ArticlePDF Available

Linear Economy Versus Circular Economy: A Comparative and Analyzer Study for Optimization of Economy for Sustainability



Upon visiting the existing literature on the subject of linear vs. circular economy, this paper finds that, the blueprint of the current economy is hardly sustainable by using the comparative benchmarking method that drained from literature. The intrinsic mechanics of the linear economy, by relying on the wasteful take - make - dispose flow, is detrimental to the environment, cannot supply the growing populace of our planet with essential services and it naturally leads to strained profitability. Elements of a plausible solution to the challenges have been around for decades, although they have only recently been compiled in to the conceptual framework of circular economy. The core ideas of Circular Economy are elimination of waste by design, respect for the social, economic and natural environment and resource-conscious business conduct. Built on the backbone of these principles, the circular economy has demonstrated to deliver tangible benefits and viability to address the economic, environmental and social challenges of our days.
1/2017 31
Linear Economy versus Circular Economy: Acomparative and analyzer study ... n Sariatli, F. n vol. 6, 2017, no. 1 n p. 31–34
Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development
This paper discusses presumably the most fundamental, complex and systemic
challenges of our days: the foundations, the design and the substantial
principles of the economy. Hence, the circular economy implies a conception
or system that keeps the added value of a product as much as possible and
eliminates the waste. When a product ends its life cycle, it is supposed to be
kept within the economy as resource which can be used productively again
and again and thus create a further value (European Commission (2014).
The work includes the research on the unsustainability of the traditional
linear economy, which contains environmental, demographic and economic
components. Based on the input from credible secondary sources, it will be
demonstrated that the natural environment is approaching (or surpassing)
a tipping point where the world irreversibly loses its capacity to sustain the
biosphere as we know it. Further, it will be shown that the conventional linear
economic model that has shone in the conditions of resource abundance,
reaches the limit for supplying the input the mankind needs for sustenance
in the empirical economic and demographic trends. The paper will present
the basic principles, the composing elements and the benets of the circular
economy alternative, which promises not merely to lengthen the availability
of the remaining pool of resources, but to permanently improve the eciency
of the economy and to enable prolonged supply for the growing needs of
Impetus to Transition: Environmental Concerns
Although the environmental burden of the humanity has been known to
accelerate since the industrialization, by the new millennium 1.5 Planet
Earths are estimated to be needed to support our social, economic and
demographic existence (WWF, 2012). In an attempt to classify the human
impact on the ecosystem, Rockström et al. (2009) introduced the concept
of Planetary Boundaries, referring to key environmental thresholds which,
when crossed, can change the current ecosystem irreversibly. In the latest
publication of the group (Steen et al., 2015), the researchers claim that four
of the nine Planetary Boundaries have already been crossed: the climate has
already changed, the biosphere has lost its integrity, the land-system has been
altered and the biogeochemical cycles have been corrupted. The Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment (2005, cited by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation
(2013)), states that fteen out of the recognized twenty-four ecosystem
services (i.e. processes of nature that support human wellbeing) are used in
an unsustainable manner or are being depleted. Based on these recognitions,
Steen et al. (2015) argue that the relative stability and the slowly evolving
environmental conditions that were characteristic in the Holocene geological
era has been surpassed by the era of Anthropocene, which is distinctive of
the abrupt and dramatic deviations caused by the economic activity as well
as the social and demographic burdens imposed by mankind. Although not
everyone embraces the radicalness of the ideas suggested by the Planetary
Boundaries, it is hardly debatable that the world’s natural tolerance to human
activity appears to be growing tired and the ecosystem shows signs of being
worn down.
