Circular economy

A circular economy (also referred to as circularity and CE)[2] is a model of production and consumption, which involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing materials and products as long as possible.[3] CE aims to tackle global challenges as climate change, biodiversity loss, waste, and pollution by emphasizing the design-based implementation of the three base principles of the model. The three principles required for the transformation to a circular economy are: eliminating waste and pollution, circulating products and materials, and the regeneration of nature. CE is defined in contradistinction to the traditional linear economy.[4][5] The idea and concepts of circular economy (CE) have been studied extensively in academia, business, and government over the past ten years. CE has been gaining popularity since it helps to minimize emissions and consumption of raw materials, open up new market prospects and principally, increase the sustainability of consumption and improve resource efficiency.[6][7]

An illustration of the circular economy concept[1]
An illustration showing the difference between the take, make waste linear economy approach, and the circular economy approach

At a government level, CE is viewed as means of combating global warming as well as a facilitator of long-term growth.[8] CE may geographically connect actors and resources to stop material loops at the regional level.[9] In its core principle, the European Parliament defines CE as, “a model of production and consumption, which involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing and recycling existing materials and products as long as possible. In this way, the life cycle of products is extended.”[3]

In a linear economy, natural resources are turned into products that are ultimately destined to become waste because of the way they have been designed and manufactured. This process is often summarized by "take, make, waste".[10] By contrast, a circular economy employs reuse, sharing, repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing and recycling to create a closed-loop system, reducing the use of resource inputs and the creation of waste, pollution and carbon emissions.[11] The circular economy aims to keep products, materials, equipment and infrastructure[12] in use for longer, thus improving the productivity of these resources. Waste materials and energy should become input for other processes through waste valorization: either as a component for another industrial process or as regenerative resources for nature (e.g., compost). The Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) defines the circular economy as an industrial economy that is restorative or regenerative by value and design.[13][14]


There are many definitions of the circular economy.[15] In China, CE is promoted as a top-down national political objective, while in other areas such as the European Union, Japan, and the USA it is a tool to design bottom-up environmental and waste management policies. The ultimate goal of promoting CE is the decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth.[16] A comprehensive definition could be: "Circular Economy is an economic system that targets zero waste and pollution throughout materials lifecycles, from environment extraction to industrial transformation, and final consumers, applying to all involved ecosystems. Upon its lifetime end, materials return to either an industrial process or, in the case of a treated organic residual, safely back to the environment as in a natural regenerating cycle. It operates by creating value at the macro, meso and micro levels and exploits to the fullest the sustainability nested concept. Used energy sources are clean and renewable. Resources use and consumption is efficient. Government agencies and responsible consumers play an active role in ensuring correct system long-term operation."[17]

More generally, circular development is a model of economic, social, and environmental production and consumption that aims to build an autonomous and sustainable society in tune with the issue of environmental resources.[18] The circular economy aims to transform our economy into one that is regenerative. An economy that innovates to reduce waste and the ecological and environmental impact of industries prior to happening rather than waiting to address the consequences of these issues.[19] This is done by designing new processes and solutions for the optimization of resources, decoupling reliance on finite resources.[18]

The circular economy is a framework of three principles, driven by design: eliminate waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use and regenerate natural systems.[4] It is based increasingly on renewable energy and materials, and it is accelerated by digital innovation. It is a resilient, distributed, diverse, and inclusive economic model. The circular economy is an economic concept often linked to sustainable development, provision of the Sustainable Development Goals (Global Development Goals) and an extension of a green economy.

Other definitions and precise thresholds that separate linear from circular activity have also been developed in the economic literature.[20][15][16]

History and aims

The concept of a circular economy cannot be traced back to one single date or author, rather to different schools of thought. [21]

General systems theory founded by the biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy, considers growth and energy for open and closed state systems. This theory was then applied to other areas such as in the case of circular economy, to economics. Economist Kenneth E. Boulding, in his paper ‘The economics of the coming Spaceship Earth’, argued that a circular economic system is a prerequisite for the maintenance of the sustainability of human life on Earth. Boulding describes the so-called “cowboy economy” as an open system in which the natural environment is typically perceived as limitless: no limit exists on the capacity of the outside to supply or receive energy and material flows.

Walter R. Stahel and Geneviève Reday-Mulvey in their book "The Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy" lay the foundation for the principles of the circular economy by describing how increasing labour may reduce energy intensive activities.

Simple economic models have ignored the economy-environment interrelationships. Allan Kneese in "The Economics of Natural Resources" indicates how resources are not endlessly renewable, and mentions the term circular economy for the first time explicitly in 1988. [22]

In their book ‘Economics of natural resources and the environment’, Pearce and Turner explains the shift from the traditional linear or open-ended economic system to the circular economic system (Pearce and Turner (1990)). [23] They describe an economic system where waste at extraction, production, and consumption stages is turned into inputs.

From the early 2000s, China integrated the notion into its industrial and environmental policies to make them resource-oriented, production-oriented, waste, use-oriented, and life cycle oriented.[24] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation [25] was instrumental in the diffusion of the concept in Europe and the Americas. The European Union introduced its vision of the circular economy in 2014, a New Circular Economy Action Plan having been launched in 2020 that "show the way to a climate-neutral, competitive economy of empowered consumers".[26]

The original diffusion of the notion benefited from three major events: the explosion of raw material prices between 2000 and 2010, the Chinese control of rare earth materials, and the 2008 economic crisis.[27] Today, the climate emergency and environmental challenges induce companies and individuals into rethinking their production and consumption patterns, the circular economy is framed as one of the answers to these challenges. Key macro-arguments in favor of the circular economy are that it could enable an economic growth that does not add to the burden on natural resources extraction but decouples resource uses from the development of economic welfare for a growing population, reduce foreign dependence on critical materials, lowers CO2 emissions, reduce the production of waste and introduces new modes of production and consumption able to create further value.[3] Corporate arguments in favor of the circular economy are that it could secure the supply of raw materials, reduces the price volatility of inputs and control costs, reduce spills and waste, extends the life cycle of products, serve new segments of customers, and generate long term shareholder value. A key idea behind the circular business models is to create loops throughout to recapture value that would otherwise be lost.[28]

Of particular concern is the irrevocable loss of raw materials due to their increase in entropy in the linear business model.[29] Starting with the production of waste in manufacturing, the entropy increases further by mixing and diluting materials in their manufacturing assembly, followed by corrosion and wear and tear during the usage period. At the end of the life cycle, there is an exponential increase in disorder arising from the mixing of materials in landfills.[29] As a result of this directionality of the entropy law, the world's resources are effectively “lost forever”.

Circular development is directly linked to the circular economy and aims to build a sustainable society based on recyclable and renewable resources, to protect society from waste and to be able to form a model that is no longer considering resources as infinite.[18] This new model of economic development focuses on the production of goods and services taking into account environmental and social costs.[18] Circular development, therefore, supports the circular economy to create new societies in line with new waste management and sustainability objectives that meet the needs of citizens. It is about enabling economies and societies, in general, to become more sustainable.

However, critiques of the circular economy [30] suggest that proponents of the circular economy may overstate the potential benefits of the circular economy. These critiques put forwards that the circular economy has too many definitions to be delimited, making it an umbrella concept that, although exciting and appealing, is hard to understand and assess. Critiques mean that the literature ignores much-established knowledge. In particular, it neglects the thermodynamic principle that one can neither create nor destroy matter. Therefore, a future where waste no longer exists, where material loops are closed, and products are recycled indefinitely is, in any practical sense, impossible. They point out that a lack of inclusion of indigenous discourses from the Global South means that the conversation is less ecocentric than it depicts itself. That there is a lack of clarity as to whether the circular economy is more sustainable than the linear economy, and what its social benefits might be, in particular, due to diffuse contours.[31] It may thus not be the panacea many had hoped for.[32]


Car life cycle

Intuitively, the circular economy would appear to be more sustainable than the current linear economic system. Reducing the resources used, and the waste and leakage created, conserves resources and helps to reduce environmental pollution. However, it is argued by some that these assumptions are simplistic; that they disregard the complexity of existing systems and their potential trade-offs. For example, the social dimension of sustainability seems to be only marginally addressed in many publications on the circular economy. Some cases that might require different or additional strategies, like purchasing new, more energy-efficient equipment. By reviewing the literature, a team of researchers from Cambridge and TU Delft could show that there are at least eight different relationship types between sustainability and the circular economy.[11] In addition, it is important to underline the innovation aspect at the heart of sustained development based on circular economy components.[33]


The circular economy can cover a broad scope. Researchers have focused on different areas such as industrial applications with both product-oriented, natural resources and services,[34] practice and policies[35] to better understand the limitations that the CE currently faces, strategic management for details of the circular economy and different outcomes such as potential re-use applications[36] and waste management.[37]

The circular economy includes products, infrastructure, equipment and services,[38] and applies to every industry sector. It includes 'technical' resources (metals, minerals, fossil resources) and 'biological' resources (food, fibers, timber, etc.).[14] Most schools of thought advocate a shift from fossil fuels to the use of renewable energy, and emphasize the role of diversity as a characteristic of resilient and sustainable systems. The circular economy includes a discussion of the role of money and finance as part of the wider debate, and some of its pioneers have called for a revamp of economic performance measurement tools.[39] One study points out how modularisation could become a cornerstone to enabling a circular economy and enhancing the sustainability of energy infrastructure.[40] One example of a circular economy model is the implementation of renting models in traditional ownership areas (e.g. electronics, clothes, furniture, transportation). By renting the same product to several clients, manufacturers can increase revenues per unit, thus decreasing the need to produce more to increase revenues. Recycling initiatives are often described as circular economy and are likely to be the most widespread models.[39]


As early as 1966 Kenneth Boulding raised awareness of an "open economy" with unlimited input resources and output sinks, in contrast with a "closed economy", in which resources and sinks are tied and remain as long as a possible part of the economy. Boulding's essay "The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth"[41] is often cited as the first expression of the "circular economy",[42] although Boulding does not use that phrase.

The circular economy is grounded in the study of feedback-rich (non-linear) systems, particularly living systems.[14] The contemporary understanding of the Circular Economy and its practical applications to economic systems evolved incorporating different features and contributions from a variety of concepts sharing the idea of closed loops. Some of the relevant theoretical influences are cradle to cradle, laws of ecology (e.g., Barry Commoner § The Closing Circle), looped and performance economy (Walter R. Stahel), regenerative design, industrial ecology, biomimicry and blue economy (see section "Related concepts").[11]

The circular economy was further modelled by British environmental economists David W. Pearce and R. Kerry Turner in 1989. In Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment,[43] they pointed out that a traditional open-ended economy was developed with no built-in tendency to recycle, which was reflected by treating the environment as a waste reservoir.[44]

In the early 1990s, Tim Jackson began to create the scientific basis for this new approach to industrial production in his edited collection Clean Production Strategies,[45] including chapters from pre-eminent writers in the field, such as Walter R Stahel, Bill Rees and Robert Constanza. At the time still called 'preventive environmental management', his follow-on book Material Concerns: Pollution, Profit and Quality of Life[46] synthesized these findings into a manifesto for change, moving industrial production away from an extractive linear system towards a more circular economy.

Emergence of the idea

In their 1976 research report to the European Commission, "The Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy", Walter Stahel and Genevieve Reday sketched the vision of an economy in loops (or circular economy) and its impact on job creation, economic competitiveness, resource savings and waste prevention. The report was published in 1982 as the book Jobs for Tomorrow: The Potential for Substituting Manpower for Energy.[47]

In 1982, Walter Stahel was awarded third prize in the Mitchell Prize competition on sustainable business models with a paper The Product-Life Factor. First prize went to the then US Secretary of Agriculture, second prize to Amory and Hunter Lovins, and fourth prize to Peter Senge.

Considered one of the first pragmatic and credible sustainability think tanks, the main goals of Stahel's institute are to extend the working life of products, to make goods last longer, to re-use existing goods and ultimately to prevent waste. This model emphasizes the importance of selling services rather than products, an idea referred to as the "functional service economy" and sometimes put under the wider notion of "performance economy". This model also advocates "more localization of economic activity".[48]

Promoting a circular economy was identified as a national policy in China's 11th five-year plan starting in 2006.[49] The Ellen MacArthur Foundation has more recently outlined the economic opportunity of a circular economy, bringing together complementary schools of thought in an attempt to create a coherent framework, thus giving the concept a wide exposure and appeal.[50]

Most frequently described as a framework for thinking, its supporters claim it is a coherent model that has value as part of a response to the end of the era of cheap oil and materials, moreover contributing to the transition to a low-carbon economy. In line with this, a circular economy can contribute to meeting the COP 21 Paris Agreement. The emissions reduction commitments made by 195 countries at the COP 21 Paris Agreement are not sufficient to limit global warming to 1.5 °C. To reach the 1.5 °C ambition it is estimated that additional emissions reductions of 15 billion tonnes of CO2 per year need to be achieved by 2030. Circle Economy and Ecofys estimated that circular economy strategies may deliver emissions reductions that could bridge the gap by half.[51]

Moving away from the linear model

Linear "take, make, dispose" industrial processes, and the lifestyles dependent on them, use up finite reserves to create products with a finite lifespan, which end up in landfills or in incinerators. The circular approach, by contrast, takes insights from living systems. It considers that our systems should work like organisms, processing nutrients that can be fed back into the cycle—whether biological or technical—hence the "closed loop" or "regenerative" terms usually associated with it. The generic circular economy label can be applied to or claimed by several different schools of thought, but all of them gravitate around the same basic principles.

