On March 28th, 2025, columnist Roy op het Veld published an article on Change Inc.–a platform for sustainable news and change-focusing on Re-Quip Foundation and the broader theme of circularity. The article was inspired by the Re-Quip Foundation event held on March 18th, 2025, where op het Veld participated as a spokesperson.
Reusing products and materials may seem like common sense; why keep buying new when recycling is a viable alternative? Yet, the circular economy doesn’t establish itself automatically, even though it is often cheaper and strengthens strategic autonomy. During the event, op het Veld gained two striking insights that further sharpened his view on sustainability. In his article, he shares these lessons, and explores why circular thinking requires more than just good intentions.
The original article (in Dutch) can be read at https://www.change.inc/circulaire-economie/de-circulaire-economie-heeft-leiderschap-nodig-en-nieuwe-woorden-41607\.
An English translated version can be found below.
The circular economy needs leadership, as well as new words
Reusing products and materials is a no-brainer. After all, why keep buying new stuff when recycling is also possible? Yet the circular economy does not come about spontaneously, although it is cheaper and it is good for strategic autonomy. A conference on circularity in the offshore sector brought columnist Roy op het Veld two new insights.
Suppose a carpenter throws away his hammer, saw and screwdriver after every job. That sounds absurd, right? Yet that is daily practice in the construction of offshore wind farms. Much of the equipment – think hoisting beams and grabs for foundation piles – ends up on site after a wind farm is installed. Valuable tools and materials lie there rusting away!
I never stopped to think about offshore wind farm construction. To be honest, I have always been primarily interested in the number of wind turbines and the power output of the turbines. After all, it’s all about the green power the turbines will generate. Right? Well, no, because there is a non-circular secret behind offshore wind farms.
Carpenters at sea
I found this out when I spoke to Natasja Sesink of investment company MeeMaken at the end of an energy conference late last year. Sesink told me about the one-time use of equipment in the installation of offshore wind farms. I couldn’t believe my ears at first. Why do the “carpenters at sea” throw away their hammers after every job?
Fortunately, Sesink had the same wonderment. But where a columnist is limited to writing pieces to vent his disbelief, Sesink turns out to be a decisive type. She took action. With like-minded people, she set up the Re-Quip Foundation. A foundation that wants to encourage circular design and construction to promote reuse. The first initiative is an online marketplace for offshore equipment. Offshore parties from across the chain – designers, builders and users – support the initiative, including Van Oord, Mammoet, TWD and IV.
Customized
Recently I was the day chairman at the founding conference of Re-Quip Foundation in Rotterdam. As soon as you delve into an issue, the first thing you learn is that solutions are not as easy as you thought beforehand. For example, I found out that the size of the wind turbines, the depth of the seabed and all kinds of safety requirements make specific demands on the equipment. Hence, customized gear is used for each project.
The offshore sector is known to be conservative, but during the presentations and debates at the congress I found out that that is not where the big problem lies. The presentations and discussions gave me two new insights.
First, circular solutions are often cheaper, but not if you only look at it on a project basis. I need to explain that. If you tailor tools for one job, then you can design them as efficiently as possible. If that same tool has to be applicable for multiple projects, then it has to be oversized, and that’s more expensive. Because project managers are responsible for one specific project, they choose the cheapest solution for that one project, not the cheapest solution for two (or five) consecutive projects.
So reuse requires a broader view, or in other words, higher-level optimization. We cannot blame the project manager – who is judged on meeting his budget – for actually making a suboptimal choice. Thus, the successful implementation of circular business models is only possible when it is considered Chefsache—a responsibility of top-level leadership. Executives must set up their kpi’s (key performance indicators) so that circularity is also rewarded on a project basis. This is not only financially smart, but also good for the climate (because less CO2 emissions) and strategic autonomy (because fewer raw materials are needed from abroad).
New words needed
Then the second insight. In addition to visionary circular leadership, it is necessary to start using different words for circularity. “Circular economy” still sounds okay, but a word like ‘second-hand’ is quickly associated with ”second-rate. Someone at the conference told of a refurbished and recertified ship’s propeller that met all the requirements, but was still difficult to sell because of “not new,” despite the fact that the propeller was 40 percent cheaper than a new one.
Luxury watches by Rolex or Cartier that change hands are not called “pre-owned” but “second-hand. Whether that is so recruiting I don’t know, but language matters. The reuse of products and resources should have a vocabulary that is catchy and recruiting. It should express that it is something valuable and noble. I challenge all creative minds to upcycle the word “second-hand” for a while.
Link to full article: De circulaire economie heeft leiderschap nodig, én nieuwe woorden | Change Inc.