Circles, spirals, pyramids and cubes: why the circular economy cannot work

Skene, Keith R.

doi:10.1007/s11625-017-0443-3

Cited by 139 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Definitions included based upon this approach were inter alia definitions provided in Geissdoerfer et al (2017), Murray et al (2017), Zhu et al (2010aZhu et al ( , 2010b and definitions outlined by the Circular Academy (2017). Thirdly, we also included all definitions outlined in a recent special issue on the circular economy in the Journal of Industrial Ecology (Bocken et al, 2017) as well as additional recent literature, e. g. Skene (2017), as suggested by one reviewer of this paper. We note regarding this overall approach that no distinct search was undertaken for definitions for works that are not peer-reviewed.…”

Section: Sample Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet it is employed -besides by Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2012) and sometimes in abridged form -only eleven times, namely by Charonis (2012), Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2014), EUKN (2015), Schut et al (2015), Hobson (2016), Cullen (2017) Goldberg (2017), Moreau et al (2017), Niero et al (2017) and Skene (2017). Only three other definitions in our sample are used more than once: The (expanded) definition by Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013a) (used three more times), the definition by Preston (2012) (used one more time) and Li et al (2010) (used one more time).…”

Section: Sample Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThe circular economy concept has gained momentum both among scholars and practitioners. However, critics claim that it means many different things to different people. This paper provides further evidence for these critics. The aim of this paper is to create transparency regarding the current understandings of the circular economy concept. For this purpose, we have gathered 114 circular economy definitions which were coded on 17 dimensions. Our findings indicate that the circular economy is most frequently depicted as a combination of reduce, reuse and recycle activities, whereas it is oftentimes not highlighted that CE necessitates a systemic shift. We further find that the definitions show few explicit linkages of the circular economy concept to sustainable development. The main aim of the circular economy is considered to be economic prosperity, followed by environmental quality; its impact on social equity and future generations is barely mentioned. Furthermore, neither business models nor consumers are frequently outlined as enablers of the circular economy. We critically discuss the various circular economy conceptualizations throughout this paper. Overall, we hope to contribute via this study towards the coherence of the circular economy concept; we presume that significantly varying circular economy definitions may eventually result in the collapse of the concept.

show abstract

Section: Sample Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sample Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most CE conceptions tend to rest on an over-simplistic understanding of material flows (Linder and Williander 2017) and waste (Velis 2018). Claiming to model the CE on nature, it could be argued that CE advocates fundamentally misunderstand the role that waste plays in our habitat (Skene 2018). While the CE tries to get rid of waste and engender a system that is superefficient, the natural ecosystem is a complex system that continues to grow, and, as it increases in size, more energy is used, and more waste is produced (ibid.).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the special issue on the contested realities of the circular economy

Corvellec

Böhm

Stowell

et al. 2020

Culture and Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past decade the 'circular economy' (CE) has established itself as an influential model for economic development, with the Chinese central and regional governments (Su et al. 2013) and the European Union (European Commission 2018) being early propagators and policy champions. The ambition of the model is to create 'circular' material flows that break with the current 'linear' economic rationale of take, make and dispose, creating business value for its participants (Lacy and Rutqvist 2015; Esposito, Tse, and Soufani 2018). Inspired, among other influences, by the cradle-to-cradle design methodology (McDonough and Braungart 2009), the CE is to create waste-free technical loops that resemble biological loops and make waste disappear at the same time as being restorative and regenerative by design. This ambition has attracted the open support from a wide range of economic and political actors: intergovernmental bodies (OECD), influential forums (World Economic Forum), advocacy associations (World Business Council for Sustainable Development-WBCSD, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Circle Economy), leading corporations and consulting firms (e.g. Accenture, Cisco, Dell, H&M, Hewlett Packard, Intel, IKEA, McKinsey, Renault, and Levy Strauss), cities (Amsterdam, Glasgow) and regions (Region Skåne in Southern Sweden). The CE comes with a promise that circular relationships among markets, customers and natural resources (Lacy and Rutqvist 2015) have a unique capacity to combine economic growth with sustainability (Ghisellini, Cialani, and Ulgiati 2016). We acknowledge that the CE is not one 'thing', but, rather, could be seen as an 'empty signifier' (Valenzuela and Böhm 2017), which allows for a whole range of interpretations and approaches to be bundled together under the term 'circular economy'. Indeed, the CE is said to have 114 definitions (Kirchherr, Reike, and Hekkert 2017), which implies that academics and practitioners do not necessarily agree on precisely what the CE entails and how it should be implemented. In short, the CE is a contested concept (Korhonen et al. 2018), which is not surprising as essentially all approaches that try to square the circle of business-society-nature relations can be questioned and challenged from a variety of different viewpoints (McManus 1996; Carew and Mitchell 2008). Despite this 'emptiness' of the CE, allowing for open interpretation and even free, creative associations between a range of economic, social and environmental factors (Murray, Skene, and Haynes 2017), influential economic and political actors have been allowed to hegemonize the CE discourse. The result has been the narrowing down of latent possibilities in the systems thinking that underpins the CE. At heart, the CE is a radical concept, as it is historically embedded in a critique of established systems relations that have produced the 'unsustainability' that characterizes contemporary, linear forms of global capitalism (Hobson 2016). At its best, CE thinking takes a whole-systems approach, aiming to redesign e...

show abstract

“…Yet, CE remains a disputed or contested concept [19,20], perhaps due to many different definitions of what it means, likely due to its interdisciplinary theory and application. Kirchherr et al (2017) analyzed 114 definitions of the term and developed a meta-definition: "a CE describes an economic system that is based on business models which replace the end of life concept with reducing, and alternatively reusing and recycling materials in production, distribution, and consumption processes .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections on Service Learning for a Circular Economy Project in a Guatemalan Neighborhood, Central America

Kumble

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research presented in this paper explored multiple objectives. First, what are the requirements for establishing a new composting business that embraces the principles of circular economy? Second, how can employment opportunities for at-risk youths from the most impoverished neighborhood in Guatemala City be created, while adhering to the tenets of social sustainability, of which human rights is the corner stone? Third, what were the requirements involved in making compost in the challenging climatic conditions of Guatemala City? And finally, from an educational perspective, how can this be taught to university students incorporating community service learning in its pedagogy, coupled with the model of action research? What are the obstacles to overcome when initiating a startup business, balancing what appeared to be a mix of complex economic, environmental, and social elements? These three elements are the recognized pillars of sustainability, and as such, there existed a great opportunity to meld the principles of circular economy, community service learning, and action research within the context of putting theories into practice. This applied research attempted to explore how effectively this could be accomplished in Guatemala while overcoming complex cultural, environmental, and economic barriers.

show abstract

Circles, spirals, pyramids and cubes: why the circular economy cannot work

Cited by 139 publications

References 80 publications

Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions

Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions

Introduction to the special issue on the contested realities of the circular economy

Reflections on Service Learning for a Circular Economy Project in a Guatemalan Neighborhood, Central America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About