One prominent thinker on the topic is Walter R. Stahel, an architect, economist, and a founding father of industrial sustainability. Credited with having coined the expression "Cradle to Cradle" (in contrast with "Cradle to Grave", illustrating our "Resource to Waste" way of functioning), in the late 1970s, Stahel worked on developing a "closed loop" approach to production processes, co-founding the Product-Life Institute in Geneva. In the UK, Steve D. Parker researched waste as a resource in the UK agricultural sector in 1982, developing novel closed-loop production systems. These systems mimicked and worked with the biological ecosystems they exploited.

Cradle to Cradle

Circular economy often refers to quantities of recycled materials or reduced waste, however Cradle to Cradle Design focuses on quality of products including safety for humans and environmental health. Popularized by the book Cradle to Cradle: Remaking The Way We Make Things, Cradle to Cradle Design has been widely implemented by architect William McDonough, who was introduced as the "father of the circular economy" while receiving the 2017 Fortune Award for Circular Economy Leadership in Davos during the World Economic Forum.

Levels of circularity ("R" models)

Another circular model using mostly "R"s: "Long-lasting, Maintenance, Repair, Reuse, Remanufacturing, Refurbishing, Recycling."
A French-language model of circularity using mostly "R"s: partage (share), réparation (repair), réemploi (reemploy), remise à neuf (refurbish/renew), recyclage (recycle)

In the 2010s, several models of a circular economy were developed that employed a set of steps, or levels of circularity, typically using English verbs or nouns starting with the letter "r".[52] The first such model, known as the "Three R principle", was "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle",[52] which can be traced back as early as the 1970s.[53] According to Breteler (2022), the 'most comprehensive and extensive' of four compared models was the "10R principle", developed by sustainable entrepreneurship professor and former Dutch Environment Minister Jacqueline Cramer.[52]

Levels of circularity (Breteler 2022)[52]
10R principle
Cramer 2017[54]
Ellen MacArthur
Foundation 2013[55]
Ladder of Lansink
Lansink 2015[56]
Three R principle
Explanation (Cramer 2017)[54][52]
Refuse Maintain/prolong Prevention Reduce 'Prevent raw materials use'
Reduce 'Decrease raw materials use'
Renew/Redesign[57] 'Redesign product in view of circularity'
Reuse Reuse/redistribute Reuse Reuse 'Use product again (second hand)'
Repair 'Maintain and repair product'
Refurbish Refurbish/
'Revive product'
Remanufacture 'Make new product from second hand'
Repurpose 'Re-use product but with other function'
Recycle Recycle Recycling Recycle 'Salvage material streams with highest possible value'
Recover Energy recovery Energy recovery 'Incinerate waste with energy recovery'
Landfill Landfill

Towards the circular economy

In 2013, a report was released entitled Towards the Circular Economy: Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. The report, commissioned by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and developed by McKinsey & Company, was the first volume of its kind[58][59] to consider the economic and business opportunity for the transition to a restorative, circular model. Using product case studies and economy-wide analysis, the report details the potential for significant benefits across the EU. It argues that a subset of the EU manufacturing sector could realize net materials cost savings worth up to $630 billion annually towards 2025—stimulating economic activity in the areas of product development, remanufacturing and refurbishment. Towards the Circular Economy also identified the key building blocks in making the transition to a circular economy, namely in skills in circular design and production, new business models, skills in building cascades and reverse cycles, and cross-cycle/cross-sector collaboration.[60] This is supported by a case study from the automotive industry,[61] highlighting the importance of integrating a circular model holistically within the entire value chain of a company, taking into account the interdependencies between the product, process, and system level.

Another report by WRAP and the Green Alliance (called "Employment and the circular economy: job creation in a more resource efficient Britain"), done in 2015 has examined different public policy scenarios to 2030. It estimates that, with no policy change, 200,000 new jobs will be created, reducing unemployment by 54,000. A more aggressive policy scenario could create 500,000 new jobs and permanently reduce unemployment by 102,000.[62]

On the other hand, implementing a circular economy in the United States has been presented by Ranta et al.[34] who analyzed the institutional drivers and barriers for the circular economy in different regions worldwide, by following the framework developed by Scott R.[63] In the article, different worldwide environment-friendly institutions were selected, and two types of manufacturing processes were chosen for the analysis (1) a product-oriented, and (2) a waste management.[34][63] Specifically, in the U.S., the product-oriented company case in the study was Dell, a US manufacturing company for computer technology, which was the first company to offer free recycling to customers and to launch to the market a computer made from recycling materials from a verified third-party source.[34] Moreover, the waste management case that includes many stages such as collection, disposal, recycling[64] in study was Republic Services, the second-largest waste management company in the US. The approach to measuring the drivers and barriers was to first identify indicators for their cases in study and then to categorize these indicators into drivers when the indicator was in favor of the circular economy model or a barrier when it was not.[34]

On 2 March 2022 in Nairobi, representatives of 175 countries pledged to create a legally binding agreement to end plastic pollution by the end of the year 2024. The agreement should address the full lifecycle of plastic and propose alternatives including reusability. The agreement is expected to facilitate the transition to a circular economy that will reduce GHG emissions by 25 per cent, according to the published statement.[65][66]

Circular product design and standards

Product designs that optimize durability, ease of maintenance and repair, upgradability, re-manufacturability, separability, disassembly and reassembly are considered key elements for the transition toward circularity of products.[67] Standardization can facilitate related "innovative, sustainable and competitive advantages for European businesses and consumers".[68] Design for standardization and compatibility would make "product parts and interfaces suitable for other products and aims at multi-functionality and modularity".[69] A "Product Family Approach" has been proposed to establish "commonality, compatibility, standardization, or modularization among different products or product lines".[70]

It has been argued that emerging technologies should be designed with circular economy principles from the start, including solar panels.[71]

Design of circularity processes

Not all types of recycling processes (one circularity process) have equal impacts on health and sustainability.

For sustainability and health, the circularity process designs may be of crucial importance. Large amounts of electronic waste are already recycled but far from where they were consumed, with often low efficiency, and with substantial negative effects on human health and the foreign environment.

Recycling should therefore "reduce environmental impacts of the overall product/service provision system assessed based on the life-cycle assessment approach".[72]

One study suggests that "a mandatory certification scheme for recyclers of electronic waste, in or out of Europe, would help to incentivize high-quality treatment processes and efficient material recovery".[73]

Digitalization may enable more efficient corporate processes and minimize waste.[74]

Circular business models

Circular business models[75]

While the initial focus of the academic, industry, and policy activities were mainly focused on the development of re-X (recycling, remanufacturing, reuse, etc.) technology, it soon became clear that the technological capabilities increasingly exceed their implementation. To leverage this technology for the transition toward a circular economy, various stakeholders have to work together. This shifted attention towards business-model innovation as a key leverage for 'circular' technology adaption.[76] Rheaply, a platform that aims to scale reuse within and between organizations, is an example of a technology that focuses on asset management & disposition to support organizations transitioning to circular business models.[77]

Circular business models can be defined as business models that are closing, narrowing, slowing, intensifying, and dematerializing loops, to minimize the resource inputs into and the waste and emission leakage out of the organizational system. This comprises recycling measures (closing), efficiency improvements (narrowing), use phase extensions (slowing), a more intense use phase (intensifying), and the substitution of products by service and software solutions (dematerializing).[75] These strategies can be achieved through the purposeful design of material recovery processes and related circular supply chains.[78] As illustrated in the Figure, these five approaches to resource loops can also be seen as generic strategies or archetypes of circular business model innovation. The development of circular products, circular business models, and, more generally, the circular economy is conditioned upon the affordances of the materials involved, that is the enablement and constraints afforded by these materials to someone engaging with them for circular purposes.[79]

Circular business models, as the economic model more broadly, can have different emphases and various objectives, for example: extend the life of materials and products, where possible over multiple 'use cycles'; use a 'waste = food' approach to help recover materials, and ensure those biological materials returned to earth are benign, not toxic; retain the embedded energy, water, and other process inputs in the product and the material for as long as possible; Use systems-thinking approaches in designing solutions; regenerate or at least conserve nature and living systems; push for policies, taxes and market mechanisms that encourage product stewardship, for example 'polluter pays' regulations.[80]

Digital circular economy

Smart circular economy framework[81]

Building on circular business model innovation, digitalization and digital technologies (e.g., internet of things, big data, artificial intelligence, blockchain) are seen as a key enabler for upscaling the circular economy.[82][83][84] Also referred to as the data economy, the central role of digital technologies for accelerating the circular economy transition is emphasized within the Circular Economy Action Plan of the European Green deal. The smart circular economy framework illustrates this by establishing a link between digital technologies and sustainable resource management.[81] This allows assessment of different digital circular economy strategies with their associated level of maturity, providing guidance on how to leverage data and analytics to maximize circularity (i.e., optimizing functionality and resource intensity). Supporting this, a Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda for circular economy was published in the framework of the Horizon 2020 project CICERONE that puts digital technologies at the core of many key innovation fields (waste management, industrial symbiosis, products traceability).[85] Researchers have emphasised the need to comply to several requirements for implementing blockchain technology in order to make a circular economy a reality.[86]

Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy (PACE)

In 2018, the World Economic Forum, World Resources Institute, Philips, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, United Nations Environment Programme, and over 40 other partners launched the Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy (PACE).[87][88] PACE follows on the legacy of WEF's CEO-led initiative, Project MainStream, which sought to scale up circular economy innovations.[89] PACE's original intent has three focal areas: (1) developing models of blended finance for circular economy projects, especially in developing and emerging economies; (2) creating policy frameworks to address specific barriers to advancing the circular economy; and (3) promoting public–private partnership for these purposes.[90][91]

In 2020, PACE released a report with partner Circle Economy claiming that the world is 8.6% circular, claiming all countries are "developing countries" given the unsustainable levels of consumption in countries with higher levels of human development.[92][93]

PACE is a coalition of CEOs and Ministers—including the leaders of global corporations like IKEA, Coca-Cola, Alphabet Inc., and DSM (company), governmental partners and development institutions from Denmark, The Netherlands, Finland, Rwanda, UAE, China, and beyond.[94][95] Initiatives currently managed under PACE include the Capital Equipment Coalition with Philips and numerous other partners[96][97][98] and the Global Battery Alliance with over 70 partners.[99][100] In January 2019, PACE released a report entitled "A New Circular Vision for Electronics: Time for a Global Reboot" (in support of the United Nations E-waste Coalition.[101][102]

The coalition is hosted by a Secretariat headed by David B. McGinty, former leader of the Human Development Innovation Fund and Palladium International, and board member of BoardSource.[103][104] Board Members include Inger Andersen, Frans van Houten, Ellen MacArthur, Lisa P. Jackson, and Stientje van Veldhoven.[105]

Circular economy standard BS 8001:2017

To provide authoritative guidance to organizations implementing circular economy (CE) strategies, in 2017, the British Standards Institution (BSI) developed and launched the first circular economy standard "BS 8001:2017 Framework for implementing the principles of the circular economy in organizations".[106] The circular economy standard BS 8001:2017 tries to align the far-reaching ambitions of the CE with established business routines at the organizational level. It contains a comprehensive list of CE terms and definitions, describes the core CE principles, and presents a flexible management framework for implementing CE strategies in organizations. Little concrete guidance on circular economy monitoring and assessment is given, however, as there is no consensus yet on a set of central circular economy performance indicators applicable to organizations and individual products.[107]

Development of ISO/TC 323 circular economy standard

In 2018, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) established a technical committee, TC 323, in the field of circular economy to develop frameworks, guidance, supporting tools, and requirements for the implementation of activities of all involved organizations, to maximize the contribution to Sustainable Development.[108] Four new ISO standards are under development and in the direct responsibility of the committee (consisting of 70 participating members and 11 observing members).

