Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Circularity of Brazilian silk: Promoting a circular bioeconomy in the

production of silk cocoons
Silvia Mara Bortoloto Damasceno Barcelos a, *, Rodrigo Salvador b, Murillo Vetroni Barros c,
Antonio Carlos de Francisco b, Graça Guedes d
a
Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM), Cianorte Campus, Cianorte, Brazil
b
Sustainable Production Systems Laboratory (LESP), Graduate Program in Industrial Engineering (PPGEP), Universidade Tecnológica Federal Do Paraná (UTFPR),
Ponta Grossa, Brazil
c
Sustainable Production Systems Laboratory (LESP), Graduate Program in Industrial Engineering (PPGEP), Universidade Tecnológica Federal Do Paraná (UTFPR),
Ponta Grossa, Parana, Brazil
d
University of Minho (Uminho), Engineering School, Azurém Campus, Portugal

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The bioeconomy is considered one of the three main sectors with the greatest opportunities for the development
Circular economy of the circular economy in Brazil, who is one of the largest silk producers in the world; and sericulture is an
Circularity agribusiness that contributes greatly to the bioeconomy in Brazil. Therefore, this research aimed to identify
Bioeconomy
opportunities for creating value by internalizing flows in the production of silk cocoons by promoting a circular
Silk farming
Silk cocoon
bioeconomy. To that end, a tool was used to assess the circularity of the referred system. The current circularity
Green energy of the production of silk cocoons, at the farm level, is 74.19 % for material, and 0 % for energy. A range of
measures are proposed, based on (i) engaging with reverse logistics practices, (ii) establishing a local agro­
industrial cooperative, and (iii) building community biodigesters, which aid a potential circularity of 85.51 %
(material), and 100 % (energy) at the farm level, and 98.42 % (material) and 100 % (energy), at the cooperative
level. On top of increasing circular value, the proposed measures might bring environmental benefits, such as
lessening environmental impacts of logistics (by valuing local resources) and replacing non-renewable energy,
and social impacts, through increased quality of life for sericulturists. Economic implications need further
investigation and are suggested to be addressed in future research endeavors, along with policy implications for
the development of a circular bioeconomy. Furthermore, an increased circularity can also contribute to a few of
the sustainable development goals (SDGs) proposed by the United Nations, such as SDGs 2, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 13.

1. Introduction
The rates of extraction, transformation, and consumption of natural
resources have been leading to a fear of ecological collapse (Gregorio
et al., 2018). This unconcerned linear behavior of production and con­
sumption has been generating unprecedented amounts of waste
(Khounani et al., 2021; Maina et al., 2017), and may also affect water
resources (Wang et al., 2020). Environmental innovations play a key
role in this transition (Aldieri et al., 2020). One alternative to overcome
the challenges of such concern of global scale is to design systems that
are more circular (Sutherland et al., 2021), thus aiming for a circular
economy (Salvador et al., 2021a). A circular economy is said to be one
that is both regenerative and restorative and aims to keep resources in
use for as long as possible (EMF, 2013a, 2013b). This approach has the
particular aim to eliminate waste - by design, to be reused, restored, or
returned (Pap et al., 2021). Building on the basic 3Rs (recycle, reduce,
and reuse), other approaches such as the 7Rs (recover, recycle, redesign,
reduce, renew, repair, and reuse) have been designed to achieve the
change towards a circular economy (Barros et al., 2020; Araujo-Morera
et al., 2021). Nonetheless, solely being more circular might not neces­
sarily be sustainable, therefore, the concept of a circular bioeconomy
sets the scene for more renewable systems (Salvador et al., 2021b). In
this context, the primary sector, especially agricultural systems, play a
major role in a circular bioeconomy (Teigiserova et al., 2021).

