Japan Forum of Business and Society Annals, No.11, pp. 1-17, 2022

1

How can we explain the success of Circular
Economy and assess its transformative
potential in the Anthropocene Era?
Valentina Carbone
ESCP Business School, Paris
Professor of Sustainability and Supply Chain Management
Co-director of the Circular Economy Chair

I am writing this paper as an engaged scholar

other types of capital, such as financial and hu-

as I believe that ― like other actors such asman) and strong sustainability (which rests onpolicymakers, managers, investors or NGOs

the objective of preserving all the different types― academics also have an important role toof capital without substitutions among them). Un-

play in fostering change to move towards alike weak sustainability, strong sustainability

more sustainable society. Building on my in-puts the emphasis on ecological preservationterest in circular economy, I am going to ad-

over economic gains. Strong sustainability im-

dress two main questions as a contribution toplies that man-made activities should be car-the current debates about how our societies

ried out within the boundaries of our natural

can cope with major grand challenges such as

ecosystems which provide us with several

climate change, biodiversity loss and resource"services" (food and water, or regulation of floods,

depletion. I will try to explain the success oferosion, etc.), but need to be preserved and re-the circular economy (CE) concept, which isstored in the long term (Davies, 2013).

gathering momentum around the world, inTo explain the success of CE and to investi-

many spheres from the political to the busi-

gate its transformative potential, the remain-(1)

ness world, but also in the academic field . I

der of this paper is organized as follows: thewill then share some ideas on a second para-

following section will introduce and define themount question, concerning the transformative

current context in which our societies are de-potential of CE in moving towards strong sus-

veloping: the Anthropocene. The second sec-

tainability. In the environmental economics

tion will discuss recent literature highlighting

field, two different orientations regarding sus-

the archetypes of the “Anthropocene society”,

tainability have been acknowledged and con-which will serve as an analytical framework,

trasted: weak sustainability (relying on the as-

inspired by institutional theory and relying on

sumption that natural capital can be replaced bya socio-political grammar, to interpret the dif-2

イントロダクション /Introduction

ferent models of CE which are put forward inunequivocal about the influence of human ac-

the political, entrepreneurial and academic world

tivity on climate change and seems to confirm(section 3) . We’ll conclude by sketching out

the entry of humanity into the Anthropocene

some answers to our two questions.

era. Beyond climate change, there is agree-

1.

From the Anthropocene to
Circular Economy

ment among scientists nowadays on the anthropic devastating impact on other phenomena, such as resource depletion and biodiversity

The term "Anthropocene" was coined in theloss ― other symptoms of the Anthropocene.

early 2000s to refer to the current, human-

To fully grasp the issue of resource deple-

dominated time period (Crutzen, 2006). It is be-tion, we should keep in mind what the domi-

ing considered as a new geological epoch where

nant development model of our economic sys-

all the chemical, biological and geological pro-tems has been during the last few decades: a

cesses of the natural Earth are increasingly

model of global value chains (Elms and Low,

affected by human activities. According to2013), characterized by an intensive process of

this theory, the Anthropocene would follow

extracting natural resources from the Earththe Holocene, a geological era lasting for the

to fuel global trade in the world market. "Ex-past 11,000 years, during which humankind

tractivism" leads to over-consumption of natu-

settled down, developed agriculture and spreadral resources, including air, water and land.

all around the world. Beyond the debates

Minerals, ores, biomass and fossil fuels arewithin the geology scientific community, thecritical resources that need to be monitored

Anthropocene concept resonates strongly innowadays due to their depletion rate and/or

the social sciences for its ability to point tointensive use, which is generating competition

the overwhelming impact of human-dominat-

among industries and alternative destinations.

ed habitats on the other species and compo-

While the global population has doubled sincenents of natural ecosystems. The Anthropo-

the 1970s, the quantity of extracted resources

cene, according to Crutzen, began at the end

has multiplied by 3.5, reaching about 100 Gi-

of the 18th century with the industrial revolu-

gatons per year (Circle Economy, 2021). Thesetion. The central idea is that climate change

figures support the thesis that demographic

and the multitude of human and non-human

expansion alone doesn't explain the boom inconsequences that it entails, marks the advent

resource consumption, which is also driven byof a new temporal age, both geological, in thatthe high resource intensity of our production

human action is reconfiguring the fundamen-models. According to the Circularity Gap Re-

tal dynamics of the Earth system, and social,port (2021), the yearly quantity of extracted

since these evolutions in turn are having ad-

resources is set to double by 2050 if our paceverse consequences on human activities andof production continues to follow current trends.

living conditions. The 6th report of the IPCC

The same document shows that of the total

Working Group 1 published in August 2021 isamount of resources extracted, one third goesHow can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

3

into durable goods (streets, cars, bridges, build-

sumption, indicated by gross domestic prod-

ings, etc.), one third goes into goods which be-uct, foreign direct investment, energy con-come waste within the same year, and one

sumption and telecommunications, are reflected

third goes into goods which will become leak-in connected changes in the Earth’s naturalages through emissions and polluting effluents

systems: climate (greenhouse gas levels, global

reaching our seas, forests and other natural

temperature), ocean acidification, terrestrial

ecosystems. On a global scale, less than 9% of

biosphere degradation and fish capture. The

all the resources that we extract go into new

great acceleration leads to the concept ofcycles of transformation or usages, through"planetary boundaries" (Rockström et al., 2009),

repurposing and recycling.

which warns us that we live in a finite world

Connecting the issue of natural resource

and that we are reaching some thresholds ―exploitation with biodiversity loss, another im-

tipping points ― beyond which it is danger-

portant symptom of the Anthropocene, a re-ous to go, and from where it would be ex-cent article published in Nature (2020) shows

tremely difficult to recover. Destructive, danthat, for the first time, human-made mass (allgerous phenomena, such as sea-level rise or

our produced goods) has reached the same lev-permafrost melting that liberates methane,el as the total living biomass on Earth, after

may be hard to control.

having doubled roughly every twenty years

Suggesting that we cannot tackle the big is-during the last century. In its Global Biodiver-sues of the Anthropocene (climate change, bio-sity Assessment, the International Panel on

diversity loss and resource depletion) without

Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES,

giving a full account of their historical roots,2019) makes it clear that concerted efforts to-leading critics have called for a different con-ward transformative change are urgently need-ceptual framework that places global change

ed to slow the precipitous global decline inin a new, ecologically oriented history of capi-

biodiversity, which dramatically threatens thetalism: the Capitalocene (Moore, 2016). They

functioning of all the main natural cycles.

suggest that the radical ecological and societal

How did we reach the Anthropocene era?

transformations needed in the Anthropocene

Several explanations have been formulated, in-era cannot happen without challenging thecluding the “Great Acceleration” thesis (Steffen

dominant economic and political power of fi-

et al., 2015). This group of scholars presented anancial actors and multinational companies,

dashboard containing a set of indicators thatand without revisiting the prevailing model of

depict the dramatic acceleration in human en-

an economy where everything is cheap (food,terprise and the impacts on the Earth systemnature, money, work, energy, etc.). Although weover the last two centuries. Their dashboard

may consider these positions as extreme andis built like a mirror, where trends of social

politically oriented, it is interesting to note that

economic activities are reflected in the Eartheven the Financial Times ― usually a pro-system. Changes in human production and con-business newspaper ― in one of its front pag-

4

イントロダクション /Introduction

es was recently calling for a “reset of capital-

restorative models, as observed in natural cy-

ism”.

cles and mechanisms (Benyus, 1997). The sec-

The backbone of our capitalistic system is a

ond overarching principle is the decoupling of

linear economy, where we have been taking,economic activities from the usage of resourc-

making, and disposing of our goods at an in-es achieved mainly through resource efficien-

creasingly fast pace since the second industri-cy and process improvement (Kjaer et al., 2019).

al revolution. The circular economy represents

The third pivotal idea is a life-cycle perspective,

a counter-model to this problematic linear

mobilized to assess the environmental impact"take-make-dispose" conception of the econo-of our activities and to bring about sustain-

my, where resources and energy are cycled

able change, without overlooking the manyin a closed loop (EMF, 2015). A circular econo-

trade-offs and tensions which may arise in the

my is theoretically consistent with the condi-

different stages of any product or service life

tion of living in a finite world with planetary

cycle (Peña et al., 2021).

boundaries and is presented as an opportunity
to meet resource needs in an era when global
demand is increasing and expected to double

2.

