CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 56

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Water-smart circular economy – Conceptualisation, transitional policy instruments and stakeholder perception

Salminen, Jani, Määttä, Kalle, Haimi, Henri, Maidell, Marjo, Karjalainen, Anna, Noro, Kirsi, Koskiaho, Jari, Tikkanen, Sarianne, Pohjola, Johanna·2022·Journal of Cleaner Production
DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130065
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130065

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 1 Water and water-related ecosystems in the CE; elements of a water-smart CE.
Fig. 1 Water and water-related ecosystems in the CE; elements of a water-smart CE.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Aleisa, 2019, Analysis on reclamation and reuse of wastewater in Kuwait, J Eng. Res., 7, 1, 10.1016/S2307-1877(25)00796-5 · DOI
  2. Berbel, 2017, Economic challenges for the EU water framework directive reform and implementation, Eur. Plann. Stud., 26, 1
  3. Bilitewski, 2012, The circular economy and its risks, Waste Manag., 32, 1, 10.1016/j.wasman.2011.10.004 · DOI
  4. Bressers, 1988, A comparison of the effectiveness of incentives and directives: the case of the Dutch water quality policy, Rev. Pol. Res., 7, 500, 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1988.tb00850.x · DOI
  5. Dalhuisen, 2003, Price and income elasticities of residential water demand: a meta-analysis, Land Econ., 79, 292, 10.2307/3146872 · DOI
  6. Desing, 2020, A circular economy within the planetary boundaries: towards a resource-based, systemic approach, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 155, 104673, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104673 · DOI
  7. Espey, 1997, Price elasticity of residential demand for water: a meta‐analysis, Water Resour. Res., 33, 1369, 10.1029/97WR00571 · DOI
  8. Fitch-Roy, 2021, All around the world: assessing optimality in comparative circular economy policy packages, J. Clean. Prod., 286, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125493 · DOI
  9. Ghisellini, 2016, A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems, J. Clean. Prod., 114, 11, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007 · DOI · Paper page
  10. de Jesus, 2018, Lost in transition? Drivers and barriers in the eco-innovation road to the circular economy, Ecol. Econ., 145, 75, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.001 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Johansson, 2021, How to handle the policy conflict between resource circulation and hazardous substances in the use of waste?, J. Ind. Ecol., 25, 994, 10.1111/jiec.13103 · DOI
  12. Kehrein, 2020, A critical review of resource recovery from municipal wastewater treatment plants – market supply potentials, technologies and bottlenecks, Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol., 6, 877‒910
  13. Kirchherr, 2017, Conceptualizing the circular economy: an analysis of 114 definitions, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 127, 221‒232, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Kirchherr, 2018, Barriers to the circular economy: evidence from the European union (EU), Ecol. Econ., 150, 264‒272, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Korhonen, 2018, Circular economy: the concept and its limitations, Ecol. Econ., 143, 37, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Lai, 2018, Bridging the gap between ecosystem service indicators and ecosystem accounting in Finland, Ecol. Model., 377, 51‒65, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.03.006 · DOI
  17. Masi, 2018, Towards a more circular economy: exploring the awareness, practices, and barriers from a focal firm perspective, Prod. Plann. Control, 29, 539, 10.1080/09537287.2018.1449246 · DOI
  18. Milios, 2021, Towards a circular economy taxation framework: expectations and challenges of implementation, Circular Econ. Sustainability, 1, 477, 10.1007/s43615-020-00002-z · DOI
  19. Nika, 2020, Water cycle and circular economy: developing a circularity assessment framework for complex water systems, Water Res., 187, 116423, 10.1016/j.watres.2020.116423 · DOI
  20. Nylén, 2019, How does the circular economy discourse affect policy-making? The case of streamlining waste utilisation in Finnish earthworks, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 149, 532, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.06.029 · DOI
  21. Pfister, 2016, Understanding the LCA and ISO water footprint: a response to Hoekstra (2017) “A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA”, Ecol. Indicat., 72, 352, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.07.051 · DOI
  22. Reike, 2018, The circular economy: new or Refurbished as CE 3.0? — exploring controversies in the conceptualization of the circular economy through a focus on history and resource value retention options, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 135, 246, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.027 · DOI
  23. Richter, 2012, A presumptive standard for environmental flow protection, River Res. Appl., 28, 1312, 10.1002/rra.1511 · DOI
  24. Salminen, 2018, Improving data quality, applicability and transparency of national water accounts – a case study for Finland, Water Resour. Econ., 24, 25, 10.1016/j.wre.2018.05.001 · DOI
  25. Schöggl, 2020, The narrative of sustainability and circular economy - a longitudinal review of two decades of research, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 163, 105073, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105073 · DOI
  26. Seebri, 2014, A meta-analysis of residential water demand studies, Environ. Dev. Sustain., 16, 499, 10.1007/s10668-013-9490-9 · DOI
  27. Sitra, 2017, Leading the cycle Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016–2025, Sitra Studies, 121
  28. Smol, 2020, Circular economy model framework in the European water and wastewater sector, J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag., 22, 682, 10.1007/s10163-019-00960-z · DOI
  29. Voulvoulis, 2018, Water reuse from a circular economy perspective and potential risks from an unregulated approach, Curr. Opinion Env. Sci. Health., 2, 32, 10.1016/j.coesh.2018.01.005 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Weckström, 2020, An order of magnitude: how a detailed, real-data-based return flow analysis identified large discrepancies in modeled water consumption volumes for Finland, Ecol. Indicat., 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105835 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 56

Metadata

Authors
Salminen, J., Määttä, K., Haimi, H., Maidell, M., Karjalainen, A., Noro, K., Koskiaho, J., Tikkanen, S., & Pohjola, J.
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
334
Pages
130065
ISSN
0959-6526
DOI
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130065
Cited by
56
References
0
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Water-smart circular economy – Conceptualisation, transitional policy instruments and stakeholder perception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130065
The paper
Salminen, J., Määttä, K., Haimi, H., Maidell, M., Karjalainen, A., Noro, K., Koskiaho, J., Tikkanen, S., & Pohjola, J. (2022). Water-smart circular economy – Conceptualisation, transitional policy instruments and stakeholder perception. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130065