The Circular Economy: A Lever for the Sustainable Development of the Wood and Forestry Sector in West Africa

Abstract

The circular economy (CE) has emerged as an innovative response to the challenges of economic growth and environmental protection. This study aims to establish a portrait of the circular economy within the wood forestry sector in Benin. The methodology includes field surveys through structured interviews in the southern and northern zones and a documentary analysis. Data were collected from direct and political stakeholders to assess their knowledge and practices. A discourse analysis, focusing on internal factors, was used to understand and analyze the motivations of local actors in the use of CE strategies. The results show that the most used strategies are maintenance and repair (52.38%), followed by donation and resale (18%). The motivations mentioned by the actors in the two zones are mainly economic (improving income and limiting expenses) and social (esthetic). However, if most of the actors do not perceive limits to these strategies, others highlight certain weaknesses, including the long process of transforming used goods (19.69%) and the loss of quality of recycled materials (15.44%). To address these weaknesses, alternative strategies, such as eco-design, optimization of operations, loan-exchange, and industrial ecology, are proposed.

1. Introduction

The wood sector, also called the “forest-wood sector”, encompasses all activities related to the harvesting, processing, and marketing of wood resources [1]. The wood sector integrates various homogeneous branches and production units, creating a complex and interconnected value chain [2]. Bazire and Gadant [3] describe this value chain as encompassing all economic operations, from the management of forest resources to the production and distribution of finished products. Thus, the process includes intermediate stages of transformation, linking the primary, secondary, and tertiary sectors [1]. However, the expansion of the wood-forest–construction sector raises environmental concerns and calls for the use of sustainable and circular practices [4]. For many years, the preservation of forest ecosystems has been at the heart of major concerns and debates among researchers and policy makers [5]. However, in the face of increasing pressure on these forests, traditional conservation strategies focused on protecting specific habitats and species are no longer sufficient to curb forest destruction and the resulting loss of biodiversity [6].

This pressure on forests is particularly worrying in African countries. While the global deforestation rate is estimated at 1%, in sub-Saharan Africa, forest loss is much higher, at 2.36% per year [7]. This reality exacerbates the depletion of natural resources due to population growth [8].

In Benin, more and more forest areas are being replaced by plantations, fields and housing [9,10]. The area deforested each year in Benin is estimated at an average of 100,000 hectares, with an annual rate of degradation of natural forest resources of 2.5%, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) [11]. This results in a growing imbalance between natural resources and the growing needs of populations seeking to improve their living conditions [12].

In this context, application of the circular economy (CE) model in this sector becomes a necessity to maximize resource management and minimize environmental impacts [4,13]. This model has been identified as a promising alternative to the traditional linear economic model [14]. According to the French Agency for Ecological Transition (ADEME), the circular economy (CE) is defined as an economic system aimed at improving resource efficiency and reducing environmental impact while promoting human well-being, encompassing all stages of the product life cycle [15]. Its application mechanism follows the “4R” principle frequently associated with CE, which stands for “Reduce-Reuse-Rehabilitate-Recycle” [16]. Although initially established to focus on waste management and minimizing environmental impacts, CE is applied to industrial waste, particularly from the wood industry [17].

In Benin, large quantities of waste are produced but not recovered [18]. Waste from the forestry sector includes debris from the harvesting process, sawdust from the wood processing process, and defective furniture at the end of its life cycle. For example, each year, more than 4500 tons of sawdust are produced in the country [19].

This study aims to explore current CE practices within the wood-forestry sector in Benin. By identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies used by the different actors in the sector, this research aims to provide practical recommendations to improve the effectiveness and use of CE practices. Furthermore, the scientific interest of this study lies in the evaluation of the CE model within the wood-forestry sector at the territorial scale, a dimension deemed relevant, but not substantially explored locally [20,21]. Unlike previous studies that focus on specific aspects or limited contexts [22,23], this research adopts a global and inclusive approach by involving all stakeholders (producers, processors, consumers, and policy makers) in the Benin value chain. This perspective allows us to identify the practices most developed by the direct actors of this sector, while exploring their motivations, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each practice. The objective is to propose integrated solutions for the sustainable management of forest resources, as well as policy and practice recommendations likely to improve the sustainability and efficiency of the sector.

2. Overview of the Wood and Forestry Sector in Benin

2.1. Importance of Forests and the Forestry Sector in the Beninese Economy

2.1.1. Forest Resources in Benin

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) describes a forest as “land of at least 0.05 to 1.0 hectares with trees that cover more than 10 to 30% of the area with crowns (or at an equivalent stand density) and that can reach a minimum height of 2 to 5 m at maturity” [24]. Based on these criteria, Benin is recognized as having a significant network of forests and protected areas, covering approximately 1.26 million hectares, or nearly 11% of the national territory [25]. This includes two large national parks (Pendjari and W) that are part of the W-Arly-Pendjari (WAP) transboundary network, with a combined area of 3.39 million hectares shared with Burkina Faso and Niger [25].

Benin is also home to 54 forest reserves, covering nearly 890,000 hectares [25]. Among its high-biodiversity forest areas, the Warri Maro and Mont Kouffé forests are also classified as national parks, bringing the share of parks to 13% of the national territory. Figure 1 shows the geographical distribution of these forest resources. The figure shows the contrasting geographical distribution of forests and plantations, with parks and natural forests predominating in the north of Benin. The southern zone, on the other hand, is characterized by only a few plantations, mainly for fruit production. This heterogeneity in the availability of wood resources can play a key role in the choice of circular economy strategies.

2.1.2. Socio-Economic Role of Forests in Benin

Furthermore, Benin’s rapidly growing population relies heavily on forest resources for its livelihoods, particularly in rural areas where forests provide food, building materials, and sources of income [26]. The country also has more than 2900 sacred forests, mainly concentrated in the south of the country, covering approximately 18,000 hectares [27]. These forests play an essential role in preserving local biodiversity, while being closely linked to cultural and religious practices. They are protected by national legislation, reflecting their ecological, social, and cultural importance for the Beninese population.

Benin’s forests also play a vital role in the economy and local communities. The forestry sector contributes to approximately 6.6% of GDP, equivalent to 143 billion FCFA (242 million dollars), an underestimated contribution due to the importance of informal activities, such as the exploitation of fuelwood and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) [28]. Forest products include fuelwood, charcoal, timber, and other items, with sawmill by-products worth almost three times the value of fuelwood [29]. Forest plantations cover 40,000 ha, or 0.3% of the forest cover, managed by the National Timber Office (ONAB) next to 20,000 ha, mainly made up of teak and Gmelina, and producing 45,000 to 60,000 m³ per year for export [29]. Domestic demand for timber is estimated at between 120,000 and 160,000 m³, while exports have reached approximately 100,000 m³ in 2018, mainly teak and Gmelina [29]. Wood energy production, which contributes 2.4% to the national economy and provides almost half of energy consumed, is mainly characterized by informal practices, with a large part of timber being from illegal logging [29]. However, the forestry sector employs approximately 200,000 people, with an annual turnover of nearly 7 billion FCFA (12 million USD), particularly benefiting youth and women. The sector also offers growth opportunities through more efficient carbonization practices and an increase in wood energy plantations [25]. These results (Figure 2) suggest that the forestry sector offers significant potential for the integration of circular economy practices, to ensure the sustainable management of natural resources including wood from forests.

2.2. The Wood-Forestry Sector in Benin: Actors, Structures, and Dynamics

2.2.1. Management and Regulation Structures

In Benin, forest management is overseen by different authorities: the General Directorate of Water, Forests and Hunting (DGEFC), the National Timber Office (ONAB), and the National Center for Wildlife Reserve Management (CENAGREF) [25]. All three entities operate under the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MCVDD). The DGEFC is the main organization and leader in the forestry sector, responsible for defining and implementing forest policies and regulations [25]. Other key forestry centers and councils include the National Center for Remote Sensing and Ecological Monitoring (CENATEL), responsible for monitoring forests and managing the forest information system; the National Forest Development Fund (FNDF), responsible for financing forestry; and the Center for Forestry Studies, Research and Training (CERF) [25].

2.2.2. Roles and Implications of Local Communities

The wood-forestry sector is dominated by several direct economic actors, mainly economic operators (both national and foreign), who intervene at different levels of the processing chain. Wood processing can be classified into three levels, including first-level processors, who purchase wood from the State via ONAB in the form of logs or squared timber and resell it without further processing [30]. Second-level processors also acquire wood from the state but engage in partial processing, reselling semi-finished products such as boards or rafters [30]. Finally, third-level processors, who represent a smaller proportion, transform wood into finished products, such as furniture or hardwood floors, after extensive processing [30].

Another important category of actors involved in the wood-forestry chain is the consumer group, which includes local populations and village associations. These consumers purchase processed wood products (furniture, cabinets, chairs, parquet floors, etc.) from economic operators. After use, some of these items are returned to be reconditioned or discarded. In addition, local farmers exploit the forests [31], while the Village Participatory Forest Management Organizations (OVIGEPAF), bring together the inhabitants of the riverside villages [25]. These associations play a key role in the development, protection, and exploitation of plantations, in collaboration with public and municipal authorities [31]. The OVIGEPAF are structured into several committees, including a revenue management committee, and aim to ensure sustainable management of forest resources. The State ensures the participatory and sustainable management of these resources through conventions and policies that define the rights and duties of stakeholders. Other local actors, such as non-timber forest product (NTFP) collectors, harvest leaves for local uses, thus participating in the regional forest economy [31]. Figure 3 summarizes the interaction between these different actors as described.