The Linear Model and its Failure (strengths)
According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013), the currently prevailing
economic design has its roots in the historically uneven distribution of wealth
by geographic region. As the consumers of resources have been largely
concentrated on the most developed regions (i.e. in the western societies), and
the material inputs have been sourced increasingly from the global arena, the
industrial nations have experienced an abundance of material resources and
energy. In this arrangement, the materials have been cheap compared to the
cost of human labor. Resultantly, the producers have been motivated to adopt
business models that relied on extensive use of materials and economized on
human work. What is more: the more energy and materials they have been
able to utilize to supplement human capital, the more competitive edge
they could manage to gain. The natural consequence of cheap material /
expensive labor is the common neglect of recycling, reusing and putting much
emphasis on waste. The regulatory, accounting and scal rules have also been
supportive of this scheme, as they did not issue aprotocol to charge producers
with the externalities, therefore the producers have been less encouraged to
consider the external costs of their operations. In addition, the system had
Furkan Sariatli
Szent István University, Gödöllő, Hungary
Upon visiting the existing literature on the subject of linear vs. circular economy, this paper nds that, the blueprint of the current economy is
hardly sustainable by using the comparative benchmarking method that drained from literature. The intrinsic mechanics of the linear economy,
by relying on the wasteful take – make – dispose ow, is detrimental to the environment, cannot supply the growing p opulace of our planet with
essential services and it naturally leads to strained protability. Elements of a plausible solution to the challenges have been around for decades,
although they have only recently been compiled in to the conceptual framework of circular economy. The core ideas of Circular Economy are
elimination of waste by design, respect for the social, economic and natural environment and resource-conscious business conduct. Built on
the backbone of these principles, the circular economy has demonstrated to deliver tangible benets and viability to address the economic,
environmental and social challenges of our days.
Keywords: circular, linear, environment, failure, benets, transition
DOI: 10.1515/vjbsd-2017-0005
Download Date | 7/5/17 3:36 AM
32 1/2017
Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development
Linear Economy versus Circular Economy: Acomparative and analyzer study ... n Sariatli, F. n vol. 6, 2017, no. 1 n p. 31–34
a natural lock-in inertia, as the ocial product approval procedures tend
to favor the existing practices over radical changes and reinvention of basic
principles. The upshot of this economic blueprint is the linear economy. Its
essence is generally summarized as take – make – dispose. That is, take the
resources you need, make the goods to be sold and make prot and dispose
of everything you do not need – including a product at the end of its lifecycle.
Based on empirical data and economic modelling, the Ellen MacArthur
Foundation (2013) quanties some of the costs of the linear model. The
source cites the report of the Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI)
which claims that 21 billion tons of materials used in production do not
get incorporated in the nal product (i.e. they are lost during the transition
between the forms of materials, in production, as unused by-products, due
to ineciency, as a result of storage problems, etc.). The Ellen MacArthur
Foundation (2013) refers to Eurostat (2011) data indicating that the volume
of material input to the European economy tallied with 65 billion tons in
2010, out of which 2.7 billion tons were dumped as waste, merely 40 percent
of which was used again in any form (e.g. through recycling, reusing or
composting). The unmanaged waste lost not only its original function, but it
was also wasted as a source of energy.
While the linear economy has been highly successful in generating
material wealth in the industrial nations up to the 20th century, it has
demonstrated weaknesses in the new millennium and the ultimate
breakdown in the near future is forecast. Based on data of professional
sources, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013) states that the commodity
prices have met atipping point in 1999 and the previously declining material
costs gained avolatile upward momentum. The incremental prices and high
volatility can be attributed to the increased demand that pushed the output to
a point in the cost curve where incremental production costs dearly and to the
depletion of easy to access extraction sites, which exposes mining to taking
technological risks for bringing new sites online. This trend has been paired
with increasing competition, which has prevented companies from passing
the increasing prices on to their customers – eventually exerting a prot
squeeze on rms and driving the value of total economic output down.
According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013), several of the
current trends extrapolated further deterioration in the potential of the linear
economy to the future projects. The demographic evolution of the mankind
further shifts the concentration of the population from the traditionally
densely populated industrialized nations towards the emerging markets. This
trend, coupled with the lightning-fast economic development of China and
India has been and is increasing the global mass of middle class consumers
by an estimated 3 billion with corresponding consumption, which is predicted
to cost 3 trillion USD per annum in infrastructural investment (Dobbs et al.,
2011). According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013), failing to meet
this level of investment, the economy is unavoidably growing to be supply
constrained – particularly in the western economies that already operate at
their near maximum capacity for example in terms of food. Addressing these
questions is fundamentally challenging, even if one discounts the local and
global political tensions, the growing interconnectedness of the markets
through nancialization and the deterioration of the environment.
Conceptual Overview of Circular Economy
Deriving from empirically tested models of environmental erosion and
the systemic impact of the economy on the environment, the prevailing
notion governing production and consumption more is better […] needs
to be entirely replaced by ‘positive development in which markets work to
automatically, systematically make things better both locally and globally
(Greyson, 2016). Conceptualized by environment-conscious economists, the
conventional linear economy (described by the widely-cited line of take –
make – dispose) is to be supplanted by the circular economy.
