, and circular material use rate (both beneficial). The indicators were analyzed over multiple years (2010–2023) to capture temporal dynamics and shifts in the national performance. The was used to order the countries by normalizing such indicators from the chosen years and assigning them equal weight. The outcome shows that, in fact, Estonia is better off than its neighbors in two out of three aspects, and that its waste per capita and materials usage per capita is significantly improving. Latvia performs best in recycling but least well in material circularity and waste minimisation. Lithuania does consistently okay, moderate performance across the board. This study adds to CE literature by developing a replicable, dynamic framework for national CE evaluation. It provides empirical evidence about regional divides operating within a common EU policy framework; and a methodological framework for more fine-grained, empirical evidence-based policy action. The findings contribute to debate for scholars and practitioners on how to benchmark and improve CE implementation in small-state contexts.

References

Ahmed, A. A., Nazzal, M. A., Darras, B. M., & Deiab, I. (2022). A comprehensive multi-level circular economy assessment framework. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 32, 700-717.

Amoozad Mahdiraji, H., Arzaghi, S., Stauskis, G., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2018). A hybrid fuzzy BWM-COPRAS method for analyzing key factors of sustainable architecture. Sustainability, 10(5), 1626.

Arruda, E. H., Melatto, R. A. P. B., Levy, W., & Conti, D. d. M. (2021, 2021/01/01/). Circular economy: A brief literature review (2015–2020). Sustainable Operations and Computers, 2, 79-86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2021.05.001

Asgari, A., & Asgari, R. (2021). How circular economy transforms business models in a transition towards circular ecosystem: the barriers and incentives. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28, 566-579.

Bathaei, A., Mardani, A., Baležentis, T., Awang, S. R., Streimikiene, D., Fei, G. C., & Zakuan, N. (2019). Application of fuzzy analytical network process (ANP) and VIKOR for the assessment of green agility critical success factors in dairy companies. Symmetry, 11(2), 250.

Bigus, J., & Georgiou, N. (2025). Relevance of debt-and tax-related motives for conditional conservatism of limited-liability and full-liability firms: evidence from Europe. Journal of Business Economics, 1-42.

Brodny, J., Tutak, M., & Grebski, W. (2024). Empirical Assessment of the Efficiency of Poland’s Energy Transition Process in the Context of Implementing the European Union’s Energy Policy. Energies, 17(11), 2689.

Chatterjee, P., Athawale, V. M., & Chakraborty, S. (2011, 2011/02/01/). Materials selection using complex proportional assessment and evaluation of mixed data methods. Materials & Design, 32(2), 851-860. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.010

Coluccia, B., Palmi, P., & Krstić, M. (2024). A multi-level tool to support the circular economy decision-making process in agri-food entrepreneurship. British Food Journal, 126(3), 1099-1120.

Dagilienė, L., Varaniūtė, V., & Bruneckienė, J. (2021). Local governments’ perspective on implementing the circular economy: A framework for future solutions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127340.

De Pascale, A., Di Vita, G., Giannetto, C., Ioppolo, G., Lanfranchi, M., Limosani, M., & Szopik-Depczyńska, K. (2023, 2023/10/15/). The circular economy implementation at the European Union level. Past, present and future. Journal of Cleaner Production, 423, 138658. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138658

dos Santos Gonçalves, P. V., & Campos, L. M. (2022). A systemic review for measuring circular economy with multi-criteria methods. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-15.

Grybaitė, V., & Burinskienė, A. (2024). Assessment of Circular Economy Development in the EU Countries Based on SAW Method. Sustainability, 16(21), 9582.

Hauschild, M. Z., McKone, T. E., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., Hald, T., Nielsen, B. F., Mabit, S. E., & Fantke, P. (2022). Risk and sustainability: trade-offs and synergies for robust decision making. Environmental Sciences Europe, 34(1), 11.

Hondroyiannis, G., Sardianou, E., Nikou, V., Evangelinos, K., & Nikolaou, I. (2024). Waste generation and macroeconomic drivers: A panel study for European countries and regions. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 35(5), 1118-1136.

Kirchherr, J., Yang, N.-H. N., Schulze-Spüntrup, F., Heerink, M. J., & Hartley, K. (2023). Conceptualizing the circular economy (revisited): an analysis of 221 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 194, 107001.

Kumar, R., & Pamucar, D. (2025). A Comprehensive and Systematic Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Methods to Solve Decision-Making Problems: Two Decades from 2004 to 2024. Spectrum of Decision Making and Applications, 2(1), 178-197.

Lu, Q.-L., Sun, W., Dai, J., Schmöcker, J.-D., & Antoniou, C. (2024). Traffic resilience quantification based on macroscopic fundamental diagrams and analysis using topological attributes. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 247, 110095.

Megevand, B., Cao, W.-J., Di Maio, F., & Rem, P. (2022). Circularity in practice: Review of main current approaches and strategic propositions for an efficient circular economy of materials. Sustainability, 14(2), 962.

Nagy, G., Heiner, S. Á., & Kovács, Z. (2025). Exploring the Presence and Absence of Academic Discourse on Public Participation in the European Green Deal: A Central and Eastern European Perspective. Societies, 15(3), 49.

Nan, Y., Del Ser, J., Walsh, S., Schönlieb, C., Roberts, M., Selby, I., Howard, K., Owen, J., Neville, J., & Guiot, J. (2022). Data harmonisation for information fusion in digital healthcare: A state-of-the-art systematic review, meta-analysis and future research directions. Information Fusion, 82, 99-122.

Nguyen, N. T. L. (2025). A bibliometric and systematic review of literature on teacher educators during the times of neoliberal internationalisation. Review of Education, 13(1), e70037.

Nikolaou, I. E., Jones, N., & Stefanakis, A. (2021). Circular economy and sustainability: the past, the present and the future directions. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1, 1-20.

Rodríguez-Antón, J. M., Rubio-Andrada, L., Celemín-Pedroche, M. S., & Ruíz-Peñalver, S. M. (2022). From the circular economy to the sustainable development goals in the European Union: An empirical comparison. International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics, 22(1), 67-95.

Spilioti, N., & Anastasiou, A. (2024). European structural and investment funds (ESIFs) and regional development across the European union (EU). Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(6), 228.

Streimikiene, D. (2024). Assessment of green growth in the Baltic States. Contemporary Economics, 18(1), 87-100.

Tambovceva, T., Titko, J., Bumanis, G., & Bajare, D. (2023). Barriers to effective construction and demolition waste management in Latvia. In SDGs in the European Region (pp. 1387-1420). Springer.

Tefera, Y., Soebarto, V., Bishop, C., Kandulu, J., & Williams, C. (2023). A scoping review of urban planning decision support tools and processes that account for the health, environment, and economic benefits of trees and greenspace. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(1), 48.

Zavadskas, E. K., Kaklauskas, A., Peldschus, F., & Turskis, Z. (2007). Multi-attribute assessment of road design solutions by using the COPRAS method. The Baltic journal of Road and Bridge engineering, 2(4), 195-203.

Zavadskas, E. K., Kaklauskas, A., Turskis, Z., & Tamošaitiene, J. (2008). Selection of the effective dwelling house walls by applying attributes values determined at intervals. Journal of civil engineering and management, 14(2), 85-93.

Downloads

Published

2025-05-01

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Streimikis, J. (2025). Comparative assessment of circular economy performance in the Baltic States using MCDM methods. Transformations and Sustainability, 1(1), 30-42. https://doi.org/10.63775/pcxj8p61