3. Methodology

3.1. Study Area

This study analyses the circularity of wood forest products in West Africa, with a particular focus on Benin. The study took place in the Northern region (in the municipalities of Parakou and N’Dali) and in the Southern region (including the municipalities of Allada, Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, and Porto-Novo). These locations were chosen because of the significant concentration of forests in the North and the strong presence of wood processing and marketing units in the South [31]. By examining the different areas of the country (Figure 4), the study explores the interactions between the geographical distribution of wood resources, the involvement of actors in the wood-forest sector and the economic and environmental issues involved.

3.2. Sampling

A sample of 284 direct actors (consumers, producers, and processors) (

Table 1. Distribution of actors interviewed by area.

Areas	Direct Actors			Total
	Producers	Processors	Consumers
North	51	41	58	150
South	30	43	61	134
Total	81	84	119	284

) and 5 political actors (executives of the Department of Wood and Forests of Benin) was constituted. These actors were selected using to the snowball method, a commonly used non-probabilistic approach. The selection process started with a key player from each category of actors in each commune. Thus, the largest producers and processors were identified as starting points, based on the recommendations of the leaders of their respective groups. Consumers, for their part, were identified directly at the points of purchase. For the Department of Wood and Forests of Benin, the main leaders of the decentralized structures were identified as starting points.

3.3. Data Collected and Collection Tools

To determine the scope of EC within the Beninese wood-forestry sector, the study was based on the 12 EC strategies (eco-design, responsible consumption and procurement, optimization of operations, collaborative economy, rental, maintenance and repair, donation and resale, reconditioning, functional economy, industrial ecology, recycling and composting, followed by recovery) established by the Institute for the Environment and Sustainable Development (IESD) (Figure 5) [32]. An inventory of the practices and strategies used by the actors (producers, processors, consumers, and policy makers) of the Beninese wood-forestry sector in terms of sustainable management of wood resources was carried out.

The data collection method of the study is essentially based on a combined qualitative and quantitative approach, integrating semi-directed interviews. In fact, individual face-to-face interviews were conducted with participants representing each category of actors, using an interview guide including open and closed multiple-choice questions (File S1). These interviews were conducted over a period of two months by a team of forest and agricultural engineers recruited and trained on the content of the interview guide.

The questions asked during the interviews focused on several key aspects: the perception of changes in the actors’ environment, their knowledge of EC and its strategies, the EC strategies developed by each actor, the factors motivating their choice of strategies, their perception of the strengths and weaknesses of these strategies, as well as the individual characteristics of the actors.

3.4. Analysis Method

In this study, the data were processed using an analysis of the content of the interviews. This method of analysis is widely recognized as a key analytical method used in the environmental policy discipline to address circular economy issues [33,34]. This approach allowed us to identify the key motivations, objectives, and meanings behind participants’ words [35]. In this study, the analysis focused on the internal dimensions of the circular economy strategies employed, without considering external factors. This focus was chosen because the study specifically assesses the use of circular economy strategies, particularly their benefits and limitations.

To refine the analysis approach, a three-level hierarchy was developed for the study of circular economy strategies in the wood-forest sector in Benin (Figure 6). The first level represents the overall objective of this analysis: to understand the main circular economy strategies used by the different actors, and the motivations behind their implementation within the wood-forest sector. At the second level, the internal factors (strengths and weaknesses) influencing the use of these strategies by the actors in the sector were highlighted. At this level, the analysis was based on the economic, social, and environmental parameters associated with the strategies developed by the actors. At the third level, alternative circular economy strategies were proposed. These strategies were developed by taking into account not only the advantages and limitations of existing strategies but also the specific realities of Benin. This approach made it possible to compare current circular economy strategies with other potential strategies not yet implemented. These were supplemented by other basic analyses such as descriptive statistics (supported by Chi-square, t-student, and ANOVA statistical tests) and correspondence factor analysis (CFA), to assess respondents’ knowledge and perceptions of the concept of circular economy, according to municipalities and categories of actors.

4. Results

4.1. Knowledge of the Concept of Circular Economy by Stakeholders

4.1.1. Knowledge of Direct Actors

• Understanding of Direct Actors on the Concept of EC

This section examines the understanding of direct stakeholders (consumers, producers, and processors) regarding the circular economy (CE) concept and its practices. The aim was to assess their perceptions and highlight two key dimensions explaining more than 66% of the variability in these perceptions (Figure 7). The first dimension, accounting for 39.29% of the knowledge variability, focuses on sustainable resource management and waste minimization, while the second dimension, accounting for 26.79% of the variance, focuses on waste repair and reuse, as well as furniture manufacturing and maintenance.

