Next Article in Journal
Technological Entrepreneurship: How does Environmental Turbulence Impact upon Collaboration Risk?
Next Article in Special Issue
Smart Cities: The Main Drivers for Increasing the Intelligence of Cities
Previous Article in Journal
Using Two Government Food Waste Recognition Programs to Understand Current Reducing Food Loss and Waste Activities in the U.S.
Previous Article in Special Issue
Diffusion of Corporate Philanthropy in Social and Political Network Environments: Evidence from China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Sustainability of Romanian SMEs and Their Involvement in the Circular Economy

1
Faculty of Finance-Banking, Accounting and Business Administration, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest 040051, Romania
2
Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy, Dimitrie Cantemir Christian University, Bucharest 040051, Romania
3
Faculty of Economic Sciences, 1 Decembrie 1918 University, Alba-Iulia 510009, Romania
4
Faculty of Geography, University of Bucharest, Bucharest 050107, Romania
5
Faculty of Business and Tourism, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest 010374, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2018, 10(8), 2761; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082761
Submission received: 22 June 2018 / Revised: 24 July 2018 / Accepted: 1 August 2018 / Published: 4 August 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Circular Economy, Ethical Funds, and Engineering Projects)

Abstract

:
Sustainability involves extending the relational framework of SMEs outside the sphere of economic activity by justifying and legitimizing actions with a social impact on the environment. Links with the circular economy are achieved through the economic and environmental dimensions and through corporate social responsibility as a component of sustainable development. The main purpose of the paper was to determine the level of involvement of Romanian SMEs in activities related to the circular economy. The sample survey conducted among SME managers offered the advantage of collecting a large amount of direct information on the activities undertaken, the size of the investments and the nature of the funding sources used over the last five years. In this descriptive research, the process of setting up a representative sample of 384 enterprises was carried out by random sampling. The major contributions of the research project are to outline the contribution of Romanian SMEs to the development of a sustainable economy through their involvement in specific activities, the size of the investments made, and the level of participation of representatives of the enterprises in courses in order to identify new sources of financing and positive solutions in order to implement the principles of the circular economy.

1. Introduction

The circular economy and sustainability are two concepts that outline an extended framework for sustainable development, through which the implementation of strategies capable of providing the enterprise with healthy development is also achieved by addressing the problems of environmental degradation and resource shortages [1,2,3,4]. Besides, the circular economy is a sustainable development strategy that tackles the problems of environmental degradation and natural resource shortages through three principles: reduction, reuse and recycling of materials [5,6,7]. These principles define a circular system where all the materials are recycled, and all the energy comes from renewable sources that support activities and rebuild the ecosystem as well as support human health, society and healthy resources that generate value [8,9,10,11].
Since small firms are an important engine of growth in the economy and sustainability is an essential input in the production process, identifying how firms respond to the circular economy is crucial to understanding growth in developing economies [12,13,14,15].
Through this study, the authors intended to highlight the extent and the degree of involvement of Romanian SMEs in the activities specific to the circular economy. To achieve this, quantitative research was carried out among SMEs in Romania using a survey with a representative sample drawn using the random numbering method. The degree of involvement of enterprises in the circular economy was first assessed with regard to issues such as the activities carried out, the level of investments made, the sources of financing attracted and the level of managers’ interest in attending courses in order to implement new circular business models. In light of an apparent logical fault, the diversity of views expressed in the literature specifically referring to the circular economy helped us to determine the best approach to position our scientific research with regard to the new challenges of SMEs in the Romanian economy.
The results of the present study suggest that successful sustainability plays an important role in the survival and success of any organization in today’s environment, which is extremely competitive and continually evolving. Finally, our findings are relevant for the transformation of Romanian SMEs by identifying the specific actions they take as part of their involvement in the circular economy.
The remainder of this study is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a brief literature review. Section 3 presents a description of the research methodology. The empirical results are presented and discussed in Section 4. Finally, conclusions and suggestions are presented in Section 5.