The phrase circular economy (CE) itself was introduced by Pearce and
Turner (1989), although the concept has deep roots dating back to the 1960s
and it has been contributed by a large number of researchers, theorists and
vocational parties. As the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015a) puts it, the
circular economy should be considered a framework: as a generic notion, the
circular economy draws on several more specic approaches that gravitate
around a set of basic principles (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015a). To
comprehend the concept, it is due to establish the composing ideas. The
relevance of this approach is underscored by the fact that pan-national
organizations (such as the World Economic Forum, 2016) also signed to and
adopted the interdisciplinary composition of circular economy.
The dawn of CE can be traced back to Boulding (1966), who suggested
to implement a cyclical ecological system instead of the wasteful linear
economic model. While the cyclical economic scheme of Boulding (1966)
was rather uid, it spurred further conceptual development of sustainability.
Stahel (1982) introduced the notion of spiral–loop (or closed loop) self-
replenishing economic construct, which Stahel (2010) eventually developed to
the idea of “performance” economy. The essence of the performance economy
is the redenition of the subject of production, sales and maintenance:
instead of goods, rms should market performance, as for example in the
recently surging sharing based business models. The concept of Stahl was
incorporated in the successful cradle-to-cradle initiative of Braungart and
McDonough (2008), which considers all material involved in industrial and
commercial processes to be nutrients, of which there are two main categories:
technical and biological (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015b). A further
aspect and building block of the circular economy is biomimicry. Proposed by
Benyus (1998), the economic system is to mimic (as in learn from and imitate)
the ways of nature to cope with industrial and commercial challenges and
gauge operational eciency against solutions experienced in the nature.
The circular economy also takes advantage of the scientic approach of the
industrial ecology, which is concerned with the energy and material ow
of the industrial (and other economic) systems, aiming to create closed
loop processes that minimize waste by deploying interdisciplinary scientic
methodology and by regarding both the local and the global natural and
social environments (Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2015c). The notion of
natural capitalism aims to create a shared economic platform that recognizes
the needs of both the environment and the capital. The core propositions of
natural capitalism are: creating closed-loop production cycle to reuse non-
degradable materials; elevating the eciency of resource usage to lengthen
the availability of natural resources; redening the producer – user contract to
“service and ow” model rather than “sell and use” and quantifying the value
of natural resources to promote reinvestment in nature (Hawken et al., 1999).
The blue economy concept extends the ideas regarding waste-usage; beyond
internal closed-loop production cycles, the waste of one industry should be
regarded as a potential input to dierent sectors, whose arrangement is often
dubbed as cascading (Pauli, 2009).
Benets of Circular Economy
The more an industrial foundation reuses and cycles its waste, the closer it
approaches to the idea of circular economy and to being more protable
(Lancaster, 2002) while also less harmless for environment. CE mainly
promotes virgin material minimization and espousal of clean technologies
(Andersen 1997, 1999). In industrial environment, it is intended to show
that circular economy would be benecial for society. Benets will be taken
not only using environment as a reservoir for residual wastes but restricting
Download Date | 7/5/17 3:36 AM
1/2017 33
Linear Economy versus Circular Economy: Acomparative and analyzer study ... n Sariatli, F. n vol. 6, 2017, no. 1 n p. 31–34
Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development
or minimizing the usage of exhausting material for production activities.
The expected benets are focused on the basic monitoring that the loss of
material wastes, in countable units, is minimized (Andersen, 2007).
To expand, there are vital points made by the Ellen MacArthur
Foundation (2013), based on modelling the application of the principles of the
circular economy, a long range of tangible benets can be detected rst of all
that deploy circular design in technological product categories (for example
via standardization, modularization or via embedding disassembly concerns
in product design) and result in securing access to better and cheaper
materials. Furthermore, performance based (e.g. sharing) business models
have already proved their dollar worth in a number of sectors. In that sense,
Prociency in the reverse material ow cycle is a potential competitive
edge for businesses while CE also opens up employment opportunities,
developing expertise in legal, mechanical, operational or cross-sectoral
challenges. The methods of circular economy are highly scalable; therefore,
CE is capable to fuel growth and attract investment capital. Thus,
incorporating the attributes of CE in the R & D phase of operation yields
spurs progress in material sciences and yields the development of higher
quality and more durable components.