* Corresponding author. 598 D. Pedro II St., Postal Code: 87.200-055, Cianorte, Paraná, Brazil.
E-mail addresses: smbdamasceno@uem.br (S.M.B.D. Barcelos), salvador.rodrigors@gmail.com (R. Salvador), murillo.vetroni@gmail.com (M.V. Barros),
acfrancisco@utfpr.edu.br (A.C. de Francisco), mgg@det.uminho.pt (G. Guedes).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113373
Received 29 April 2021; Received in revised form 15 July 2021; Accepted 22 July 2021
Available online 28 July 2021
0301-4797/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al.
The defining elements of a circular bioeconomy are the production of
goods and the offer of services, based on bioresources, with high added-
value, and the planning on the use of bioresources/biomaterials in a
cascaded way (and upcycling whenever possible) seeking to minimize
resource input and the leakage of these resources to the natural envi­
ronment (Salvador et al., 2021b). Initiatives to advance the circular
bioeconomy have been launched worldwide, especially in Europe (Eu­
ropean Commission, 2018), however, with the coming down of
geographical barriers for businesses, the largest bioeconomies have a
key role in fomenting and promoting more circular bioeconomy-based
businesses. On that note, the bioeconomy in Brazil has been said to be
in the top three sectors holding the greatest opportunities for advancing
the circular economy in the country (EMF, 2017).
In that context, one large contributor to the bioeconomy in Brazil is
the production of silk cocoons. It is important not only because Brazil is
one of the largest producers of silk yarn in the world, but also because
the majority of the Brazilian production of silk yarn is subject to export.
Brazil ranked fifth among the largest global silk producers in 2019
(World Atlas, 2021). The sericulture industry, introduced in the country
at the beginning of the 20th century, has become an important
agro-industrial activity, creating job opportunities in rural areas and in
the industry (spinning) (Porto, 2014), and currently the State of Paraná
is the largest national producer.
Silk production in Brazil is concentrated on exports (Barcelos et al.,
2020), and that powers economic factors. It is also worth mentioning the
economic and social importance of silk production in Brazil, and its
impacts on the environment, and, thus, its potential for a more sus­
tainable local and global development (Giacomin et al., 2017), by
providing high-quality and sustainable raw materials for the textile in­
dustry (Pennacchio, 2016).
In Brazil, the production of silk cocoons is an integrated activity,
between the sericulturists (farm) and the silk yarn manufacturer (in­
dustry), and embeds from the cultivation of mulberry trees (Morus sp.)
(to feed the silkworms), to the rearing of silkworms until cocoons are
ready to be sent for the manufacturing phase (Garay et al., 2014). In this
integrated system, the spinning company (industry) seeks local pro­
ducers to form partnerships, providing the mulberry stems (for the
cultivation of mulberry trees), as well as the silkworms to partner seri­
culturists, and guarantees the purchase of cocoons produced by seri­
culturists at market price (Santos et al., 2016).
That said, a couple of studies can already be found in the existing
literature contextualizing the value recovery of byproducts and wastes
in the production of silk. Bhavsar et al. (2020), for instance, reported on
the development of a new opportunity for the coloration of silk fabrics
using a protein extracted from the silkworm pupae extracted from the
cocoons during the yarn manufacturing process. Orlandi et al. (2020), in
turn, demonstrated that the wastewater derived from the silk sericin can
be used for pharmaceutical and cosmetic ends due to its range of bio­
logical properties. Nonetheless, as it can be observed in the existing
literature, opportunities for a circular bioeconomy seem to have been
explored only at the manufacturing phase of the life cycle of silk. It is
argued that further opportunities for increased circularity need to be
investigated at the agricultural phase, especially at the farm, which is
where the characteristics of silk production can be managed and
adjusted.
Given this scenario, this study was guided by the following question:
how to create value in the production of silk cocoons by promoting a
circular bioeconomy? Therefore, this article aimed to identify oppor­
tunities for creating value by internalizing flows in the production of silk
cocoons by promoting a circular bioeconomy. The novelty of this study
lies in the very essence of advancing the existing knowledge on the
circularity of production of silk cocoons, by determining the circularity
of said production system and proposing measures to internalize mate­
rial and energy flows, thus adding value to the activities performed by
sericulturists. By reaching the proposed goal, this research contributed
to both theory and practice. Theoretical contributions comprised
2
Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373
deepening the (scarce) existing knowledge on the circularity of the
production of silk cocoons (especially in Brazil, but also on a worldwide
context), and practical contributions comprised unveiling opportunities
for value-added initiatives, including a biowaste-to-bioenergy route and
the enshrining of the local economy. Moreover, it can also enlighten
governments with regard to deploying adequate policies to advance a
circular bioeconomy in the sector (Stegmann et al., 2020).
2. Methods
2.1. Calculating circularity
In Brazil, circular economy approaches have been taking place rather
slowly, but gradually. Circular economy initiatives began to appear in
the National Solid Waste Policy (Brazil, 2010), and more recently with
the update of the ISO TC 323 circular economy (ISO, 2018), considering
a life cycle perspective. To Therond (2017), the performance of circular
economy is evaluated using a life cycle perspective of the entire pro­
duction system.
To propose actions that enable internalizing flows and increasing
circularity, firstly, one needs to identify how circular the system is. The
steps to determine the circularity of a system and to generate a circular
graph were based on the study of Barros (2019), which proposed a tool
to assess the circularity of organizations and processes. The circularity
indicators were developed based on the opportunity to measure circu­
larity in an organization that presents material and energy flows, being
able to enter, exit and/or circulate within the organization (UNEP,
2021). The tool is also available on a open online platform (agro­
circlewins.com.br), where the user subscribes, enters the required data,
and a complete circularity report is generated, with results regarding the
circularity of the organization and the processes, and a circular graph
(material and/or energy).
The tool allows determining the circularity of each process and also
for the organization as a whole. This can assist the decision maker in
identifying less circular processes and taking steps towards enhancing
circular routes. In order to generate the results in terms of the percent
circularity and the circular graph, one needs to provide a few inputs,
such as process name, activity name, material and energy name; origin
and destination of each flow, and; mass (g, kg, ton) (for material) and/or
energy (kW, kWh, J) (for energy) specification. To that end, a data
collection form can be used, which can be seen in the next section.
2.2. Contextualizing the region under study and data collection
The property that was the object of this research is located in the
region known as “the silk valley” in Brazil. The silk valley is situated in
the state of Paraná, in southern Brazil. The region is favorable (e.g., in
terms of climate) to the production of silk cocoons, thus being the heart
of the production of silk cocoons in the country. The rearing of silk­
worms takes place during nine to ten months in the year approximately.
Production is halted during the winter months, which is the time win­
dow during which there is no production of mulberry leaves to feed the
silkworms.
The rural property investigated is considered a “Reference Unit” in
the production of silk cocoons, for making use of recommended prac­
tices and being a reference to the silk cocoon production system, with
the assistance of IDR-IAPAR-EMATER - Rural Development Institute of
Paraná - Paraná Agronomic Institute - Company for Technical Assistance
and Rural Extension. In the state of Paraná, 25 Reference Units have
been identified (Oswaldo da Silva Pádua - Agricultural Technician -
State Coordinator of the Sericulture Program. Information provided by
telephone), located in the municipalities of Alto Paraná, Altônia,
Astorga, Cruzeiro do Sul, Ivaté, Iretama, Indianópolis, Luziânia, Man­
daguaçu, Nova Esperança, Santa Cruz do Monte Castelo, Tapira,
Tuneiras do Oeste, and Xambrê. The rural property investigated in this
research is representative of the practices in all of the remaining 24
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al.
Reference Units, producing silk cocoons during ten months each year,
and it is located in the municipality of Indianópolis. The monitoring of
the Reference Units has been happening since 2014, with the goal of
promoting a sustainable rural development, expanding sericulture to
other areas, increasing income by promoting a more qualified produc­
tion system, making it competitive, and improving the quality of life of
farmers’ families.
For data collection, a form was used (see Barros, 2019). The infor­
mation was collected on-site, with the property owner. Data collection
was based on the existing processes at the rural property, such as mul­
berry cultivation, silkworm rearing, and the energy network. These
processes were defined in a reference Scenario 1 (S1), reflecting current
practices. An alternate future scenario, Scenario 2 (S2), was proposed,
being a projection of potential improvements in the processes at the
rural property (and in the collaboration with nearby partners) in order
to increase the internal value of the production system. Scenario 2
promoted more circular routes, increasing circularity, and avoiding
external inputs/outputs, hence seeking to internalize flows. In Scenario
2, new practices regarding the engagement with reverse logistics, the
establishment of an agroindustrial cooperative, and the use of a bio­
digester, were proposed (the circularity results of the two scenarios are
presented in section 3). All information about data collection can be seen
in Table A.1 (Appendix A). The material specification represents the
quantity measured in mass (kg/year). Energy corresponds to the mea­
surement of electricity (kW.h/year). However, a few materials needed to
be converted to a mass unit, e.g., water (density: 1.000 kg/m3), form­
aldehyde (density: 815 kg/m3), herbicide (density: 1.151 kg/m3), and
biogas (to generate 1 kWh of energy (Coldebella, 2006)).
2.3. System boundaries of the case study
The circularity of the production of silk cocoons is determined within
different boundaries (or levels).
For Scenario 1: on level 1, only the activities within the rural prop­
erty are taken into consideration, where everything that originates from
or goes to the outside of the property is called “the external”. Scenario 1
only accounted for level 1, as there are no other processes beyond the
limits of the rural property, e.g., it does not include neighboring rural
properties, or an agro-industrial cooperative.
For Scenario 2: the boundaries for level 1 are the same as for Scenario
1. On level 2, it is considered the rural property (producer of silk co­
coons), its immediate surrounding partners (such as neighboring prop­
erties that participate in energy or material exchanges), and an agro-
industrial cooperative.
For designing Scenario 2, a few assumptions, based on the existing
literature, were made, as follows:
● Yield of biogas from silkworm excrement: 105.81 m3/Mg, with a
methane content of 50.4 % (Lochynska and Frankowski, 2018);
● Yield of biogas from green mass waste: 125.59 m3/Mg, with a
methane content of 52.4 % (Lochynska and Frankowski, 2018);
● The yield of digestate was calculated considering the remaining mass
after production of biogas;
● Density of biogas: 1.11 kg/m3 (Chandra et al., 2011);
● Yield of electricity from biogas: 0.475 m3 of biogas to produce 1 kWh
of electricity (Coldebella et al., 2006).
3. Closing material and energy flows in the production of silk
cocoons
The results of this study are divided into Scenario 1 (current state)
(section 3.1), and Scenario 2 (future state) (section 3.2).
3.1. Scenario 1
Initially, Scenario 1 presents the processes in the rural property, such
3
Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373
as the cultivation of mulberry trees and silkworm rearing, and their
respective material circularity (in terms of mass). Table 1 shows the
circularity (%) per process at level 1.
The process named ‘rural property’ represents flows of materials that
remain within the limits of the property (see Table A.1.), e.g., some
green mass (mulberry leaves and branches) is lost during the transport of
mulberry leaves from the field to the location where they are stored,
falling on the ground and being left in the mulberry field. In addition,
the packages of formaldehyde are kept in the farm (accumulated in a
shed) for use as storage and transportation of liquids (e.g. water). The
water used for all processes on the property comes from an artesian well.
Total circularity for level 1 is 74.19 %. This means that most of the
materials are circulating within the farm, and only 25.81 % of the ma­
terials come from or are sent to the outside of the property. In this sense,
Fig. 1 shows the circular graph in terms of material flows.
The circular graph presents the routes of the materials inside (silk­
worm rearing, mulberry crop, rural property) and outside the rural
property (the external). It shows flows going from one process to another
(origin-destination). The greater the thickness of the arrow, the more
material (kg/year) is being moved.
The external is highlighted in gray color. The largest material flow
occurs from the external to the mulberry crop; these materials can be
seen in Table A.1 and include, e.g., limestone, phosphorus, mulberry
branches, herbicide, packaging, fertilizer, and water. The largest mate­
rial flows are fertilizer 59,999.85 kg/year (from the external to the
mulberry crop); green mass (mulberry leaves and branches) 46,178.10
kg/year (from the mulberry crop to the silkworm rearing), and; green
mass waste 20,122.20 kg/year (from the mulberry crop to the property).
Furthermore, Fig. 2 presents the circular graph in terms of energy for
level 1.
Electricity consumption in the rural property, for the production of
silk cocoons, accounts for 450 kWh/year. All of this energy comes from
the external (energy network). Therefore, the circularity in terms of
energy at the rural property is null.
Seeking energy sufficiency is a critical issue for the property. Ini­
tiatives to try to internalize energy flows are suggested. In addition,
launching such initiatives might also increase circularity on the property
to rates above 74.19 % as in the current scenario (for circularity of
material flows). Therefore, the future scenario (Scenario 2) presents
strategies based on initiatives to internalize materials and energy flows,
promoting circular economy practices, as can be seen in the next section.
3.2. Scenario 2
Scenario 2 is an extension of Scenario 1 with the addition of a few
processes, such as the establishment and use of a community bio­
digester, along with an electric motor generator, also the engagement
with reverse logistics (for packaging), and the establishment of an
agroindustrial cooperative. Scenario 2 brings new opportunities to close
the material and energy flows circulating within the farm, in an attempt
to increase circularity and thus make the business more sustainable (see
e.g., UNEP, 2021). Therefore, Table 2 shows the circularity (%) per
process for material and energy at levels 1 and 2.
Scenario 2 presents new processes that go beyond the property
limits, e.g., reverse logistics and the agroindustrial cooperative. The
ideal of the tool is to analyze the last and outermost level, as that is
Table 1
Circularity (%) calculations for processes and organization at level
1.
Process Level 1 (rural property)
Silkworm rearing 94.46 %
Mulberry crop 60.65 %
Rural property 100.00 %
Total circularity 74.19 %
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al. Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373