2. Literature Review

The circular economy concept has been debated in several schools of thought and theory that have challenged linear economic systems that suppose that resources are infinite [16,17,18]. According to their studies, some specialists consider the circular economy as a space economy that works by reproducing the limited initial input stock and recycling the waste produced [19,20,21]. Other specialists consider the circular economy to be an industrial economy that relies on the ability to restore natural resources [22,23] and aims to minimize (or eliminate) waste, use renewable energy sources and phase out the use of harmful substances [24].
The specialists considered that there was also the need to accept an economic model in which the materials and energy of waste products are reintroduced into the economic system [25]. Thus, a clear distinction was made between two different types of materials in a closed-loop economy: materials of biological origin and materials of non-biological origin. Materials of biological origin (forest products) can return to the biosphere as raw materials, but materials of non-biological origin (plastics or metals) cannot return to the biosphere and are not biodegradable [26,27]. This type of economy transcends the linear economy [28], seeking new transformations across the value chain to keep both types of material in the circular economy, preserving their value for as long as possible [29].
Different studies based on the design, investigation and creation of a general framework on the ecological side of the circular economy have been carried out by specialists around the world, including circular design [30], design for circular behavior [31,32], the incorporation of ecosystem services [33], evaluating the environmental dimension based on material efficiency strategy [34], and the analysis of consumer behavior related to the circular economy [35].
Implementing the concept of the circular economy requires a detailed analysis of the opportunities and benefits it can bring to a country’s economy. According to specialists’ studies, large enterprises have greater facility in adopting and realizing beneficial circular business models, such as creating new jobs [36,37], reducing costs in different sectors of the economy (cars, electric machines, machinery and equipment) [38], supply-side price mitigation on commodity markets, or supply risks [39]. Once large enterprises have adopted circular business models, SMEs become aware of the benefits of the circular economy and of improving their efficiency in using natural resources.
The European Commission report states that more than two-thirds of interviewed SMEs are satisfied with the return on investments made to improve resource efficiency, and have seen production cost reductions over the past two years [40]. Romanian SMEs are extremely different, so every branch of the national economy can benefit from the implementation of the principles of the circular economy in an adapted manner [41]. In these conditions, the extent to which SMEs are willing to adopt ecological measures and their attitude to green policies depends on the sector in which they operate [42].
Most studies undertaken by specialists have indicated that SMEs do not adopt and implement the principles of the cyclical economy due to the initial costs, the reimbursement period for investments, or the high costs of achieving resource efficiency [43,44,45]; the high cost of organic business models [46,47]; the impossibility of supporting profitable economic activity due to hidden costs, a lack of highly qualified employees, and sudden changes in the economic environment [48]; the lack of financial resources to establish and manage a recycling system [49]; a lack of information, including information on deviations from the ex-ante cost estimates of ecological procedures, which may induce uncertainty and harm the competitiveness of SMEs [38]; the production of a small amount of waste, so that the circular economy represents an economically unfavorable option [50]; the lack of internal competencies leading to a dependence on recommendations made by external actors [44]; and the limited influence of SMEs on suppliers’ involvement in sustainable activities [51,52].
In addition, in the SME sector, there is only modest initiative from the government to support new investment, with no coherent legislative measures to encourage the circular economy convictions and principles [42]. In support of this, we can offer the example of the Ecological Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), which has no clear delimitation between large businesses and the SME sector [53,54]. In this case, only the managers’ commitment to sustainability contributes to the adaptation and implementation of the principles of the circular economy to the needs of the SMEs [55,56]. The need for a better regulatory agenda to design and implement environmental policies is highlighted by the first assessment of the EU Environmental Assistance Program for SMEs [57].
Research undertaken by the European Commission highlights the fact that some concepts and terms in the EU legislation are not clearly defined, namely provider responsibility, separate collection quality and the definitions of recycling, re-use and recovery [58]. In Romania between 2002 and 2008, the SME sector developed steadily, with the growth of more than 69% in the number of enterprises [41]. The number of active entities increased from 326,443 in 2002 to 557,189 in 2008. The impact of the financial and economic crisis was felt strongly among SMEs, with the loss of about 11.73% of the enterprises, with a total of 491,805 active entities registered at the end of 2010 [43]. Over the last four years, the SME sector has seen a slow growth of only 10%, with a distribution by representative sectors of trade (38.98%), industry (11.84%), construction (9.60%), transport (6.10%), hotel and restaurants (4.52%), agriculture, forestry and fishing (2.18%) and other services (26.77%) [59].

3. Research Methodology