The elimination of waste from the value chain has the quantiable
benet of reducing systemic and direct material cost and diminishing
resource dependence. Thus, circular economy benets organizations with
operational as well as strategic advantages. It means that, by reducing the
level of material input needed, the economy may save billions of dollars. The
transition/advance scenario estimates of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation
(2013) say the European Union may save up to 400/600 billion USD in material
costs annually, primarily in the automotive and machinery sectors. From this
point of view, due to the closed-loop processes, the economy grows less
exposed to price uctuations of the materials and the attened cost curve
ultimately results in a more ecient use of resources in terms of both value
and volume.
As a result of that, the sectoral composition of the economy shifts
towards the more innovative, ecient and productive service sector, as the
majority of externalities is associated with the use and ow of material,
lower material consumption evidently decreases the exposure to externalities
and the growing eciency of material use stimulates innovation and yields
creative solutions beyond the immediate cost related benets
Last but not least, there are outcomes reecting to end users such as
the reverse ow of materials extending the consumer – producer contact,
beneting rms with elevated consumer loyalty, product designs with reuse
of materials incorporated reduce complexity and prolong product life-cycles
which will make product consumer-benet centered, application of the
principles of the circular economy promotes production of goods built-to-last,
which ultimately reduces the total cost of ownership and the market receives
new ways of accessing goods (e.g. through sharing), which enriches the set
of choices and increases customer satisfaction. Controversially, although
practicing those above, there are still obstacles we have to cope with such
as in Chinese example; deciency of social indicators, lack of indicators for
industrial/urban reconciliation, lack of indicators of business performance,
lack of prevention oriented indicators, lack of measurable criteria and certain
barriers on implementation (Geng et al., 2011).
SWOT Analysis for Circular Economy versus Linear Economy
Although there are quite enormous benets and opportunities of circular
economy, it is also necessary to cope with a series of hardships. Circular
economy implies a more manageable waste, recyclable resources, protable
organizations and more sustainable environment, however, awareness
of it is still arguable and tendency upon Circular economy by sectoral and
governmental still is quite minimal level. A set of legal, R & D, capital and
introductory rules and campaigns yet needs to be done. As described below,
it is intended to indicate some certain values which may assist us to scale
current and future standing implicated by the SWOT analysis.
Prociency in the reverse material ow cycle is a potential competitive
Elimination of waste from the value chain has the quantiable benet
of reducing systemic and direct material cost and diminishing resource
Incorporating the attributes of CE in the R & D phase of operation yields
spurs progress in material sciences and yields the development of
higher quality and more durable components.
Due to the closed-loop processes, the economy grows less exposed
to price uctuations of the materials and the attened cost curve
ultimately results in more ecient use of resources in terms of both
value and volume.
Externalities are associated with the use and ow of material,
lower material consumption evidently decreases the exposure to
Circular economy still requires amalgamation of the entire product life
cycle from raw material provision to annihilation (Van Ewijik, 2014).
No specic guidelines to sectors on how to implement circular economy.
There is still no internationally recognized standards institution to
regulate the sector (Circular Academy, 2017).
Circular Economy may omit the feature of semi-recyclability when
choosing a raw material for production process.
Public opinion about CE is yet inecient and social marketing
campaigns lack to access sectoral people.
There is still no special legal regulation about circular economy and its
application (Circular Academy, 2017).
Investments about circular economy to introduce the system to sector
are not enough.
By reducing the level of material input needed, the economy may save
billions of dollars. The EU may save up to 600 billion USD in material
costs annually.
Deploying circular design in technological products, results in securing
access to better and cheaper materials.
Developing expertise in legal, mechanical, operational or cross-sectoral
challenges in circular solutions opens business opportunity for the
Developing expertise in sectoral or cross-sectoral challenges in circular
solutions opens business opportunity for the enablers.
If companies can control entire life cycle, they can easily cross-subsidize
dierent activities and that can cause high prices and incapable
If producers could direct their own product-waste, it may be more
dicult to benet from waste management for those in scale economy.
Managing whole life cycle of product and strong collaboration can
cause cartel structures.
Download Date | 7/5/17 3:36 AM
34 1/2017
Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development
Linear Economy versus Circular Economy: Acomparative and analyzer study ... n Sariatli, F. n vol. 6, 2017, no. 1 n p. 31–34
A gradual or sequencing nancial disruptions in the system can cause
unpleasant outcomes for the interdependant sector due to complex and
interlinked sector (Van Ewijik, 2014).
