Hero image

Norway

Partners
Circular Norway
Circle Economy New
Overview
Circularity indicator set
Material flows and footprints
Waste treatment
Key sectors
Circular economy in action
Recommendations
About
References
  1. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2021). Nasjonal strategi for ein grøn, sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  2. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment and Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. (2024). Handlingsplan for en sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  3. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2025). Inviterer til dugnad for mer ombruk, reparasjon og deling. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  4. In Rockström et. al. (2009), this is named ‘Chemical pollution’.
  5. In Rockström et. al. (2009), this is named ‘Biodiversity loss’, updated to ‘Biodiversity integrity’ by Steffen et. al. (2015). (Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B., & Sörlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223). doi:: 10.1126/science.1259855
  6. Data used in this analysis is taken primarily from 2018.
  7. Data used in this analysis is taken primarily from 2022.
  8. Global Footprint Network. (n.d.). Ecological footprint—national footprint and biocapacity accounts 2022 edition. Retrieved from: Global Footprint Network website
  9. Circle Economy. (2020). The circularity gap report 2020. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  10. Eurostat. (2024). Real GDP per capita. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  11. Earth Overshoot Day. (2022). How many Earths? Retrieved from: Overshoot Day website
  12. Circle Economy, PGGM, KPMG, WBCSD, & EBRD. (2018). Linear Risks. Retrieved from: Circle Economy website
  13. Bocken, N., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C. & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering 33(5), 308-320. doi:10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124
  14. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2021). Nasjonal strategi for ein grøn, sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  15. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment and Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. (2024). Handlingsplan for en sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  16. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2025). Inviterer til dugnad for mer ombruk, reparasjon og deling. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  17. Government of Norway. (2021). Veikart for grønn konkurransekraft. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  18. Deloitte. (2020). Study for a national strategy for circular economy: short summary. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  19. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2021). Nasjonal strategi for ein grøn, sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  20. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2021). Nasjonal strategi for ein grøn, sirkulær økonomi. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  21. EY. (2024). Nature has limits: How to reduce Norway’s material footprint. Oslo: EY. Retrieved from: EY website
  22. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2024). Supplerende tildelingsbrev etter RNB 2024. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  23. Norwegian Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2025). Tildelingsbrev 2025 for Miljødirektoratet. Retrieved from: Government of Norway website
  24. Data used in this analysis is taken primarily from 2022.
  25. Haas, W., Krausmann, F., Wiedenhofer, D. & Heinz, M. (2015). How circular is the global economy? An assessment of material flows, waste production, and recycling in the European Union and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(5), 765–777. doi:10.1111/jiec.12244
  26. CGRi. (n.d.). The power of countries to close the Circularity Gap. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  27. Circle Economy. (2020). The circularity gap report Norway. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  28. This approach accounts for the physical flows of materials embodied in imported products and the flows of materials exported as products and services. Thus, the material footprint, also referred to as Raw Material Consumption (RMC), is the total amount of raw materials extracted to meet the final demand of an economy. 
  29. Water and air are two natural resources generally excluded from economy-wide material flow analysis because their scale is so significant that including their mass obscures other resource use. For more insights, please refer to the Methodology Document.
  30. Based on own analysis using 2022 data
  31. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report Denmark. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  32. Circle Economy. (2022). The circularity gap report Sweden. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  33. Circle Economy. (2022). The circularity gap report Scotland. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  34. Circle Economy. (2024). The circularity gap report Ireland. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  35. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report Switzerland. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  36. Circle Economy. (2022). The circularity gap report Northern Ireland. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  37. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report the United Kingdom. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  38. Based on Eurostat data using 2022 data
  39. Circle Economy. (2022). The circularity gap report Poland. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  40. Based on Circularity Gap Report 2023, using 2018 data
  41. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report 2023. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  42. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report 2023. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  43. Circle Economy. (2023). The circularity gap report 2023. Amsterdam: Circle Economy. Retrieved from: CGRi website
  44. IRP. (2024). Global Resources Outlook 2024: Bend the trend. Pathways to a livable planet as resource use spikes. UNEP: Nairobi. Retrieved from: UNEP website
  45. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2022) Norway 2022. Retrieved from: IEA website
  46. Statistics Norway. (2024). Production and consumption of energy, energy balance and energy account. Retrieved from: Statistics Norway website
  47. European Environment Agency (EEA). (2024). New registrations of electric vehicles in Europe. Retrieved from: EEA website
  48. Statistics Norway. (2024). Production and consumption of energy, energy balance and energy account. Retrieved from: Statistics Norway website
  49. Industrial machinery and equipment includes those assets necessary to industrial activities such as smelters, mills, furnaces, robots, hardware, but also different construction vehicles (for example, cranes, loaders, excavators, etcetera.). 
  50. Eurostat. (n.d.). Waste generation and treatment (env_wasgt). Metadata. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  51. Eurostat. (n.d.). Management of waste excluding major mineral waste, by waste management operations (env_wasoper). Metadata. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  52. Eurostat. (2024). Circular material use rate. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  53. Statistics Norway. (2025). Production index for construction. Retrieved from: SSB website
  54. U.S. Department of Energy. (2023). Light duty vehicle greenhouse gas life cycle assessment. Retrieved from: Department of Energy website
  55. As Eurostat reports: ‘The information on the generation of waste can not be directly linked to the information on the treatment of waste for several reasons. The generation of waste concerns the waste produced in the country, the treatment of waste the waste treated in the country, so differences can occur due to import and export of waste. Moreover, the generation of waste includes the waste produced by waste treatment activities (sorting, composting, incineration), whereas treatment only includes the final treatment. Waste treatment is a process which takes time and in the meanwhile some of the weight might be lost (drying). Also waste undergoes dismantling and sorting between generation and (final) treatment. A discarded vehicle may not be displayed as such in waste treatment data, but the materials it was composed of like metal, glass, textiles etc. In short, the two components of waste statistics, generation and treatment, will be equal rather by coincidence.’ Source: Eurostat website
  56. European Environment Agency (EEA). (2023). Waste prevention country profile: Norway. Retrieved from: EEA website
  57. Trading Economics. (n.d.). Norway GDP. Retrieved from: Trading Economic website
  58. European Environment Agency (EEA). (2023). Waste prevention country profile: Norway. Retrieved from: EEA website
  59. Eurostat. (n.d.). Waste generation and treatment (env_ wasgt). Metadata. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  60. Dredging spoils and soils included soil and rock excavated during construction or overburden from mining. According to paragraph 414 of Eurostat’s Handbook of MFA, ‘Compilers have to de-select (exclude) the following two waste streams W126 Soils and W127 Dredging spoils. In fact, W126 and W127 consist of excavated soil which is not accounted for as domestic extraction on the EW-MFA material input side and thus should not be accounted for at the material output side either.’ In EW-MFA, the condition for a flow to qualify as domestic extraction is its acquisition of monetary value, thereby crossing the environment-economy boundary. Source: Eurostat website. For more information, please refer to the Methodology Document and the Project annex.
  61. According to paragraph 65 and 66 of Eurostat’s Handbook of MFA: ‘ [...] A distinction has been made between ‘used’ and ‘unused’ extraction (Eurostat 2001, paras. 3.29ff). ‘Used’ refers to an input for use in any economy, i.e. whether a material acquires the status of a product. [...] ‘Unused’ flows are materials that are extracted from the environment without the intention of using them, i.e. materials moved at the system boundary of economy-wide MFA on purpose and by means of technology but not for use” (Eurostat 2001, paras. 3.29ff.). Examples of unused extraction are soil and rock excavated during construction or overburden from mining, the unused parts of felling in forestry, the unused by-catch in fishery, the unused parts of the straw harvest in agriculture or natural gas flared or vented at the extraction site. EWMFA records only extractions of materials that are used. The term ‘domestic extraction’—abbreviated DE— always refers to ‘used’ extraction if not otherwise specified (Eurostat 2009, p. 12).
  62. For more details, refer to the Project Annex.
  63. Eurostat. (2010). Guidance on classification of waste according to EWC-Stat categories. Retrieved from: Eurostat website
  64. FAFO. (2024). Arbeidstakere i bygge- og anleggsnæringen i 2015 og 2022. Retrived from: FAFO
  65. Material footprint and climate footprint is calculated in these analyses.
  66. Statistisk Norway. (2024). Table 10514. Retrieved from: SSB website
  67. NHO Byggenæringen. (2024). Markedsrapport for byggenæringen. Retrived from: NHO Byggenæringen website
  68. Circular Norway og Finansforbundet (2022). Finansnæringen som pådriver for en sirkulær økonomi. Retrived from: Circular Norway website
  69. Statistics Norway. (2024). Table 10514. Retrieved from: SSB website
  70. Statistics Norway. (2024). Table 09247 and 09781. Retrieved from: SSB website
  71. NHO Byggenæringen, Fellesforbundet, Direktoratet for byggkvalitet og Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet (2024) Byggenæringens klimafotavtrykk. Retrived from: Regjeringen.no
  72. Statistisk Norway. (2024). Table 10785: Byggeareal. Avgang av bygninger, etter statistikkvariabel og år. Retrived from: Statistisk Norway website
  73. NHO Byggenæringen, Fellesforbundet, Direktoratet for byggkvalitet og Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet. (2024). Byggenæringens klimafotavtrykk. Retrived from: Regjeringen.no
  74. Statens Vegvesen. (2024). Vikart. Retrived from: Statens vegvesen website
  75. Statistisk Norway (2024). Table 14328. Retrieved from: Statistisk Norway website
  76. NHO Byggenæringen, Fellesforbundet, Direktoratet for byggkvalitet og Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet. (2024). Byggenæringens klimafotavtrykk. Retrieved from: Regjeringen.no
  77. IRP. (2024). Global Resources Outlook 2024 - Bend the trend: Pathways to a liveable planet as resource use spikes. Retrieved from: IRP website
  78. Oslotre. (2022). Hasletre. Retrieved from: Oslotre.no
  79. The Guardian. (2024). We´re still in the 1970s with cement´: Norway plant to blaze carbon-free concrete trail. Retrieved from: The Guardian website
  80. ISO. (2024). 59004:2024. Circular economy – Vocabulary, principles and guidance for implementation.
  81. NHO Byggenæringen, Fellesforbundet, Direktoratet for byggkvalitet og Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet (2024) Byggenæringens klimafotavtrykk. Retrieved from: Regjeringen.no
  82. EBA. (2023). Veileder for klimagassreduksjoner i boligblokker. Retrieved from: EBA.no
  83. IRP (2024). Global Resources Outlook 2024 - Bend the trend: Pathways to a liveable planet as resource use spikes. Retrieved from: IRP website
  84. SINTEF. (2022). Herøysund bru. Retrieved from: SINTEF website
  85. FutureBuilt. (2024). Nedre Sem låve. Retrieved from: FutureBuilt website.
  86. Norwegian Environmental Agency. (2025). Klimatiltak i Norge. Kunnskapsgrunnlag 2025. Retrieved from: Norwegian Environmental Agency website
  87. Statistisk Sentralbyrå (2024). Retrieved from: Statistikkbanken, tabell 03982: Innenlandsk persontransport, etter transportmåte.
  88. Transportøkonomisk Institutt (TØI). (2023). Transportytelser i Norge1946-2022. Retrieved from: TØI website
  89. Transportøkonomisk Institutt (TØI). (2022). Bildeling i Bergen - erfaringer og effekter. Retrieved from: TØI website
  90. Norwegian Environmental Agency. (2024). Klimatiltak i Norge. Kunnskapsgrunnlag 2024. Retrieved from: Norwegian Environmental Agency website
  91. DNV. (2024). Energy transition outlook Norway 2024. Retrieved from: DNV website
  92. DNV. (2025). Safe and green ship recycling for shipowners. Retrieved from: DNV website
  93. Agarwala, N. (2023). Promoting Circular Economy in the shipping industry. Journal of International Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/25725084.2023.2276984
  94. DNV (2024). Energy transition outlook Norway 2024. Retrieved from: DNV website
  95. Norwegian Environmental Agency. (2025). Klimatiltak i Norge. Kunnskapsgrunnlag 2025. Retrieved from: Norwegian Environmental Agency website
  96. Norwegian Environmental Agency. (2025). Klimatiltak i Norge. Kunnskapsgrunnlag 2025. Retrieved from: Norwegian Environmental Agency website
  97. Norwegian Environmental Agency. (2025). Klimatiltak i Norge. Kunnskapsgrunnlag 2025. Retrieved from: Norwegian Environmental Agency website
  98. Statistisk Sentralbyrå. (2024). Utslipp til luft - tabell 08942. Retrieved from: SSB website
  99. ITS Norway. (2024). Hvorfor fjerner regjeringen målet om godsoverføring fra vei til sjø?. Retrieved from: ITS website
  100. Deloitte. (2020). Kunnskapsgrunnlag for nasjonal strategi for sirkulær økonomi. Delutredning 1. Potensial for økt sirkularitet. Retrieved from: Regjeringen.no
  101. European Commission. (2025). Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Retrieved from: European Commission website
  102. KPMG. (2024). Norway: Carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) for imports from 2026. Retrieved from: KPMG website

The Circularity Gap Report is an initiative of Circle Economy, an impact organisation dedicated to accelerating the transition to the circular economy.

© 2008 - Present | RSIN 850278983