To conduct this research, we considered the hypothesis that SMEs are the engine for the development of a circular economy. SMEs can make a major contribution to the development of a sustainable economy by gradually integrating the principles of the circular economy into their own business model. The determining role of SMEs remains: (1) producing beneficial effects for a country’s economy by recycling waste and using it as a raw material in production processes; (2) developing products and services in symbiosis with other industries by reducing resource consumption; (3) creating customized, high quality and value-customized products; (4) job creation and staff qualification in the field of environmental protection; and (5) increasing competition in sustainable product markets. Taking into account this hypothesis, the purpose of the research was to determine the level of involvement of Romanian SMEs in the activities specific to a circular economy.
The main objectives of the research were as follows:
  • Highlighting the activities related to the circular economy conducted by SME managers in Romania in the last five years;
  • Identifying the size of current and future investments by allocating percentages of turnover both to businesses that have carried out circular economy activities over the past five years and those willing to develop circular business models in the years to come;
  • Description of the funding sources used by SMEs in the last five years to ensure good functioning and to carry out activities related to the circular economy;
  • Identifying the level of participation of Romanian managers in courses to acquire the knowledge and skills regarding the performance of some activities that promote resource efficiency, eco-innovation and the circular economy.
Thus, in order to achieve the objectives, quantitative marketing research was carried out among SME managers in Romania. The main considerations were: (1) the development of governmental and European programs that provide access to important sources of funding and create premises for coherent, systematic and coordinated actions aimed at fostering entrepreneurship and increasing the number of SMEs; (2) the interconnected functioning of productive SME chains, with a high potential for adding value at the national, regional and global levels; and (3) the massive contribution of the SME sector to the formation of national GDP, to the economic and sustainable growth of a country, generating social progress and social prosperity.
At the end of February 2017, the statistical metadata database of the National Institute of Statistics of Romania was consulted in order to obtain the information necessary for the realization of the quantitative research. According to the data provided by National Institute of Statistics [59], on 28 February 2017, a list was established in which 552,483 active enterprises with a minimum of five years of age and a number of employees ranging from 1–249 were identified in Romania (www.statistici.insse.ro). Micro-enterprises represent 89.12% of all SMEs in Romania (Figure 1).
In Romania, micro-enterprises are defined as enterprises that have up to nine employees and achieve a net annual turnover of up to two million euro. Small enterprises are defined as enterprises that have up to 49 employees and achieve a net annual turnover of up to 10 million euro.
The research method used in the quantitative study was a survey by sampling, using a questionnaire as the data collection tool. The study was conducted between 12 March and 12 April 2017, with the support of eight interviewers with experience in the field who drafted the questionnaires for all eight development regions of Romania: North-East, South-East, South-Muntenia, South-West Oltenia, West, North-West, Center and Bucharest-Ilfov (Figure 2). Each interviewer held face-to-face interviews with business managers in one of Romania’s development regions. For example, one interviewer covered the West region, another the South-West region.
The sampling frame was made up of enterprises (SMEs), since these entities, both in terms of organization and functioning and through the activities carried out, were able to provide all the data and information necessary to achieve the intended purpose. The selection was based on simple random sampling, using a random number generator, from a list that included all Romanian SMEs with a minimum of five years of activity and a number of employees ranging from 1–249 people. The main criteria for structuring the enterprises were the number of employees, the development region; the field of activity and the year of establishment (minimum of five years) (Table 1 and Table A1).
It is necessary to clarify that the list was based on the statistical metadata from the National Institute of Statistics of Romania, which removed active SMEs with a working life of less than five years, inactive SMEs and those with a number of employees over 249 people. In this way, the structure of the research sample was a faithful reproduction of the structure of the reference population. The fundamental principle that was taken into account when using the sampling method was that the layers chosen were related to the dependent variable that was the object of the research. The proportion of subjects (SMEs) in each layer of the sample was proportional to that of the subjects at that layer level in the total population. To ensure a probability of guaranteeing 95% of the research results and obtaining an error margin of ±5% for a value p = 0.50, the sample size should be 384 observation units, thus the survey included 384 enterprises (SMEs). In the first phase, sub-samples were extracted from each layer, resulting in a high level of representativeness of the total sample, compared to simple random sampling, which can generate overrepresentation of some population groups and underrepresentation of others.
After identifying the enterprises, contact was established with their representatives to determine who should be surveyed, to obtain the survey participation agreement and to establish details of the meeting. The survey was the basis of the research; the process used to interview the SME managers was face-to-face interviews. The questionnaire was structured around four distinct objectives: (1) the activities undertaken related to the circular economy; (2) the size of the investments made; (3) the funding sources used for these types of activities; (4) participation in the acquisition of skills related to resource efficiency, eco-innovation and the circular economy. The information processing was based on the responses received from the SME managers and the information centralization was performed in relation to the consistency and convergence of the purpose of the research.