Strategic management in a circular economy

The CE does not aim at changing the profit maximization paradigm of businesses. Rather, it suggests an alternative way of thinking how to attain a sustained competitive advantage (SCA), while concurrently addressing the environmental and socio-economic concerns of the 21st century. Indeed, stepping away from linear forms of production most often leads to the development of new core competencies along the value chain and ultimately superior performance that cuts costs, improves efficiency, promote brand names, mitigate risks, develop new products,[109] and meets advanced government regulations and the expectations of green consumers. But despite the multiple examples of companies successfully embracing circular solutions across industries, and notwithstanding the wealth of opportunities that exist when a firm has clarity over what circular actions fit its unique profile and goals, CE decision-making remains a highly complex exercise with no one-size-fits-all solution. The intricacy and fuzziness of the topic is still felt by most companies (especially SMEs), which perceive circular strategies as something not applicable to them or too costly and risky to implement.[110] This concern is today confirmed by the results of ongoing monitoring studies like the Circular Readiness Assessment.[111]

Strategic management is the field of management that comes to the rescue allowing companies to carefully evaluate CE-inspired ideas, but also to take a firm apart and investigate if/how/where seeds of circularity can be found or implanted. The book Strategic Management and the Circular Economy defined for the first time a CE strategic decision-making process,[112] covering the phases of analysis, formulation, and planning. Each phase is supported by frameworks and concepts popular in management consulting – like idea tree, value chain, VRIE, Porter's five forces, PEST, SWOT,[113] strategic clock, or the internationalization matrix – all adapted through a CE lens, hence revealing new sets of questions and considerations. Although yet to be verified, it is argued that all standard tools for strategic management can and should be calibrated and applied to a CE. A specific argument has already been made for the strategy direction matrix of product vs market and the 3 × 3 GE-McKinsey matrix to assess business strength vs industry attractiveness, the BCG matrix of market share vs industry growth rate, and Kraljic's portfolio matrix.[114]

Adoption and applications by industry

Textile industry

A circular economy within the textiles industry refers to the practice of clothes and fibers continually being recycled, to re-enter the economy as much as possible rather than ending up as waste.

A circular textiles economy is in response to the current linear model of the fashion industry, "in which raw materials are extracted, manufactured into commercial goods and then bought, used and eventually discarded by consumers" (Business of Fashion, 2017).[115] 'Fast fashion' companies have fueled the high rates of consumption which further magnify the issues of a linear system. "The take-make-dispose model not only leads to an economic value loss of over $500 billion per year but also has numerous negative environmental and societal impacts" (Business of Fashion, 2018).[116] Such environmental effects include tons of clothing ending up in landfills and incineration, while the societal effects put human rights at risk. A documentary about the world of fashion, The True Cost (2015),[117] explained that in fast fashion, "wages, unsafe conditions, and factory disasters are all excused because of the needed jobs they create for people with no alternatives." This shows that fast fashion is harming the planet in more ways than one by running on a linear system.

It is argued that by following a circular economy, the textile industry can be transformed into a sustainable business. A 2017 report, "A New Textiles Economy",[118] stated the four key ambitions needed to establish a circular economy: "phasing out substances of concern and microfiber release; transforming the way clothes are designed, sold and used to break free from their increasingly disposable nature; radically improving recycling by transforming clothing design, collection, and reprocessing; and making effective use of resources and moving to renewable input." While it may sound like a simple task, only a handful of designers in the fashion industry have taken charge, including Patagonia, Eileen Fisher, Nathalia JMag and Stella McCartney. An example of a circular economy within a fashion brand is Eileen Fisher's Tiny Factory, in which customers are encouraged to bring their worn clothing to be manufactured and resold. In a 2018 interview,[119] Fisher explained, "A big part of the problem with fashion is overconsumption. We need to make less and sell less... you get to use your creativity but you also get to sell more but not create more stuff."

Circular initiatives, such as clothing rental startups, are also getting more and more highlight in the EU and in the US as well. Operating with circular business model, rental services offer everyday fashion, baby wear, maternity wear for rent. The companies either offer flexible pricing in a 'pay as you rent' model like Palanta does,[120] or offer fixed monthly subscriptions such as Rent The Runway or Le Tote.

Another circular initiative is offering a take-back program. A company located in Colorado Circular Threads repurposes post-consumer waste materials such as old denim jeans, retired climbing rope, and discarded sails into new products, rather than letting them go to a landfill. Their take back program allows the consumer to return any product at any time so that it can be recycled again.[121]

Both China and Europe have taken the lead in pushing a circular economy. McDowall et al. 2017 stated that the "Chinese perspective on the circular economy is broad, incorporating pollution and other issues alongside waste and resource concerns, [while] Europe's conception of the circular economy has a narrower environmental scope, focusing on waste and resources and opportunities for business".[122]

Construction industry

The construction sector is one of the world's largest waste generators. The circular economy appears as a helpful solution to diminish the environmental impact of the industry.

Circular economy in the construction supply chain[86]

Construction is very important to the economy of the European Union and its state members. It provides 18 million direct jobs and contributes to about 9% of the EU's GDP.[123] The main causes of the construction's environmental impact are found in the consumption of non-renewable resources and the generation of contaminant residues, both of which are increasing at an accelerating pace.[124]

Decision making about the circular economy can be performed on the operational (connected with particular parts of the production process), tactical (connected with whole processes) and strategic (connected with the whole organization) levels. It may concern both construction companies as well as construction projects (where a construction company is one of the stakeholders).

End-of-life buildings can be deconstructed, hereby creating new construction elements that can be used for creating new buildings and freeing up space for new development.[125]

Modular construction systems can be useful to create new buildings in the future, and have the advantage of allowing easier deconstruction and reuse of the components afterwards (end-of-life buildings).

Another example that fits the idea of circular economy in the construction sector on the operational level, there can be pointed walnut husks, that belong to hard, light and natural abrasives used for example in cleaning brick surfaces. Abrasive grains are produced from crushed, cleaned and selected walnut shells. They are classified as reusable abrasives. A first attempt to measure the success of circular economy implementation was done in a construction company.[126] The circular economy can contribute to creating new posts and economic growth.[127] According to Gorecki,[128] one of such posts may be the Circular economy manager employed for construction projects.

Automotive industry

The circular economy is beginning to catch on inside the automotive industry.[129] A case study within the heavy-duty and off-road industry[61] analyses the implementation of circular practices into a lean manufacturing context, the currently dominant production strategy in automotive. Lean has continuously shown to increase efficiency by eliminating waste and focusing on customer value,[130] contributing to eco-efficiency by narrowing resource loops. However, other measures are needed to slow down and close the resource loops altogether and reach eco-effectiveness.[131] The study finds significant potentials by combining the lean and the circular approach, to not only focus on the product and process levels (eco-efficiency), but also on the system perspective (eco-effectiveness).[61] There are also incentives for carmakers to do so as a 2016 report by Accenture stated that the circular economy could redefine competitiveness in the automotive sector in terms of price, quality, and convenience and could double revenue by 2030 and lower the cost base by up to fourteen percent. So far, it has typically translated itself into using parts made from recycled materials,[132] remanufacturing of car parts and looking at the design of new cars.[133][134] With the vehicle recycling industry (in the EU) only being able to recycle just 75% of the vehicle, meaning 25% isn't recycled and may even end up in landfills,[135] there is much to improve here. In the electric vehicle industry, disassembly robots are used to help disassemble the vehicle.[136] In the EU's ETN-Demeter project (European Training Network for the Design and Recycling of Rare-Earth Permanent Magnet Motors and Generators in Hybrid and Full Electric Vehicles)[137] they are looking at the sustainable design issue. They are for example making designs of electric motors of which the magnets can be easily removed for recycling the rare earth metals.

Some car manufacturers such as Volvo are also looking at alternative ownership models (leasing from the automotive company; "Care by Volvo").[138]

Logistics industry

The logistics industry plays an important role in the Dutch economy because the Netherlands is located in a specific area where the transit of commodities takes place on a daily basis. The Netherlands is an example of a country from the EU that has increasingly moved towards incorporating a circular economy given the vulnerability of the Dutch economy (as well as other EU countries) to be highly dependable on raw materials imports from countries such as China, which makes the country susceptible to the unpredictable importation costs for such primary goods.[139]

Research related to the Dutch industry shows that 25% of the Dutch companies are knowledgeable and interested in a circular economy; furthermore, this number increases to 57% for companies with more than 500 employees. Some of the areas are chemical industries, wholesale trade, industry and agriculture, forestry and fisheries because they see a potential reduction of costs when reusing, recycling and reducing raw materials imports. In addition, logistic companies can enable a connection to a circular economy by providing customers incentives to reduce costs through shipment and route optimization, as well as, offering services such as prepaid shipping labels, smart packaging, and take-back options.[139] The shift from linear flows of packaging to circular flows as encouraged by the circular economy is critical for the sustainable performance and reputation of the packaging industry.[78] The government-wide program for a circular economy is aimed at developing a circular economy in the Netherlands by 2050.[140]

Several statistics have indicated that there will be an increase in freight transport worldwide, which will affect the environmental impacts of the global warming potential causing a challenge to the logistics industry. However, the Dutch council for the Environment and Infrastructure (Dutch acronym: Rli) provided a new framework in which it suggests that the logistics industry can provide other ways to add value to the different activities in the Dutch economy. Examples of adding value in innovative ways to the Dutch economy are an exchange of resources (either waste or water flows) for production from different industries and changing the transit port to a transit hub concept. The Rli studied the role of the potentials of the logistics industry for three sectors, agriculture and food, chemical industries and high tech industries.[139]


The Netherlands, aiming to have a completely circular economy by 2050,[141] intends a shift to circular agriculture (kringlooplandbouw[142]) as part of this plan. This shift plans on having a "sustainable and strong agriculture" by as early as 2030.[143][144] Changes in the Dutch laws and regulations will be introduced. Some key points in this plant include:

  • closing the fodder-manure cycle
  • reusing as much waste streams as possible (a team Reststromen will be appointed)
  • reducing the use of artificial fertilizers in favor of natural manure
  • providing the chance for farms within experimentation areas to deviate from law and regulations
  • implementing uniform methods to measure the soil quality
  • providing the opportunity to agricultural entrepreneurs to sign an agreement with the Staatsbosbeheer ("State forest management") to have it use the lands they lease for natuurinclusieve landbouw ("nature-inclusive management")
  • providing initiatives to increase the earnings of farmers

Furniture industry

When it comes to the furniture industry, most of the products are passive durable products, and accordingly implementing strategies and business models that extend the lifetime of the products (like repairing and remanufacturing) would usually have lower environmental impacts and lower costs.[145] Companies such as GGMS are supporting a circular approach to furniture by refurbishing and reupholstering items for reuse.[146]

The EU has seen a huge potential for implementing a circular economy in the furniture sector. Currently, out of 10,000,000 tonnes of annually discarded furniture in the EU, most of it ends up in landfills or is incinerated. There is a potential increase of €4.9 billion in Gross Value Added by switching to a circular model by 2030, and 163,300 jobs could be created.[147]

A study about the status of Danish furniture companies' efforts on a circular economy states that 44% of the companies included maintenance in their business models, 22% had take-back schemes, and 56% designed furniture for recycling. The authors of the study concluded that although a circular furniture economy in Denmark is gaining momentum, furniture companies lack knowledge on how to effectively transition, and the need to change the business model could be another barrier.[148]

Another report in the UK saw a huge potential for reuse and recycling in the furniture sector. The study concluded that around 42% of the bulk waste sent to landfills annually (1.6 million tonnes) is furniture. They also found that 80% of the raw material in the production phase is waste.

Oil and gas industry

The uptake to reuse within the oil and gas industry is very poor, the opportunity to reuse is never more evident, or possible, as when the equipment is being decommissioned.[12] Hundreds of thousands of tons of waste are being brought back onshore to be recycled. Unfortunately, what this equates to; is equipment, which is perfectly suitable for continued use, being disposed of.[149]

In the next 30–40 years, the oil and gas sector will have to decommission 600 installations in the UK alone. Over the next decade around 840,000 tonnes of materials will have to be recovered at an estimated cost of £25Bn. In 2017 North Sea oil and gas decommissioning became a net drain on the public purse. With UK taxpayers covering 50%–70% of the bill, there is an urgent need to discuss the most economic, social and environmentally beneficial decommissioning solutions for the general public.[150]

Organizations such as Zero Waste Scotland have conducted studies to identify areas with reuse potential, allowing equipment to continue life in other industries, or be redeployed for oil and gas .[151]

Renewable energy industry

Oil and gas energy resources are incompatible with the idea of a circular economy, since they are defined as "development that meets the needs of the present while compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".[152] A sustainable circular economy can only be powered by renewable energies, such as wind, solar, hydropower, and geothermal.[153]

What gives entities the ability to achieve 'net zero' carbon-emissions, is that they can offset their fossil fuel consumption by removing carbon from the atmosphere. While this is a necessary first step, global smart grid technologist, Steve Hoy, believes that in order to create a circular economy we should adapt the concept of 'True Zero' as opposed to 'net zero', which is eliminating fossil fuel consumption entirely so that all energy is produced from renewable sources.[154][155]

Current growth projections in the renewable energy industry expect a significant amount of energy and raw materials to manufacture and maintain these renewable systems. "Due to the emissions attributed to fossil-fuel electricity generation, the overall carbon footprint of renewable energy technologies is significantly lower than for fossil-fuel generation over the respective systems lifespan."[156] However, there are still linear trajectories when establishing renewable energy systems that should be assessed in order to fully transition to a circular economy.[5]

Education industry

In 2018, The Ellen MacArthur Foundation identified 138 institutions with circular economy course offerings.[157] Since then the theme of CE topics in teaching has been incorporated at a steadily increasing pace, with plans for adoption at university, city, and country wide levels.[158][159] Zero Waste Scotland is an example of a country wide program that plans to implement CE into the Scottish education system through the "YES Circular Economy Challenge" which advocates that "every learning environment should have a whole-environment approach to learning for sustainability that is robust, demonstrable, evaluated and supported by leadership at all levels".[159] A 2021 report by the EMF compares London and New York CE course offerings and finds that there is not a "whole-environment" representation when it comes to different CE topics, with an element of the technical CE cycle being covered in 90% and element of the biological cycle covered in 50% of the 80 analyzed circular economy courses.[158] The EMF looks critically at the distribution of CE courses and researchers at Utrecht University Julian Kirchherr and Laura Piscicelli analyze the success of their introductory CE course in "Towards an Education for the Circular Economy (ECE): Five Teaching Principles and a Case Study". With 114 published definitions for the Circular Economy, synthesis and collaboration, previously exemplified, could benefit and popularize CE application in higher education.[158]

Plastic waste management

Laws related to recyclability, waste management, domestic materials recovery facilities, product composition, biodegradability and prevention of import/export of specific wastes may support prevention of plastic pollution. A study considers producer/manufacturer responsibility "a practical approach toward addressing the issue of plastic pollution", suggesting that "Existing and adopted policies, legislations, regulations, and initiatives at global, regional, and national level play a vital role".[160]

Standardization of products, especially of packaging[161][162] which are, as of 2022, often composed of different materials (each and across products) that are hard or currently impossible to either separate or recycle together in general or in an automated way[163][164] could support recyclability and recycling.