Stakeholder knowledge varies by area. Consumers and producers in the northern area (Parakou) mainly associate CE with sustainable resource management (SRM), considering it as an approach based on the valorization and intelligent use of resources. This perception is illustrated by the words of respondent C118, who states that “Circularity is a resource management that aims to make the most of each element or material. The circular economy consists of managing resources in a sustainable and intelligent manner”. On the other hand, consumers and producers in the cities of Cotonou and Porto-Novo, as well as processors in Parakou, perceive CE as a process aimed at the manufacture and maintenance of furniture (FEM) or the repair and reuse of waste (RRD). Producer P34 explains “The circular economy is an economy where we manage to produce good wood that carpenters use to make resistant furniture that will last”.

In Abomey-Calavi and Porto-Novo, the EC is seen as a waste minimization strategy (MG) or a form of cyclical economy that takes into account environmental protection (ECPE). For example, producer P59 notes that “The circular economy: it is a strategy that avoids wasting wood and contributes to protecting the resources we have”.

At the same time, processors in the municipality of Allada associate the concepts of circular economy and circularity with the irresponsibility of certain actors in the sector (DEIT). For example, transporters (of wood and products derived from its processing) do not respect traffic rules, which leads to accidents and losses. This is what consumer C26 expressed when he stated that the circular economy calls for “the irregularity and irresponsibility of transporters or wood harvesters”. At the same time, some consumers in this municipality expressed their lack of knowledge of these concepts, as evidenced by the words of producer P47: “The circular economy: it’s new and it doesn’t inspire me much”.

• Global Analysis of the Knowledge of Direct Actors

As a result, the analysis of local knowledge reveals some limitations compared to the ADEME definition. The actors in Parakou, with their focus on sustainable resource management, are the most aligned with the principles of the CE. In contrast, perceptions focused on furniture manufacturing and maintenance, or on excessive spending and the irresponsibility of processors, reflect a partial and sometimes distorted understanding of the broader objectives of the CE. These results illustrate a varied understanding of the CE concept among different actors, with distinct priorities and concerns depending on the geographical context and types of actors. However, the perception of the circular economy by direct actors mainly focuses on sustainable resource management, waste minimization, waste repair and reuse, and furniture manufacturing and maintenance.

4.1.2. Perception of Indirect Actors

The analysis of political actors’ perceptions of the concepts of circular economy and circularity reveals a diverse understanding of these notions. Political actors, although limited in number, express ideas that align with sustainable resource management, innovation in the wood sector, and the fight against waste. Some perceive the circular economy as an innovation serving the wood sector, echoing the perspectives of Bahers et al. [36] and Gallaud and Laperche [37], who consider CE strategies as a set of innovative methods. In contrast, other actors emphasize sustainable and regenerative resource management, involving silvicultural practices. This is consistent with the conclusions of the National Institute for the circular economy [4], which highlights the interest of CE as a method to ensure the long-term management of wood resources. These discourses reflect a generally positive perception of the EC concept among policy actors, even if it is not always as precise or exhaustive as the ADEME [15] definition. The ADEME definition focuses not only on sustainability and resource regeneration but also on the entire life cycle of products, including reducing environmental impact and improving human well-being.

4.2. Overview of Practices and Strategies Used by Actors

Direct Actors

• Strategies Developed by Direct Actors

An overview of the practices and strategies most used by direct actors (producers, processors, and consumers) reveals significant differences between the North and South zones (Figure 8). The most frequently used strategies in the South zone are maintenance and repair (60.17%), donation and resale (18.64%), and recycling (8.47%). Maintenance and repair aim to extend the life of products by keeping them in good working order. Donation and resale consist of redistributing unused or good condition products to other users, while recycling consists of reconditioning used products to make them usable again. These strategies are widely used by actors in the South to extend the life of products and avoid waste ${\mathcal{X}}^2=62.08 p<0.05$.

• Most used strategies in the North

In the North zone, the most used strategies are maintenance and repair (44.59%), donation and resale (18.24%), but also rental (15.54%) and others cited in the minority. The rental strategy consists of renting goods rather than owning them when they are not in use, thus avoiding malfunctions due to non-use. The widespread use of donation and resale, as well as maintenance and repair, in both zones, highlights a general awareness of the need to extend the life of products or save resources while minimizing waste. However, rental is particularly important in the North, suggesting a different approach to access to goods.

• Most used strategies in the South

In the South, strategies such as the collaborative economy, rental, and recovery are not widely used, while in the North, less commonly used strategies include reuse, remanufacturing, responsible consumption and sourcing, and recycling.