4. Results and Discussion

The first objective was related to highlighting the main activities specific to the circular economy, carried out by SME managers in Romania (Figure 3).
In 241 (62.8%) of the 384 SMEs participating in the research, the managers said at least one activity related to the circular economy had taken place in the last five years. In total, 143 (37.2%) of 384 enterprises did not have at least one circular activity in the last five years. The management of the Romanian enterprises showed a positive attitude towards carrying out activities to support the circular economy at every stage of the value chain: production, consumption, repair and manufacture, waste management and secondary raw materials that are reintroduced into the economy.
In 62.8% of the SMEs surveyed in Romania, the managers said that they make real efforts to conduct activities related to the circular economy but face financial problems, with labor shortages and many legal barriers. However, the managers of these SMEs proposed the development of new strategies for the circular economy in the coming years and hoped to make a lot of progress in this regard.
The main activities related to the circular economy undertaken by Romanian SMEs in the last five years were (Figure 4) strengthening the guarantees offered to consumers who purchase goods online (14.10%), the use of renewable energy (12.78%), designing smart and green products and using energy labeling (12.33%), the use of advanced manufacturing facilities that generate cleaner production (10.13%), safe wastewater reuse (5.29%), the application of innovative techniques for the use of secondary raw materials/alternatives (3.08%) (2.64%), and the prevention of waste generation, the stimulation of recycling and the reduction of resource use (2.20%).
In order to identify the link between the three categories of enterprise and the activities related to the circular economy, a factorial analysis of correspondence (Figure 5) was used. The SMEs were grouped into three categories: micro-enterprises (0–9 employees), small enterprises (10–49 employees) and medium-sized enterprises (50–249 employees). Figure 5 shows the existence of certain associations between the three categories of enterprises and the activities related to the circular economy undertaken in the last five years.
A total of 219 of 343 micro-enterprise managers said that they already use advanced manufacturing facilities that generate clean production, carry out intelligent and environmentally-friendly product design, practice energy labeling, and use renewable energy constantly (see Table 1). In total, 5.29% of the 384 respondents claimed that they re-used waste water safely in the manufacturing process, the effects being reduced costs and reduced pressure on the resources used (see Figure 4). The two managers in the agricultural field claimed that water reuse contributes to the recycling of nutrients by replacing solid fertilizers. A further 22 small business managers claimed to have strengthened the guarantees offered to consumers who purchase goods online to provide better protection against defective products, thus contributing to sustainability and increased product repair potential. In this way, they claim they prevent the discarding of products and contribute significantly to the circular economy.
The managers of the SMEs surveyed said that they use innovative technologies that integrate into aspects relevant to the circular economy. At the level of their own businesses, the managers apply technologies to improve the use of secondary raw materials to increase energy efficiency and reduce wastewater generation, thereby helping to protect and reduce the use of available natural resources. Regarding waste reduction activities (recycling and reuse), most business managers have adopted sustainable and consistent waste management strategies. Some managers said they are trying to reduce the amount of waste by different methods: waste recycling, selling waste to certain specialized companies or re-using waste in the manufacturing process. Most respondents acknowledged that they do not carry out circular economy activities, but have planned future strategies based on concrete and measurable objectives. The second objective was to invest some percentage of the company’s turnover in order to carry out activities related to the circular economy. Of the nearly 241 businesses that have developed circular economy activities over the past five years, most have invested an average of 1–5% of their turnover per year. Figure 6 shows that most of the investments were made by SMEs in the Bucharest-Ilfov and North-West regions. Almost 57.75% of the 241 enterprises that have carried out at least one activity related to the circular economy over the last five years have made investments of over 1%, while 31.69% of the SMEs have made no investments (Figure 6).
In 10.56% (30 enterprises) of the SMEs participating in the research, managers did not keep a clear record of what percentage of their turnover they invested in circular economy activities over the past five years. Of the 158 enterprises that had not developed circular economy activities over the past five years, 30.38% would be willing to invest more than 1% of the turnover on average per year, 58.23% do not want to invest, and 11.39% did not know. Almost 34 enterprises invested between 1% and 5% of their turnover per year (21.52%), while 10 enterprises (6.33%) invested between 6% and 10% and 2.53% invested, on average, over 10% or more (Figure 6).
Figure 7 shows that 16 business managers in the Bucharest-Ilfov region who have not developed circular economy activities over the past five years, would be willing to invest more than 1% of their own turnover, on average, per year. Another 20 SME managers (North-West, Center, North-East, South-West Oltenia and West) said that they would be willing to invest part of the enterprise’s turnover into circular economy activities over the next few years. Most activities undertaken by microenterprises that are related to the circular economy will be included in their future strategy; microenterprises represent 84.58% of all SMEs in Romania (Figure 7).
The third objective was related to the funding sources used by SMEs over the last five years to finance the activities related to the circular economy. Most of the SMEs surveyed funded their activities related to the circular economy from their own funds, i.e., turnover. Approximately 42.75% of the enterprises that have carried out at least one activity related to the circular economy over the last five years financed these types of activities from their own funds or from loans from close persons. Only 13.04% of enterprises used bank loans, while 10.51% benefited from government grants. Another 9.42% of the SMEs used various non-reimbursable funds from the EU, the EBRD, and the IMF, or had access to alternative sources of funding. Of the SMEs included in the survey, no enterprise had used a certain type of green technology investment (0%) for the circular economy activities undertaken over the last five years (Figure 8). Figure 8 shows that 125 enterprises of the 196 that used finances from their own funds come from two important sectors of the national economy: trade and services.
Of the 32 enterprises financed by bank loans, only eight come from industry and construction and six from agriculture, hotels and restaurants and transport. Non-reimbursable government funding benefited 10 enterprises from industry, construction, commerce and other services. Only six of the businesses analyzed, from trade and other services, used non-reimbursable grants from the EU, the EBRD or the IMF. Managers from 276 enterprises of the 384 surveyed who have been involved in the circular economy over the last five years specified the funding sources for these types of activity. For 42 of the 276 enterprises analyzed, managers did not want to indicate the sources of finance for the activities related to the circular economy undertaken over the last five years.
The last objective of the research was to identify the level of participation of SME representatives in courses to acquire new knowledge and skills regarding the implementation of resource efficiency, eco-innovation and circular economy activities and the determination of subjects of high interest for them (for example, the following courses are organized by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the National Center for Production and Sustainable Consumption Denkstatt Romania, the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, the Ministry of European Funds and other public institutions and approved NGOs: Creative START, EU Ecolabel, START-UP Nation, GO Circular, capital markets and derivative financial instruments, etc.). Of the 384 SMEs surveyed, only 24.7% attended courses such as Geometric, 4th CSA, WaterWorks 2015, Synamera, Innovoucher, Columbus, CoBioTech and others. Almost 64.8% of the SME managers did not attend courses, despite being aware of the running of governmental and European programs where free lectures are organized with the support of major institutions such as KPMG, Ecofys, CSR Netherlands and Circle Economy. Figure 9 shows that the managers who attended courses show an increased interest in topics such as EU-funded financial instruments to finance circular solutions (26.79%), participation in green public procurement (21.43%) and government programs to support SMEs related to circular actions (17.86%) (Figure 9).