Five societal archetypes in the
Anthropocene society

by 2050, while the linear economy is increas-

Once we have understood the challenges of

ingly criticized for its huge negative impact

the Anthropocene and highlighted the promis-on the natural environment. The circular

es of circular economy to move towards more

economy concept is relatively new, althoughsustainable production and consumption mod-it has roots in ecological, environmental, andels, I would like to introduce the grammarindustrial economics where scholars have in-through which I will try to answer the ques-

vestigated the relationship between the envi-

tion of why circular economy is so popularronment and economic systems. (For a compre-

nowadays in the political, business and soci-hensive overview of the evolution of the concept

etal spheres. I will build on a socio-politicaland key debates, see Ghisellini et al., 2016; Geiss-

and institutional approach, developed by Or-

doerfer et al., 2017; Rosa et al., 2019.). Beyond theganizational Theory scholars Hoffman anddifferent forms that a circular economy may

Jennings (2018) who have identified several so-take in the business world, three general andcietal “archetypes” in what they call the "An-shared principles are identified as the main le-thropocene Society”. Archetypes can be de-vers that can drive the shift towards this al-

fined as ideal representations of the values

ternative model, which is presumed to re-em-

and actions of a social unit. According to We-

bed economic activities within planetaryber (1949), they help to understand the mean-boundaries. The first is biomimicry which en-ing (intended or not) of a social group. Arche-courages humans to consider Nature as a

types are therefore tools to help observers un‑

template and should lead us to engage inderstand how different worldviews guide cog-

symbiotic relationships, repeated cycles andnition and behaviors. More specifically, in or-How can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

Table 1

5

The Features of the Three Archetypes of the Anthropocene Society
THREE ARCHETYPES OF THE ANTHROPOCENE SOCIETY
Market Rules

Main attitude and logic

Technology Fix

Cultural Re-enlightenment

Reduce the impact, preserve Technology will save the

Frugality, de-growth

lifestyle and growth

Abandon the dominant culture

world

and behaviors
JustificationRole of regulation

Dominant organizations

Saving the planet can gener-

Any bad event can be “fixed”

We are the problem. Change

ate business opportunities andby technological progress andyourself and you’ll change thecreate jobs

scienceworld

The market rules the world

The State and the market are The market and technology
subordinated to the possibili- are subject to education, eth-

Huge power of the Big compa-

ties of technology

ics, community or religious organizations.

Scientific institutions + in‑­

Institutions are more numerous and varied; they produce
new imaginaries

nies, and facilitating role of the formed engineers who developStatesolutions and have them ac‑
cepted.
Relationship between Mankind and nature opposed. Rational man, who tames namankind and nature
Anthropocentric vision. Nature ture, to master and enslave
is separate from mankind. It natural resources. Mechanistic
must be controlled and ex- view

Mankind and nature reconciled beyond the naturalistic
vision of the West. Organic
view

ploitedSource: developed by the author, based on Hoffman and Jennings (2018).

ganizational theory, an archetype is a set offor solutions through technology, and the cul-

structures and systems that systematicallytural renaissance. These archetypes were origi-

embodies a common interpretive schema (Green-

nally labelled denial, collapsed systems, market

wood and Hinings, 1993). Hoffman and Jennings

rules, technology-fix and cultural re-enlighten-(2018) are interested in the different norms,

ment. Each of them embodies alternative ways

values and cognitive frames at work when in-of thinking, imaginaries, values which are

dividuals, organizations and social groups deal

shared by a certain group of people and orga-with climate change, biodiversity loss, re-nizations in their endeavor to define and tack-source depletion and the other manifestationsle problems, thus leading to very differentof the Anthropocene.

frames and initiatives.