The paper observed the fundamental challenges of the current economic
arrangements: the linear economy. It was established that the take – make–
dispose construct is not suited to meet the current, let alone the projected
future needs of mankind. The investigation found that the economic agents
throughout the prevalence of the linear economy have been intrinsically
counter-motivated to be mindful for resource exploitation eciency, which
resulted in excessive level of waste output. The recent environmental and
economic trends have palpably demonstrated that the blueprint of the linear
economy has met its limits: on the one hand, the natural environment seems
to be unable to tolerate the current level of resource exploitation; on the other
hand, the growing scarcity of resources driven both by the depletion and by
increasing demand due to the demographic trends exerts relentless pressure
on the attainable prot.
The paper found that the circular economy is a viable, sustainable and
unavoidable alternative which is capable to cope with the challenges. The
collection of concepts composing the circular economy enables reducing the
waste by incorporating reusing components of goods by design via closed
loop and cascaded approaches, containing the dependence of the economy on
material and energy inputs, increasing the resilience of the economic system,
the preservation of the environment, supplying the growing demands of the
ever more populated planet and increasing the operationability and cost-
eciency of production. What is more, the circular economy is compatible
with the inherent interests of the corporations, as it is aligned with the
competitive and the strategic frameworks and it is capable to enrich the
contract between the consumers and the producers.
Ultimately, the author personally nds the transition from the linear to
the circular economy essential. The author particularly nds it valuable that
although it requires fundamental alterations of the mechanics of production
and consumption, it is down to earth in terms of human needs and it does not
impose unrealistic expectations from any segment of the value chain or from
the consumers.
ANDERSEN, MS. 1997. Evaluation of the cleaner technology programme, environmental
review no. 14. Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen. [Online]. Retrieved on
April 19, 2017 Available at:les/86521632/cleanertechn_uk.pdf
ANDERSEN, MS. 1999. Governance by green taxes: implementing clean water policies
in Europe 1970–1990. In Environmental Economy Policy Studies, vol. 2, no. 1, pp.
39–63. [Online]. Retrieved on April 19, 2017. Available at:
ANDERSEN, MS. 2006. An introductory note on the environmental economics of the circular
economy, Springer, pp. 133–134 [Online]. Retrieved on April 19, 2017. Available at:les/252409/download?download_frd=1&verier=8v
BENYUS, J. 1998. Biomimicry: innovation inspired by nature. New York : Quill, 1998.
BOULDING, K. 1966. The economics of the coming spaceship Earth. In Jarrett, H. (ed)
Environmental quality in a growing economy. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1966.
BRAUNGART, M. – McDONOUGH, W. 2008. Cradle-to-cradle – Remaking the way we make
things. New York : North Point Press, 2008.
CIRCULAR ACADEMY. 2017. Circular economy: critics and challenges – How can we bridge
the circularity gap? [Online]. Retrieved on February 21, 2017. Available at: http://
Resource revolution: Meeting the world’s energy, material, food, and water needs.
[Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
ELLEN MacARTHUR FOUNDATION. 2013. Towards the circular economy. [Online]. Accessed
on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
ELLEN MacARTHUR FOUNDATION. 2015a. Schools of thought – performance
economy. [Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at: https://www.
ELLEN MacARTHUR FOUNDATION. 2015b. Schools of thought – industrial ecology. [Online].
Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
ELLEN MacARTHUR FOUNDATION. 2015c. Schools of thought – cradle to cradle. [Online].
Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
EUROPEAN COMISSION. 2014. Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme
for Europe. Brussels, pp. 2, 2.7.2014 COM 398 nal. [Online]. Retrieved on Feb 10,
2017. Available at:
EUROSTAT. 2011. Waste statistics. [Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at: http://
GENGA, Y.  FUA, J.  SARKISC J.  XUEA, B. 2012. Towards a national circular economy
indicator system in China: an evaluation and critical analysis. In Journal of Cleaner
Production, vol. 23, 2012, no. 1, pp. 216–224.
GREYSON, J. 2016. A glance at waste-free economy. [Online]. Available at: http://www.
HAWKEN, P.  LOVINS, A.B.  LOVINS, L.H. 1999. Natural capitalism: The next industrial
evolution. London : Earthscan, 1999.
