




































AGORA International Journal of Economical Sciences, http://univagora.ro/jour/index.php/aijes 

ISSN 2067-3310, E-ISSN 2067-7669 

No. 1 (2023), pp. 135-144 

 

135 
 

HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL 

STUDY ON THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN 

COUNTRIES 

 

T. ZHGHENTI, V. CHKAREULI, M. R. DE HARO, V. M. MORENO, D. ATSTAJA 

 

Tsotne Zhghenti¹, Vakhtang Chkareuli², Manuel Rios de Haroº, Valentin Molina 

Morenoºº, Dzintra Atstaja³ 

Business and Technology University, Georgia  

¹ orcid.org/0000-0002-6779-172X, E-mail: tsotne.zhghenti@btu.edu.ge 

² orcid.org/0000-0001-9484-2484 

University of Granada, Spain  

º orcid.org/0000-0002-4329-370X 

ºº orcid.org/0000-0003-2679-3195 

BA School of Business and Finance, Latvia  

³ orcid.org/0000-0002-9411-7212 

 

Abstract. The shift towards circular practices requires a variety of supportive 

actions from different parties, such as education from academic institutions, 

institutional support from government and policymakers, and financial aid. Our 

research aims to provide data on the adoption of circular practices in Georgia and 

selected Eastern European countries. The findings of the research summarize the trends 

of adoption of circular practices among firms in different economies.  

In today's rapidly changing business environment, companies are under increasing 

pressure to reduce their environmental impact and embrace sustainable practices. 

Circular economy is seen as a promising solution to these challenges, as it shifts the 

focus from linear models of production and consumption to a closed-loop system where 

waste is reduced and resources are conserved. 

The concept of circular economy has gained significant traction in recent years, as 

companies seek to reduce their environmental impact and achieve long-term 

sustainability. By adopting circular practices, companies can reduce the cost of goods 

sold, improve resource efficiency, and promote a cleaner environment. However, the 

adoption of circular practices requires a significant change in organizational culture, 

which can be challenging for many businesses. 

Our research aims to provide practical information for policymakers and 

stakeholders from the private sector on the adoption of circular practices in Georgia 

and selected Eastern European countries. The results of the research will provide 

valuable insights into the trends of adoption of circular practices among firms in 

different economies and highlight the benefits of embracing circular economy.  

In conclusion, the transition to circular practices is a highly sought-after trend for 

businesses seeking to reduce their cost of goods sold, promote sustainability,  and benefit 

from a cleaner environment. The adoption of circular practices requires a significant 

change in organizational culture, which can be challenging for many businesses. Our 

mailto:tsotne.zhghenti@btu.edu.ge


HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL STUDY ON 

THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

 

136 
 

research aims to provide practical information for policymakers and stakeholders from 

the private sector on the adoption of circular practices in Georgia and selected Eastern 

European countries and summarize the trends of adoption of circular practices among 

firms in different economies. 

Keywords: circular business, circular economy, Georgia, CE business models, EBRD-

EIB-WBG enterprises survey. 

 

INTRODUCTION  

In a modern era, scarcity has become a major research dimension for many 

economists, which is basically linked to the limited resources on the one hand and limitless 

wants of people on the other. Governments, policymakers, scientists and the businesses 

are rethinking the traditional paradigm of economics, which is based on a linear approach 

(take-make-dispose) and should be changed towards the circularity. In this sense, 

circularity means to redesign operations on various levels, so that processes become more 

sustainable and eco-friendlier. By managing finite resources, a circular economy promotes 

a continual positive development cycle that maintains and increases natural capital, 

optimizes resource yields, and reduces system risks. 

Most fundamental incentives for the companies to transform linear business 

operations to circular ones, still lays in the willingness to reduce negative environmental 

impacts. On top of that, businesses are seeing the potential fruits of improving resource-

usage efficiency, thus reducing cost of goods sold, increasing competitive advantages and 

easing access to new markets. Also, environmental regulations and institutional incentives 

provided by policy-makers and governments, especially in developed countries are 

pushing companies to seek for alternative ways of doing business to reduce emissions and 

negative impact environment. In some cases, besides restrictions governments are 

providing subsidies and tax deductions to support circular business models.  