5. Conclusions

The results of this research highlighted the major contribution of SMEs to the development of a sustainable economy through their engagement in specific activities and through increasing the size of their investments. In the last five years, almost six out of ten Romanian enterprises (62.8%) engaged in activities specific to the circular economy [41]. The most frequent activities were the consolidation of guarantees for consumers who purchase goods online (14.10%), use of renewable energy (12.78%), smart and environmentally friendly product design and energy labeling (12.33%) and the use of advanced manufacturing facilities to achieve clean production (10.13%).
The research revealed that although more than half of the Romanian SMEs have undertaken at least one activity specific to the circular economy over the last five years, their level of involvement will remain moderate in the future. The main barriers to the development of a sustainable economy remain: (1) the low volume of future investments made by small- and medium-sized enterprises and micro-enterprises due to their small turnover; (2) the reduced rate of participation of business managers in non-reimbursable grant programs for circular actions and distinct SME programs that include courses necessary for the specialization and development of new circular business models.
Based on the review of the literature on the strategies, advantages and difficulties encountered in adopting the circular economy, a quantitative research study was carried out, including a wide range of areas of activity captured by SMEs, providing knowledge that can support successful actions for the implementation of the circular economy [60,61,62]. In Romania, according to the answers provided by the managers of the interviewed SMEs, the circular economy is seen as a significant strategic issue. As noted, circular economy activities in Romania’s SMEs are still modest, and we believe that creating a fiscal, legal or organizational framework coupled with additional governmental actions to promote the principles of the circular economy would contribute to the successful implementation of the circular economy. Enhancing collaboration between micro, small- and medium-sized enterprises and providing support from large enterprises can also help to successfully implement the circular economy in Romania.
The size of the sample and the nature of the data used in this study did not allow for detailed research into the public or private sector, but this information is nonetheless very important and useful to policy-makers, professionals and economic agents in the business environment and academia. Research into the circular economy should be deepened at the national level.
Our suggestions for future research can be summarized as follows: (1) analyze how SMEs can access the human resources and technology needed to successfully adopt the circular economy; (2) determine the potential for internal and external optimization of the consumption of raw materials, water and energy; (3) analyze how SMEs can meet the needs of consumers, taking into account the principles of the circular economy; (4) analyze the effectiveness of the strategies aligned with the policies of the circular economy at the level of SMEs; (5) carry out a comparative analysis of the efficiency and the degree of successful implementation of the circular economy between different countries of the European Union.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.O. and S.C.; Methodology, M.C.T. and D.I.T.; Validation, D.-M.O.C. and A.M.-P.; Formal Analysis, I.O. and M.S.H.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, S.C. and M.C.T.; Writing—Review and Editing, I.O.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Sample structure.
Table A1. Sample structure.
Development RegionNumber of CompaniesAreas of ActivityNumber of CompaniesNumber of EmployeesNumber of CompaniesWeight in Total (%)Sample Size
North-West development region74,531Agriculture, forestry and fishing16250–9 people14490.281
10–49 people1500.030
50–249 people270.010
Industry88270–9 people78661.516
10–49 people8120.161
50–249 people1480.030
Construction71570–9 people63781.225
10–49 people6590.130
50–249 people1200.020
Trade29,0520–9 people25,8914.9619
10–49 people26740.512
50–249 people4880.090
Hotels and restaurants33690–9 people30030.572
10–49 people3100.060
50–249 people570.010
Transport45480–9 people40530.783
10–49 people4190.080
50–249 people760.010
Other services19,9510–9 people17,7803.4013
10–49 people18360.351
50–249 people3350.060
Center development region53,596Agriculture, forestry and fishing11690–9 people10420.201
10–49 people1080.020
50–249 people200.000
Industry63480–9 people56571.084
10–49 people5840.110
50–249 people1070.020
Construction51470–9 people45870.883
10–49 people4740.090
50–249 people860.020
Trade20,8920–9 people18,6183.5614
10–49 people19230.371
50–249 people3510.070
Hotels and restaurants24230–9 people21590.412
10–49 people2230.040
50–249 people410.010
Transport32710–9 people29150.562
10–49 people3010.060
50–249 people550.010
Other services14,3470–9 people12,7852.459
10–49 people13210.251
50–249 people2410.050
North-East development region54,846Agriculture, forestry and fishing11960–9 people10660.201
10–49 people1100.020
50–249 people200.000
Industry64960–9 people57891.114
10–49 people5980.110
50–249 people1090.020
Construction52670–9 people46940.903
10–49 people4850.090
50–249 people880.020
Trade21,3790–9 people19,0523.6514
10–49 people19680.381
50–249 people3590.070
Hotels and restaurants24800–9 people22100.422
10–49 people2280.040
50–249 people420.010
Transport33470–9 people29830.572
10–49 people3080.060
50–249 people560.010
Other services14,6810–9 people13,0842.5010
10–49 people13510.261
50–249 people2460.050
South-East development region52,057Agriculture, forestry and fishing11350–9 people10120.191
10–49 people1050.020
50–249 people190.000
Industry61650–9 people54941.054
10–49 people5670.110
50–249 people1030.020
Construction49990–9 people44550.853
10–49 people4600.090
50–249 people840.020
Trade20,2920–9 people18,0843.4613
10–49 people18680.361
50–249 people3410.070
Hotels and restaurants23530–9 people20970.402
10–49 people2170.040
50–249 people400.010
Transport31770–9 people28310.542
10–49 people2920.060
50–249 people530.010
Other services13,9350–9 people12,4182.389
10–49 people12830.251
50–249 people2340.040
South-Muntenia development region50,624Agriculture, forestry and fishing11040–9 people9840.191
10–49 people1020.020
50–249 people190.000
Industry59960–9 people53431.024
10–49 people5520.110
50–249 people1010.020
Construction48620–9 people43320.833
10–49 people4470.090
50–249 people820.020
Trade19,7330–9 people17,5863.3713
10–49 people18160.351
50–249 people3310.060
Hotels and restaurants22890–9 people20400.391
10–49 people2110.040
50–249 people380.010
Transport30890–9 people27530.532
10–49 people2840.050
50–249 people520.010
Other services13,5510–9 people12,0772.319
10–49 people12470.241
50–249 people2270.040
Bucharest-Ilfov development region147,210Agriculture, forestry and fishing32110–9 people28610.552
10–49 people2960.060
50–249 people540.010
Industry17,4350–9 people15,5372.9711
10–49 people16050.311
50–249 people2930.060
Construction14,1370–9 people12,5982.419
10–49 people13010.251
50–249 people2370.050
Trade57,3830–9 people51,1389.7938
10–49 people52821.014
50–249 people9630.181
Hotels and restaurants66550–9 people59311.144
10–49 people6130.120
50–249 people1120.020
Transport89840–9 people80061.536
10–49 people8270.161
50–249 people1510.030
Other services39,4060–9 people35,1176.7226
10–49 people36270.693
50–249 people6610.130
South-West Oltenia development region41,608Agriculture, forestry and fishing9070–9 people8090.151
10–49 people840.020
50–249 people150.000
Industry49280–9 people43920.843
10–49 people4540.090
50–249 people830.020
Construction39960–9 people35610.683
10–49 people3680.070
50–249 people670.010
Trade16,2190–9 people14,4542.7711
10–49 people14930.291
50–249 people2720.050
Hotels and restaurants18810–9 people16760.321
10–49 people1730.030
50–249 people320.010
Transport25390-9 people22630.432
10–49 people2340.040
50–249 people430.010
Other services11,1380–9 people99261.907
10–49 people10250.201
50–249 people1870.040
West development region48,011Agriculture, forestry and fishing10470–9 people9330.181
10–49 people960.020
50–249 people180.000
Industry56860–9 people50670.974
10–49 people5230.100
50–249 people950.020
Construction46110–9 people41090.793
10–49 people4240.080
50–249 people770.010
Trade18,7150–9 people16,6783.1912
10–49 people17230.331
50–249 people3140.060
Hotels and restaurants21710–9 people19340.371
10–49 people2000.040
50–249 people360.010
Transport29300–9 people26110.502
10–49 people2700.050
50–249 people490.010
Other services12,8520–9 people11,4532.198
10–49 people11830.231
50–249 people2160.040
Total522,483 522,483 522,483100.00384
Source: Authors’ calculation based on information extracted from the National Institute of Statistics of Romania [59].