PAULI, G. 2009. 10 years 100 innovations 100 million jobs inspired by nature. Report to
the Club of Rome. [Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at: http://www.les/Blue%20Economy%202009.pdf
PEARCE, D.W.  TURNER, R.K. 1989. Economics of natural resources and the environment.
Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989.
ROCKSTRÖM, J.  STEFFEN, W.  NOONE, K.  PERSSON, et al. 2009. A safe operating
space for humanity. In Nature, vol. 461, 2009, no. 24, pp. 472–475.
STAHEL, W. 1982. Product-life factor. [Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
STAHEL, W. 2010. The performance economy 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan,
STEFFEN, W.  RICHARDSON, K.  ROCKSTRÖM, J.  CORNELL, et al. 2015. Planetary
boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. In Science, 347
(6223), 2015.
VAN EWJIK, STIJIN. 2014. Three Challenges to the Circular Economy, UCL Institute for
Sustainable Resources. [Online]. Retrieved on February 26, 2017. Available at:
WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM. 2016. From linear to circular – Accelerating a proven concept.
[Online]. Accessed on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
WWF. 2012. Living planet report 2012 – Biodiversity, biocapacity and better choices.
[Online]. Retrieved on Dec 21, 2016. Available at:
Contact address
Furkan Sariatli, PhD Student, Szent Istvan University, Faculty of Economics
and Social Sciences, Doctoral School for MBA, Pater Karoly ut.1, 2100 Gödöllő,
Hungary, e-mail:
Download Date | 7/5/17 3:36 AM
... ca su alcance y aplicación en contextos tecnológicos, sociales, ambientales y de innovación, enfatizando siempre en la necesidad de una toma de consciencia sobre los impactos del modelo lineal, que es comúnmente explicado en torno a la idea de crecimiento económico continuo, afectación y deterioro medioambiental y consumo creciente, cuyos fallos tienden a hacerlo cada vez menos viable, como indican, entre otros,Sariatli (2017),Rizos (2017) y Michelini (2017a. ...
Dicho libro tuvo como propósito reflexionar sobre la Economía Circular (EC) que se consolida cada vez más como una estrategia importante dentro de la sostenibilidad ambiental. A nivel mundial se ha visto que trae beneficios sociales, económicos y ambientales y por eso se vienen implementando grandes apuestas al respecto. En Colombia, se establece la Estrategia Nacional de Economía Circular (2018), donde se propende por crear nuevas oportunidades para el desarrollo sostenible de los territorios y de las cadenas productivas. De acuerdo con lo anterior, en el libro se plantea, la economía circular desde: las ciudades circulares, la construcción de ciudades inteligentes, la gobernanza urbana, las políticas públicas y, por último, las finanzas desde una mirada en los contextos internacional, nacional y local.
... Although there is no agreed-upon definition of CE (Kirchherr et al. 2017), the term is generally used to refer to an economy "based on the principles of designing out waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use, and regenerating natural systems" (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2017). This contrasts with the so-called "linear economy", the current and dominant consumption-based economic paradigm described above, which is characterised by taking resources, making goods to be sold, and disposing of everything one does not need, including the product at the end of its lifecycle (Sariatli 2017). Products are typically made to be consumed and discarded by the user once they are no longer considered valuable. ...
Full-text available
The world’s current model for economic development is unsustainable. It encourages high levels of resource extraction, consumption, and waste that undermine positive environmental outcomes. Transitioning to a circular economy (CE) model of development has been proposed as a sustainable alternative. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a crucial enabler for CE. It can aid in designing robust and sustainable products, facilitate new circular business models, and support the broader infrastructures needed to scale circularity. However, to date, considerations of the ethical implications of using AI to achieve a transition to CE have been limited. This article addresses this gap. It outlines how AI is and can be used to transition towards CE, analyzes the ethical risks associated with using AI for this purpose, and supports some recommendations to policymakers and industry on how to minimise these risks.
... millennium, and a near-term collapse is predicted (Sariatli, 2017). According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013), the current economic model, as shown in Figure 1, has its roots in the historically unequal distribution of income by geographic region. ...
