Different visions of circular economy
What is circular economy? Where does the concept come from and what are the many concepts related to it? What does the circular economy have to do with other ideas such as industrial ecology, cradle to cradle, steady-state economics, buen vivir, doughnut economics and degrowth? These are the questions that Martin Calisto Friant (Utrecht University), Walter Vermeulen (Utrecht University) and Roberta Salomone (University of Messina) have examined in their latest research, published in the journal Resources, Conservation & Recycling and openly accessible here.
To answer the above questions, the authors have examined the long history of circular economy (CE) ideas and debates from the early 20th century to nowadays by reviewing over 72 different CE-related concepts and ideas from the Global North and South alike. From this analysis their work develops the first 2x2 classification of circularity visions to date, which distinguishes different circularity discourses based on their position on fundamental socio-ecological aspects. This crucial addition to the CE literature, allows for a better navigation and understanding of the diverse visions of this contested concept. It can help both academics and practitioners better address the key challenges of CE implementation by fostering a cross-pollination of ideas, policies, practices and solutions.
The authors have found that there are two broad strains of circularity discourses: Circular Economy and Circular Society. Circular economy visions focus on sustainably circulating resources and see circularity mostly through the lens of business, industrial and technological innovations. It includes concepts such as Industrial Ecology, Industrial Metabolism, Biomimicry, Bioeconomy, Cleaner Production and Reverse Logistics. Circular Society visions, on the other hand, do not only seek to sustainably circulate resources throughout the economy, but also to circulate wealth, knowledge, technology and power in fundamentally redistributive and democratic manners. They thus have a holistic vision of circularity that includes social and political components (Steady State Economics, Doughnut Economics, Degrowth, Voluntary Simplicity, Regenerative Design, Permaculture and Buen Vivir.
To better illustrate the differences between the diversity of circularity discourse, the researchers establishe four main circularity discourse types (see figure below). Circularity discourses can be differentiated based on whether they are technological optimist or sceptical and whether they holistically integrate the social, ecological and political considerations of circularity or have a segmented focus on resource and economic considerations alone.
This research reveals that the present status quo is situated in the Technocentric Circular Economy discourse type, despite of the significant amount of literature on other circular discourses. The paper therefore aims to open the imaginary on the plurality of possible circular futures that exist and expand from the current focus on technocentric market-based approaches to circularity by including a diversity of other voices from the Global North and South alike. To learn more about these discourses and their implication for academics and practitioners please see the full article.