For instance, there are systems that can theoretically distinguish between and sort 12 types of plastics such as PET using hyperspectral imaging and algorithms developed via machine learning[165][166] while only an estimated 9% of the estimated 6.3 billion tonnes of plastic waste from the 1950s up to 2018 has been recycled (12% has been incinerated and the rest reportedly being "dumped in landfills or the natural environment").[167]

Rare-earth elements recovery

Literature published in 2004 suggests that, along with previously established pollution mitigation, a more circular supply chain would help mitigate some of the pollution at the extraction point. This means recycling and reusing REEs that are already in use or reaching the end of their life cycle.[168] A study published in 2014 suggests a method to recycle REEs from waste nickel-metal hydride batteries, demonstrating a recovery rate of 95.16%.[169] Rare-earth elements could also be recovered from industrial wastes with practical potential to reduce environmental and health impacts from mining, waste-generation and imports if known and experimental processes are scaled up.[170][171] A study suggests that "fulfillment of the circular economy approach could reduce up to 200 times the impact in the climate change category and up to 70 times the cost due to the REE mining."[172] In most of the reported studies reviewed by a scientific review, "secondary waste is subjected to chemical and or bioleaching followed by solvent extraction processes for clean separation of REEs."[173] One study suggests that by 2050, up to 40 to 75% of the EU's clean energy metal needs could come from local recycling.[174]

A study estimates losses of 61 metals, showing that usespans of, often scarce, tech-critical metals are short.[175][176] A study using Project Drawdown's modeling framework indicates that, even without considering costs or bottlenecks of expansion of renewable energy generation, metal recycling can lead to significant climate change mitigation.[177]


Researchers have developed recycling-routes for 200 industrial waste chemicals into important drugs and agrochemicals, for productive reuse that reduces disposal costs and hazards to the environment.[178][179] A study has called for new molecules and materials for products with open-environmental applications, such as pesticides, that can be neither circulated nor recycled and provides a set of guidelines on how to integrate chemistry into a circular economy.[180]

Circular developments around the world


Already since 2006, the European Union has been concerned about environmental transition issues by translating this into directives and regulations. Three important laws can be mentioned in this regard:

On 17 December 2012, the European Commission published a document entitled "Manifesto for a Resource Efficient Europe".[181]

In July 2014, a zero-waste program for Europe has been put in place aiming at the circular economy.[182] Since then, several documents on this subject have been published. The following table summarizes the various European reports and legislation on the circular economy that have been developed between 2014 and 2018.[183]

In addition to the above legislation, the EU has amended the Ecodesign Working Plan to add circularity criteria and has enacted ecodesign regulations with circular economy components for 7 product types (refrigerators, dishwashers, electronic displays, washing machines, welding equipment and servers and data storage products).[184] These ecodesign regulations are aimed at increasing the repairability of products by improving the availability of spare parts and manuals.[184] At the same time, the European research budget related to the circular economy has increased considerably in the last few years: it has reached 964 million euros between 2018 and 2020.[183] In total, the European Union has invested 10 billion euros on Circular Economy projects between 2016 and 2019.[184]

One waste atlas aggregates some data about waste management of countries and cities, albeit the data is very limited.[185]

The "Circularity Gap Report" indicates that "out of all the minerals, biomass, fossil fuels and metals that enter the world's economy, only 8.6 percent are reused".[186][187]


The "Manifesto for a Resource Efficient Europe" of 2012 clearly stated that "In a world with growing pressures on resources and the environment, the EU has no choice but to go for the transition to a resource-efficient and ultimately regenerative circular economy."[181] Furthermore, the document highlighted the importance of "a systemic change in the use and recovery of resources in the economy" in ensuring future jobs and competitiveness, and outlined potential pathways to a circular economy, in innovation and investment, regulation, tackling harmful subsidies, increasing opportunities for new business models, and setting clear targets.

The European environmental research and innovation policy aims at supporting the transition to a circular economy in Europe, defining and driving the implementation of a transformative agenda to green the economy and the society as a whole, to achieve a truly sustainable development. Research and innovation in Europe are financially supported by the program Horizon 2020, which is also open to participation worldwide.[188] Circular economy is found to play an important role to economic growth of European Countries, highlighting the crucial role of sustainability, innovation, and investment in no-waste initiatives to promote wealth.[33]

The European Union plans for a circular economy are spearheaded by its 2018 Circular Economy Package.[189] Historically, the policy debate in Brussels mainly focused on waste management which is the second half of the cycle, and very little is said about the first half: eco-design. To draw the attention of policymakers and other stakeholders to this loophole, the Ecothis, an EU campaign was launched raising awareness about the economic and environmental consequences of not including eco-design as part of the circular economy package.

In 2020, the European Union released its Circular Economy Action Plan.[190]

"Closing the loop" (Dec 2015 - 2018)

This first circular economy Action Plan consisted of 54 measures to strengthen Europe's global competitiveness, promote sustainable economic growth and create more jobs.[191] Among these 54 measures, for example, is the importance of optimizing the use of raw materials, products and waste in order to create energy savings and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The main goal being in this respect to lead to the development of a framework conducive to the circular economy.[191] In addition, the development of this Action Plan was also intended to enable the development of a new market for secondary raw materials. Concretely, here are the principal areas concerned by the Action Plan:[122]

  • Production
  • Consumption
  • Waste Management
  • Boosting markets for secondary materials
  • Innovation, investment and 'horizontal' measures
  • Monitoring progress

The Action plan was also a way to integrate a policy framework, an integration of existing policies and legal instruments. It includes notably some amendments.[122] As a matter of fact, the implementation of this new plan was supported by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC). This support included in-depth consultation.[192]

Circular Economy Action Plan of 2020

This new action was adopted by the European Commission in March 2020.[193] A total of 574 out of 751 MEPs voted in favour of the action plan.[194] It focuses on better management of resource-intensive industries, waste reduction, zero-carbonization and standardization of sustainable products in Europe.[193] Prior to the development of this new action plan, we can also mention the Green Deal of 2019, which integrated ecological and environmental ambitions to make Europe a carbon-neutral continent. On 10 February 2021, the European Parliament submitted its proposals to the Circular Economic Action Plan (CEAP) of the commission, highlighting five major areas in particular.[195] Those are the following:

  • Batteries
  • Construction and Buildings
  • ICT
  • Plastics
  • Textils

Two additional sectors on which the CEAP focuses could be added: packaging & food and water.[196]

Countries ranking

The European leaders in terms of circular economy are designated mostly by their current efforts for a shift towards circular economy but also by their objectives and the means implemented in this shift. It remains difficult to precisely rank how countries score in terms of circular economy, given the many principles and aspects of it and how differently one single country can score in each of these principles but some tendencies do appear in the average score, when combining the principles.

  • The Netherlands: the government aims to reuse 50% of all materials as far as possible by 2030[197] and to convert waste into reusable materials anywhere it is possible. The next goal is then to make the country shift towards a 100% waste-free economy by 2050.[198] These objectives were all set from 2016 to 2019 in a series of programs for a governmental circular economy, raw materials agreements and transition agendas focusing on the five most important sectors for waste: biomass and food, plastics, manufacturing industry, construction and consumer goods.
  • Germany: Germany is a leader in some aspects of circular economy, like waste management and recycling.[199]
  • France is also adding several texts and measures for a better circular economy in the country such as the roadmap for circular economy in 2018, consisting of 50 measures for a successful transition to circular economy.[200]
  • Belgium is also a consequent actor in the field. It scored second in the circular material use rate, before France but after the Netherlands.[201] In the other principles of circular economy, it usually scores in the top 5.

Other notable countries are Italy, the United Kingdom, Austria, Slovenia, and Denmark.[201]

Outside the EU, countries such as Brazil, China, Canada, the USA and especially Japan are working on the shift towards it.[202]

Most countries that are in the lead in the field of circular economy are European countries, meaning that Europe in general is in the lead group at the moment. The reasons behind this are numerous. First of all, circular economy is a field that is, at the moment mostly advanced in the developed countries, thanks to, between others, technology.[203] The efforts of the European Commission are also non negligible, with documents such as the Commission staff working document "Leading the way to a global circular economy: state of play and outlook"[204] or the new action plan for circular economy in Europe,[205] being one of the main blocs of the green deal.[206]

Even if Europe as a whole is a good actor in the field, some European countries are still struggling to make the shift faster. These countries are mostly the eastern European countries (Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, etc.) but also in some fields Portugal, Greece, Croatia and even Germany.[207]

In 2018, the newspaper Politico made a ranking of the (by then) 28 European countries by making an aggregation of the 7 key metrics of the commission for each country. The advantage here is that it gives a general view of how countries work towards circular development and how they compare to each other but the main drawback is that, as mentioned in the article, the 7 metrics all have equal weight and importance in Politico's calculations, which isn't the case in real life. Indeed, it is said in the same article that the countries that score the highest in CE are not necessarily the greenest according to the Environmental Performance Index.[208] For example, Germany, which scores 1st in the Politico ranking, only scores 13th worldwide in the EPI and is behind 10 European countries.[209]


Since 2015, there is a plan concerning the circular economy adopted by the European Commission. This first plan includes 54 actions. There are also 4 legislative proposals with the objective of legal change.

a) the framework directive on waste
b) the directive on the landfill of waste
c) the directive on packaging and packaging waste
d) the directive on batteries and accumulators and their waste.[210]

During the 2018 negotiations between the Parliament and the council, different elements will be adopted in four directives. These are mainly: « The main objectives are the following in the European framework

  • Minimum 65% of municipal waste to be recycled by 2035
  • Minimum 70% of all packaging waste to be recycled by 2030
  • Maximum 10% of municipal waste to be landfilled by 2035
  • Certain types of single use plastic will be prohibited to place on market as of July 2021
  • Minimum 32% of the Union's gross final consumption of energy to originate from renewable sources by 2030.

The main objectives are the following in the European framework [211]

Since 2020, Europe's new green deal plan focuses on "design and production from the perspective of the circular economy",[212] its main objective is to ensure that the European economy keeps these resources as long as possible. The action plan of this circular development is mainly based on different objectives. They are:

  • "To make sustainable products the norm in the EU.
  • To empower consumers to choose.
  • Focusing on the most resource-intensive sectors with a high potential to contribute to the circular economy.
  • Ensure less waste."[212]

Europe's green deal, which came into being in 2019, aims at a climate-neutral circular economy. For this, a distinct difference between economic growth and resources will be found. "A circular economy reduces the pressure on natural resources and is an indispensable prerequisite for achieving the goal of climate neutrality by 2050 and halting biodiversity loss."[212]


Since 2014, Belgium has adopted a circular strategy. This is marked by 21 measures to be followed.In Belgium, the three Belgian regions (Flanders, Brussels and Wallonia) have different personal objectives. For Flanders, a strategy called vision 2050 has been put in place. For Wallonia, there is a plan following the declaration of the regional policy for Wallonia from 2019 to 2024. Since 23 January 2020, Wallonia has adopted a new strategy including three governance bodies: a steering committee, an intra-administration platform and a steering committee??.[213] For Brussels, a plan was adopted in 2016 to develop the circular economy in its region. This plan will be in place for a period of 10 years.[214]

The Netherlands

The Netherlands set a plan of action for circular economy in 2016 and have been doing additional efforts for a transition towards a 100% circular economy by 2050 (and 50% by 2030). The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research estimates that a full shift towards Circular Economy will, at the long term, generate not less than 7,3 billion euros and 540.000 new jobs in the sector. The work will be developed around the five pillars mentioned above: plastics, biomass and food, the construction sector, the manufacturing industry, and consumer goods.[198] The government has also put a fund in place to facilitate and accelerate the shift. These funds are part of the 300 million € annually spent by the government for climate-related decisions and actions. The envelope is also completed by the ministry of infrastructure, which allocated €40 million for circular economy-related actions in 2019 and 2020. Other actions such as an allocation of subsidies for enterprises that make change or invest in the field have been taken. Initiatives at the subnational level are also encouraged and regions such as Groeningen, Friesland, the Northern Netherlands, etc. ere taking actions to not only reduce their environmental impact but accelerate and accentuate their actions towards Circular economy.[215]

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

CE is one of the major deals of the 2018-2023 Luxembourg government.