Full-text available
This paper interconnects the literature on circular economy and sustainable finance. In addition to describing the reasons behind circular economy projects, this paper surveys the literature on financing circularity. The financial industry plays a significant and increasing role in promoting sustainability by supporting sustainable investment projects. To obtain funds for circular economy projects, sponsors face additional challenges due to business and financial complexities inherent to such projects. We characterise and describe firms’ reasons for developing circular economy projects as well as how these projects are funded by using a clinical study focused on three projects. Extant literature presents 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle); the reduction of cost and pollution; improvement in competitiveness, innovation, and processes; improvement of ESG ratings, and enhance reputation. All these reasons are positively correlated and address resource scarcity, impact on environment, and economic concerns. Innovative circular projects are typically funded via a mix of sustainable equity - venture capital funds, impact investors, EU funds - and debt - sustainable bonds (green and ESG bonds) and loans.
... As a result, the CE offers both strategic and operational advantages to businesses. The overall economy might save billions of dollars by reducing the quantity of raw material input required (Geng et al., 2012;Sariatli, 2017). ...
In regional and global contexts, the circular economy (CE) has gained significant traction to sustain the economy while maintaining environmental and social justice. However, the literature on CE lacks substantial information regarding the theory and methodology of putting CE into practice. The goal of this work is to create a framework for evaluating CE indicators and CE implementation in biological systems. The findings of this study suggest that CE may be more complicated than previously thought, involving a wide variety of interconnected mechanisms. The CE’s guiding principles differentiate between biological and man-made (artificial) material and resource cycles. Biological cycles concern the safe and efficient movement of renewable biotic resources into and out of the biosphere. This study looks at the 13 different indicators of a circular economy, with a particular emphasis on the biological approaches that make up the biological cycle. The 13 papers were broken down as follows: four at the macro level, three at the meso level, and seven at the micro level. Furthermore, through the analysis of various literary sources, this paper proposed a framework for calculating and quantifying the CE. The framework’s first steps are measurement criteria, the second are level monitoring procedures, and the third is the impact of CE. The proposed framework will aid in disseminating knowledge across regions, industries, and stakeholders, as well as accelerating CE implementation.
Im vorliegenden Kapitel wird die Kreislaufwirtschaft im Kontext der additiven Fertigung diskutiert. Hauptmotivation ist, die sich verändernde Industrielandschaft und den entscheidenden Ansatz für zukünftige Generationen zu verstehen, mehr Materialien zu recyceln und gleichzeitig weniger Abfall zu erzeugen. Das Kapitel analysiert mithilfe der Qualitativen Datenanalyse (QDA) Aussagen von Vertretern einiger Unternehmen in der 3D-Druck-Branche zu den Geschäftsmodellen im Hinblick auf die Kreislaufwirtschaft. Anhand der Ergebnisse der QDA konnten Lücken insbesondere in der Kommunikation zwischen verschiedenen Geschäftsbereichen aufgedeckt werden, die die Umsetzung kreislauforientierter Geschäftsmodelle erschweren.
Electric vehicles (EVs) have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as limit other local pollutants that negatively impact the health of the urban population. The complete life cycle of EVs needs to be better evaluated to avoid natural resource depletion while nullifying end-use emissions in order to meet climate goals. Thus, to face the challenges of resource use and the effective implementation of strategies to reduce the negative externalities of this process, it is necessary to focus on the end-of-life (EoL) management of these vehicles by applying strategies based on Circular Economy (CE) concepts. Based on a systematic literature review through a bibliometric approach, the proposed chapter sought to identify the points of synergy between Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and CE strategies to reduce the carbon footprint of EVs, with a focus on battery electric vehicles (BEVs). After analyzing 54 articles from the Web of Science and Scopus databases that met quality and applicability criteria, a framework of the relationship between LCA stages and CE strategies for transportation systems was developed, highlighting opportunities and challenges for each CE stage and the life cycle of EV, consolidating the contribution of this research.
The bioeconomy comprises all primary arms of production, including industrial and economic sectors that employ biological resources and techniques to generate bio-based products and services, while creating new industries and employment. Advocates of the bioeconomy anticipate that biotechnology will play a key role in its development via scientific advances that will spur innovations in deriving products and energy from renewable biomass. About 50 countries have adopted bioeconomy policies, with a view to unlocking new vistas for economic development and innovation, while pushing towards the attainment of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Nigeria has an estimated annual biomass potential of about 200 billion kilogrammes, which could be harnessed to generate biofuels via integrated bio-refineries and microbial conversion. In addition, alternative food sources from microorganisms, aquaponics and other products from wood, especially as a plastic alternative and medicines provide endless opportunities for a sustainable bioeconomy in Nigeria.
