Evaluation of Resource Circulation Policy to Promote the Transition to the Circular Economy

Published on July 29, 2025
Published by Social Administrative Program Evaluation Division

   Resource circulation policy, which has evolved from traditional waste management policy, is now a far-reaching concept that involves not only waste recycling but also the efficient use of resources. Globally, countries are transitioning from an economic structure based on mass production and consumption to a circular economy focused on resource circulation. Along with this trend, the scope and the importance of resource circulation policy have increased, with carbon neutrality and a sustainable society becoming new goals. For Korea, in particular, where natural resources are scarce and waste management is a constant challenge, transitioning to a circular economy is essential as a means to ensure resource security and respond to environmental issues and climate change.
   Against this backdrop, this report analyzes the outcomes and effectiveness of Korea's resource circulation policy in promoting a circular economy. It reviews the volume of waste generation and greenhouse gas emissions and discusses key issues and areas for improvement in major resource circulation policies and programs.
   First, the volume of municipal and industrial waste generation continues to increase while greenhouse gas emissions from the waste sector exceeded the 2023 target. If this trend continues, achieving the 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) might not be feasible. This calls for efforts to strengthen the effectiveness of the country’s resource circulation policy to produce tangible outcomes.
   Second, the Korean government's policy goals are still focused on waste generation and disposal, despite the full revision of the Framework Act on Resources Circulation into the Act on Promotion of Transition to Circular Economy and Society to facilitate the shift towards a circular economy. To address this situation, it is necessary to leverage a variety of performance indicators, such as resource productivity and circular material use rates, to better monitor the efficiency of resource use and other outcomes. In addition, tracking annual performance by each indicator might be a useful way to evaluate the progress toward performance targets.
   Third, Korea's current waste generation statistics require improvement, as they may overestimate the amount of recycled waste and are unable to track actual recycling rates. Also, the waste classification scheme differs from that used in other OECD and EU member countries.
   Fourth, an organic cooperative system for effective role and information sharing should be established, such as a consultative body for the promotion of the circular economy, to prevent redundancies or gaps in responsibilities across relevant ministries.
    Fifth, key programs such as the extended producer responsibility (EPR), the expansion of the use of recycled materials, performance management for city/provincial governments and businesses, and public reserves of recyclable materials require systematic management as well as program overhaul to ensure their stable operation and enhanced performance.