Nick Jeffries

In this interview, we explore Nick's journey that has kept him involved in aspects of circular economy and regeneration, and his views on the importance of the Circular Buildings Coalition (CBC) at this moment in time.  

Introducing Nick Jeffries
‍
Nick is a Chartered Environmental Civil Engineer by profession and spent nearly a decade and a half working on water, urban masterplanning and international development projects that took him all over the world. Around2008 he realised that climate change was a really important issue, so undertook a Masters in Renewable Energy, leading him down the path of small-scale off-gridsystems as an enabler of economic development in the global south. He was part of the team that developed an affordable solar irrigation system called Futurepump.  

He eventually moved to the Isle of Wight, and joined the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF), where he is currently working. This felt like a natural progression of his work in sustainability and renewable energy, as the circular economy, beyond better management of materials and products, is also about regenerating natural systems, the idea that “we cannot only do less harm, but also improve the world through our actions.”

He has been with EMF for 8 years working in many roles, all centred on research, analysis and communication. He has led the Insights and Analysis team and been at the heart of a number of the Foundation’s major thought-leadership studies including Cities and the Circular Economy for Food, the climate paper "Completing the Picture" and the most recent Building Prosperity study. In the last couple of years, Nick has been leading the Foundation’s built environment initiative, partnering with Arup and Biomimicry 3.8, working with CBC and setting up the Circular Leaders Group.

In the following conversation, Nick shares his perspective, motivations and insights as well as his vision for driving change with the CBC.

‍QN: Why is it important for you, on a personal note and as an organization, to be a part of the CBC?

A: There is an overlap between the personal and organisational reasons. The organisations or partners that are part of the CBC are all doing their thing to improve the economy, society and natuonomy, society and nature. But if all this work, all these reports and frameworks, is done in independent silos, the messages get diluted and it creates a confusing marketplace of ideas. That is why they need to work together, and while they may have differing views, focuses and ways of working, they are all after the same thing: an economy that helps people and nature thrive. This coalition is a formalisation of them working together. And having all these thought leaders working together makes them much more powerful.

The other thing is that the EMF has a large network of organisations that are large companies, so working with the CBC and the Blueprint Projects (BPPs) allows me to work with smaller companies, with innovators, entrepreneurs and start-ups. This allows me to have a diverse exposure to organisations that are driving the circular economy.

‍
QN: What specific actions, by the CBC, would you like to see over the next two years?

A: There has been a lot of work done in the first of two phases, running from 2022 to 2024, creating a lot of thought leadership assets form the various partners, including the BPPs and their progress. We now need to do a better job of ramping up communication to share more widely our insights and knowledge with industry and key built environment decision makers.

The other action that I would like to see more of in the next phase is greater connection and collaboration between industry and the CBC. One mechanism to achieve this is through the Circular Leader Group (CLG)that EMF and Arup have established. This industry group, comprising a mix of circular designers, some major value chain players and asset owners, has beenset up to share knowledge, exchange skills and develop collaborative projects. Through closer integration with the CLG, this will ensure that current and future blueprint projects are aligned with the needs of the industry.

‍QN: Who and what will/can drive the transition? – bigger picture.

A: Scaling up the circular built environment is a bit of a dance between policy and finance, so we need policymakers to send clear signals to industry to act. Just as there are mandatory standards for energy efficiency, so all new buildings should have mandatory standards for embodied emissions. Once the enabling policies are in place, the financing usually follows.

The other thing is refurbishment, up until a few years ago in the UK, you got a tax break on new builds, and you were taxed on refurbishments and repairs. There are some small pockets of enabling policy, for example in Sweden, but we need more clear signals from policymakers that prolonging the life of buildings over demolition.

At the moment, there isn't enough finance flowing to circular projects to allow it to scale. One reason is that the business case of the wider system benefits of the circular economy has not been articulated clearly enough. This is why EMF produced the Building Prosperity study, which estimated over €500 billion of new revenue potential for the EU construction associated with a circular and nature-positive transformation of the built environment, as well as many other nature, climate and social benefits. In my view, the circular economy is about longer-term value creation that is more distributed, and the financial sector is usually set up for short-term value creation that goes to a small number of organisations and is not distributed.

So, we need the kind of organisations that are interested in the former: longer-term value creation where you get a reasonable return on your investment over a longer period of time, with both social and environmental benefits.