There is a wide consensus that bioeconomy must be sustainable, circular, respect the ecological boundaries of the planet and be economically viable. These concepts have been mostly generated by the European Union in the early years of this century. This article outlines some of the critical stages that allowed the bioeconomy concept to evolve in the European Union (EU), led by the inspiring personality and leadership of Christian Patermann. In the second part, the authors put forward some challenges, triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic and by the increasing geopolitical instability, that bioeconomy should take on board and discuss among stakeholders. These discussions are expected to develop evolving strategies able to adapt to the changing needs and circumstances of our word.
Full-text available
İzmir, zengin termal kaynaklara sahip ve bu sayede termal turizm faaliyetleri bakımından potansiyeli bulunan bir şehirdir. Bu potansiyelin sürdürülebilir bir şekilde devam edebilmesi için hizmet üretim ve tüketim sürecinde kaynakların etkin kullanılması, ortaya çıkan atıkların azaltılması ve geri dönüşümü önem arz etmektedir. Bu bağlamda bu çalışmanın amacı, termal konaklama işletmelerinde jeotermal kaynaklar başta olmak üzere hizmet üretim sürecinde oluşan atıkların döngüsel ekonomi çerçevesinde değerlendirilebilmesiyle ilgili farkındalığı artırmak ve yapılan uygulamalarla ilgili bir vaka analizi gerçekleştirmektir. Nitel araştırma deseni benimsenerek İzmir’de faaliyet gösteren bir termal konaklama işletmesinin yöneticileriyle yüz yüze görüşmeler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen veriler Maxqda 2020 Pro programıyla incelenmiş ve betimsel analiz ile yorumlanmıştır. Araştırmada ortaya çıkan en önemli bulgu işletmenin jeotermal kaynaklardan ortaya çıkan atık suyu çeşitli nedenler ile denize dökmesi ve re-enjeksiyon sistemini kullanmamasıdır. Sonuç olarak işletme döngüsel ekonomi uygulamalarını tam olarak yerine getiremese de sürdürülebilirlik faaliyetlerine dikkat ettiği anlaşılmaktadır.
Full-text available
Every year more than 900 million tonnes of food is wasted, contributing to almost 10% of total greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing food waste has been identified as essential to tackle the current climate crisis, and links to several UN’s sustainable development goals. This is especially critical for energy and resource-intensive food products like meat, whose consumption is predicted to reach an historical maximum by 2030. Whilst wastage occurs at all stages of the supply chain, tractable data about the journey of food from production to consumer remains largely hidden or unrecorded. Powered by the latest advances in sensing like smart food packaging and digital technologies such as Big Data and IoT, Digital Twins offer a valuable opportunity to monitor and control meat products and processes across the whole supply chain, enabling food waste to be reduced and by-products reintegrated into the supply chain. This paper proposes a new framework for a Digital Twin that integrates key technological enablers across different areas of the meat supply chain towards with the goal of a “zero-waste”, circular meat supply chain.
Full-text available
This article analyzes the use of economic instruments for environmental policy in four European countries. The study employs data from national and international sources for an ex post evaluation of the effects of economic policy instruments in the clean water programs of Denmark, France, Germany, and The Netherlands from 1970 to 1990. It is shown that among the four countries The Netherlands were the most successful in environmental terms, regarding social costs and with respect to technological innovation. On the one hand the study confirms that economic instruments can work as rather powerful stimuli for the implementation of public policies; on the other hand it provides some unexpected findings regarding the significance of the institutional context for the design and operation of market-based instruments. It is argued that institutionalized practices of public policy making influenced the specific design of the four water pollution control programs, including the design and role of economic instruments, and that the regulatory design in turn affected the degree to which the incentives provided by the economic instruments were able to influence the behavior of the polluters. The study hence points to the significance of taking into account the institutional setting of the design and operation of market-based instruments, an observation with both theoretical and practical implications.
Full-text available
The planetary boundaries framework defines a safe operating space for humanity based on the intrinsic biophysical processes that regulate the stability of the Earth system. Here, we revise and update the planetary boundary framework, with a focus on the underpinning biophysical science, based on targeted input from expert research communities and on more general scientific advances over the past 5 years. Several of the boundaries now have a two-tier approach, reflecting the importance of cross-scale interactions and the regional-level heterogeneity of the processes that underpin the boundaries. Two core boundaries—climate change and biosphere integrity—have been identified, each of which has the potential on its own to drive the Earth system into a new state should they be substantially and persistently transgressed.