The circular economy: New or Refurbished as CE 3.0? — Exploring Controversies in the Conceptualization of the Circular Economy through a Focus on History and Resource Value Retention Options
Циркулярная экономика: новая или восстановленная как CE 3.0? — Исследование противоречий в концептуализации циркулярной экономики с акцентом на историю и варианты сохранения ценности ресурсов
2017-11-21
SCID: 54.1/bzq4c2u2
Discuss with AI
10R typologycircular economyremanufacturing and refurbishingresource circularityvalue retention options
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
Over the last decade, the concept of the circular economy has regained attention, especially related to efforts to achieve a more sustainable society. The ‘revival’ of the circular economy has been accompanied by controversies and confusions across different actors in science and practice. With this article we attempt at contributing to advanced clarity in the field and providing a heuristic that is useful in practice. Initially, we take a focus on the historical development of the concept of circular economy and value retention options (ROs) for products and materials aiming for increased circularity. We propose to distinguish three phases in the evolution of the circular economy and argue that the concept – in its dominant framing – is not as new as frequently claimed. Having established this background knowledge, we give insights into ‘how far we are’ globally, with respect to the implementation of circularity, arguing that high levels of circularity have already been reached in different parts of the globe with regard to longer loop value retention options, such as energy recovery and recycling. Subsequently, we show that the confusion surrounding the circular economy is more far reaching. We summarize the divergent perspectives on retention options and unite the most common views a 10R typology. From our analyses, we conclude that policymakers and businesses should focus their efforts on realization of the more desirable, shorter loop retention options, like remanufacturing, refurbishing and repurposing – yet with a view on feasibility and overall system effects. Scholars, on the other hand, should assist the parties contributing to an increased circular economy in practice by taking up a more active role in attaining consensus in conceptualizing the circular economy.
Key Findings
1
A unified 10R typology synthesizes the most common perspectives on product and material value retention options.
2
Conflicting perspectives on value retention options contribute substantially to conceptual confusion surrounding the circular economy.
3
Global circularity is already relatively advanced for longer-loop retention options, particularly energy recovery and recycling.
4
Policymakers and businesses should prioritize feasible shorter-loop options—remanufacturing, refurbishing, and repurposing—while considering overall system effects.
5
Researchers should play a more active role in building conceptual consensus and supporting practical circular-economy implementation.
6
The circular economy has evolved through three historical phases, indicating that its dominant contemporary framing is not as novel as often claimed.
Research Object
The circular economy concept and product/material resource retention options
Research Subject
The historical evolution, conceptual controversies, and implementation of circularity across resource retention options, especially the feasibility and system effects of shorter-loop strategies
Publication Details
Publication Date
2017-11-21
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest