Circular futures: “Circularity needs anticipation”
New research assesses four different scenarios for future circular economies
Despite the attention the concept of circular economy has recently attracted, what possible circular futures could look like is still very rarely discussed. A new paper, published in the journal Ecological Economics by Utrecht University’s circular economy experts Thomas Bauwens, Marko Hekkert and Julian Kirchherr, outlines different plausible scenarios that can guide society for advancing a circular economy and shows that a circular economy can be organized in very contrasting ways.
“Major systemic transformations like the transition to a circular economy need long-term perspectives,” says Thomas Bauwens, lead author of the study and circular economy expert at the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development. “No one really looks at how a circular economy would actually work, what it would look like, and what the pros and cons of different circular futures are. But circularity needs that anticipation.” In this thought experiment, the researchers use a matrix with two axes – technological innovation and governance type – to propose four different possible scenarios.
Ease of living through automation
Perhaps the closest scenario to a science-fiction movie is ‘Circular Modernism’. In this scenario, high-tech innovations are combined with a strong, centralised government. “Circular Modernism relies on our ability to develop high-tech innovations to take care of circular issues such as waste sorting. A lot is done by robots and artificial intelligence, and consumers don’t need to change their behaviour that much,” Bauwens illustrates.
The government would provide incentives for big companies to develop and implement circular innovations. “A possible pitfall of this scenario is that some technologies may take a long time to be widely adopted. And when they are and offer people ease of living through automation, resource consumption might ‘rebound’ and increase sharply.”
Making people consume less
In the second scenario, ‘Planned Circularity’, there is a strong centralised government, but unlike Circular Modernism it does not offer the same high-tech innovations. “This is a more authoritarian response to circularity challenges. The government sets rules and regulations to force economic actors to adopt circular practices,” Bauwens says. “It would be very controlled and planned by the government – imagine imposing taxes or quotas on resource consumption.”
Decentralised governance
The two scenarios in the categories where the decisions aren’t made by centralised governments are ‘Bottom-up Sufficiency’ and ‘Peer-to-peer Circularity’.
In Bottom-up Sufficiency, on the low-tech side of the axis, decision-making is left up to local actors and communities. “This scenario might be facilitated by bottom-up initiatives such as Transition Towns – a movement of communities coming together to reimagine and rebuild our world, and it includes schemes like community recycling and sharing of products. Here, we imagine the largest change in people’s behaviours.” A downside is that almost everyone needs to voluntarily change their behaviour in order for this scenario to be feasible. “There might also be social resistance due to all the changes businesses and people would have to make.”
The last scenario, Peer-to-peer Circularity, imagines more decentralised production and consumption through 3D printing and peer-to-peer, blockchain based platforms that enable consumers to exchange and share goods with one another. “This would be like a sharing economy. The upside here is that the key technologies, such as 3D printing and blockchain, are already being used. However, there might be some resistance against decentralisation of governance.”
Thought experiment
The researchers developed these scenarios by conducting a thought experiment to define the axes and the narratives of the different futures. “We also held a focus group with policy makers, circular entrepreneurs, and academics in circular economy, to gather additional insights,” Bauwens says.
A true North for policy-makers
By generating visions of alternative circular futures, these scenarios may provide a clearer directionality to policy-makers and businesses, helping them both anticipate and understand the consequences of a paradigm shift towards a circular economy. “They can provide a ‘true north’, particularly for policy-makers in their efforts to transition towards a more circular economy,” says Julian Kirchherr, circular economy expert at Utrecht University. “We do need to remember that there are upsides and downsides to different scenarios, and that there are important trade-offs between their environmental, social, economic and governance dimensions,” Bauwens adds.
"Many practitioners criticize that circular economy remains a fuzzy concept. We hope to make it less fuzzy with this work", concludes Marko Hekkert, director of the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development.
This paper was developed as part of an NWO project that studies the roles of circular start-up ecosystems in advancing circular futures.
Publication: Thomas Bauwens, Marko Hekkert, Julian Kirchherr, Circular futures: What Will They Look Like?, Ecological Economics, Volume 175, 2020, 106703, ISSN 0921-8009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106703.