• Comparative analysis of the most used strategies according to the types of actors

A comparative analysis of the strategies most used by consumers, producers, and processors reveals significant disparities, as well as similarities in current practices (Figure 9). Among consumers, the three most used strategies are maintenance and repair (50.49%), donation and resale (17.48%), and recovery (10.68%). These practices highlight the desire of stakeholders to extend the life of products and minimize waste production, as part of a more sustainable approach to consumption. Saving consumers also appear to favor sharing unused goods through donation and resale (${\mathcal{X}}^2=57.08 p<0.05$).

For producers, the three main strategies used are maintenance and repair (60%), rental (15%), and donation and resale (11.25%). While maintenance and repair are also a priority for producers, rental occupies a significant place, reflecting a tendency to optimize the use of equipment and resources without resorting to direct purchase. The practice of donation and resale is also widely used, highlighting producers’ efforts to minimize waste and maximize the reuse of available resources. From the processors’ perspective, the predominant strategies are like those of producers, namely maintenance and repair (44.58%), donation and resale (26.51%), rental (13.25%), and other strategies are cited less frequently. The collaborative economy, responsible sourcing, and reuse are only mentioned by a small minority (1.2%) of processors.

In summary, common strategies across all three groups include maintenance and repair, as well as donation and resale, indicating a widespread awareness of the need to extend product life and reduce waste. Disparities in the use of other strategies reflect the specific roles and needs of each group of actors in the wood value chain.

• Seniority in the strategies developed by direct actors

Figure 10 shows the average number of years of use of EC strategies, both by zone and by type of actor. The results show a significant difference by zone (t = 4.31; p < 0.05) and by type of actor (F = 6.11; p < 0.05). Actors in the North zone are the most experienced, with an average seniority of 16.6 years, compared to 12.5 years for those in the South zone. This difference allows us to conclude that the actors in the North are the most experienced in the application of these strategies.

• Seniority according to the types of actors

In terms of actor types, producers stand out as the most experienced, with an average of 16.8 years of experience in using circular economy strategies, followed by processors (15.2 years) and consumers (12.8 years). These statistics indicate that producers, being the first links in the value chain, have a deeper understanding and practice of circular economy strategies.

The analysis of the content of interviews with the different actors shows that their sources of knowledge on these strategies mainly include personal inspiration gained through experience, the influence of close friends, and training received by parents, as well as professional training. For example, one consumer mentioned that “my parents, not being well-off, taught me how to take care of my belongings such as furniture”. While one processor stated that “my knowledge comes from the professional training in carpentry that I received”.

• Motivations for the strategies developed

Figure 11 shows the motivations (economic and social) of two groups of actors to use circular economy strategies. The results reveal significant differences (${\mathcal{X}}^2=38.19 p<0.05$) and a predominance of economic objectives in both zones. In the North zone, the main motivation is the improvement of income (58.16%), followed by the limitation of economic expenditure (5.67%). In the South zone, while the improvement of income is also a key motivation (36.44%), the limitation of economic expenditure (20.34%) plays a more important role than in the North. This difference probably reflects more pressing economic needs in the South, where the extension of the life of equipment contributes directly to a more economical management of resources.

Among the social motivations, esthetics has a greater relative importance in the South zone (12.71%) than in the North zone (2.13%), where the actors prioritize the renewal of the functional quality of the equipment (29.77%). This suggests that in the South, the actors give more value to the appearance of the object, while in the North, the emphasis is on its functionality. The last social motivation, although rarely mentioned, is the satisfaction of a job well done, which indicates that this dimension has less influence on the choice of strategies.

These results demonstrate that even if economic motivations are globally dominant, social motivations still play an important role in both areas.

4.3. Analysis of the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Strategies Developed

The analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies developed reveals significant differences depending on the area and the type of actor, with “C” representing the consumer category, “P” the producers, and “T” the processors (

Table 2. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of circular economy strategies developed by stakeholders.

Strengths/Weaknesses	South (%)			North (%)			Total (%)
	C	P	T	C	P	T	C	P	T	Average
Strengths (Advantages)
Indifferent	20.45	0.0	6.82	12.90	2.82	0.0	17.33	1.98	3.61	6.95
Limits deforestation	4.54	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	2.66	0.0	0.0	0.77
Extended life span	22.73	0.0	4.54	29.03	0.0	2.56	25.33	0.0	3.61	8.49
A real source of income	4.54	66.67	65.91	0.0	22.53	69.23	2.67	35.64	67.46	36.29
Minimize waste	0.0	0.0	2.27	16.13	2.82	10.25	30.66	1.98	6.02	11.58
Quality renewal	2.27	3.33	0.0	12.9	66.19	10.26	6.66	47.52	4.82	22.01
Weaknesses (Limits)
No	88.64	93.33	88.64	61.29	14.08	15.38	77.33	37.62	54.22	54.44
Requires more time	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	59.15	23.07	0.0	41.58	10.84	19.69
Loss of some of the quality of recycled materials	0.0	0.0	0.0	6.45	23.94	53.85	2.66	16.83	25.3	15.44
Reduction	0.0	4.54	6.82	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	2.66	3.61	1.93
Lack of processing tools	0.0	0.0	0.0	6.45	1.41	0.0	2.66	0.99	0.0	1.16
Short product life	0.0	0.0	0.0	19.35	0.0	0.0	8.0	0.0	0.0	2.32

Source: field data (July 2024).