References

  1. Allwood, J.M. Squaring the circular economy: The role of recycling within a hierarchy of material management strategies. In Handbook of Recycling State-of-the-Art for Practitioners, Analysts, and Scientists; Worrel, E., Reuter, M.A., Eds.; Elsevier: Waltham, MA, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-0-12-396459-5. [Google Scholar]
  2. Núñez-Cacho, P.; Molina-Moreno, V.; Corpas-Iglesias, F.A.; Cortés-García, F.J. Family businesses transitioning to a circular economy model: The case of “Mercadona”. Sustainability 2018, 10, 538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yuan, Z.; Bi, J.; Yuichi, M. The circular economy: A new development strategy in China. J. Ind. Ecol. 2014, 10, 4–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chamberlin, L.; Boks, C. Marketing approaches for a circular economy: Using design frameworks to interpret online communications. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Velis, C.A.; Vrancken, K.C. Circular economy and global secondary material supply chains. Waste Manag. Res. 2015, 33, 389–391. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Scheepens, A.E.; Vogtländer, J.G.; Brezet, J.C. Two life cycle assessment (LCA) based methods to analyse and design complex (regional) circular economy systems. Case: Making water tourism more sustainable. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 114, 257–268. [Google Scholar]
  7. Molina-Moreno, V.; Leyva-Díaz, J.C.; Sánchez-Molina, J. Pelletasa technological nutrient within the circular economy model: Comparative analysis of combustion efficiency and CO and NOx emissions for pellets from olive and almond trees. Energies 2016, 9, 777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Biesbroek, G.R.; Klostermann, J.E.M.; Termeer, C.J.A.M.; Kabat, P. On the nature of barriers to climate change adaptation. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2013, 13, 1119–1129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Semenza, J.C. Climate Change and Human Health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 7347–7353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  10. Ziraba, A.K.; Haregu, T.N.; Mberu, B. A review and framework for understanding the potential impact of poor solid waste management on health in developing countries. Arch. Public Health 2016, 74, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Hashemi, H.; Pourzamani, H.; Rahmani Samani, B. Comprehensive planning for classification and disposal of solid waste at the industrial parks regarding health and environmental impacts. J. Environ. Public Health 2014, 230, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Li, L.; Li, Z.; Wu, G.; Li, X. Critical success factors for project planning and control in prefabrication housing production: A China study. Sustainability 2018, 10, 836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Olson, P.D.; Zuiker, V.; Danes, S.M.; Stafford, K.; Heck, R.; Duncan, K.A. The impact of the family and the business on family business sustainability. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 639–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hadin, Å.; Hillman, K.; Eriksson, O. Prospects for increased energy recovery from horse manure—A case study of management practices, environmental impact and costs. Energies 2017, 10, 1935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kovach, J.J.; Hora, M.; Manikas, A.; Patel, P.C. Firm performance in dynamic environments: The role of operational slack and operational scope. J. Oper. Manag. 2015, 37, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Meinel, U.; Schüle, R. The difficulty of climate change adaptation in manufacturing firms: Developing an action-theoretical perspective on the causality of adaptive inaction. Sustainability 2018, 10, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liu, L. Evaluation of the sustainability of the industrial chain based on circular economy. J. Shandong Jianzhu Univ. 2012, 27, 88–91. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gifford, R.; Kormos, C.; McIntyre, A. Behavioral dimensions of climate change: Drivers, responses, barriers, and interventions. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Chang. 2011, 2, 801–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lewandowski, M. Designing the business models for circular economy—Towards the conceptual framework. Sustainability 2016, 8, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arushanyan, Y.; Björklund, A.; Eriksson, O.; Finnveden, G.; Söderman, M.L.; Sundqvist, J.-O.; Stenmarck, Å. Environmentalassessment of possible future waste management scenarios. Energies 2017, 10, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lazarevic, D.; Buclet, N.; Brandt, N. The application of life cycle thinking in the context of European waste policy. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 29, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Montoya, F.; Peña-García, A.; Juaidi, A.; Manzano-Agugliaro, F. Indoor lighting techniques: An overview of evolution and new trends for energy saving. Energy Build. 2017, 140, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jo, S.-H.; Lee, E.-B.; Pyo, K.-Y. Integrating a Procurement Management Process into Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM): A case-study on oil and gas projects, the piping process. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hoornweg, D.; Bhada, P. What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management; Urban Development Series; Knowledge Papers No. 15; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  25. Bautista-Lazo, S.; Short, T. Introducing the all seeing eye of business: A model for understanding the nature, impact and potential uses of waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 40, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bicket, M.; Guilcher, S.; Hestin, M.; Hudson, C.; Razzini, P.; Tan, A.; Ten Brink, P.; van Dijl, E.; Vanner, R.; Watkins, E.; et al. Scoping Study to Identify Potential Circular Economy Actions, Priority Sectors, Material Flows & Value Chains; Study Prepared for the EU Commission, DG Environment; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, Luxemburg, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy. Opportunities for the Consumer Goods Sector; Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Cowes, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  28. Heal, G.; Millner, A. Uncertainty and decision making in climate change economics. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2014, 8, 120–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bocken, N.M.P.; Short, S.W.; Rana, P.; Evans, S. A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 65, 42–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Moreno, M.; De los Rios, C.; Rowe, Z.; Charnley, F. A Conceptual Framework for Circular Design. Sustainability 2016, 8, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Roos, G. Business model innovation to create and capture resource value in future circular material chains. Resources 2014, 3, 248–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wastling, T.; Charnley, F.; Moreno, M. Design for Circular Behaviour: Considering Users in a Circular Economy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Boons, F.; Lüdeke-Freund, F. Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 45, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Walker, S.; Coleman, N.; Hodgson, P.; Collins, N.; Brimacombe, L. Evaluating the Environmental Dimension of Material Efficiency Strategies Relating to the Circular Economy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Govindan, K.; Soleimani, H.; Kannan, D. Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain: A comprehensive review to explore the future. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2014, 240, 603–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Oghazi, P.; Mostaghel, R. Circular business model challenges and lessons learned—An industrial perspective. Sustainability 2018, 10, 739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Talonen, T.; Hakkarainen, K. Elements of sustainable business models. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2014, 6, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Jasch, C. How to perform an environmental management cost assessment in one day. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14, 1194–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Beuren, F.H.; Gomes Ferreira, M.G.; Cauchick Miguel, P.A. Product-service systems: A literature review on integrated products and services. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 222–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. European Commission. Flash Eurobarometer 381-SMEs, Resource Efficiency and Green Markets; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2013; Available online: https://dbk.gesis.org/dbksearch/sdesc2.asp?no=5874&db=e (accessed on 22 March 2018).
  41. Lakatos, E.S.; Cioca, L.-I.; Dan, V.; Ciomos, A.O.; Crisan, O.A.; Barsan, G. Studies and investigation about the attitude towards sustainable production, consumption and waste generation in line with circular economy in Romania. Sustainability 2018, 10, 865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zamfir, A.-M.; Mocanu, C.; Grigorescu, A. Circular economy and decision models among European SMEs. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lakatos, E.S.; Dan, V.; Cioca, L.I.; Bacali, L.; Ciobanu, A.M. How supportive are romanian consumers of the circular economy concept: A survey. Sustainability 2016, 8, 789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Trianni, A.; Cango, E. Dealing with barriers to energy efficiency and SMEs: Some empirical evidences. Energy 2012, 37, 494–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Grimmer, M.; Woolley, M. Green marketing messages and consumers’ purchase intentions: Promoting personal versus environmental benefits. J. Mark. Commun. 2012, 20, 231–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lawrence, S.R.; Collins, E.; Pavlovich, K.; Arunachalam, M. Sustainability Practices of SMEs: The case of NZ. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2006, 15, 242–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Stoeckl, N. The private costs and benefits of environmental self-regulation: Which firms have most to gain? Bus. Strategy Environ. 2004, 13, 135–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Yacob, P.; Aziz, N.S.B.; bin Mohamad Makmur, M.F.; bin Mohd Zin, A.W. The policies and green practices of Malaysian SMEs. Glob. Bus. Econ. Res. J. 2013, 2, 52–74. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rizos, V.; Behrens, A.; van der Gaast, W.; Hofman, E.; Ioannou, A.; Kafyeke, T.; Flamos, A.; Rinaldi, R.; Papadelis, S.; Hirschnitz-Garbers, M.; et al. Implementation of circular economy business models by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): Barriers and enablers. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Denafas, G.; Ruzgas, T.; Martuzeviˇcius, D.; Shmarin, S.; Hoffmann, M.; Mykhaylenko, V.; Ogorodnik, S.; Romanov, M.; Neguliaeva, E.; Chusov, A.; et al. Seasonal variation of municipal solid waste generation and composition in four east European cities. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 89, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Eltayeb, T.K.; Zailani, S. Going green through green supply initiatives towards environmental sustainability. Oper. Supply Chain Manag. 2009, 2, 93–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wooi, G.C.; Zailani, S. Green Supply Chain Initiatives: Investigation on the Barriers in the Context of SMEs in Malaysia. Int. Bus. Manag. 2010, 4, 20–27. [Google Scholar]
  53. Studer, S.; Welford, R.; Hills, P. Engaging Hong Kong businesses in environmental change: Drivers and barriers. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2006, 15, 416–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Velenturf, A.P.M.; Purnell, P.; Tregent, M.; Ferguson, J.; Holmes, A. Co-producing a vision and approach for the transition towards a circular economy: perspectives from government partners. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Parker, C.M.; Redmond, J.; Simpson, M. A review of interventions to encourage SMEs to make environmental improvements. Environ. Plan. 2009, 27, 279–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, C.; Côté, R. A framework for integrating ecosystem services into China’s Circular Economy: The case of eco-industrial parks. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. European Commission. European Business Awards for the Environment Rewarding Eco-Innovation for Jobs and Growth; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2015; Available online: http://docplayer.net/16713447-European-commission-european-business-awards-for-the-environment-2014-2015-rewarding-eco-innovation-for-jobs-and-growth.html (accessed on 20 March 2018).