Activities from Circular economy, which covers almost all industrial sectors, is 

increasing in terms of generating new revenues, reducing costs, and encouraging 

innovation. This growth is driven by shifts in regulation and evolving consumer attitudes.  

The topic is getting very actual in Georgian Economic policy too. However, there is 

a lack of relevant local academic publications and related business statistics. For this 

reason, the research is using database from EBRD-EIB-WBG survey to calculate and 

provide detailed numbers on usage of circular practices in Georgian firms and to analyze 

general trends between other economies in the survey. Furthermore, the research can also 

dive deeper into exploring the challenges and opportunities that Georgian firms face in 

implementing circular economy practices, as well as identifying potential gaps in current 

policies and regulations that may be hindering the development of a circular economy in 

the country. Additionally, research can investigate on the potential benefits of a circular 

economy for the country's economy, environment and society, and how it can contribute 

to achieving sustainable development goals. 

Within the framework of the research, one of the factors is the assessment of 

developed countries with certain indicators, which is an important point for the 

implementation of additional analysis. 



Tsotne ZHGHENTI, Vakhtang CHKAREULI, Manuel Rios DE HARO, Valentin Molina 

MORENO, Dzintra ATSTAJA 

 

137 
 

I. Literature Review  

It was already mentioned in the introduction that local academic publications related to 

concept of circular economy are extremely rare in Georgia. However, several authors are 

discussing the general landscape of establishing circular economy in Georgia (Gubeladze & 

Pavliashvili, 2020; Pavliashvili, & Prasek, 2020; Jishkariani, et. al.; 2021; Buachidze et. al.; 

2021). Additionally, some publications discussing the green economy opportunities from 

finance industry (Aslanishvili, & Omadze, 2019) or from the perspective of investemt sector 

(Verulidze & Miceikienė, 2021). 

Another study (Chachkhiani et al., 2022) provides a qualitative and quantitative evaluation 

of the solid waste management system in Kutaisi, Georgia and the Imereti region. It reveals 

that share of recyclables is higher in urban areas and commercial centres. 

On the other hand, there are plenty of academic publications which analysing circular 

business models or generally circular practices in firms from Eastern European countries 

(Malinauskaite et al., 2017; Muizniece et al., 2019), especially discussing challanges for 

circular business models in Baltic countries (Rizos et al., 2016; Uvarova et al., 2020, Atstja et 

al., 2021). 

Accordingly, the research has focus on international publications which can provides 

useful insights or methodological notes to explore relevant data to analyse the current state of 

usage circular practices in local companies in Georgia. The few modern studies have used the 

green module from EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys to analyze green and circular 

economy trends in business for selected countries.  

A study conducted by Kalantzis et al. (2022) is analyzing green management and green 

investments of firms and distinguish capital intensive or non-capital-intensive investments. The 

results are provided on regional level. The paper uses data from EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise 

Surveys to examine the determinants of green investment strategies in firms. It also uses 

logistic IV regression to analyze the data and finds that financially constrained firms pursue 

fewer mitigation measures while more climate-aware firms pursue more mitigation measures. 

Whether, other publication has focus on levels of green management practices by country 

(Martin et al. 2022). That research used three different data sets including data set was from 

the EBRD-EIB-WB Enterprise Surveys, which provided information on firms' credit 

constraints, green management, and green investments. The purpose of this analysis was to 

understand the relationship between credit constraints, green management, and green 

investments and their impact on pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. 

Another research is measuring losses from extreme events based on the green module 

(Benincasa et al. 2022).  

The one recent publication used that survey for arguing that green management positively 

impacts on labor productivity, sales, and innovation (Fernandez, V. 2022). This study also finds 

that green management practices are influenced by various factors such as peer effects, 

management quality, customer requirements, and foreign ownership. 