always the most comprehensive, which includes all the stipulated limits.
In this case, level 2 in terms of material is 98.42 % circular, and in terms
of energy it is 100 % circular.
The circularity of mulberry crops is 98.26 %, as some materials come
from the external, such as mulberry stems, herbicide, packaging, and
water. The same occurs with silkworm rearing (95.39 %), with material
flows originating in the external, such as the very silkworms, and water;
and also destined to the external, as unreelable silk (anafaia), and silk
cocoons (final products).
Fig. 3 shows the circular graph in terms of material flows for level 2
in Scenario 2.
The largest flows in terms of material (mass) observed in Fig. 3 are:
from the biodigester to the mulberry crop (59,999.85 kg/year of bio­
fertilizer), from the mulberry crop to the silkworm rearing [46,178.10
kg/year of green mass (mulberry leaves and stems) from the rearing of
silkworms to the biodigester (148.50 kg/year of kraft paper, 28,800.00
kg/year of rearing bed waste (branches), and 7200.00 kg/year of rearing
bed waste (excrement))].
The biodigester was used in the transformation of organic matter into
Fig. 1. Circular graph in terms of material flows for level 1. biofertilizer and biogas. The inputs for the biodigester consist of rearing
bed waste, kraft paper (for covering the rearing beds), and green mass
waste (from the mulberry crop). As output, the process generates bio­
fertilizer that is destined to the mulberry crop (59,999.85 kg/year) and
the remaining (6212.30 kg/year) goes to the agroindustrial cooperative.
Another output is biogas, which has three destinations. First,
1051.58 kg/year go to the electric motor generator (for electricity
production). After the anaerobic digestion of the wastes is made by the
biodigester, the decomposition of chemical energy generates the biogas
and is transformed into mechanical energy, which ends up activating the
generator that allows the production of electricity (see, e.g., Kivaisi and
Rubindamayugi, 1996; Wang et al., 2014). This energy is clean,
renewable, and can be a viable economic option. Second, 18.00 kg/year
go to the silkworm rearing (replacing liquefied petroleum gas), and
third, 9.353.57 kg/year go to the agro-industrial cooperative (where it
can have various uses, e.g. heat generation, cooking gas, biomethane).
In terms of energy flows, Fig. 4 presents the circular graph for level 2
in Scenario 2.
In terms of electricity, in Scenario 2 it was possible to make it 100 %
circular through the implementation of the biodigester and the electric
motor generator. The advantage of generating agricultural waste from
the rural environment is that this material can be used as a raw material
Fig. 2. Circular graph in terms of energy flows for level 1.
for the biodigester (Aljerf, 2018). In this case, the process produced
1051.58 kg/year of biogas destined to the electric motor generator to
Table 2 generate 450.00 kWh/year. This amount of electricity was enough to
Circularity (%) calculations for processes and the organization for material and supply the entire silkworm rearing process for the rural property.
energy at levels 1 and 2.
Process Material Energy

Level 1 Level 2 (rural Level 1 Level 2 (rural

(rural property, (rural property,
property) reverse logistics, property) reverse logistics,
and and
agroindustrial agroindustrial
cooperative) cooperative)

Mulberry crop 78.21 % 98.26 % – –

Biodigester 88.29 % 100.00 % – –
Silkworm 94.63 % 95.39 % – –
rearing
Electric motor – – 100.00 % 100.00 %
generator
Reverse – 100.00 % – –
logistics
Agroindustrial – 100.00 % – –
cooperative
Total 85.51 % 98.42 % 100.00 % 100.00 %
circularity

Fig. 3. Circular graph in terms of material flows for level 2.

4
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al. Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373

Fig. 5. Circularity and sustainability implications of proposed measures.

bio-fertilizers, making the production chain more efficient and cleaner.

Parallel to the growing resource consumption is the production of an
increasing amount of waste (Lee at el., 2021). Therefore, circular
economy actions can reduce the generation of disposable animal and
agricultural waste (Donner et al., 2021), redirect outbound materials to
Fig. 4. Circular graph in terms of energy flows for level 2. a more sustainable valorization (Donner et al., 2020) in agroindustrial
cooperatives (see section 4.1.2), generate clean energy, produce
Therefore, no amount of electricity comes from outside the property, bio-fertilizer and fuel of renewable origin (Kapoor et al., 2020) using
making the property, in terms of energy, completely circular. biodigesters (see section 4.1.3), and make the production chain more
sustainable (Kokkinos et al., 2020), by using reverse logistics practices,
for instance (see section 4.1.1).
4. Opportunities for adding circular value by internalizing
Bio-based clusters can be formed in the region to strategize the
material and energy flows
collection of waste, which is feedstock for the production of bioenergy
and biofertilizer. Those feedstocks would include the wastes of rearing
From the changes implemented in Scenario 2 (compared to Scenario
beds, and the agricultural waste (green mass left in mulberry fields), and
1), one can see a considerable increase in the overall circularity, from
they would enable the production of bioenergy and biofertilizer under
74.19 % to 85.51 % in terms of material flows (on level 1), and from 0 %
the management of the cooperative, thus establishing biorefineries.
to 100.00 % in terms of energy flows, for level 1. For level 2, it is possible
Moreover, as later addressed in section 4.3, effective policies could
to reach 98.42 % and 100.00 % of circularity for material and energy,
foster the creation and development of such bioclusters, and the use of
respectively.
innovation to produce other high value-added bio-based products.
The changes proposed to the system as a whole in order to add cir­
cular value, and which were responsible for the results seen in scenario
4.1. Sustainability impacts of the proposed measures for adding circular
2, can be summarized in three overall measures, as listed hereafter:
value
Engaging with reverse logistics practices (plastic packaging).
Currently, the plastic packages of formaldehyde are kept in the property
4.1.1. Engaging with reverse logistics practices
and reused for storing and transporting water; however, they should be
Local circularity. The return, upwards in the supply chain, of the
returned to the responsible stakeholder in the supply chain for adequate
plastic packages of formaldehyde (which is used as sanitizer) decreases
disposal. This is what is proposed in Scenario 2.
the overall circularity of the system, as it then leaves the system
Establishing a local agroindustrial cooperative. Currently, the
(considering both levels 1 and 2).
materials necessary for the production of silk cocoons are acquired from
Economic. Considering the boundaries of levels 1 and 2, this mea­
the silk thread manufacturer and/or from independent stores and
sure does not seem to have economic implications, as the property
properties (e.g. herbicides and fertilizers). In Scenario 2, it is proposed
owners could take the empty packages to a location indicated by the
that a local cooperative be established in order to prioritize the local
local cooperative when they travel to buy the materials needed for the
economy and resources.
rearing of silkworms.
Building community biodigesters. Currently, the rearing bed
Environmental. Environmental impacts can be said to be positive,
waste is dragged from the rearing beds and simply laid on the mulberry
as those packages are likely to have remnants of the products, and the
fields. In Scenario 2, it is suggested that a community biodigester be
toxic substances contained in them might cause a range of impacts to the
built, which could be managed by the local agroindustrial cooperative,
environment, depending on how these packages are handled at the
and that the wastes (from the rearing beds and the wastes left behind on
property. Nonetheless, further investigation (e.g. conducting a life cycle
the mulberry field - such as mulberry leaves and branches) be used to
assessment) is needed to measure the potential environmental impacts.
produce biogas and biofertilizer (digestate).
Social. The social impacts can be considered positive, because as
Those measures, on top of helping increase circularity, result in
mentioned above, the reuse of packaging that probably contains rem­
environmental, economic, and social implications, as presented in Fig. 5
nants of products and toxic substances, can cause a series of impacts on
and discussed hereafter.
human health, such as intoxication and allergies. Knowing that the
The implications of the proposed measures towards a more circular
formaldehyde has a carcinogenic potential, its packaging should never
bioeconomy shown in Fig. 5 can be related to a more sustainable
be reused by farmers or for animal care. In addition, reverse logistics is a
development in rural properties and can contribute to greater innova­
practice that helps to keep the place (property) clean, promoting a
tion and technology advancement. The inclusion of circular economy
healthier environment for its residents and aiding the non-proliferation
practices in agribusinesses can foster initiatives aimed at generating
of rodents among other silkworm predators, since the property accu­
electricity through renewable sources, such as biogas, and at the same
mulates packaging in a shed near the cocoon rearing shed.
time, take advantage of animal (silkworm litter), forestry (mulberry
stems remaining as rearing bed waste), and agricultural waste (branches
left in the field when harvesting mulberry leaves) for the production of

5
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al.
4.1.2. Establishing a local agroindustrial cooperative
Local circularity. Establishing a cooperative certainly helps take
better advantage of the locally available resources. With the establish­
ment of a local cooperative, the rural producers could acquire materials
used in the cultivation of mulberry trees (e.g. limestone, phosphorus,
and the biofertilizer - see section 5.1.3) and in the rearing of silkworms
(e.g. lime, chlorine, gas - in this case biogas -, formaldehyde, kraft paper,
and even electricity) from the cooperative; thus increasing the local
circularity of resources and contributing to the local economy.
Economic. Economic advantages gauged from this initiative include
the potentially lower costs for all the materials acquired locally, due to
simplified logistics. On top of cutting logistic costs, a local cooperative
would enable supporting local businesses and seeking better deals (e.g.
bulk purchases), thus promoting local/regional development. With
lower overall costs, the rural producers might be able to save to improve
their working conditions and/or quality of life, hence contributing to a
better distribution of income.
Environmental. As in the economic advantages, reducing the need
for transportation might trigger environmental benefits. If acquiring
resources locally, the need for transportation from long distances is
reduced, and so are the environmental impacts related to such
transportation.
Social. It provides sericulturists with greater autonomy and
decision-making power, since they are totally dependent on the silk
spinning company, which is currently the only one in the country. As
previously mentioned, by producing their own energy, through biogas,
they would not have the energy bill weighing on their monthly expenses,
for example, being able to channel these resources to their health, ed­
ucation of children, family leisure, improvement of equipment and in­
vestment in technology for the production of cocoons. In other words,
the establishment of a cooperative can bring many other benefits, such
as the generation of extra income through the transformation of second-
quality cocoons into decorative products, home textiles, and even some
clothing and fashion accessories, due to their cooperative members, and
it might also encourage family succession in the business.
4.1.3. Building community biodigesters
Local circularity. In fact, establishing a biodigester on a farm (or in
the agroindustrial cooperative) can help increase local circularity. The
biodigester is a key point in transforming waste to energy, a product
with high added-value (see e.g., Zanin and Bagatini, 2012). In the case
study, the inputs of materials such as rearing bed waste, kraft paper, and
green mass waste could generate biogas and biofertilizer.
Economic. In this case, the economic aspects depend on other fac­
tors that go beyond the limits of this analysis. An economic analysis with
payback, internal rate of return, and cost-benefit considering different
types of technologies is necessary to assess the economic feasibility of
the process. Another factor taken into account is the best location for
building the biodigester (see e.g., Ma et al., 2005; Villamar et al., 2016;
Rodríguez et al., 2017; Laasasenaho et al., 2019; Yalcinkaya, 2020),
which depends on several factors stipulated by the agroindustrial
cooperative, such as proximity to roads, rivers, pipelines, and amount of
raw material generated at each property.
Environmental. By means of the biodigester, a series of wastes are
not disposed of incorrectly in the environment and turn into environ­
mentally friendly inputs to the process of anaerobic digestion. The
products generated by the biodigester are aligned with renewable and
clean materials/energy, which are (i) biogas, that can be used to produce
electricity (renewable energy), as cooking gas (replacing liquefied pe­
troleum gas), or can be upgraded into biomethane through a process of
purification (being able to replace diesel and gasoline in vehicles, for
instance); and (ii) biofertilizer (replacing chemical/mineral fertilizers).
Social. From a social perspective one can cite the long-term health
effects that can be gauged when comparing energy being generated from
non-renewable sources against energy generated from biowastes.
Moreover, reducing monthly expenses with (for instance) energy, fuels
6
Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373
(ethanol, diesel, gasoline), liquefied petroleum gas (for domestic use and
cocoon production) has a significant improvement in the quality of life
of workers.
4.2. Contributions to the UN’s sustainable development goals
The results of this study contribute to some of the UN’s SDGs, as
mentioned hereafter.
SDG 2: zero hunger. Agriculture is an important sector of subsistence,
due to food production. By 2050 the world’s population is expected to
reach the figure of nine billion people (UN, 2019), and, with that, re­
searchers point to an increase of up to 110 % in global crop demand by
2050 compared to 2005 (Tilman et al., 2011). Moreover, approximately
10 % of the global population was exposed to severe food insecurity in
2017 (Ten Berge et al., 2019). Therefore, a strong performance in the
agri-food sector is necessary to provide adequate, healthy and nutritious
food to the global population and the principles of circular economy can
help to achieve this goal.
SDG 7: clean energy. The establishment of community biodigesters,
in the Brazilian Silk Valley, enables producing electricity from wastes
and contributes to providing more renewable energy to the rural prop­
erties in the region.
SDG 9: industry, innovation and infrastructure. Establishing a local
cooperative and building community biodigesters in the Brazilian Silk
Valley contributes to renewing the infrastructure (and the business
structure) of the rural workers (silkworm rearers/sericulturists).
SDG 11: sustainable cities and communities. As it could be seen in
section 4.1, the measures proposed to increase circular value also
contribute to increasing the sustainability (see Fig. 5) of the rural
community in the Silk Valley.
SDG 12: responsible consumption and production. The production of
silk cocoons in a more sustainable way (see section 4.1) can contribute
to reducing the emissions to the environment of the silk yarn produced
in Brazil, thus encouraging a more sustainable production and
consumption.
SDG 13: climate action. Promoting the local economy via the
establishment of a local agroindustrial cooperative might simplify lo­
gistic operations and thus reduce the overall environmental impacts of
transportation. Moreover, substituting the electricity from the local
network with the energy produced from waste might reduce the carbon
emissions related to energy production.
Moreover, as an overarching take-away, it could be seen, mainly
from the establishment of the reverse logistics for plastic packaging, that
greater circularity (or retention of resources in a place) is not necessarily
better, be it from a circular, environmental, economic, or social
perspective. Greater circularity is many times desired in order to slow,
narrow, and/or close flows of resources; however, it is necessary to
include sustainability assessments (especially from an environmental
point of view) when designing or proposing more circular systems.
The measures proposed and simulated in Scenario 2 are not yet in
place. It is necessary to highlight that establishing a local cooperative, as
well as building community biodigesters might require governmental
incentive and financing, hence public policies could drive such devel­
opment, as addressed in the next section.
4.3. Policy implications and further opportunities for circular businesses
Individual rural property owners might not have the economic
power to make the investments necessary to establish the infrastructure
needed to produce and use the energy from the waste derived from
sericulture, even if organized in small groups. Therefore, it is necessary
that local, regional, and national governments firstly recognize the value
that is being lost (in economic, environmental, and social terms), and
join the local community to propose and implement policies that favor
the establishment of more circular practices, help establish new busi­
nesses, and take better advantage of local resources.
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al.
Moreover, in case the properties have biogas or energy surpluses,
there might be legal requirements to be met in order to sell or trade said
surpluses. Energy surpluses could be sold and incorporated into the local
energy network. Biogas surpluses could be sold and injected into gas
networks or sold to nearby properties or establishments either as biogas
or biomethane. Nonetheless, for biogas to be upgraded into biomethane,
it needs to be purified, which makes for another investment in the
respective infrastructure. All of this also calls for new policies, including
financial incentives and tax exemptions, which take into consideration
the externalities carried by new circular practices, such as the valuation
of the local economy, and the trade-offs of energy-related greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions from the use of bioenergy (when compared to the
energy mix delivered locally).
Further business opportunities can be spotted in the use of (so-called)
second-quality cocoons for the artisanal production of textile and
fashion products as well as decoration (e.g., embroidery, scarfs, home-
textile). Also on that note, the pupae (from inside the cocoons) could
be used for producing fish feed (where the pupae is commercialized
either fresh or dried and processed). Nonetheless, for these opportunities
to come true, there is an inherent need for capacity building (e.g., ed­
ucation and training of personnel) and for awareness to be raised so that
new markets are unveiled.
There are a few challenges to be overcome, in terms of policy mak­
ing, in order to foster circular businesses within the scope of this
research. The challenges and insights on how they could be overcome
through increased policy support are presented hereafter.
Lack of awareness. The general population, local businesses, and
governments lack awareness about what circular economy and circular
bioeconomy are, and how they can help advance the local economy and
contribute to a more sustainable development. Policy measures could be
drawn in order to educate the population, by means of awareness raising
campaigns, introducing the concepts and common practices related to
circular economy and circular bioeconomy.
Lack of skills and expertise. New practices will be needed to take
better advantage of the bioresources available, therefore, new policies
could encourage the collaboration of local businesses and rural prop­
erties with (for instance) local universities to provide education and
training.
Lack of knowledge on routes for valorization of bioproducts.
Along with the awareness of common practices and the education and
training on circular economy and circular bioeconomy, incentives for
innovation could boost the development of novel paths for valorizing
bioresources in the context of producing silk cocoons.
Lack of support from the government. Governments need to be
closer to the community and get to know the local needs in order to
listen, dialogue and propose effective policies.
Lack of capital, general infrastructure, and storage capabilities.
There is a need for capital investment for the new business practices to
take place in the context of a circular bioeconomy in the production of
silk cocoons. Governments should develop policies that incentivize and
support the establishment and development of these new businesses by
means of financial incentives and tax exemption policies.
Low readiness level of locally available technology. Locally
available technology might not yet have reached the level of develop­
ment necessary for an effective circular bioeconomy in the context of
producing silk cocoons. Therefore, governments could incentivize the
development of other actors in the supply chain in order to create a more
resilient and robust value chain, also by creating policy incentives.
Lack of collaboration. Individual owners of business or rural
properties might not be aware of possible partnerships or be hesitant to
engage in collaborative efforts. Therefore, the incentive policies to be
developed by governments could include the premise of prioritizing
consortia over individuals, whenever appropriate.
Therefore, identifying circularity in the agricultural production
chain can make it more efficient and clean. It should also be noted that
development in the field can foster increased energy efficiency, better
7
Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373
management of animal and agricultural waste and, consequently, costs
can be reduced. Such approaches can drive the technological progress of
rural units, enabling the transition to a more sustainable path in the
medium and long terms. However, it could be seen that the imple­
mentation of governmental policies could thrust the development of a
circular bioeconomy in the context of the production of silk cocoons.
5. Conclusions
This study sought to identify opportunities for creating value by
internalizing flows in the production of silk cocoons by promoting a
circular bioeconomy. The production of silk cocoons in Brazil has
contributed significantly to the sustainable development of the regions
that produce them, involving inputs and outputs of materials and energy
that have shaped the environmental, social, and economic impacts of
said production. The design of a more circular system in the production
of silk cocoons can contribute positively to a circular bioeconomy in this
agribusiness. Scenario 1 (current state) showed a material circularity of
74.19 %, while Scenario 2 (future state) showed a potential for 98.42 %
for material circularity (when including the suggested proposals/mea­
sures). It is noted that the increase in circularity impacts the three areas
of sustainability adding circular value. The silk produced from such a
system carries with it that added-circular-value, which accompanies the
entire silk value chain.
Furthermore, a circular bioeconomy in the context of the production
of silk cocoons can help achieve some of the sustainable development
goals (SDG) proposed by the United Nations, such as SDG 2 (zero hun­
ger), SDG 7 (clean energy), SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infra­
structure), SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG 12
(responsible consumption and production), and SDG 13 (climate
action).
Limitations to this study should be mentioned. The yield of biogas
and digestate from the input of bioresources (given the use of green mass
from mulberry waste as well as from silkworm litter), the yield of
electricity from biogas, the methane content in the biogas, the density of
biogas, were taken from the literature. Moreover, the aspects that need
to be accounted for when determining the location of the biodigester
were not discussed, and the economic aspects, such as costs for the
installation and maintenance of the biodigester and the motor generator
were not considered in this study.
Therefore, it is worth emphasizing the importance and need for an
assessment of the economic feasibility of the measures proposed, espe­
cially the establishment of the community biodigesters, in addition to
the involvement of public policies, as well as including sustainability
assessments in this proposed system. In this sense, concrete actions need
to be developed to make agribusinesses more productive and sustain­
able, reducing rural poverty, and increasing the resilience of the rural
population when faced with threats and crises. Agribusinesses comprise
an important sector in terms of subsistence, with regard to the produc­
tion of food, feed, and basic supplies. For those aims to be met and
obstacles to be faced, robust techniques need to be used in agribusi­
nesses, in which a circular bioeconomy plays a major role.
Credit author statement
Silvia M. B. D. Barcelos: Conceptualization, Investigation, Meth­
odology, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Rodrigo
Salvador: Methodology, Data curation, Investigation, Writing - original
draft, Writing - review & editing. Murillo V. Barros: Methodology, Data
curation, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review &
editing. Antonio C. De Francisco: Conceptualization, Supervision.
Graça Guedes: Conceptualization, Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al. Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373

interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Editor of the Journal of Envi­
ronmental Management for the efficient handling of the manuscript and
the reviewers for the valuable comments helping to improve on the
earlier version of the paper.
This research was financially supported by the Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance
Code 001, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tec­
nológico - Brasil (CNPq) (Sponsored by CNPq 310686/2017–2), and
Fundação Araucária (Support for Scientific and Technological Devel­
opment of Paraná) by means of CP20/2013, Doctoral Program in Textile
Engineering in partnership with a Foreign Institution (Uminho/UEM/
UTFPR).

Appendix A. Inputs and Outputs of Material and Energy

Table A.1
Inputs and Outputs of Material and Energy per Process

Inputs Outputs

Supplier Material/Energy Specification Material/Energy Specification Client

Process name: Mulberry crop

S1: External Limestone 3500.10 kg/year Green mass (mulberry leaves and 46,178.10 kg/ S1: Silkworm rearing
S2: Agroindustrial stems) year S2: Silkworm rearing
cooperative
S1: External Phosphorus 49.95 kg/year Green mass waste 20,122.20 kg/ S1: Property
S2: Agroindustrial year S2: Biodigester
cooperative
S1: External Mulberry Stems 4.05 kg/year Packaging 1.04 kg/year S1: Property
S2: External S2: Reverse Logistics
S1: External Herbicide 20.72 kg/year
S2: External
S1: External Packaging 1.04 kg/year
S2: External
S1: External C1 Fertilizer 59,999.85 kg/
S2: Biodigester C2 Biofertilizer year
S1: External Water 2790.00 kg/year
S2: External
Process name: Silkworm rearing
S1: External Lime 180.00 kg/year Packaging (formaldehyde) 1.00 kg/year S1: Property
S2: Agroindustrial S2: Reverse Logistics
cooperative
S1: External Chlorine 18.00 kg/year Packaging (raffia sack, lime, and 146.99 kg/year S1: External
S2: Agroindustrial chlorine) S2: Reverse Logistics
cooperative
S1: External C1 Liquefied petroleum gas 18.00 kg/year Unreelable silk (anafaia) 27.00 kg/year S1: External
S2: Biodigester C2 Biogas S2: External
S1: External Formaldehyde 14.67 kg/year Kraft paper 148.50 kg/year S1: External
S2: Agroindustrial S2: Biodigester
cooperative
S1: Mulberry crop Green mass (mulberry leaves) 46,178.10 kg/ Rearing bed waste (branches) 28,800.00 kg/ S1: Mulberry crop
S2: Mulberry crop year year S2: Biodigester
S1: External Kraft paper 148.50 kg/year Rearing bed waste (silkworm litter/ 7200.00 kg/year S1: Mulberry crop
S2: Agroindustrial excrement) S2: Biodigester
cooperative
S1: External Silkworms 40.50 kg/year Cocoons 3424.50 kg/year S1: External
S2: External S2: External
S1: External Water 522.20 kg/year
S2: External
S1: External Packaging (formaldehyde) 1.00 kg/year
S2: Agroindustrial
cooperative
S1: External Packaging (raffia sack, lime, and 146.99 kg/year
S2: Agroindustrial chlorine)
cooperative
S1: Energy network Electricity 450.00 kWh/
S2: Electric motor year
generator
Process name: Biodigester
S2: Silkworm rearing Rearing bed waste (branches) 28,800.00 kg/ Biogas 1051.58 kg/year S2: Electric motor
year generator
S2: Silkworm rearing Rearing bed waste (silkworm litter/ 7200.00 kg/year Biogas 18.00 kg/year S2: Silkworm rearing
excrement)
S2: Silkworm rearing Kraft paper 148.50 kg/year Biogas 9353.57 kg/year S2: Agroindustrial
cooperative
S2: Mulberry crop Green mass waste 20,122.20 kg/ Biofertilizer 59,999.85 kg/ S2: Mulberry crop
year year
Biofertilizer 6212.30 kg/year
(continued on next page)

8
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al. Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373

Table A.1 (continued )

Inputs Outputs

Supplier Material/Energy Specification Material/Energy Specification Client

S2: Agroindustrial
cooperative
Process name: Electric motor generator
S2: Biodigester Biogas 1051.58 kg/year Electricity 450.00 kWh/ S2: Silkworm rearing
year

References manner. J. Environ. Manag. 279, 111822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jenvman.2020.111822.
Kivaisi, A.K., Rubindamayugi, M.S.T., 1996. The potential of agro-industrial residues for
Aldieri, L., Makkonen, T., Vinci, C.P., 2020. Environmental knowledge spillovers and
production of biogas and electricity in Tanzania. Renew. Energy 9 (1–4), 917–921.
productivity: a patent analysis for large international firms in the energy, water and
https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1481(96)88429-1.
land resources fields. Resour. Pol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Kokkinos, K., Karayannis, V., Moustakas, K., 2020. Circular bio-economy via energy
resourpol.2020.101877.
transition supported by Fuzzy Cognitive Map modeling towards sustainable low-
Aljerf, L., 2018. Data of thematic analysis of farmer‫ ׳‬s use behavior of recycled industrial
carbon environment. Sci. Total Environ. 721, 137754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wastewater. Data in brief 21, 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.09.125.
scitotenv.2020.137754.
Araujo-Morera, J., Verdejo, R., López-Manchado, M.A., Santana, M.H., 2021. Sustainable
Laasasenaho, K., Lensu, A., Lauhanen, R., Rintala, J., 2019. GIS-data related route
mobility: the route of tires through the circular economy model. Waste Manag. 126,
optimization, hierarchical clustering, location optimization, and kernel density
309–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.03.025.
methods are useful for promoting distributed bioenergy plant planning in rural
Barcelos, S.M.B.D., Salvador, R., Guedes, M.D.G., de Francisco, A.C., 2020. Opportunities
areas. Sustain Energy Tech Assess 32, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
for improving the environmental profile of silk cocoon production under Brazilian
seta.2019.01.006.
conditions. Sustainability 12 (8), 3214. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083214.
Lee, R.P., Tschoepe, M., Voss, R., 2021. Perception of chemical recycling and its role in
Barros, M.V., Salvador, R., do Prado, G.F., de Francisco, A.C., Piekarski, C.M., 2020.
the transition towards a circular carbon economy: a case study in Germany. Waste
Circular economy as a driver to sustainable businesses. Clean. Environ. Syst. 100006.
Manag. 125, 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.02.041.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2020.100006.
Lochynska, M., Frankowski, J., 2018. The biogas production potential from silkworm
Barros, M.V., 2019. Tool to Promote Circular Economy in Rural Properties, 2019.
waste. Waste Manag. 79, 564–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.08.019.
Master’s thesis. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, p. 107. https://reposit
Ma, J., Scott, N.R., DeGloria, S.D., Lembo, A.J., 2005. Siting analysis of farm-based
orio.utfpr.edu.br/jspui/handle/1/4283. (Accessed 7 April 2021).
centralized anaerobic digester systems for distributed generation using GIS. Biomass
Bhavsar, P., Dalla Fontana, G., Tonin, C., Patrucco, A., Zoccola, M., 2020. Superheated
Bioenergy 28 (6), 591–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.12.003.
water hydrolyses of waste silkworm pupae protein hydrolysate: a novel application
Maina, S., Kachrimanidou, V., Koutinas, A., 2017. A roadmap towards a circular and
for natural dyeing of silk fabric. Dyes Pigments 183, 108678. https://doi.org/
sustainable bioeconomy through waste valorization. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain.
10.1016/j.dyepig.2020.108678.
Chem. 8, 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2017.07.007.
Brazil, 2010. Lei nº 12.305, de 02 de agosto de 2010. Institui a Política Nacional de
Orlandi, G., Faragò, S., Menato, S., Sorlini, M., Butti, F., Mocchi, M., Segale, L., 2020.
Resíduos Sólidos (PNRS). Diário Off. Repúbl. Feder. Brasil, Brasília, DF 3.
Eco-sustainable silk sericin from by-product of textile industry can be employed for
Chandra, R., Vijay, V.K., Subbarao, P.M.V., Khura, T.K., 2011. Performance evaluation of
cosmetic, dermatology and drug delivery. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. https://doi.
a constant speed IC engine on CNG, methane enriched biogas and biogas. Appl.
org/10.1002/jctb.6441.
Energy 88 (11), 3969–3977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.04.032.
Pap, S., Boyd, K.G., Taggart, M.A., Sekulic, M.T., 2021. Circular economy based landfill
2006 Coldebella, A., 2006. The Viability of Using Biogas from Bovine Culture and Swine
leachate treatment with sulphur-doped microporous biochar. Waste Manag. 124,
Culture to the Generation of Electric Power and Irrigation for Rural Proprieties,
160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.01.037.
Master’s thesis. Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Parana, Cascavel, p. 74. http://te
Pennacchio, H.L., 2016. Silk cocoon. Agricultural indicators - conab [Casulo de seda.
de.unioeste.br/handle/tede/2841. (Accessed 7 April 2021).
Indicadores da agropecuária – conab). Ano XXV 10, 01-114. https://www.conab.go
Donner, M., Gohier, R., de Vries, H., 2020. A new circular business model typology for
v.br/info-agro/precos/revista-indicadores-da-agropecuaria?start=30. (Accessed 5
creating value from agro-waste. Sci. Total Environ. 716, 137065. https://doi.org/
April 2021).
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137065.
Porto, A.J., 2014. Sericulture in the state of São Paulo. Bol. Ind. Anim. 71 (3), 291–302.
Donner, M., Verniquet, A., Broeze, J., Kayser, K., De Vries, H., 2021. Critical success and
Rodríguez, R., Gauthier-Maradei, P., Escalante, H., 2017. Fuzzy spatial decision tool to
risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-
rank suitable sites for allocation of bioenergy plants based on crop residue. Biomass
products. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 165, 105236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Bioenergy 100, 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.03.007.
resconrec.2020.105236.
Salvador, R., Barros, M.V., Freire, F., Halog, A., Piekarski, C.M., Antonio, C., 2021a.
EMF (Ellen MacArthur Foundation), 2017. A Circular Economy in Brazil: an Initial
Circular economy strategies on business modelling: identifying the greatest
Exploration. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Cowes, UK. https://www.ellenmacarthur
influences. J. Clean. Prod. 299, 126918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foundation.org/assets/downloads/A-Circular-Economy-in-Brazil-An-initial-explor
jclepro.2021.126918.
ation.pdf. (Accessed 5 April 2021).
Salvador, R., Puglieri, F.N., Halog, A., de Andrade, F.G., Piekarski, C.M., Antonio, C.,
EMF (Ellen MacArthur Foundation), 2013a. Towards the Circular Economy, Economic
2021b. Key aspects for designing business models for a circular bioeconomy.
and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation,
J. Clean. Prod. 278, 124341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124341.
Cowes, UK.
Santos, V. da C., Souza, K. A. de, Abrantes, R.S.X., Santos, C.L., dos, A., Soares, D. de M.
EMF (Ellen MacArthur Foundation), 2013b. Towards the Circular Economy:
A., Loiola, M.V. do C., Lima, P. M. F. de, Santos, E.L.A., 2016. Sericicultura: colhendo
Opportunities for the Consumer Goods Sector. Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
os frutos da criação do bicho-da-seda. Info. Téch. Semiárido 10 (2), 62–68. https://
European Commission, 2018. A Sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the
www.gvaa.com.br/revista/index.php/INTESA/article/view/4572. (Accessed 5 April
Connection between Economy. society and the environment.
2021).
Giacomin, A.M., Garcia Jr., J.B., Zonatti, W.F., Silva-Santos, M.C., Laktim, M.C.,
Stegmann, P., Londo, M., Junginger, M., 2020. The circular bioeconomy: its elements and
Baruque-Ramos, J., 2017. Brazilian silk production: economic and sustainability
role in European bioeconomy clusters. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. X 6, 100029.
aspects. Procedia Eng. 200, 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.014.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcrx.2019.100029.
Garay, L.B., Nembri, A., Oro, A.L., Fassina, V.A., das Neves Saez, C.R., Chiarello, A.S.,
Sutherland, D.L., Burke, J., Ralph, P.J., 2021. Trade-offs between effluent quality and
et al., 2014. New technique to produce large amount of flat silk by biospinning.
ammonia volatilisation with CO2 augmented microalgal treatment of anaerobically
Agric. Sci. 5 (14), 1483. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2014.514159.
digested food-waste centrate. J. Environ. Manag. 277, 111398. https://doi.org/
Gregorio, V.F., Pié, L., Terceño, A., 2018. A systematic literature review of bio, green and
10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111398.
circular economy trends in publications in the field of economics and business
Teigiserova, D.A., Tiruta-Barna, L., Ahmadi, A., Hamelin, L., Thomsen, M., 2021. A step
management. Sustainability 10 (11), 4232. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114232.
closer to circular bioeconomy for citrus peel waste: a review of yields and
ISO (International Organization for Standardization), 2018. Technical Committee ISO/
technologies for sustainable management of essential oils. J. Environ. Manag. 280,
TC 323, Circular Economy. https://www.iso.org/committee/7203984.html.
111832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111832.
(Accessed 6 April 2021).
Ten Berge, H.F., Hijbeek, R., van Loon, M.P., Rurinda, J., Tesfaye, K., Zingore, S.,
Kapoor, R., Ghosh, P., Kumar, M., Sengupta, S., Gupta, A., Kumar, S.S., Pant, D., 2020.
Boogaard, H.L., 2019. Maize crop nutrient input requirements for food security in
Valorization of agricultural waste for biogas based circular economy in India: a
sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Food Sec. 23, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
research outlook. Bioresour. Technol. 123036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gfs.2019.02.001.
biortech.2020.123036.
Therond, O., Duru, M., Roger-Estrade, J., Richard, G., 2017. A new analytical framework
Khounani, Z., Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Nazemi, F., Shaeifi, M., Karimi, K.,
of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev.
Tabatabaei, M., Mortaza, A., Lam, S.S., 2021. Exergy analysis of a whole-crop
37 (3), 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0429-7.
safflower biorefinery: a step towards reducing agricultural wastes in a sustainable

