Circular Economy Governance and Research Development in Southeast Asia: A Scientometric and Comparative Recycling Governance Analysis of the Philippines and Romania

Abstract

The transition toward a circular economy has become a major policy response to growing concerns over resource depletion, plastic pollution, and the environmental impacts of linear production and consumption systems. Although circular economy research has expanded rapidly during the past decade, existing studies often examine research development and governance performance separately, limiting understanding of how knowledge production relates to the institutional conditions that shape recycling transitions. Comparative evidence linking Southeast Asian circular economy development with emerging European experiences remains limited. This study integrates scientometric analysis and comparative environmental-governance assessment to examine circular economy research development in Southeast Asia and recycling governance in the Philippines and Romania. Scientometric analysis was conducted using 3,678 Scopus-indexed publications published between 1971 and 2025. Publication trends, thematic evolution, and collaboration networks were analyzed using Bibliometrix, Biblioshiny, and VOSviewer. Comparative governance assessment was based on policy documents, institutional reports, and secondary datasets related to recycling infrastructure, policy implementation, resource recovery, and institutional coordination. The results revealed a substantial increase in circular economy scholarship after 2015, with research activity concentrated in a small number of regional hubs, particularly Indonesia (820 publications) and Malaysia (650 publications). Thematic analysis indicated a shift from conventional waste-management research toward broader themes involving sustainability transitions, environmental governance, resource efficiency, and circular business models. Collaboration-network analysis demonstrated moderate regional connectivity (network density = 0.36) but also highlighted uneven participation among Southeast Asian countries. Comparative assessment revealed marked differences in recycling governance between the Philippines and Romania. Romania achieved a substantially higher composite recycling-performance score (4.14) than the Philippines (2.14), reflecting stronger institutional coordination, regulatory enforcement, recycling infrastructure, and resource-recovery integration associated with European Union policy alignment and the implementation of a national Deposit Return System. In contrast, recycling governance in the Philippines remains constrained by uneven implementation capacity, infrastructure limitations, and fragmented institutional arrangements despite the presence of comprehensive environmental legislation. By linking research development with governance performance, the study provides a broader perspective on how institutional conditions influence circular economy transitions. The findings underscore the importance of governance coherence, infrastructure investment, and sustained policy implementation in advancing resource recovery and environmental sustainability in developing and transitioning economies.