However, previous studies did not displaying the specific rates of adoption the different 

green/circular practices by firms for country level. Additionally, none of them has focus on 

insights of Georgia which is our priority research example. Furthermore, the literature review 

is showing that there is a lack of research that is exploring the circular economy from the 



HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL STUDY ON 

THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

 

138 
 

consumer's perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to fill this gap by exploring the 

sharing economy characteristics from the consumers' perspective in Georgia. The research will 

underline and understand the current problems to prepare recommendations for the upcoming 

challenges. The quantitative and qualitative findings from the paper can be source material for 

future researchers in this field in Georgia. 

 

II. Methodology  

The primary source of our research is the database by EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise 

Surveys, which was conducted between 2018 and 2020. This database covers approximately 

28,000 enterprises in 41 economies of the European Union, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and 

the Middle East and North Africa. These economies include Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, 

Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Egypt, Estonia, 

Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyz Republic, Latvia, 

Lebanon, Lithuania, Malta, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, North Macedonia, 

Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Tunisia, 

Turkey, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and the West Bank and Gaza. 

Our research focuses on a special module of the survey, the Green Economy module, 

which covers basic green management practices and green investments. For the purposes of 

our research, we have selected 10 questions for further analysis and discussion. These questions 

(BMGC23A-BMGC23J) are related to a firm's recent experience (over the last 3 years) of 

adopting circular measures (practices or technologies). The research calculates the share of 

firms (on a country level) that have adopted these circular measures. It uses weights according 

to the median eligibility from the Enterprise Surveys database. 

The following 10 indicators were calculated according to this methodology: Share of firms 

that had adopted specific practices over the last three years: 

 Heating and Cooling Improvements 

 More Climate-Friendly Energy Generation on Site 

 Machinery Upgrades 

 Energy Management 

 Waste Minimization, Recycling, and Waste Management 

 Air Pollution Control Measures 

 Water Management 

 Upgrades of Vehicles, Vessels, and Aircraft in The Fleet 

 Improvement of Lighting Systems 

 Other Pollution Control Measures 

The data for the research was collected from eligible firms, who were asked a set of 

questions with three possible answers: "Yes," "No," or "Do Not Know." To calculate the value 

for each question, the sum of the weights of the "Yes" answers was divided by the total weight 

of all eligible enterprises for that specific question. This provided an overall understanding of 

the situation, but to gain a more in-depth insight, the research also analyzed the data in a more 

granular manner by breaking it down into regions and industries, with a focus on Georgia. By 

doing this, the research was able to provide a more comprehensive picture of the situation in 

the state, including specific trends and patterns at the regional and industry levels. 



Tsotne ZHGHENTI, Vakhtang CHKAREULI, Manuel Rios DE HARO, Valentin Molina 

MORENO, Dzintra ATSTAJA 

 

139 
 

Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the adoption of circular measures by 

companies in a diverse range of economies. By focusing on a specific set of questions related 

to circular measures, the research is able to provide detailed information on which practices are 

being adopted most frequently and in which countries. Additionally, the use of weights based 

on median eligibility ensures that the results accurately reflect the experiences of the surveyed 

companies. 

 

III. Results and Discussion 

Figure 1 presents the results of an analysis of the share of enterprises that have 

implemented selected circular practices in Georgia over the last three years. The data was 

obtained from the EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys, which were conducted between 2018 

and 2020. The survey covered a sample of enterprises in Georgia, and included a special 

module on green economy practices, from which the data for this analysis was extracted. 

The results of the analysis indicate that the highest adoption rates among the selected 

circular practices were for machinery upgrades (43.0%), improvement of lighting systems 

(42.0%), and upgrades of vehicles, vessels, and aircraft in the fleet (37.1%). Heating and 

cooling improvements were also relatively frequent among Georgian enterprises, with an 

adoption rate of 34.6%. However, practices related to recycling and waste reduction had 

significantly lower adoption rates, with only 20.9% of firms reporting having implemented 

these practices. 

The data also reveals that the adoption of other circular approaches related to pollution 

reduction or climate-friendly initiatives was relatively low among Georgian enterprises. Only 

13% of firms reported having implemented air pollution control measures, and 8.5% reported 

having implemented other pollution control measures. Additionally, only 6.2% of firms 

reported having adopted more climate-friendly energy generation on-site. The adoption of 

practices related to energy management and water management was also relatively low, with 

17.1% and 16.0% of firms reporting having implemented these practices over the last three 

years, respectively. 

