Circular economy and the Productivity Commission

A/Prof Martin Geissdoerfer, Jennifer Macklin, A/Prof Glen Croy, Prof Amrik Sohal, Alesha McCallion, Dr Mark Boulet, Dr Stefan Kaufman, Lauren Brumley, A/Prof Duncan Maxwell, Dr Victor Bunster-Milnes, Dr Matthew French, Janet Creaney, A/Prof Anita Foerster and Prof Denise O'Connor, 2026

Purpose

Australia’s circular-economy debate risked stopping at waste management and incremental recycling gains. We saw a bigger possibility. Circularity could drive productivity, resilience, innovation and international competitiveness with environmental and social value.

We wanted to move the conversation from managing waste to transforming systems. That meant stronger government coordination, clearer standards and greater focus on strategies including durability, reuse and repair. It also meant recognising place-based and First Nations knowledge. Our practical aim: turn multidisciplinary evidence into policy and scalable action for governments, industry and communities.

Practice

We made two submissions to the Productivity Commission inquiry. Our first submission brought together research on business and consumer barriers, manufacturing, textiles, construction, healthcare, trade, taxation and measurement.

We proposed eight system settings. These included national targets, an industrial and trade strategy, coordinated standards, public procurement, investment and incubator funds, stronger product stewardship and a national research mission.

We responded to its interim report in April 2025. We challenged its emphasis on downstream waste and supplied detailed evidence on prefabricated construction, food waste, textiles, mining, electronics, regional communities, behavioural barriers and innovation. We proposed place-based plans, transition brokers, challenge-based funding, harmonised regulation, an outcomes framework and an R&D-led partnership. This second submission was built explicitly on Australia’s Circular Economy Framework.

Output

The Commission engaged with the evidence. Its final report, dated 22 August 2025, cited Monash eleven times across nine substantive pages and listed both submissions.

Our first submission informed its account of mission-oriented innovation. Our second submission contributed to discussions of prefabrication and disassembly, free riding in voluntary textiles stewardship, place-based planning, regional infrastructure, packaging regulation and mission-based outcomes.

These ideas connected with recommendations for place-based plans and transition brokers, a challenge-based grant program and a national outcomes framework. Not every proposal was accepted. The Commission considered our Circular Economy Standards Board but chose a lower-cost intergovernmental taskforce. The result was meaningful engagement, not wholesale adoption.

Outcome

Our research moved into a national inquiry’s evidence base and recommendation architecture. Monash University researchers could see empirical findings and practical proposals travel beyond individual projects and into policy design.

The Commission and Government gained integrated evidence connecting circularity with productivity, regional capability, consumer behaviour, innovation and regulation. The clearest influence appeared where Monash University was directly cited, particularly challenge-based innovation and place-based implementation. Other similarities—including mining reform, electronics stewardship and broader metrics—show alignment with a shared policy direction, rather than evidence of Monash acting alone.

Impact

The wider impact is still unfolding. In March 2026, Environment Ministers advanced nationally consistent stewardship and data, packaging reform, exploration of harmonised mandatory battery stewardship and national action on solar panels.

This next step carried forward themes shared by Monash, the national Framework and the Commission: harmonisation, productivity, domestic material markets and resilient supply chains.

Effective implementation could reduce fragmentation for businesses, strengthen regional and Indigenous-led initiatives, create markets for durable and recovered products, improve access to repair and reuse, and reduce environmental harm. Monash contributed evidence, ideas and practical pathways to a wider national effort—helping turn circular-economy ambition into momentum for action across Australia.