  58. Study on Coherence of Waste Legislation, Study Prepared for the European Commission. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/studies/index.htm (accessed on 20 March 2018).
  59. National Institute of Statistics. Available online: http://statistici.insse.ro/shop/index.jsp?page=tempo3&lang=ro&ind=INT104B (accessed on 10 March 2018).
  60. Ormazabal, M.; Prieto-Sandoval, V.; Puga-Leal, R.; Jaca, C. Circular Economy in Spanish SMEs: Challenges and opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 185, 157–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ruggieri, A.; Braccini, A.M.; Poponi, S.; Mosconi, E.M. A meta-model of inter-organisational cooperation for the transition to a circular economy. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chen, J. Development of Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2006, 13, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Distribution of economically active SMEs in Romania by their size on 31 January 2017 [59].
Figure 1. Distribution of economically active SMEs in Romania by their size on 31 January 2017 [59].
Sustainability 10 02761 g001
Figure 2. Distribution of economically active SMEs in the eight development regions of Romania on 31 January 2017 [59].
Figure 2. Distribution of economically active SMEs in the eight development regions of Romania on 31 January 2017 [59].
Sustainability 10 02761 g002
Figure 3. The share of SMEs that have carried out at least one activity related to the circular economy in the last five years.
Figure 3. The share of SMEs that have carried out at least one activity related to the circular economy in the last five years.
Sustainability 10 02761 g003
Figure 4. Description of activities related to the circular economy undertaken by Romanian SMEs in the last five years.
Figure 4. Description of activities related to the circular economy undertaken by Romanian SMEs in the last five years.
Sustainability 10 02761 g004
Figure 5. The correspondence between the three categories of enterprises and the activities related to the circular economy undertaken in the last five years.
Figure 5. The correspondence between the three categories of enterprises and the activities related to the circular economy undertaken in the last five years.
Sustainability 10 02761 g005
Figure 6. The distribution of SMEs that have carried out activities related to the circular economy in the eight development regions of the country, according to the share of investments made during the last five years.
Figure 6. The distribution of SMEs that have carried out activities related to the circular economy in the eight development regions of the country, according to the share of investments made during the last five years.
Sustainability 10 02761 g006
Figure 7. Distribution of SMEs not involved in circular economy activities in the eight development regions of the country, according to the share of future investments achievable.
Figure 7. Distribution of SMEs not involved in circular economy activities in the eight development regions of the country, according to the share of future investments achievable.
Sustainability 10 02761 g007
Figure 8. Distribution of SMEs according to the main fields of activity of the economy and by the way in which they finance activities related to the circular economy.
Figure 8. Distribution of SMEs according to the main fields of activity of the economy and by the way in which they finance activities related to the circular economy.
Sustainability 10 02761 g008
Figure 9. Assessing the interest of managers in the subjects treated in the specialization courses and in actions specific to the circular economy.
Figure 9. Assessing the interest of managers in the subjects treated in the specialization courses and in actions specific to the circular economy.
Sustainability 10 02761 g009
Table 1. Sample structure.
Table 1. Sample structure.
Number of EmployeesTotal SMEs StudiedSample of SMEs Investigated
No.%No.%
0–9 people (micro-enterprises)465,62189.1234389.32
10–49 people (small enterprises)48,0929.20359.11
50–249 people (medium enterprises)87701.6861.56
Total522,483100384100.00
Development Region
North-West development region74,53114.265514.26
Center development region53,59610.263910.26
North-East development region54,84610.504010.50
South-East development region52,0579.96389.96
South-Muntenia development region50,6249.69379.69
Bucharest-Ilfov development region147,21028.1810828.18
South-West Oltenia development region41,6087.96317.96
West development region48,0119.19359.19
Total522,483100384100.00
Areas of Activity
Agriculture, forestry and fishing11,3952.1882.01
Industry61,88011.844511.85
Construction50,1759.60379.61
Trade203,66538.9815038.99
Hotels and restaurants23,6214.52174.52
Transport31,8866.10246.25
Other services139,86126.7710326.78
Total522,483100384100.00
Year of Establishment
5–9 years382,45873.2028173.18
9–14 years90,39017.306617.19
>15 years49,6369.50379.64
Total522,483100384100
Source: Authors’ calculation based on information extracted from the National Institute of Statistics of Romania [59].

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Oncioiu, I.; Căpuşneanu, S.; Türkeș, M.C.; Topor, D.I.; Constantin, D.-M.O.; Marin-Pantelescu, A.; Ștefan Hint, M. The Sustainability of Romanian SMEs and Their Involvement in the Circular Economy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2761. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082761

AMA Style

Oncioiu I, Căpuşneanu S, Türkeș MC, Topor DI, Constantin D-MO, Marin-Pantelescu A, Ștefan Hint M. The Sustainability of Romanian SMEs and Their Involvement in the Circular Economy. Sustainability. 2018; 10(8):2761. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082761

Chicago/Turabian Style

Oncioiu, Ionica, Sorinel Căpuşneanu, Mirela Cătălina Türkeș, Dan Ioan Topor, Dana-Maria Oprea Constantin, Andreea Marin-Pantelescu, and Mihaela Ștefan Hint. 2018. "The Sustainability of Romanian SMEs and Their Involvement in the Circular Economy" Sustainability 10, no. 8: 2761. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082761

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop