Between Europe and Japan: Tracing Japan’s Circular Transition in 2025
Observations from Moving Across Two Policy Landscapes
In 2025, Japan adopted its Fifth Basic Plan for the Promotion of a Circular Economy and is currently debating revisions to key resource-related legislation. With the Osaka–Kansai Expo underway, the term “circular economy” is gaining clear visibility across the country.
Over the past two months, I have participated in policy roundtables, industry platforms, startup gatherings and dialogues with local governments. I had the opportunity to engage directly with policy leaders from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), the Ministry of the Environment, regional mayors and heads of industry associations.
At the same time, from my base in Europe, I have increasingly been invited to share insights with Japanese companies and municipalities on the structure of EU regulation, the underlying policy philosophy, and the possible future trajectory of these frameworks.
Moving between these two environments has revealed several important dynamics.
1. Japan’s Transition Is Built on Consensus
While the EU is accelerating its transition through regulatory instruments such as ESPR, DPP and expanded EPR schemes, Japan’s approach centres on industry-led dialogue and coordination through public–private platforms.
Institutions are shaped through accumulated agreement among stakeholders.
This consensus-oriented process — often described through the concept of wa, or harmony — is deeply embedded in Japan’s institutional fabric.
To understand Japan’s trajectory, one must understand this structure of consensus-building.
2. Europe Is Referenced — Yet Deeper Understanding Is Still Emerging
Japanese companies and organisations are closely and consistently monitoring EU regulatory developments.
ESPR, DPP and the expansion of ELV-related frameworks are now widely recognised terms.
However, much of the discussion still centres on compliance — how to meet requirements, how to prepare for reporting, how to mitigate regulatory exposure.
The structural thinking behind these regulations — why the EU is moving in this direction, what long-term industrial transformation is implied, and how future market conditions may evolve — is less widely explored.
There is considerable room here.
EU regulation is not merely about compliance. It signals industrial redesign. Depending on how it is interpreted, it can represent substantial risk — or significant opportunity.
In my discussions, I aim to share this structural reading of European institutional development and its likely trajectory.
3. Japan’s Latent Strength
Japan has accumulated decades of experience in recycling policy.
Today, the conversation is gradually shifting from recycling-centred systems toward embedding circularity at the design stage.
At the same time, Japan retains distinctive strengths:
- Advanced manufacturing quality and production capability
- A deeply rooted culture of traceability
- Long-term, stable organisational governance
As structural understanding deepens, Japan’s implementation capacity could become a powerful accelerator.
4. Between Europe and Japan
In Europe, collaboration with Asia is increasingly framed as strategic.
In Japan, awareness is growing that EU regulation will shape future competitive conditions.
Yet asymmetries in understanding and information persist on both sides.
Bridging this gap requires more than surface-level regulatory interpretation. It requires understanding institutional philosophy, structural direction and industrial implications.
Japan’s current trajectory is at a stage that warrants close and careful attention.
5. Conclusion
While Europe and Japan have distinct institutional cultures and decision-making structures, both are working towards the same goal of transitioning towards a circular economy.
It is important to understand these differences. This will help to avoid conflict and create more opportunities for connection.
Dialogue has already commenced.
In future discussions, the European textile industry will be the focus, with particular attention given to the movement evident in this institutional context, as well as the shift towards circular business models from the design stage and changes in international supply chains.