). Overall, the most frequently mentioned strength is the positive economic impact on income (36.29%), indicating that actors mainly value the economic benefits related to resource sustainability and income generation, particularly among processors. Quality renewal through reconditioning and repair is another notable strength (22.01%). Other strengths mentioned include waste minimization (11.58%), extending the life of goods (8.49%), and reducing deforestation (0.77%), although these aspects are less highlighted by actors.

A comparative analysis by zone and type of actor shows that in the South zone, consumers emphasize the extended life of products (22.73%), while producers (66.67%) and processors (65.91%) emphasize the economic benefits in terms of income. In the North, the results are similar for consumers and processors, but producers emphasize the benefits of sustainability (66.19%) for goods more.

While stakeholders highlighted several benefits of circular economy strategies, they also highlighted several weaknesses that hinder their implementation. These include the longer time frame (19.69%) to implement the strategies and the loss of quality of recycled materials (15.44%). This was highlighted by several respondents, including producer P20, who stated: “The disadvantage is that the products (furniture) lose some of their strength”, suggesting that reconditioned or repaired products are not as strong as new products.

Other limitations, such as lack of processing tools and reduced orders, were perceived as marginal weaknesses, with respective proportions of 1.16% and 1.93%. These results suggest that material quality issues and time requirements are more important in specific actor contexts, while other challenges are considered to have less impact overall.

By area and by actor type, the analysis shows that in the South, most actors do not report any weaknesses in the use of strategies. Only a few producers (4.54%) and processors (6.82%) mentioned that the use of CE strategies limits the ordering of new materials, which contributes to a decrease in their revenues. In the North, producers and processors expressed more pronounced concerns about the time needed to process recycled products and the loss of quality of recycled materials. Consumers in the North, on the other hand, were more sensitive to the weaknesses associated with the shorter lifespan of recycled products.

In conclusion, although EC strategies are appreciated for their economic benefits and contribution to resource sustainability, they face challenges such as the loss of quality of recycled materials and the time required for their implementation. These perceptions vary by area and type of actor, with distinct concerns evident between the two regions.

4.4. Proposals for Alternative Strategies

According to the results obtained, the strategies developed by the actors—such as maintenance, repair, donation and resale, recovery, responsible consumption, rental and recycling—present important strengths but also notable weaknesses (Figure 12). Among the advantages are the extension of the product life, the generation of revenue streams, and the reduction in waste. However, these strategies often involve challenges such as the time needed to renew (transform) used goods, a loss of quality of recycled products, a short life after recycling, a reduction in customer orders, and a lack of transformation tools.

To address these limitations, several alternative strategies are proposed. First, eco-design integrates sustainability into the product design phase [38]. In the wood industry, this could involve creating furniture using energy- and resource-efficient production methods, as well as recycled or recyclable materials. This approach directly addresses concerns about the short product lifespan and loss of quality of recycled materials by integrating sustainability principles into the design phase, using recent technological advances that maintain quality close to that of the original materials. Economic benefits include reduced waste and recycling costs, as products are designed to be easier to repair or recycle. Environmental benefits are also important, as fewer resources are used, reducing the overall ecological footprint [38]. Finally, social benefits come in the form of increased awareness of sustainable practices among design teams. However, this strategy may require a larger initial investment in training and R&D [38].

Another proposed alternative method is industrial ecology, which aims to create closed-loop production systems where waste from one process becomes raw materials for another [37]. In the wood industry, this could primarily imply the need to establish synergistic relationships between wood processing units and companies using wood by-products, such as chips or sawdust, to minimize losses and waste emissions. This alternative strategy will partly solve the problem of the lack of processing tools by maximizing the use of locally available resources while reducing waste. Economic benefits include reduced costs for waste and raw material treatment [39]. Environmental benefits imply a reduced ecological footprint through an optimized use of resources and waste minimization [37]. At the social level, this strategy promotes innovation and collaboration between sectors, allowing better access to quality raw materials and partially mitigating the problem of quality loss of recycled products. However, it may involve logistical and coordination challenges between industry players.

Operations optimization is another strategy to improve efficiency and reduce energy consumption in production [32]. In developed countries, this involves using advanced technologies and best practices to minimize waste and inefficiencies. This strategy specifically addresses time constraints in product processing by streamlining operations. Economic benefits include lower production costs and increased productivity [32]. Environmental benefits include a more efficient use of resources and reduced greenhouse gas emissions [32].