9
S.M.B.D. Barcelos et al.
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., Befort, B.L., 2011. Global food demand and the sustainable
intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 108 (50),
20260–20264. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116437108.
UNEP, 2021. Sustainable trade in resources. Global Material Flows, Circularity and
Trade. https://www.resourcepanel.org/sites/default/files/documents/document/m
edia/unep_irp_sutainable_trade_in_resources_report.pdf.
UN (United Nations), 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://www.
un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2019.
html. (Accessed 7 April 2021).
Villamar, C.A., Rivera, D., Aguayo, M., 2016. Anaerobic co-digestion plants for the
revaluation of agricultural waste: sustainable location sites from a GIS analysis.
Waste Manag. Res. 34 (4), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X16628979.
Wang, H., Huang, J., Zhou, H., Deng, C., Fang, C., 2020. Analysis of sustainable
utilization of water resources based on the improved water resources ecological
10
Journal of Environmental Management 296 (2021) 113373
footprint model: a case study of Hubei Province, China. J. Environ. Manag. 262,
110331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110331.
Wang, X., Chen, Y., Sui, P., Gao, W., Qin, F., Wu, X., Xiong, J., 2014. Efficiency and
sustainability analysis of biogas and electricity production from a large-scale biogas
project in China: an emergy evaluation based on LCA. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 234–245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.001.
World Atlas, 2021. World Leaders in Silk Production. https://www.worldatlas.com/artic
les/world-leaders-in-silk-production.html. (Accessed 7 April 2021).
Yalcinkaya, S., 2020. A spatial modeling approach for siting, sizing and economic
assessment of centralized biogas plants in organic waste management. J. Clean.
Prod. 255, 120040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120040.
Zanin, A., Bagatini, F.M., 2012. The Economic and Financial Feasibility of a Biodigester:
A Sound Alternative for Reducing the Environmental Impact of Swine Production.
Sustainable Development–Authoritative and Leading Edge Content for
Environmental Management. Intech, Rijeka, Croatia, pp. 371–388.