Comparison of the CoR with the EP resolution "Resource efficiency: moving towards a circular economy":
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+TA+P8-TA-2015-0266+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN

The European Parliament resolution of 9 July 2015 is in line with the CoR opinion in particular on the following issues:
• the European Commission needs to come forward with a new ambitious proposal on the circular economy;
• implementing a full-scale circular economy requires the involvement also of regions, cities, and local communities; (EP resolution point 9: " the European Commission needs to involve local and regional authorities throughout the development of the circular economy package");
• increase of at least 30% in resource productivity by 2030;
• recall of the potential of the circular economy to generate savings for business and to create sustainable jobs;
• reinforcement by the EU of provisions/product standards to promote ambitious eco-design , with a broadening of the current eco-design Directive requirements through resource-efficiency criteria;
• a minimum percentage of recycled materials to be used in marketed products (with the EP resolution calling on the European Commission to assess establishing minimum recycled material content in new products in connection with the future revision of the Eco-design Directive);
• promotion of green public procurement to support a circular economy;
• develop measures to facilitate the development of markets for secondary raw materials, creating a uniform legal framework/set of product standards;
• setting clear minimum standards for extended producer responsibility requirements;
• accelerated introduction of economic instruments in waste management;
• unambiguous definition of municipal waste;
• establishing a single method of calculation of recycling targets (with the EP being more specific on the method to be applied);
• setting also a binding waste reduction target for municipal waste (CoR by 2020, with by 2020, the amount of municipal waste generated per person is reduced by 10% compared to the level recorded in 2010; EP by 2025, also for commercial and industrial waste, and accompanied by minimum requirements in the Waste Framework Directive for national waste prevention programmes, with e.g. comparable targets and indicators);
• a binding ban on landfilling for 2030, except for certain hazardous waste and certain residual waste (CoR: with maximum 5% landfilling of residual waste; EP: except residual waste for which landfilling is the most environmentally sound option);
• increasing recycling/preparation for reuse targets to at least 70 % of municipal solid waste and 80 % recycling of packaging waste by 2030 as proposed by the European Commission;
• the need for additional binding provisions on biowaste – yet with different instruments suggested: EP calls for introducing mandatory separate collection for biowaste by 2020 and for a binding food waste reduction target of at least 30 % by 2025 in the manufacturing, retail/distribution, food service/hospitability sectors and the household sector; CoR calls for a binding bio-waste recycling target);
• the need for external verification of Member States' waste statistics (with the CoR yet limiting this to only if the reliability of the data in the reports is in doubt);

The European Parliament resolution is more ambitious then the CoR opinion in particular on the following issues. The European Parliament resolution:
• calls for strictly limiting incineration, with or without energy recovery, by 2020, to non-recyclable and non-biodegradable waste;
• stresses the need for a fiscal framework that is in accordance with the ‘polluter pays’ principle; calls for progress in this area to be pursued by the Member States as part of the European Semester process;
• calls on the Commission to establish a permanent resource-efficiency platform, including all relevant stakeholders, so as to encourage and facilitate the application of the latest research findings, the exchange of best practices and the emergence of new industrial synthesis and industrial ecosystems (CoR opinion refers to EREP as the former platform in which the CoR participated, yet does not call for its extension);
• calls on the European Commission to put forth the same waste targets for all the Member States so as to ensure an equally high level of environmental protection across the EU and so as not to undermine the single market (CoR opinion stays vague on this. It supports the EC proposal, yet underlines the need to take into account the different starting positions of member states in waste management);
• calls on the European Commission to further investigate the feasibility of proposing a regulatory framework for enhanced landfill mining so as to permit the retrieval of secondary raw materials that are present in existing landfills and to examine the development of an environmental permit system for the recycling industry;
• urges the Commission to propose a target to reduce marine litter by 50 % by 2025 compared with 2014 levels;
• stresses the need to formulate targets for the collection and recycling of specific critical metals in the light of their growing scarcity and with a view to reducing dependency;

The CoR Opinion is more ambitious in the European Parliament resolution in particular on the following issues. The CoR Opinion:
• calls for establishing additional targets regarding preparation for reuse, which should be binding, discrete and specific to each waste flow, particularly for furniture, textiles and WEEE;
• calls on the European Commission to assess whether or not a single construction and demolition waste (CDW) waste target is sufficient to incentivise the collection, sorting and recycling of different construction materials or whether specific targets for those construction materials with a smaller share in C&D waste would be necessary.

European Commission new circular economy package of 2 December 2015:
When withdrawing the July 2014 circular economy package, which formed the basis of this CoR opinion, the European Commission pledged to put forward 'a more ambitious proposal.'
The CoR's follow-up activities to its opinion during 2015 insisted on this pledge by the European Commission.
The new package includes lower waste-management targets then the CoR opinion called for. It does neither include a resource-efficiency target nor a waste prevention target, which both the CoR opinion has called for.
The new package however includes in its action plan more detailed measures on the production and consumption phases, and on stimulating markets for secondary raw materials. This reflects the general call of the CoR opinion on the European Commission to take a more coherent approach to the circular economy, covering all phases of a product life cycle.