ISO 59020: A Circularity Percentage Needs a Boundary and a Denominator
By Jonathan Anthony Burkett
Reporting and original analysis | November 5, 2026
A product described as circular can still leave a reader asking a basic question: circular in what respect? The phrase may concern materials entering production, a possible second use, an arrangement for collection or a calculation covering only one stage. A percentage appears more precise, but it also needs an explanation. Without a boundary and a denominator, a number can be difficult to interpret even when the arithmetic is correct. ISO 59020 provides a useful point of entry into that problem. Its public scope invites organizations to make measurement a defined process rather than an attractive label attached after a decision.
ISO lists ISO 59020:2024, Circular economy — Measuring and assessing circularity performance, as the published first edition. Its public description covers measurement within defined economic systems, indicator selection, data collection and interpretation. The separate ISO/WD 59020 page, checked November 5, 2026, identifies a second edition under development at working-draft stage. A proposed replacement is therefore distinct from an already published replacement. This article uses those public scope descriptions, not the purchased standard’s full requirements. The examples that follow are original illustrations of measurement questions; they do not establish conformity with either document.
Start with the object of the claim
Imagine a hypothetical company that sells tables and announces that a certain share of its materials comes from recovered sources. Before comparing that claim with another company’s, a reader needs to know the object being measured. Is it one model, every table sold during a period or the whole business, including packaging and other products? A good explanation names that object. Otherwise a favorable result for a small product line can drift into a statement that appears to describe a much larger organization.
The boundary also has a time dimension. A calculation for a calendar year may include different suppliers and product mixes from a calculation for a single production run. A company can improve one process while its total volume changes in another direction. These possibilities do not make measurement futile. They make the accompanying description necessary. A reader should be able to understand the period, the scope and the unit before deciding what the result demonstrates. The most prominent number on a page should not require guesswork about what the page is counting.
The denominator makes the percentage
Consider a deliberately simple arithmetic example. A batch uses 200 kilograms of a material, including 80 kilograms identified as recovered input. For that material and that batch, 80 divided by 200 gives 40 percent by mass. If the product also contains other materials excluded from those 200 kilograms, the result cannot automatically be described as 40 percent of the entire product. The calculation has answered a narrower question. The example is not an ISO calculation method; it demonstrates how changing the denominator changes the meaning of an otherwise familiar percentage.
Mass is also different from the number of components or the purchase price. A heavy component can dominate a mass calculation while several lighter parts raise different questions about separation or later use. A value expressed by cost may change when prices change even if physical inputs stay the same. These observations suggest a useful editorial habit: write the unit beside the number. A percentage becomes more informative when a reader can finish the sentence describing it without supplying an unstated assumption.
Data quality belongs beside the result
A calculation can be exact about uncertain inputs. In a hypothetical assessment, one supplier might provide a measured figure, another an estimate and a third no usable record. Combining those inputs without explanation gives the final number a confidence its ingredients may not deserve. A transparent report can distinguish measured, estimated and missing information, and explain how each was treated. This does not require a public reader to reproduce every spreadsheet. It does require enough context to assess the strength of the claim.
Missing information should not quietly become a zero when zero has a different meaning. There is a difference between no recovered material and no verified information about recovered material. That distinction matters for improvement as well as communication. The first may suggest changing a physical process; the second may suggest improving supplier records or traceability. A useful measurement system helps a team identify which problem it faces. The number then becomes a basis for a decision rather than a substitute for investigating the work behind it.
A circularity measure answers a particular question
An indicator about material circulation does not, by itself, answer every environmental or social question about a product. A reader may also want to know about energy, durability, transport, working conditions or actual use. ISO’s public description says complementary methods can be used to assess broader impacts. The practical implication is to resist making one result carry a claim larger than its scope. A well-defined measure can contribute to understanding without becoming a certificate that every consequence of a product has been evaluated.
For a purchasing team, this can lead to a more useful comparison. Ask suppliers to explain the boundary, unit, period and evidence for a circularity statement. Then identify what other information the purchasing decision needs. A table that can be repaired, a replacement part that can be obtained and a collection service that operates where the buyer is located raise distinct questions. This is general analytical guidance, not a list of ISO requirements. It gives the buyer a way to connect an environmental statement with the practical life of an item.
Keep the version visible
Standards development creates another kind of boundary: the difference between what has been published and what is being proposed. An organization discussing a working draft should retain that status in its explanation. A reader should not have to discover later that a reference to a new edition meant an unfinished document. Equally, the existence of a revision project does not mean the previously published edition has already disappeared. The official catalog entries offer a route for checking those stages as they change.
The strongest public explanation of a circularity percentage is one that makes its limits easy to see. State the object, the period, the unit, the denominator and the quality of the evidence. Explain what decision the measure supports and what questions remain outside it. This does not weaken a useful result; it makes the result available for informed comparison. A number can then do the job it is suited to do: describe a defined aspect of performance, provide a basis for checking progress and help people decide where better evidence or a different action is needed.
Image note: This stock furniture photograph illustrates a product that could be assessed; it is not evidence of a circularity claim. Credit: Bilal Mansuri / Pexels. Source photograph; Pexels license.
#upstormed #jonathananthonyburkett #jonathanburkett #ISO59020 #CircularEconomy #Measurement