The Luxembourg added in 2019 Circular economy in their data-driven innovation strategy, considering it now as a crucial field for innovation in the next years. It is present in most sectors of the country's development plan even if it is still only at the beginning of its development.[216]

More initiatives are starting to emerge, however, to develop better in the field:

· The 2019 "Circular economy strategy Luxembourg", a document testifying on the efforts made and to be made and the willingness to transform the Grand Duchy into an example in the field;[217]

· Holistic strategic studies such as the "strategic group for circular economy";[216]

· insertion of circular economy as a subject to be discussed by all the six main pillars of the "third industrial revolution";[216]

· Creation of the Fit4Circularity program to allocate funds to innovative businesses in the field;[216]

· Participation in Circular economy-related events such as "Financing the circular economy" (2015) at the European Investment Bank or the "Circular economy hotspot" (2017);[216]

· Work on educational tools in the field;[216]

· Collaboration with municipalities, at the subnational level, to encourage them to become more circular;[216]

· The establishment of value chains for local materials such as wood and a better gestion of raw materials in general;[217]

· A cooperation between the public and the private sector;[217]

· The ‘Product Circularity Data Sheet’ (PCDS) launched in 2019 by the government to study and determine the circular potential of products and materials;[217]

· An implementation of tools and methods such as a regulatory framework (laws), a financial framework (financial helps and sanctions), creation, management and sharing of knowledge on the subject, etc.;[217]

· A coordination of the Luxembourg goals with the SDG's[218] and the 2030 agenda.[217]

Circular bioeconomy

The bio-economy, especially the circular bio-economy, decreases dependency on natural resources by encouraging sustainable goods that generate food, materials, and energy using renewable biological resources (such as lupins). According to the European Commission's EU Science Center, the circular bioeconomy produces €1.5 trillion in value added, accounting for 11% of EU GDP. The European Investment Bank invests between €6 billion and €9 billion in the bio-economy per year.[219][220]

The European Circular Bioeconomy Fund

Eligibility requirements and core terms of reference for an equity and mezzanine debt fund were established by the European Investment Bank and the European Commission directorates-general for agriculture and research and innovation. As a result, an investment adviser was chosen, and the European Circular Bioeconomy Fund was created.[221][222]

The European Circular Bioeconomy Fund invests in early-stage companies with developed innovations that are searching for funds to broaden their activities and reach new markets.[223][224][225][219] It specifically invests in:

  • circular/bio-economy technologies
  • biomass/feed stock production that boots agricultural productivity while lowering environmental impact
  • biomass/feed stock technologies that result in higher-value, green goods
  • bio-based chemicals and materials
  • biological alternatives in fields such as cosmetics.[219][226]

Circular Carbon Economy

During the 2019 COP25 in Madrid, William McDonough and marine ecologist Carlos Duarte presented the Circular Carbon Economy at an event with the BBVA Foundation. The Circular Carbon Economy is based on McDonough's ideas from Carbon Is Not The Enemy[1] and aims to serve as the framework for developing and organizing effective systems for carbon management. McDonough used the Circular Carbon Economy to frame discussions at the G20 workshops in March 2020 before the framework's formal acceptance by the G20 Leaders in November 2020.

Critiques of circular economy models

There is some criticism of the idea of the circular economy. As Corvellec (2015) put it, the circular economy privileges continued economic growth with soft "anti-programs", and the circular economy is far from the most radical "anti-program".[227] Corvellec (2019) raised the issue of multi-species and stresses "impossibility for waste producers to dissociate themselves from their waste and emphasizes the contingent, multiple, and transient value of waste".[228]:217 "Scatolic engagement draws on Reno's analogy of waste as scats and of scats as signs for enabling interspecies communication. This analogy stresses the impossibility for waste producers to dissociate themselves from their waste and emphasizes the contingent, multiple, and transient value of waste".[228]:217

A key tenet of a scatolic approach to waste is to consider waste as unavoidable and worthy of interest. Whereas total quality sees in waste a sign of failure, a scatolic understanding sees a sign of life. Likewise, whereas the Circular Economy analogy of a circle evokes endless perfection, the analogy of scats evokes disorienting messiness. A scatolic approach features waste as a lively matter open for interpretation, within organizations as well as across organizational species.[228]:219

Corvellec and Stål (2019) are mildly critical of apparel manufacturing circular economy take-back systems as ways to anticipate and head off more severe waste reduction programs:

Apparel retailers exploit that the circular economy is evocative but still sufficiently vague to create any concrete policies (Lüdeke‐Freund, Gold, & Bocken, 2019) that might hinder their freedom of action (Corvellec & Stål, 2017). Their business-centered qualification of take-back systems amounts to an engagement in "market action (...) as leverage to push policymakers to create or repeal particular rules," as Funk and Hirschman (2017:33) put it.[229]:26

Research by Zink and Geyer (2017: 593) questioned the circular economy's engineering-centric assumptions: "However, proponents of the circular economy have tended to look at the world purely as an engineering system and have overlooked the economic part of the circular economy. Recent research has started to question the core of the circular economy—namely, whether closing material and product loops do, in fact, prevent primary production."[230]

There are other critiques of the circular economy (CE).[231][232] For example, Allwood (2014) discussed the limits of CE 'material circularity', and questioned the desirability of the CE in a reality with growing demand.[42] Do CE secondary production activities (reuse, repair, & remake) actually reduce, or instead displace, primary production (natural resource extraction)? The problem CE overlooks, its untold story, is how displacement is governed mainly by market forces, according to McMillan et al. (2012).[233] It's the tired old narrative, that the invisible hand of market forces will conspire to create full displacement of virgin material of the same kind, said Zink & Geyer (2017).[230] Korhonen, Nuur, Feldmann, and Birkie (2018) argued that "the basic assumptions concerning the values, societal structures, cultures, underlying world-views and the paradigmatic potential of CE remain largely unexplored".[234]

It is also often pointed out that there are fundamental limits to the concept, which are based, among other things, on the laws of thermodynamics.[5] According to the second law of thermodynamics, all spontaneous processes are irreversible and associated with an increase in entropy. It follows that in a real implementation of the concept, one would either have to deviate from the perfect reversibility in order to generate an entropy increase by generating waste, which would ultimately amount to still having parts of the economy which follow a linear scheme, or enormous amounts of energy would be required (from which a significant part would be dissipated in order to for the total entropy to increase).[235] In its comment to concept of the circular economy the European Academies' Science Advisory Council (EASAC) came to a similar conclusion:

Recovery and recycling of materials that have been dispersed through pollution, waste and end-of-life product disposal require energy and resources, which increase in a nonlinear manner as the percentage of recycled material rises (owing to the second law of thermodynamics: entropy causing dispersion). Recovery can never be 100% (Faber et al., 1987). The level of recycling that is appropriate may differ between materials.[236]

In addition to this, the circular economy has been criticized for lacking a strong social justice component.[237] Indeed, most circular economy visions, projects and policies don't address key social questions regarding how circular economy technologies and solutions will be controlled and how their benefits and costs will be distributed.[238] To respond to these limitations some academics and social movements prefer to speak of a circular society rather than a circular economy.[238] They thereby advocate for a circular society where knowledge, political power, wealth, and resources are sustainably circulated in fundamentally democratic and redistributive manners, rather than just improving resource efficiency as most circular economy proposals do.[238]

Moreover, it has been argued that a post-growth approach should be adopted for the circular economy where material loops are put (directly) at the service of wellbeing, instead of attempting to reconcile the circular economy with GDP growth.[239] For example, efficiency improvements at the level of individual products could be offset by a growth in total or per-capita consumption,[240] which only beyond-circularity measures like choice editing and rationing unsustainable products or emissions may be able to address.

The various approaches to 'circular' business and economic models share several common principles with other conceptual frameworks:


Janine Benyus, author of Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature, defined biomimicry as "a new discipline that studies nature's best ideas and then imitates these designs and processes to solve human problems. Studying a leaf to invent a better solar cell is an example. I think of it as 'innovation' inspired by nature".[241]

Blue economy

Initiated by former Ecover CEO and Belgian entrepreneur Gunter Pauli, derived from the study of natural biological production processes the official manifesto states, "using the resources available...the waste of one product becomes the input to create a new cash flow".[242]

Cradle to cradle

Created by Walter R. Stahel and similar theorists, in which industry adopts the reuse and service-life extension of goods as a strategy of waste prevention, regional job creation, and resource efficiency in order to decouple wealth from resource consumption.[243][244]

Industrial ecology

Industrial ecology is the study of material and energy flows through industrial systems. Focusing on connections between operators within the "industrial ecosystem", this approach aims at creating closed-loop processes in which waste is seen as input, thus eliminating the notion of undesirable by-product.[245]

Resource recovery

Resource recovery is using wastes as an input material to create valuable products as new outputs. The aim is to reduce the amount of waste generated, therefore, reducing the need for landfill space and also extracting maximum value from waste.

Sound Material-Cycle Society

A similar concept used in Japan.

Systems thinking

The ability to understand how things influence one another within a whole. Elements are considered as 'fitting in' their infrastructure, environment and social context.

"The Biosphere Rules"

The Biosphere Rules is a framework for implementing closed-loop production processes. They derived from nature systems and translated for industrial production systems. The five principles are Materials Parsimony, Value Cycling, Power Autonomy, Sustainable Product Platforms and Function Over Form.

See also


  1. Geissdoerfer, M., Pieroni, M.P., Pigosso, D.C. and Soufani, K. (2020). "Circular business models: A review" (PDF). Journal of Cleaner Production. 277: 123741. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123741. S2CID 225282542.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. "Circularity Indicators". Retrieved 2019-03-14.
  3. "Circular economy: definition, importance and benefits | News | European Parliament". 2015-02-12. Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  4. "New to circular economy overview". Retrieved 2021-12-06.
  5. Reuter, Markus A.; van Schaik, Antoinette; Gutzmer, Jens; Bartie, Neill; Abadías-Llamas, Alejandro (1 July 2019). "Challenges of the Circular Economy: A Material, Metallurgical, and Product Design Perspective". Annual Review of Materials Research. 49 (1): 253–274. Bibcode:2019AnRMS..49..253R. doi:10.1146/annurev-matsci-070218-010057. ISSN 1531-7331. S2CID 140525621. Retrieved 27 September 2022.
  6. Tunn, V. S. C.; Bocken, N. M. P.; van den Hende, E. A.; Schoormans, J. P. L. (2019-03-01). "Business models for sustainable consumption in the circular economy: An expert study". Journal of Cleaner Production. 212: 324–333. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.290. ISSN 0959-6526. S2CID 158627557.
  7. Shpak, Nestor; Kuzmin, Oleh; Melnyk, Olga; Ruda, Mariana; Sroka, Włodzimierz (August 2020). "Implementation of a Circular Economy in Ukraine: The Context of European Integration". Resources. 9 (8): 96. doi:10.3390/resources9080096. ISSN 2079-9276.
  8. Calisto Friant, Martin; Vermeulen, Walter J. V.; Salomone, Roberta (2020-10-01). "A typology of circular economy discourses: Navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 161: 104917. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104917. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 222121823.
  9. Castro, Camila Gonçalves; Trevisan, Adriana Hofmann; Pigosso, Daniela C. A.; Mascarenhas, Janaina (2022-04-15). "The rebound effect of circular economy: Definitions, mechanisms and a research agenda". Journal of Cleaner Production. 345: 131136. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131136. ISSN 0959-6526. S2CID 247150037.
  10. Brydges, Taylor (2021-04-15). "Closing the loop on take, make, waste: Investigating circular economy practices in the Swedish fashion industry". Journal of Cleaner Production. 293: 126245. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126245. ISSN 0959-6526. S2CID 233577453.
  11. Geissdoerfer, Martin; Savaget, Paulo; Bocken, Nancy M. P.; Hultink, Erik Jan (2017-02-01). "The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?". Journal of Cleaner Production. 143: 757–768. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048. S2CID 157449142.
  12. Invernizzi, Diletta Colette; Locatelli, Giorgio; Velenturf, Anne; Love, Peter ED.; Purnell, Phil; Brookes, Naomi J. (September 2020). "Developing policies for the end-of-life of energy infrastructure: Coming to terms with the challenges of decommissioning". Energy Policy. 144: 111677. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111677. S2CID 225307513.
  13. Morseletto, Piero (2020). "Restorative and regenerative: Exploring the concepts in the circular economy". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 24 (4): 763–773. doi:10.1111/jiec.12987. ISSN 1530-9290. S2CID 203500060.
  14. Towards the Circular Economy: an economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2012. p. 24. Archived from the original on 2013-01-10. Retrieved 2012-01-30.
  15. Kirchherr, Julian; Reike, Denise; Hekkert, Marko (2017-12-01). "Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 127: 221–232. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005. ISSN 0921-3449.
  16. Ghisellini, Patrizia; Cialani, Catia; Ulgiati, Sergio (2016-02-15). "A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems". Journal of Cleaner Production. Towards Post Fossil Carbon Societies: Regenerative and Preventative Eco-Industrial Development. 114: 11–32. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007. ISSN 0959-6526.
  17. Nobre, Gustavo Cattelan; Tavares, Elaine (2021-09-10). "The quest for a circular economy final definition: A scientific perspective". Journal of Cleaner Production. 314: 127973. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127973. ISSN 0959-6526.
  18. Local Government for Sustainability Africa. (s. d.). Circular development | ICLEI Africa. Circular Development Pathway. Consulté le 15 mars 2021, à l’adresse
  19. Économie circulaire - Ellen Macarthur Foundation. (s. d.). Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Consulté le 9 mars 2021, à l’adresse
  20. García-Barragán, Juan F.; Eyckmans, Johan; Rousseau, Sandra (March 2019). "Defining and Measuring the Circular Economy: A Mathematical Approach". Ecological Economics. 157: 369–372. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.003. S2CID 158885640.
  21. Wautelet, Thibaut (2018). "The Concept of Circular Economy: its Origins and its Evolution". doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17021.87523. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  22. Kneese, Allen V. (1988). "The Economics of Natural Resources". Population and Development Review. 14: 281–309. doi:10.2307/2808100. JSTOR 2808100.
  23. "Pearce & Turner, Economics Natural Resources Environment | Pearson". Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  24. Zhu, Junming; Fan, Chengming; Shi, Haijia; Shi, Lei (2019). "Efforts for a Circular Economy in China: A Comprehensive Review of Policies". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 23 (1): 110–118. doi:10.1111/jiec.12754. ISSN 1530-9290. S2CID 158702257.
  25. "Let's build a circular economy". Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  26. "Press corner". European Commission - European Commission. Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  27. L’économie circulaire. (2020, 4 novembre). Ministère de la Transition écologique.
  28. "Why the circular economy is all about retaining value | McKinsey". Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  29. Lienig, Jens; Bruemmer, Hans (2017). "Recycling Requirements and Design for Environmental Compliance". Fundamentals of Electronic Systems Design. Springer. pp. 193–218. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55840-0_7. ISBN 978-3-319-55839-4.
  30. Corvellec, Hervé; Stowell, Alison F.; Johansson, Nils (2021). "Critiques of the circular economy". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 26 (2): 421–432. doi:10.1111/jiec.13187. ISSN 1530-9290. S2CID 238087986.
  31. "Critiques of the Circular Economy". Retrieved 2021-10-07.
  32. Lund University [Press Release] (Sep 29, 2021). "Circular economy is not the panacea many had hoped for". Lund University. Archived from the original on 2021-09-29. Retrieved October 7, 2021.
  33. Hysa, Eglantina; Kruja, Alba; Rehman, Naqeeb Ur; Laurenti, Rafael (12 June 2020). "Circular Economy Innovation and Environmental Sustainability Impact on Economic Growth: An Integrated Model for Sustainable Development". Sustainability. 12 (12): 4831. doi:10.3390/su12124831.
  34. Ranta, Valtteri; Aarikka-Stenroos, Leena; Ritala, Paavo; Mäkinen, Saku J. (August 2018). "Exploring institutional drivers and barriers of the circular economy: A cross-regional comparison of China, the US, and Europe". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 135: 70–82. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.017. hdl:10024/158840. S2CID 11329865.
  35. Murray, Alan; Skene, Keith; Haynes, Kathryn (2015-05-22). "The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context". Journal of Business Ethics. 140 (3): 369–380. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2. S2CID 41486703.
  36. Kaur, Guneet; Uisan, Kristiadi; Lun Ong, Khai; Sze Ki Lin, Carol (2017). "Recent trend in Green sustainable Chemistry & waste valorisation: Rethinking plastics in a circular economy". Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry. 9: 30–39. doi:10.1016/j.cogsc.2017.11.003.
  37. Casarejos, Fabricio; Bastos, Claudio R.; Rufin, Carlos; Frota, Mauricio N. (November 2018). "Rethinking packaging production and consumption vis-à-vis circular economy: A case study of compostable cassava starch-based material". Journal of Cleaner Production. 201: 1019–1028. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.114. S2CID 158684066.
  38. "Circular Economy Pioneer | Nordic Waves Group". Nordic Waves ENG. Retrieved 2022-06-03.
  39., My Digital (2021-08-06). "Scope of Circular Economy". My Digital Retrieved 2021-08-06.
  40. Mignacca, Benito; Locatelli, Giorgio; Velenturf, Anne (26 Feb 2020). "Modularisation as enabler of circular economy in energy infrastructure". Energy Policy. 139: 111371. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111371.
  41. Boulding, Kenneth E. (March 8, 1966). "The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth" (PDF). In H. Jarrett (ed.) Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, Resources for the Future, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, pp. 3-14. Retrieved 26 August 2018, or Archived 2019-04-16 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved 26 August 2018.
  42. Allwood, Julian M. (2014). "Squaring the Circular Economy". Handbook of Recycling. pp. 445–477. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-396459-5.00030-1. ISBN 978-0-12-396459-5.
  43. David W. Pearce and R. Kerry Turner (1989). Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0801839870.
  44. Su, Biwei; Heshmati, Almas; Geng, Yong; Yu, Xiaoman (2012). "A review of the circular economy in China: moving from rhetoric to implementation". Journal of Cleaner Production. 42: 215–227. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.020.
  45. Jackson, Tim (1993). Clean Production Strategies Developing Preventive Environmental Management in the Industrial Economy. CRC Press. ISBN 9780873718844.
  46. Jackson, Tim (1996). Material Concerns — Pollution, Profit and Quality of Life. Routledge.
  47. "Cradle to Cradle | The Product-Life Institute". 2012-11-14. Retrieved 2013-11-20.
  48. Clift & Allwood, "Rethinking the economy", The Chemical Engineer, March 2011
  49. Zhijun, F; Nailing, Y (2007). "Putting a circular economy into practice in China" (PDF). Sustain Sci. 2: 95–101. doi:10.1007/s11625-006-0018-1. S2CID 29150129.
  50. "The Ellen MacArthur Foundation website". Retrieved 23 January 2013.
  51. Blok, Kornelis; Hoogzaad, Jelmer; Ramkumar, Shyaam; Ridley, Shyaam; Srivastav, Preeti; Tan, Irina; Terlouw, Wouter; de Wit, Terlouw. "Implementing Circular Economy Globally Makes Paris Targets Achievable". Circle Economy. Circle Economy, Ecofys. Retrieved 20 April 2017.
  52. F.H.R. Breteler (6 April 2022). "Enhancement of the process of reusing building products" (PDF). Retrieved 24 September 2022.
  53. "The Story Behind "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle" - Pantheon Enterprises". Pantheon Enterprises. 14 November 2016. Retrieved 24 September 2022.
  54. Cramer, Jacqueline (2017). "The Raw Materials Transition in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area: Added Value for the Economy, Well-Being, and the Environment". Environment. Taylor & Francis. 59 (3): 14–21. doi:10.1080/00139157.2017.1301167. S2CID 157859507.
  55. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013). "Towards The Circular Economy - Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition" (PDF). Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved 24 September 2022.
  56. Lansink, Ad (2015). "From waste-to resource-management: Waste management and circular economy: a critical analysis" (PDF). Recycling Vision B.V. Retrieved 24 September 2022.
  57. Jacqueline Cramer (22 May 2017). "Towards a Circular City". YouTube. Retrieved 26 September 2022.
  58. "Towards the Circular Economy Vol. 3: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains | Shared by Business". Retrieved 2021-12-06.
  59. "Towards the Circular Economy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-11-23. Retrieved 18 April 2021.
  60. Towards the Circular Economy: Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition (PDF) (Report). Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2013. Retrieved 2020-05-15. And: Towards the Circular Economy: an economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. 2012. p. 60. Archived from the original on 2013-01-10. Retrieved 2012-01-30.
  61. Schmitt, Thomas; Wolf, Christopher; Lennerfors, Thomas Taro; Okwir, Simon (2021-10-10). "Beyond "Leanear" production: A multi-level approach for achieving circularity in a lean manufacturing context". Journal of Cleaner Production. 318: 128531. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128531. ISSN 0959-6526.
  62. Estimating Employment Effects of the Circular Economy
  63. Scott, W. Richard (2008). Institutions and Organization: Ideas and Interest (Third ed.). Stanford University: Sage Publications. pp. 50–51. ISBN 978-1-4129-5090-9.
  64. Republic Services. "Republic Services Annual Report 2017" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 December 2018. Retrieved 30 March 2019.
  65. "Historic day in the campaign to beat plastic pollution: Nations commit to develop a legally binding agreement". UN Environment Programme (UNEP). 2 March 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
  66. "End plastic pollution: Towards an international legally binding instrument*" (PDF). United Nations Environmental Programm. Retrieved 13 March 2022.
  67. Tecchio, Paolo; McAlister, Catriona; Mathieux, Fabrice; Ardente, Fulvio (1 December 2017). "In search of standards to support circularity in product policies: A systematic approach". Journal of Cleaner Production. 168: 1533–1546. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.198. ISSN 0959-6526. PMC 5656090. PMID 29200663.
  68. "Standardization in a Circular Economy – Closing the Loop" (PDF). Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  69. "Circular Design - Design for Circular Economy" (PDF). Retrieved 29 May 2022. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  70. Parajuly, Keshav; Wenzel, Henrik (May 2017). "Product Family Approach in E-Waste Management: A Conceptual Framework for Circular Economy". Sustainability. 9 (5): 768. doi:10.3390/su9050768. ISSN 2071-1050.
  71. Davies, Matthew. "Solar panels: we need to recycle parts of them to use again and avoid a mountain of waste". Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  72. Ragossnig, Arne M; Schneider, Daniel R (February 2019). "Circular economy, recycling and end-of-waste". Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy. 37 (2): 109–111. doi:10.1177/0734242X19826776. ISSN 0734-242X. PMID 30803418. S2CID 73458186.