 

Figure 1: Share of firms which adopted specific measure over last 3 years in Georgia  

 
source: Author’s own calculations on database of EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys 

conducted in 2018-2020. 



HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL STUDY ON 

THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

 

140 
 

 

The results of our research on the adoption of circular practices in Georgia found that the 

capital city of Tbilisi has a higher share of firms implementing these practices (7.4% vs 9.9%) 

compared to other regions. Out of the 10 indicators analyzed, Tbilisi had higher adoption rates 

for 9 of them, with the only exception being "Other Pollution Control Measures". The study 

also revealed that large-size enterprises (47.25%) were more likely to adopt circular practices 

compared to medium (29.4%) and small enterprises (19.7%). These findings highlight the 

importance of creating an enabling environment for circular practices, particularly in regions 

outside of Tbilisi, to encourage more widespread adoption. Additionally, there is a need to 

develop support mechanisms for medium and small enterprises to adopt circular practices and 

contribute to a more sustainable future. 

It should be noted that these findings are consistent with the results from the survey of all 

41 economies included in the EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys. The highest average 

indicator among all economies surveyed was for machinery upgrades (41.0%), which is also 

the most frequent circular practice adopted by Georgian enterprises (43.0%). 

Another research finding is that most of the indicators for Georgia are close to the average 

numbers for all the countries surveyed in the EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys. However, 

there is a significant gap in the adoption of "Waste Minimization, Recycling and Waste 

Management" practices, which are adopted by only 20.9% of Georgian enterprises, while this 

indicator is significantly higher in most of the other countries surveyed (average value 36.0%). 

This can be seen in Figure 2, which displays the share of firms that have adopted waste 

management practices for selected Eastern European and Baltic countries. The rate is notably 

higher in EU countries, and Georgia's score is lower than that of Moldova or Ukraine. It has 

been also noticed that the rate of waste management in businesses of varying sizes in the state 

of Georgia is significantly lower in comparison to other regions. This lack of proper waste 

management practices can have adverse effects on the environment and public health. It is 

crucial that firms in Georgia make an effort to improve their waste management processes to 

ensure a cleaner and safer future for all. 

 

Figure 2: Share of firms which adopted waste management measures over last 3 years in 

selected countries 

 
source: Author’s own calculations on database of EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys 

conducted in 2018-2020 



Tsotne ZHGHENTI, Vakhtang CHKAREULI, Manuel Rios DE HARO, Valentin Molina 

MORENO, Dzintra ATSTAJA 

 

141 
 

Additionally, Georgian enterprises have lower ranks in terms of introducing energy or 

water management measures. This can be seen in Figure 3, which displays the adoption rates 

for selected indicators in Eastern European and Baltic countries. Estonia and Latvia are the 

leaders in terms of average adoption rates for the 10 indicators analyzed.  Based on the data 

provided, it is evident that the Baltic countries, specifically Estonia and Latvia, have higher 

adoption rates for circular economy practices compared to Georgia. These countries have 

consistently higher rates in various indicators such as machinery upgrades, waste management, 

energy management, water management and lighting improvements. For instance, Estonia has 

an average adoption rate of 69.8% for machinery upgrades, which is significantly higher than 

Georgia's rate of 43%. This trend can also be observed in other indicators such as green energy 

generation, where Estonia has an average of 11% and Latvia has an average of 9.7% which is 

relatively higher than the 6.2% in Georgia. 

Overall, the research provides valuable insights into the adoption of circular practices by 

firms in Georgia and can be used to compare the country's achievements with those of other 

economies surveyed. It highlights the areas in which enterprises in Georgia have made the most 

progress in terms of circular adoption, as well as areas where there is room for improvement. 

Additionally, the findings of this research can inform the development of policies and 

initiatives aimed at promoting the adoption of circular practices among Georgian enterprises, 

particularly in smaller and medium-sized enterprises and other regions of the country. 

