Circular futures: What will they look like?

Publication date

2020

Authors

Bauwens, T.J.F.ISNI 0000000492835872
Hekkert, M.P.ORCID 0000-0003-0570-5117ISNI 0000000139241969
Kirchherr, J.W.ISNI 0000000464978446

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

Abstract

The circular economy is argued to hold great promise for achieving sustainability. Yet, there is a dearth of research about what a circular future may look like. To address this gap, this paper proposes different plausible scenarios for a circular future, using a 2 × 2 scenario matrix method developed through a thought experiment and a focus group. Key drivers of change in this matrix are the nature of technologies deployed – high-tech or low-tech innovations – and the configuration of the governance regime – centralized or decentralized. From this, our paper builds four scenario narratives for the future of a circular economy: “planned circularity”, “bottom-up sufficiency”, “circular modernism”, and “peer-to-peer circularity”. It delineates the core characteristics and the upsides and downsides of each scenario. It shows that a circular economy can be organized in very contrasting ways. By generating insights about alternative circular futures, these scenarios may provide a clearer directionality to policy-makers and businesses, helping them both anticipate and understand the consequences of a paradigm shift towards a circular economy and shape policies and strategies, especially in the context of so-called mission-oriented innovation policies. They may also provide a sound basis for quantitatively modelling the impacts of a circular economy.

Keywords

Foresight, Sustainability transitions, Scenario planning, Circular business models, Environmental governance, circular innovations, SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure, SDG 17 - Partnerships for the Goals

Citation

Bauwens, T J F, Hekkert, M P & Kirchherr, J W 2020, 'Circular futures : What will they look like?', Ecological Economics, vol. 175, 106703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106703