  73. Hagelüken, Christian; Lee-Shin, Ji Un; Carpentier, Annick; Heron, Chris (September 2016). "The EU Circular Economy and Its Relevance to Metal Recycling". Recycling. 1 (2): 242–253. doi:10.3390/recycling1020242. ISSN 2313-4321.
  74. Antikainen, Maria; Uusitalo, Teuvo; Kivikytö-Reponen, Päivi (1 January 2018). "Digitalisation as an Enabler of Circular Economy". Procedia CIRP. 73: 45–49. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2018.04.027. ISSN 2212-8271.
  75. Geissdoerfer, Martin; Morioka, Sandra Naomi; de Carvalho, Marly Monteiro; Evans, Steve (July 2018). "Business models and supply chains for the circular economy". Journal of Cleaner Production. 190: 712–721. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.159. S2CID 158887458.
  76. Rashid, Amir; Asif, Farazee M.A.; Krajnik, Peter; Nicolescu, Cornel Mihai (October 2013). "Resource Conservative Manufacturing: an essential change in business and technology paradigm for sustainable manufacturing". Journal of Cleaner Production. 57: 166–177. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.012.
  77. "Solutions". Retrieved 2020-05-07.
  78. Batista, Luciano; Gong, Yu; Pereira, Susana; Jia, Fu; Bittar, Alexandre (December 2019). "Circular supply chains in emerging economies – a comparative study of packaging recovery ecosystems in China and Brazil" (PDF). International Journal of Production Research. 57 (23): 7248–7268. doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1558295. S2CID 116320263.
  79. Babri, Maira; Corvellec, Hervé; Stål, Herman I. (2021-10-11). "Material affordances in circular products and business model development: for a relational understanding of human and material agency". Culture and Organization. 28 (1): 79–96. doi:10.1080/14759551.2021.1986506. ISSN 1475-9551. S2CID 240732205.
  80. Weetman, Catherine (2016). A circular economy handbook for business and supply chains : repair, remake, redesign, rethink. London, United Kingdom: Kogan Page. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-74947675-5. OCLC 967729002.
  81. Kristoffersen, Eivind; Blomsma, Fenna; Mikalef, Patrick; Li, Jingyue (November 2020). "The smart circular economy: A digital-enabled circular strategies framework for manufacturing companies". Journal of Business Research. 120: 241–261. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.044.
  82. "Intelligent Assets: Unlocking the circular economy potential, by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and World Economic Forum as part of Project MainStream". Retrieved 2020-10-28.
  83. "How to transition to a digital circular economy?". G-STIC. 2020-10-28. Retrieved 2020-10-28.
  84. "Circular Economy Pioneer | Nordic Waves Group". Nordic Waves ENG. Retrieved 2022-06-03.
  85. "New Circular Economy Strategic R&I Agenda now available". CICERONE. 2020-09-27. Retrieved 2020-10-28.
  86. Sadeghi, M.; Mahmoudi, A.; Deng, X.; Luo, X. (2022-06-27). "Prioritizing requirements for implementing blockchain technology in construction supply chain based on circular economy: Fuzzy Ordinal Priority Approach". International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. doi:10.1007/s13762-022-04298-2. ISSN 1735-2630. S2CID 250065647.
  87. Hub, IISD's SDG Knowledge. "WEF Launches Public-Private Platform on Circular Economy | News | SDG Knowledge Hub | IISD". Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  88. "Home". PACE. Retrieved 2021-01-20.
  89. "Circular Economy". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  90. Hub, IISD's SDG Knowledge. "WEF Launches Public-Private Platform on Circular Economy | News | SDG Knowledge Hub | IISD". Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  91. "The Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy (PACE)". Sitra. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  92. "The world is now only 8.6% circular - CGR 2020 - Circularity Gap Reporting Initiative". Retrieved 2021-01-20.
  93. "Circular Gap Report 2020" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-02-04.
  94. "Members". Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  95. "WEF PACE pdf" (PDF).
  96. "Philips delivers on commitment to the circular economy at DAVOS 2019". Philips. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  97. "Capital Equipment Coalition". Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  98. "The Capital Equipment Pledge". The Capital Equipment Pledge. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  99. "Global Battery Alliance". Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  100. "Global Battery Alliance". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  101. "A New Circular Vision for Electronics" (PDF).
  102. "A New Circular Vision for Electronics: Time for a global reboot". Green Growth Knowledge Platform. 2019-02-10. Retrieved 2019-03-12.
  103. "Team". PACE. Retrieved 2021-01-20.
  104. "RELEASE: PACE Welcomes David McGinty as Global Director". World Resources Institute. 2019-05-16. Retrieved 2021-01-20.
  105. "Members". PACE. Retrieved 2021-01-20.
  106. "Developing BS 8001 - a world first". The British Standards Institution. Retrieved 29 December 2017.
  107. Pauliuk, Stefan (February 2018). "Critical appraisal of the circular economy standard BS 8001:2017 and a dashboard of quantitative system indicators for its implementation in organizations". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 129: 81–92. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.019.
  108. "ISO/TC 323 - Circular economy". ISO. Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  109. Dezi, Luca; Hysa, Xhimi; Calabrese, Mario; Mercuri, Francesco (2022-03-19). "Open Total Quality Management in the Circular Economy age: a social enterprise perspective through the case of Patagonia". Total Quality Management & Business Excellence: 1–15. doi:10.1080/14783363.2022.2051698. ISSN 1478-3363. S2CID 247575847.
  110. Cristoni, Nicolò; Tonelli, Marcello (October 2018). "Perceptions of Firms Participating in a Circular Economy". European Journal of Sustainable Development. 7 (4). doi:10.14207/ejsd.2018.v7n4p105.
  111. "Circular Readiness Assessment website" Retrieved on 26 July 2018
  112. Petrović, Nataša (2020). "Book review of:Strategic Management and the Circular Economy by Marcello Tonelli and Nicoló Cristoni". Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies. 25 (1): 76–78. doi:10.7595/management.fon.2020.0005. S2CID 225885231. Retrieved 5 November 2021.
  113. Pesce, Marco; Tamai, Ilaria; Guo, Deyan; Critto, Andrea; Brombal, Daniele; Wang, Hongguang; Cheng, Antonio; Marcomini, Antonio (2020). "Circular economy in China: Translating principles into practice". Sustainability. 12 (3): 832. doi:10.3390/su12030832.
  114. Tonelli, Marcello; Cristoni, Nicolò (2018). Strategic Management and the Circular Economy. Routledge. p. 222. ISBN 978-1-351-59269-7.
  115. "In Copenhagen, Gearing up for a Circular Fashion System". The Business of Fashion. 2017-05-11. Retrieved 2018-10-30.
  116. "Dame Ellen MacArthur on Building Momentum for Sustainability in Fashion". The Business of Fashion. 2018-01-11. Retrieved 2018-10-30.
  117. Ross, M (Producer), & Morgan, A (Director). (2015, May). The true cost [Motion Picture]. United States: Life is My Movie Entertainment.
  118. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, A new textiles economy: Redesigning fashion's future, (2017,
  119. The Glossy Podcast. (2018, May 30). Eileen Fisher on 34 years in sustainable fashion: "It's about constantly learning" [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from
  120. "how PALANTA works". Retrieved 12 December 2020.
  121. "About Us".
  122. McDowall, Will; Geng, Yong; Huang, Beijia; Barteková, Eva; Bleischwitz, Raimund; Türkeli, Serdar; Kemp, René; Doménech, Teresa (June 2017). "Circular Economy Policies in China and Europe" (PDF). Journal of Industrial Ecology. 21 (3): 651–661. doi:10.1111/jiec.12597. S2CID 157819895.
  123. "Construction | Growth". European Commission. 2016-07-05. Retrieved 6 December 2018.
  124. Nuñez-Cacho, Pedro; Górecki, Jarosław; Molina-Moreno, Valentin; Corpas-Iglesias, Francisco Antonio (2018). "New Measures of Circular Economy Thinking in Construction Companies". Journal of EU Research in Business. 2018: 1–16. doi:10.5171/2018.909360.
  125. Ajayebi, Atta; Hopkinson, Peter; Zhou, Kan; Lam, Dennis; Chen, Han-Mei; Wang, Yong (1 November 2020). "Spatiotemporal model to quantify stocks of building structural products for a prospective circular economy". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 162: 105026. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105026. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 224915113.
  126. Nuñez-Cacho, Pedro; Górecki, Jarosław; Molina-Moreno, Valentín; Corpas-Iglesias, Francisco Antonio (2018). "What Gets Measured, Gets Done: Development of a Circular Economy Measurement Scale for Building Industry". Sustainability. 10(7) (2340): 2340. doi:10.3390/su10072340.
  127. Górecki, Jarosław; Nuñez-Cacho, Pedro; Corpas-Iglesias, Francisco Antonio; Molina-Moreno, Valentin (2019). "How to convince players in construction market? Strategies for effective implementation of circular economy in construction sector". Cogent Engineering. 6 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1080/23311916.2019.1690760.
  128. Górecki, Jarosław (2020). "Simulation-Based Positioning of Circular Economy Manager's Skills in Construction Projects". Symmetry. 12 (1): 50. doi:10.3390/sym12010050.
  129. European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform
  130. Belekoukias, Ioannis; Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo; Kumar, Vikas (2014-09-17). "The impact of lean methods and tools on the operational performance of manufacturing organisations". International Journal of Production Research. 52 (18): 5346–5366. doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.903348. hdl:10545/622279. ISSN 0020-7543. S2CID 53579492.
  131. Bocken, Nancy M. P.; de Pauw, Ingrid; Bakker, Conny; van der Grinten, Bram (2016-07-03). "Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy". Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering. 33 (5): 308–320. doi:10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124. ISSN 2168-1015. S2CID 11754573.
  132. Automakers Enter the Circular Economy
  133. The Circular Economy In The Automotive Sector: How Far Can We Introduce It?
  134. The Circular Economy Applied to the Automotive Industry
  135. End-of-Life Vehicle Recycling in the European Union
  136. Robot-Assisted Disassembly for the Recycling of Electric Vehicle Batteries
  137. "DEMETER project".
  138. Riding the wave of change in the automotive industry with circular economy
  139. van Buren, Nicole; Demmers, Marjolein; van der Heijden, Rob; Witlox, Frank (8 July 2016). "Towards a Circular Economy: The Role of Dutch Logistics Industries and Governments". Sustainability. 8 (7): 647. doi:10.3390/su8070647.
  140. Zaken, Ministerie van Algemene (2016-09-14). "A Circular Economy in the Netherlands by 2050 - Policy note -". Retrieved 2020-05-08.
  141. Zaken, Ministerie van Algemene (2017-01-23). "Circulaire economie -". (in Dutch). Retrieved 2021-05-07.
  142. "Kringlooplandbouw". WUR (in Dutch). 2018-09-07. Retrieved 2021-05-07.
  143. Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (2019-06-17). "Omslag naar duurzame en sterke landbouw definitief ingezet - Nieuwsbericht -". (in Dutch). Retrieved 2021-05-07.
  144. Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (2019-06-17). "Realisatieplan Visie LNV: Op weg met nieuw perspectief - Publicatie -". (in Dutch). Retrieved 2021-05-07.
  145. Kaddoura, Mohamad; Kambanou, Marianna Lena; Tillman, Anne-Marie; Sakao, Tomohiko (2019). "Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study". Sustainability. 11 (18): 4819. doi:10.3390/su11184819.
  146. "Circular economy 101". 2020-10-06.
  147. "Furn 360 Project | Circular Economy in furniture sectors".
  148. "Circular economy in the Danish furniture sector". 2018-12-19.
  149. "About Legasea".
  150. "New project to apply circular economy to oil and gas decommissioning". 2019-07-24.
  151. "North sea oil and gas rig decommissioning & re-use opportunity report". 2015-10-08.
  152. "Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future - A/42/427 Annex - UN Documents: Gathering a body of global agreements". Retrieved 2021-10-21.
  153. Desing, Harald; Widmer, Rolf; Beloin-Saint-Pierre, Didier; Hischier, Roland; Wäger, Patrick (2019-12-11). "Powering a Sustainable and Circular Economy—An Engineering Approach to Estimating Renewable Energy Potentials within Earth System Boundaries". Energies. 12 (24): 4723. doi:10.3390/en12244723. ISSN 1996-1073.
  154. "Net zero no more: We are entering the era of honest electricity". Canary Media. Retrieved 2021-10-21.
  155. "Enosi raises $1.5 million for clean energy tech, as demand for renewables ramps up". SmartCompany. 2021-10-13. Retrieved 2021-10-21.
  156. Gallagher, John; Basu, Biswajit; Browne, Maria; Kenna, Alan; McCormack, Sarah; Pilla, Francesco; Styles, David (2019). "Adapting Stand-Alone Renewable Energy Technologies for the Circular Economy through Eco-Design and Recycling". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 23 (1): 133–140. doi:10.1111/jiec.12703. ISSN 1530-9290. S2CID 55267588.
  157. "Global Snapshot | Shared by Learning". Retrieved 2021-12-06.
  158. "The circular economy in higher education | Shared by Learning". Retrieved 2021-12-07.
  159. Scotl, Get In Touch Zero Waste; Scotl, Limited Registered in; Floor, Ground; Office: 01786 433 930, Moray House Forthside Way Stirling FK8 1QZ (2021-06-03). "Circular economy in education". Zero Waste Scotland. Retrieved 2021-12-07.
  160. Thushari, G. G. N.; Senevirathna, J. D. M. (1 August 2020). "Plastic pollution in the marine environment". Heliyon. 6 (8): e04709. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04709. ISSN 2405-8440. PMC 7475234. PMID 32923712.
  161. Qureshi, Muhammad Saad; Oasmaa, Anja; Pihkola, Hanna; Deviatkin, Ivan; Tenhunen, Anna; Mannila, Juha; Minkkinen, Hannu; Pohjakallio, Maija; Laine-Ylijoki, Jutta (1 November 2020). "Pyrolysis of plastic waste: Opportunities and challenges". Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis. 152: 104804. doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2020.104804. ISSN 0165-2370. S2CID 200068035.
  162. Zorpas, Antonis A. (1 April 2016). "Sustainable waste management through end-of-waste criteria development". Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 23 (8): 7376–7389. doi:10.1007/s11356-015-5990-5. ISSN 1614-7499. PMID 26690583. S2CID 36643191.
  163. Ulrich, Viola (6 November 2019). "Plastikmüll und Recycling: Acht Mythen und Irrtümer". DIE WELT (in German). Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  164. Enck, Judith; Dell, Jan (30 May 2022). "Plastic Recycling Doesn't Work and Will Never Work". The Atlantic. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
  165. "Breakthrough in separating plastic waste: Machines can now distinguish 12 different types of plastic". Aarhus University. Retrieved 19 January 2022.
  166. Henriksen, Martin L.; Karlsen, Celine B.; Klarskov, Pernille; Hinge, Mogens (1 January 2022). "Plastic classification via in-line hyperspectral camera analysis and unsupervised machine learning". Vibrational Spectroscopy. 118: 103329. doi:10.1016/j.vibspec.2021.103329. ISSN 0924-2031. S2CID 244913832.
  167. "The known unknowns of plastic pollution". The Economist. 3 March 2018. Retrieved 17 June 2018.
  168. Ali, Saleem H. (2014-02-13). "Social and Environmental Impact of the Rare Earth Industries". Resources. 3 (1): 123–134. doi:10.3390/resources3010123.
  169. Yang, Xiuli; Zhang, Junwei; Fang, Xihui (2014-08-30). "Rare earth element recycling from waste nickel-metal hydride batteries". Journal of Hazardous Materials. 279: 384–388. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.07.027. ISSN 0304-3894. PMID 25089667.
  170. "Rare earth elements for smartphones can be extracted from coal waste". New Scientist.
  171. Deng, Bing; Wang, Xin; Luong, Duy Xuan; Carter, Robert A.; Wang, Zhe; Tomson, Mason B.; Tour, James M. (2022). "Rare earth elements from waste". Science Advances. 8 (6): eabm3132. Bibcode:2022SciA....8M3132D. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abm3132. PMC 8827657. PMID 35138886.
  172. Amato, A.; Becci, A.; Birloaga, I.; De Michelis, I.; Ferella, F.; Innocenzi, V.; Ippolito, N. M.; Pillar Jimenez Gomez, C.; Vegliò, F.; Beolchini, F. (1 May 2019). "Sustainability analysis of innovative technologies for the rare earth elements recovery". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 106: 41–53. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2019.02.029. hdl:11566/264482. ISSN 1364-0321. S2CID 115810707.
  173. Jyothi, Rajesh Kumar; Thenepalli, Thriveni; Ahn, Ji Whan; Parhi, Pankaj Kumar; Chung, Kyeong Woo; Lee, Jin-Young (10 September 2020). "Review of rare earth elements recovery from secondary resources for clean energy technologies: Grand opportunities to create wealth from waste". Journal of Cleaner Production. 267: 122048. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122048. ISSN 0959-6526. S2CID 219469381.
  174. "Study quantifies metal supplies needed to reach EU's climate neutrality goal". K. U. Leuven. Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  175. "New life cycle assessment study shows useful life of tech-critical metals to be short". University of Bayreuth. Retrieved 23 June 2022.
  176. Charpentier Poncelet, Alexandre; Helbig, Christoph; Loubet, Philippe; Beylot, Antoine; Muller, Stéphanie; Villeneuve, Jacques; Laratte, Bertrand; Thorenz, Andrea; Tuma, Axel; Sonnemann, Guido (19 May 2022). "Losses and lifetimes of metals in the economy" (PDF). Nature Sustainability. 5 (8): 717–726. doi:10.1038/s41893-022-00895-8. ISSN 2398-9629. S2CID 248894322.
  177. Gorman, Miranda R.; Dzombak, David A.; Frischmann, Chad (1 September 2022). "Potential global GHG emissions reduction from increased adoption of metals recycling". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 184: 106424. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106424. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 249321004.
  178. Yirka, Bob. "A computer system that analyzes chemical waste and proposes ways to make new products from it". Retrieved 12 May 2022.
  179. Wołos, Agnieszka; Koszelewski, Dominik; Roszak, Rafał; Szymkuć, Sara; Moskal, Martyna; Ostaszewski, Ryszard; Herrera, Brenden T.; Maier, Josef M.; Brezicki, Gordon; Samuel, Jonathon; Lummiss, Justin A. M.; McQuade, D. Tyler; Rogers, Luke; Grzybowski, Bartosz A. (April 2022). "Computer-designed repurposing of chemical wastes into drugs". Nature. 604 (7907): 668–676. Bibcode:2022Natur.604..668W. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04503-9. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 35478240. S2CID 248415772.
  180. Kümmerer, Klaus; Clark, James H.; Zuin, Vânia G. (24 January 2020). "Rethinking chemistry for a circular economy". Science. 367 (6476): 369–370. Bibcode:2020Sci...367..369K. doi:10.1126/science.aba4979. PMID 31974237. S2CID 210880064.
  181. "Manifesto for a Resource Efficient Europe". European Commission. Retrieved 21 January 2013.
  182. Leipold, Sina (2021-01-11). "Transforming ecological modernization 'from within' or perpetuating it? The circular economy as EU environmental policy narrative". Environmental Politics. 30 (6): 1045–1067. doi:10.1080/09644016.2020.1868863.
  183. Völker, Thomas; Kovacic, Zora; Strand, Roger (2020-03-03). "Indicator development as a site of collective imagination? The case of European Commission policies on the circular economy". Culture and Organization. 26 (2): 103–120. doi:10.1080/14759551.2019.1699092. hdl:1956/23327. S2CID 214278775.
  184. Calisto Friant, Martin; Vermeulen, Walter J. V.; Salomone, Roberta (2021-07-01). "Analysing European Union circular economy policies: words versus actions". Sustainable Production and Consumption. 27: 337–353. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2020.11.001. ISSN 2352-5509. S2CID 228878623.
  185. "Waste Atlas". Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  186. "World's consumption of materials hits record 100bn tonnes a year". The Guardian. 22 January 2020. Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  187. "The world is now only 8.6% circular - CGR 2020 - Circularity Gap Reporting Initiative". Retrieved 29 May 2022.
  188. See Horizon 2020 – the EU's new research and innovation programme:
  189. "Circular Economy Strategy – Environment – European Commission". Retrieved 2019-12-31.
  190. "EUR-Lex - 52020DC0098 - EN - EUR-Lex". Retrieved 2021-11-09.
  191. Commission Européenne (2020). Changer nos modes de production et de consommation: le nouveau plan d'action pour l'économie circulaire montre la voie à suivre pour évoluer vers une économie neutre pour le climat et compétitive dans laquelle les consommateurs ont voix au chapitre. Consulté le 29 mars, à l'adresse
  192. European Economic and Social Committee (2017). Circular Economy : One year after adoption, working together for the future (s. d.). Consulté 29 mars 2021, à l’adresse
  193. European Commission (11 March 2020). "Changing how we produce and consume: New Circular Economy Action Plan shows the way to a climate-neutral, competitive economy of empowered consumers". Archived from the original on 2020-03-11.
  194. Water Europe (2021). European Parliament adopts resolution on the new Circular (s. d.). Consulté 29 mars 2021, à l’adresse
  195. Cambre Associates(10 février 2021). Consulté 29 mars 2021, à l'adresse
  196. WBCSD_Circular_Economy_Action_Plan_2020–Summary_for_business.pdf. (s. d.). Consulté 29 mars 2021, à l’adresse
  197. (6 November 2019). "Accelerating the transition to a circular economy". Archived from the original on 2020-04-18.
  198. (4 November 2019). "Circular Dutch economy by 2050". Archived from the original on 2020-04-18.
  199. Eurostat. "Recycling rate of municipal waste". Archived from the original on 2020-07-09.
  200. Ministry for an Ecological and Solidary Transition. "50 measures for a 100% circular economy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-10-20.
  201. Eurostat (2021). "Circular material use rate". Archived from the original on 2021-04-15.
  202. Iles, Joe (2018-08-01). "Which country is leading the circular economy shift?". Medium. Retrieved 2021-04-18.
  203. De Jong, Sijbren. "The circular economy and developing countries" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-05-02.
  204. "Leading the way to a global circular economy: state of play and outlook" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-09-22.
  205. "EUR-Lex - 52020DC0098 - EN - EUR-Lex". Retrieved 2021-04-18.
  206. "New Circular Economy Strategy - Environment - European Commission". Retrieved 2021-04-18.
  207. Eurostat. "Main tables - Circular economy". Archived from the original on 2021-04-15.
  208. "Ranking how EU countries do with the circular economy". POLITICO. 2018-05-17. Retrieved 2021-04-18.
  209. "2018 environmental performance index" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-08-27.
  210. "Utilisation efficace des ressources et économie circulaire | Fiches thématiques sur l'Union européenne | Parlement européen".
  211. "Belgium".
  212. "Press corner".
  213. "La Wallonie amorce une stratégie ambitieuse en économie circulaire | le développement durable en Wallonie | le développement durable en Wallonie".
  214. "Belgium".
  215. "Assessing and unlocking the circular economy in Groningen, Netherlands | The Circular Economy in Groningen, the Netherlands | OECD iLibrary". Retrieved 2021-05-03.
  216. "The Data-Driven Innovation Strategy for the Development of a Trusted and Sustainable Economy in Luxembourg". 2019. Retrieved 2021-05-03.
  217. Schosseler, Paul (February 2021). "Circular economy strategy Luxembourg" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-04-30.
  218. "SDGs". Nordic Waves ENG. Retrieved 2022-06-03.
  219. "Bioeconomy investment fund shows what Monty Python forgot about lupins". European Investment Bank. Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  220. "The circular economy and the bioeconomy — Partners in sustainability — European Environment Agency". Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  221. "Bioeconomy investment fund shows what Monty Python forgot about lupins". European Investment Bank. Retrieved 2021-05-18.
  222. "A European fund to support the circular bioeconomy | European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform". Retrieved 2021-05-18.
  223. "ECBF - European Circular Bioeconomy Fund | Bio-Based Industries - Public-Private Partnership". Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  224. "About". ECBF. Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  225. "European Circular Bioeconomy Fund » Circular City Funding Guide". Circular City Funding Guide. Retrieved 2021-04-19.
  226. "Investment Focus". ECBF. Retrieved 2021-04-20.
  227. Corvellec, Hervé. (2015). "New directions for management and organization studies on waste". Technical report. Göteborg: Gothenburg Research Institute, University of Gothenburg.
  228. Corvellec, Hervé (March 2019). "Waste as scats: For an organizational engagement with waste". Organization. 26 (2): 217–235. doi:10.1177/1350508418808235. S2CID 150181546.
  229. Corvellec, Hervé; Stål, Herman I. (September 2019). "Qualification as corporate activism: How Swedish apparel retailers attach circular fashion qualities to take-back systems". Scandinavian Journal of Management. 35 (3): 101046. doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2019.03.002. S2CID 150928136.
  230. Zink, Trevor; Geyer, Roland (June 2017). "Circular Economy Rebound". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 21 (3): 593–602. doi:10.1111/jiec.12545. S2CID 157110158.
  231. Lazarevic, David; Valve, Helena (September 2017). "Narrating expectations for the circular economy: Towards a common and contested European transition". Energy Research & Social Science. 31: 60–69. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.006.
  232. Valenzuela, Francisco; Böhm, Steffen (2017). "Against wasted politics: A critique of the circular economy". Ephemera. 17 (1): 23–60.
  233. McMillan, Colin A.; Skerlos, Steven J.; Keoleian, Gregory A. (June 2012). "Evaluation of the Metals Industry's Position on Recycling and its Implications for Environmental Emissions: Journal of Industrial Ecology". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 16 (3): 324–333. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00483.x. S2CID 59069446.
  234. Korhonen, Jouni; Nuur, Cali; Feldmann, Andreas; Birkie, Seyoum Eshetu (February 2018). "Circular economy as an essentially contested concept". Journal of Cleaner Production. 175: 544–552. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111.
  235. Korhonen, Jouni; Honkasalo, Antero; Seppälä, Jyri (January 2018). "Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations". Ecological Economics. 143: 37–46. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041.
  236. "Circular economy: a commentary from the perspectives of the natural and social sciences" (PDF). European Academies' Science Advisory Council (EASAC).
  237. Genovese, Andrea; Pansera, Mario (2021-04-03). "The Circular Economy at a Crossroads: Technocratic Eco-Modernism or Convivial Technology for Social Revolution?". Capitalism Nature Socialism. 32 (2): 95–113. doi:10.1080/10455752.2020.1763414. ISSN 1045-5752. S2CID 219477616.
  238. Calisto Friant, Martin; Vermeulen, Walter J. V.; Salomone, Roberta (2020-10-01). "A typology of circular economy discourses: Navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 161: 104917. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104917. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 222121823.
  239. Bauwens, Thomas (1 December 2021). "Are the circular economy and economic growth compatible? A case for post-growth circularity". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 175: 105852. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105852. ISSN 0921-3449.
  240. Corvellec, Hervé; Stowell, Alison F.; Johansson, Nils (April 2022). "Critiques of the circular economy". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 26 (2): 421–432. doi:10.1111/jiec.13187. ISSN 1088-1980. S2CID 238087986.
  241. "What is Biomimicry?". Biomimicry Institute. Archived from the original on 2013-11-13. Retrieved 2013-11-20.
  242. "Blue Economy : Green Economy 2.0". Retrieved 2013-11-20. (see:
  243. Zhong, Shan (2018). "Tightening the loop on the circular economy: Coupled distributed recycling and manufacturing with recyclebot and RepRap 3-D printing" (PDF). Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 128: 48–58. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.023. S2CID 13833024.
  244. Cooper, Tim (2005). "Slower Consumption Reflections on Product Life Spans and the "Throwaway Society"" (PDF). Journal of Industrial Ecology. 9 (1–2): 51–67. doi:10.1162/1088198054084671.
  245. "International Society for Industrial Ecology – Home". Retrieved 2013-11-20.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.