 

Figure 3: Share of firms which adopted energy or water management measures over last 

3 years in selected countries 

 
Source: Author’s own calculations on database of EBRD-EIB-WBG Enterprise Surveys 

conducted in 2018-2020 

 

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The adoption of circular practices by enterprises in developing countries, including 

Georgia, is still relatively low. Despite the recognized potential for circular economy (CE) to 

promote sustainability and reduce waste, many companies are not yet investing in or 

considering the implementation of circular approaches in their business operations. The 

transition to circular business models can be a challenging process, with various obstacles that 



HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL STUDY ON 

THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

 

142 
 

companies of different sizes and industries may face. 

One of the most significant obstacles is the lack of financial capability, as implementing 

circular practices often requires investments in new technologies and equipment. This is 

particularly challenging for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that may not have the 

resources to make these investments. Additionally, economic policies in many developing 

countries still tend to favor linear business models, providing little incentive for companies to 

adopt circular practices. 

Another obstacle that companies may face is a lack of knowledge about CE business 

models and the current state of the circular economy. Despite the growing interest in the topic, 

many companies still lack an understanding of the benefits and potential challenges of 

implementing circular practices. This lack of knowledge can make it difficult for companies to 

identify opportunities for circular practices in their operations and to develop effective 

strategies for their implementation. 

In such developed countries, as we identified in the part of the research by the principle of 

random selection, there are also many challenges in the way of implementing the circular 

economy, therefore a developing country like Georgia must definitely develop its own way in 

terms of the development of circular processes. 

To overcome these obstacles, it is essential to create and distribute knowledge about CE 

business models, the current state of the circular economy, and the potential challenges that 

companies may face. This can be done through various means, such as training and education 

programs, workshops, and networking events. Additionally, targeted support and funding for 

SMEs to implement circular practices can help to overcome financial barriers and encourage 

the adoption of circular practices. Furthermore, the economic policies should be adjusted to 

support and encourage the implementation of circular economy in the country. 

In conclusion, the adoption of circular practices by enterprises in developing countries, 

including Georgia, is still relatively low. The transition to circular business models can be a 

challenging process, with various obstacles that companies of different sizes and industries 

may face. However, by creating and distributing knowledge about CE business models and 

providing support and funding to overcome financial barriers, we can encourage the adoption 

of circular practices and promote sustainable and circular economic growth in developing 

countries. Additionally, economic policies should be adjusted to support and encourage the 

implementation of circular economy in the country, which will help to overcome the lack of 

knowledge of the circular economy among companies and promote sustainable business 

models. Overall, a concerted effort is needed to support the transition to circular economy and 

promote sustainable business practices in developing countries.  

 

Acknowledgement 

This work was prepared at Business and Technology University, Georgia. 

 

REFERENCES 

1. Tašner, V., & Gaber, S. (2016). The age of studies and reports: Selected elements 

concerning the background of encounters defining the power of education. Center for 

Educational Policy Studies Journal, 6(2), 61–78. 



Tsotne ZHGHENTI, Vakhtang CHKAREULI, Manuel Rios DE HARO, Valentin Molina 

MORENO, Dzintra ATSTAJA 

 

143 
 

2. Aslanishvili, D., & Omadze, K. (2019). Green economy and access to finance in Georgia 

(going beyond the commercial banking sector to finance businesses in Georgia). Journal 

of Economics and Business, 2(3). 

3. Atstja, D., Cudečka-Puriņa, N., Vesere, R., Abele, L., & Spivakovskyy, S. (2021, May). 

Challenges of textile industry in the framework of Circular Economy: Case from Latvia. 

In International Conference on Sustainable, Circular Management and Environmental 

Engineering (ISCMEE 2021). EDP Sciences. 

4. Benjamin AMSHOFF, CHRISTIAN DÜLME, JULIAN ECHTERFELD and  JÜRGEN 

GAUSEMEIER (2015). Business Model Patterns for Disruptive Technologies 

International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 19 No. 03 

5. Benincasa, E., Betz, F., & Gattini, L. (2022). How do firms cope with losses from extreme 

weather events?. Available at SSRN 4171196. 

6. Buachidze, N., Dzebisashvili, N., Gurguliani, I., Chikviladze, K., & Ghosh, S. K. (2021). 

Circular Economy of Georgia. In Circular Economy: Recent Trends in Global 

Perspective (pp. 359-382). Springer, Singapore. 