A final promising alternative strategy is that of exchange. This approach, although not part of known CE strategies, will encourage users to borrow or exchange goods rather than buying them again. This reduces the demand for new production and, therefore, the carbon footprint. Above all, this alternative responds to the concern of reducing orders and waste, while facilitating a more collective and rational use of available resources. In the wood sector, this could be facilitated by community initiatives where wood processing tools and equipment are shared between craftsmen (processors) and producers. This would also strengthen community ties and foster a culture of sharing and cooperation.

However, although the proposed alternative strategies are based on the desired objectives and the benefits (socio-economic and environmental) sought by the stakeholders, the acceptance of these strategies cannot be entirely based on these factors. Indeed, as Venkatesh et al. [40] point out in their capitalization studies on the acceptance and use of innovations, the factors that come into play in the decision or acceptance of an innovation are multiple. They focus on the perceived usefulness and ease of use of the proposed innovation, contextual factors (culture, age and experience), and emotional factors (pleasure and anxiety). Similarly, Zhu et al. [41] identified variables such as perceived system quality, usefulness, ease of use, cultural compatibility, social influence, and emotion as being critical in the use of technologies or innovations.

To ensure the effectiveness of these alternative strategies, it is necessary to support stakeholders in their implementation. Future studies could assess additional factors such as perceived usefulness, ease of use, contextual influences, and emotional considerations. Figure 12 presents a hierarchical synthesis of these alternative proposals and outlines future perspectives for the implementation of the proposed strategies.

4.5. DGEFC Position on Strategies to Promote

The results show that policy actors in the forestry sector favor specific circular economy strategies, with a strong preference for several strategies simultaneously, including valorization (60%), followed by eco-design (40%), and the functional economy (20%). Valorization, as the most favored strategy, highlights the importance given by policy actors to transforming waste into reusable resources. They believe that this would significantly reduce the environmental footprint by minimizing waste and optimizing the use of materials. This priority is aligned with the circular economy principles described by ADEME [15], which emphasize maximizing the value of resources throughout their life cycle. Furthermore, promoting the wood sector through valorization is considered a key lever to improve the visibility, competitiveness, and sustainability of the forestry sector, with 80% of respondents highlighting this advantage.

Eco-design, although less of a priority than added value from the point of view of policy actors, remains essential to create sustainable products from the design phase, thus reducing environmental impacts and improving product longevity. They recognize, however, that eco-design requires a change in design and production processes, requiring not only specialized training but also a very large initial investment.

The functional economy, although the least prioritized, would also present, according to policy actors, significant benefits by extending the life of products through shared use. For these actors, this latter strategy will reduce the demand for new products and minimize waste. However, they also note that this approach requires a change in business model and culture, which may take time or be difficult to implement and accept by businesses and consumers. Taken together, these strategies proposed by policy actors show a balanced and integrated approach, essential for the transition to a circular and sustainable economy, aligning economic, environmental, and social interests. Despite these challenges, recognizing these weaknesses allows stakeholders to better prepare and develop appropriate solutions to overcome these obstacles, thus ensuring a smoother transition to a sustainable circular economy. Policy actors should continue to promote these strategies while considering the initial costs and training needs to maximize their positive impact on sustainability and resource efficiency.

5. Discussion

The analysis of direct stakeholders’ knowledge of EC reveals a varied understanding of the concept. Northern stakeholders perceive EC mainly as an approach to sustainable resource management, valuing and intelligently using each element or material to minimize waste. In contrast, Southern stakeholders see EC more as a process of manufacturing and maintaining goods, repairing and reusing waste, and a strategy for minimizing waste and protecting the environment. This divergence in perception has also been highlighted in several other studies, where it has been reported that EC can mean different things to different actors [42,43,44].

Furthermore, while direct actors have a more practical perception based on their daily experiences, political actors define EC as a mechanism aimed at sustainable and regenerative management of resources, with an emphasis on innovation and the fight against waste. This corroborates with the observations of several other authors who have highlighted that stakeholders (academics, practitioners/businesses, policy makers, etc.) in the field of CE would have different interpretations of the concept of CE [42,45]. This implies that no single stakeholder group has the undisputed authority to define exactly what CE means [43]. Despite multiple efforts to clarify and conceptualize CE, it remains subject to various interpretations [44]. Thus, the variability in knowledge of direct actors in the context of this study can be explained by the absence of a formal and universally accepted definition of CE [44]. However, policy actors, while being better aligned with ADEME’s (2014) strategic principles, could benefit from a better understanding of the concrete practices of direct actors, as Kirchherr et al. [44] and Bahers et al. [36] point out, for a more global perspective.

Disparities in CE strategies between the North and the South are due to differences in the availability and cost of wood resources, as shown by the geographical distribution (Figure 1), as well as local economic conditions. In the South, where the intensity of monetary poverty is lower, but the cost of living is higher [46], practices such as maintenance, repair, donation, and resale are used to maximize the lifespan of products. These strategies reduce waste and economic expenditure, responding to the greater economic pressures in this region [47]. However, these practices are commonly used in both areas (North and South), confirming the importance of these strategies for resource sustainability [48]. These trends show an alignment with CE principles, requiring a tailored approach that takes into account these few specificities to promote their wider and effective use [44].

Circular economy strategies, through income generation and asset renewal, are recognized for their ability to create economic value and encourage the informal sector, thereby boosting developing economies [49]. It is also recognized that the circular economy promotes a change in mindset by viewing waste as a resource rather than a problem to be disposed of, allowing products to last longer and reducing waste [50].

The recognition of sustainability by Northern producers highlights the long-term benefits of CE practices, supported by Tambovceva et al. [51] and Sharma et al. [52], who highlight the stimulation of sustainable development and the reuse of materials to conserve resources. However, identified weaknesses, such as the need for more time for implementation and the loss of quality of recycled materials, represent significant obstacles, in agreement with Ali et al. [53]. Moreover, the lack of transformation tools and the reduction in orders, as highlighted by Corvellec et al. [54] and Velis and Vrancken [55], add barriers to the widespread use of CE. To overcome these challenges, specific training and access to appropriate tools, recommended by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation [56], are necessary to optimize CE processes and strengthen stakeholder engagement.

Finally, alternative strategies proposed to improve CE in the wood sector, such as eco-design, operations optimization, lending and trading, and industrial ecology, address the identified weaknesses while maximizing benefits. Eco-design, by integrating sustainability principles from the product design phase [57], can address the problems of quality loss and the short lifespan of recycled products, while reducing costs and the ecological footprint. Operations optimization, by improving existing processes and integrating advanced technologies, can significantly increase efficiency while minimizing energy and waste [32]. The exchange strategy, which Perret [58] also sees as a form of collaborative economy approach, could thus encourage reductions in the demand for new production and in carbon footprint. Finally, industrial ecology encourages the creation of synergies between production units and companies using by-products, thus optimizing the use of resources and minimizing waste [59]. Some of the strategies proposed by political actors (valorization and economy of functionality) are not included in the proposed alternative strategies because they may require deeper infrastructure and behavioral changes that go beyond immediate solutions tailored to our specific context.

However, a limitation of the present study is related to the fact that the analysis and proposals of alternative methods do not integrate the perception of the actors on the potential usefulness of the strategies. Therefore, future studies should be undertaken to better assess the level of acceptance of the proposed alternative strategies. In addition, another study could be conducted to further evaluate other factors such as the perception of the usefulness and ease of use of the proposed innovative strategies, and contextual factors as well as emotional factors (pleasure and anxiety). Indeed, as Rogers [60] states in his book Diffusion of Innovations, the acceptability of an innovation is the degree to which an innovation is consistent with the existing values, prior needs, experiences and cultural norms of the user. In this regard, he emphasizes that the relative advantages of the proposed innovations are not the only factors determining their acceptance within a population. Other factors, such as compatibility, complexity and trialability, are equally important in determining the receptiveness of a population to innovations. In this context, for each alternative strategy proposed in this study, it is necessary to assess the level of compatibility with existing practices, available resources, the objectives of potential users, and their situation, as recommended by Dubois and Bobillier-Chaumon [61].

6. Conclusions

The results of this study highlight a certain level of disparity in the use of CE strategies between the North and the South, as well as between different types of actors in the wood sector. Actors in the North have been using CE strategies for a longer time, influenced by economic motivations such as improving income and asset sustainability. In the South, on the other hand, although motivated by economic aspects, actors also highlight social motivations such as esthetics and the beauty of the good. The strengths of the strategies developed by the actors include extending the life of products and generating income, but they are limited by challenges such as the loss of quality of recycled materials and the time needed to implement the strategies. Alternative proposals, including eco-design, industrial ecology, and optimization of operations, offer promising solutions to overcome these weaknesses and maximize economic, environmental, and social benefits. Furthermore, the loan and exchange of goods is proposed not only to reduce the need for new resources, but also to strengthen community ties and promote a culture of cooperation.

In view of these results, it becomes essential to strengthen the capacities of actors through specific training and tools adapted to the proposed strategies. This includes the development of educational programs and technical aids to integrate sustainability principles from product design to consumption, and to promote circular economic models. In addition, the promotion of industrial ecology at the territorial level could be facilitated by the creation of cooperation platforms between production units and local companies. The implementation of public policies encouraging industrial synergies and offering financial incentives to initiatives aimed at reducing waste and using recycled resources could also accelerate this transition.