7. Chachkhiani, M., Allesch, A., Reichenbach, J., & Huber-Humer, M. (2022). Formal and 

informal solid waste management in Kutaisi, Georgia: A status quo report based on 

material flow analysis. Waste Management & Research, 0734242X221135261. 

8. De Haas, R., Martin, R., Muûls, M., & Schweiger, H. (2022). Managerial and financial 

barriers during the green transition (No. dp1837). Centre for Economic Performance, LSE. 

9. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, (2013) Towards the Circular Economy, Economic and 

business rationale for an accelerated transition (pp. 11) 

10. Fernandez, V. (2022). Environmental management: Implications for business 

performance, innovation, and financing. Technological Forecasting and Social 

Change, 182, 121797. 

11. Gubeladze, D., & Pavliashvili, S. (2020). Linear economy and circular economy-current 

state assessment and future vision. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in 

Economy, (5 (32)). 

12. Geissdoerfer, M., Morioka, S., de Carvalho, M., & Evans, S. (2018). Business models and 

supply chains for the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 190 712-

721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.159 

13. Jishkariani, M., Ghosh, S. K., & Didbaridze, K. (2021). Energy and Economic Indicators 

Influencing Circular Economy in Georgia. In Circular Economy: Recent Trends in Global 

Perspective (pp. 331-358). Springer, Singapore. 

14. Kalantzis, F., Schweiger, H., & Dominguez, S. (2022). Green Investment by Firms. 

15. Malinauskaite, J., Jouhara, H., Czajczyńska, D., Stanchev, P., Katsou, E., Rostkowski, P., 

... & Spencer, N. (2017). Municipal solid waste management and waste-to-energy in the 

context of a circular economy and energy recycling in Europe. Energy, 141, 2013-2044. 

16. Muizniece, I., Zihare, L., Pubule, J., & Blumberga, D. (2019). Circular economy and 

bioeconomy interaction development as future for rural regions. Case study of Aizkraukle 

region in Latvia. Environmental and Climate Technologies, 23(3), 129-146. 

17. Meseguer-Sánchez, V., Gálvez-Sánchez, F. J., López-Martínez, G., & Molina-Moreno, V. 

(2021). Corporate social responsibility and sustainability. A bibliometric analysis of their 

https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919615400022
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919615400022
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919615400022
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919615400022
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919615400022


HOW ARE BUSINESSES ADOPTING CIRCULAR PRACTICES – EMPIRICAL STUDY ON 

THE CASE OF GEORGIA AND SELECTED EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES 

 

144 
 

interrelations. Sustainability, 13(4), 1636. 

18. Pavliashvili, S., & Prasek, D. D. E. (2020). Accelerating Transition to the Circular 

Economy in Georgia“, Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences, 14. 

19. Rizos, V., Behrens, A., Van der Gaast, W., Hofman, E., Ioannou, A., Kafyeke, T., ... & 

Topi, C. (2016). Implementation of circular economy business models by small and 

medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): Barriers and enablers. Sustainability, 8(11), 1212. 

20. Uvarova, I., Atstaja, D., Grinbergs, U., Petersons, J., Gegere-Zetterstroma, A., & Kraze, 

S. (2020, October). Transition to the circular economy and new circular business models–

an in-depth study of the whey recycling. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and 

Environmental Science (Vol. 578, No. 1, p. 012019). IOP Publishing. 

21. Uvarova, I., Atstaja, D., & Korpa, V. (2020). Challenges of the introduction of circular 

business models within rural SMEs of EU. International Journal of Economic Sciences. 

22. Uvarova, I., Atstaja, D., Korpa, V., Avena, L., & Erdmanis, M. (2020). End-of-life tyre 

recycling: Going beyond to new circular business models in Latvia. Engineering for Rural 

Development.  

23. Verulidze, V., & Miceikienė, A. (2021). Green economy as a new opportunity to stimulate 

export and attract investments, the case of Georgia. Management Theory and Studies for 

Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, 43(4), 468-474.  

 

 