Hoffman and Jennings have identified and

For the purpose of our analysis, we set

characterized five archetypes structuring theaside denial and collapsed systems, as we arespectrum of possibilities between dystopia

using Hoffman and Jennings’ heuristic modeland utopia through gradual transformations(2018) to analyze the success and transforma-and progressive adjustments, based on differ-tive potential of CE, which implies that we ac-ent dominant logics: blindness towards theknowledge and accept (we don’t deny) the exis-

Anthropocene grand challenges, which hin-tence of climate change, biodiversity loss andders any transition, the collapse of our societ-

resource depletion. Therefore, we are looking

ies, the persistence of a market logic, the search

for a way out, a possible counter model to6

イントロダクション /Introduction

navigate towards sustainable futures (we don’t

the technological logic of the system. As con-think it is too late to act, as is assumed in the col-veyed by many successful tech entrepreneurs

lapsed system archetype). The Table 1 above(cf. the example of Elon Musk and his invest-

summarizes the main features of the three ar-ments in TESLA giga-factories), technology ischetypes, highlighting both the socio-politicalthought to be able to save our world, repair

and cultural-normative dimensions.

our relationship with natural resources andIn the first archetype of Anthropocene So-

free us from our dependence on fossil fuels.

ciety, the market dominates the institutional

However, such blind optimism, relying on ab-

structures of society, following the idea thatsolute faith in technology, lacks critical per-the market can solve all problems including

spectives and fails to consider the possible un-climate change, while at the same time gener-

intended consequences of new technologies.

ating business opportunities. The easy recon-

Power relationships in society and the politi-

ciliation of environmental and economic pillars

cal-economic order that drives environmental

in a simplistic win-win approach is led by big

degradation are also overlooked (York and Clark,

companies deploying their political and finan-2010).

cial power, while the State acts as facilitator.

In these two archetypes, people and organi-

Human relationships with Nature are very in-zations strive to preserve today's life style ―strumental and exploitative. This underlying

either by trusting the market (green growth)

logic also feeds into scholarly work in theor technology (geo-engineering initiatives) ― deep-

business and society field, such as the shared

ly believing that corporate innovation andvalue approach (Porter and Kramer, 2011) which

technology can save the world and the capi-

promotes and celebrates the power of busi-

talistic model. While they somehow defend

ness to cope with contemporary societal chal-the relevance and power of the market andlenges. On a more macro scale, the green growth

innovation, the last archetype explicitly chal-paradigm perfectly fits the market rules ar-lenges these assumptions. The Cultural re-en-chetype (Bowen and Hepburn, 2014).

lightenment archetype designs a new world,

The second archetype shares with the pre-profoundly changing human behavior and life-

vious one its hybrid nature, aimed at combin-styles, through philosophical and spiritual re-ing the pursuit of economic value creation

newal, which values simplicity, frugality and,with the provision of solutions for the com-in its most radical forms, de-growth. It recalls

mon good. What differentiates it from thethe idea of “sustainability-as-flourishing” (Eh-Market rules archetype is the emphasis on

renfeld, 2008). In this archetype, a new society

the logics of professions, particularly in sci-and production system would emerge fromence and technology, on the “Techno-fix” domi-

grassroots innovation, local communities andnant view. Entrepreneurs in this archetypeethical engagement. Typical examples of re-would be those that provide technological so-

enlightenment might be permaculture and re-lutions, as long as these solutions align withgenerative agriculture initiatives trying toHow can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

Figure 1

7

Circular economy butterfly diagram

move away from the intensive agriculture mod-counter-model and the different actors, princi-el and its huge negative externalities on natu-

ples and initiatives emerging in the businessral ecosystems, to rely instead on local andand political spheres.

symbiotic relationships with nature. A distinctive feature of this archetype is the explicit

3-1. Circular Economy and Market rules

balance between ecological and social dimen-

The most famous image of CE is the “butter-sions for a transition towards a sustainable

fly diagram” (Figure 1), produced by the Ellenworld (Raworth, 2017).

MacArthur Foundation, a true institutional3.

How does Circular Economy
relate to these archetypes?

entrepreneur in the field. This Foundation is
actively engaged in the emergence and generalization of CE models, by bringing busi-

I will now elaborate on the proposition thatnesses, governments, local municipalities andcircular economy is enjoying great successstart-ups together around its many initiatives.

because it cuts across all the archetypes ofThe butterfly image conveys a positive, desir-

the Anthropocene Society, with particular em-

able way of coping with the externalities ofphasis on a few of them. I will take into con-the linear economy, with the ultimate objec-sideration the visual representations of CE

tive of decoupling the usage of resources fromwhich frame the way we make sense of thiseconomic growth. The dual representation of

8

イントロダクション /Introduction

biological and technical cycles suggests thatprocess, such as remanufacturing or recycling.

man-made systems can replicate Nature's way of

The idea of this infinitely reproducing virtu-

functioning (here the reference to biomimicry,ous circle seems extremely optimistic andand the principle of “Nature as a template” istends to overlook the radical shifts needed tovery explicit), thus allowing us to preserve nat-break away from the linear organization ofural resources:

our production models and the power dynamics at play among capitalist firms and their

In a circular economy, we eliminate waste

stakeholders.

and pollution, circulate products and materi-

We find the same optimism and “call to ac-als, and regenerate nature. The circular econ-tion” in the high number of voluntary commit-

omy system diagram, known as the butter-ments made by big multinational companies

fly diagram, illustrates the continuous flow

to shift towards a circular economy, with a fo-

of materials in the economy. There are two

cus on different industrial sectors. For exam-

main cycles ― the technical cycle and theple, led by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation,

biological cycle. In the technical cycle, prod-in collaboration with the UN Environment

ucts are kept in circulation in the economy

Programme, the “New Plastic Economy Global

through reuse, repair, remanufacture andCommitment” has united more than 500 orga-

recycling. In this way, materials are kept innizations behind a shared vision of a CE for

use and never become waste. In the biologi-

plastics. Each business and government signa-

cal cycle, the nutrients from biodegradable

tory has committed to a set of concrete 2025

materials are returned to the Earth, throughtargets at the global level and reports prog-

processes like composting or anaerobic di-ress publicly every year using common defini-

gestion. This allows the land to regeneratetions and measurements. With the ambition ofso the cycle can continue (https://ellenmacar-

amplifying the impact of individual actions, athurfoundation.org/circular-economy-diagram).

Network of national and regional “Plastic Pacts”
has been developed where solutions areThis diagram contains multiple repetitions ofmeant to be tailored to local contexts. Eachanother image, the loop, which recurs fre-

Plastics Pact is a joint commitment made byquently in the CE representation in its closed

businesses, governments, NGOs and other rel-form. Closing the loop of the traditional linear

evant organizations in the local plastics value

flows of the linear economy is presented as

chain at a national or regional level. However,reasonable and easy, and would allow us to

the ambitious targets defined and communi-

take our products back, reuse, repair or recy-

cated by these initiatives have been poorly

cle them to then start a new cycle. In this im-achieved so far, and the marginal progress

age there are no signs of the hurdles of circu-

observed has been largely driven by recy-larizing flows, nor of the losses and waste

cling (Rhein and Sträter, 2021), with minimum

which are intrinsically linked to any industrial

effort shown on the reduction of plastic pack-How can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

9

aging introduced in the market (for example,

2050 climate neutrality target and to haltthrough the elimination of single-use packaging).

biodiversity loss (A new circular economy ac-

Nonetheless, these actors still claim that bytion plan, European Commission 2020 https://

2040 such initiatives may reduce the annual

eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=

volume of plastics entering our oceans by

1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN).

80%, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
25%, generate savings of USD 200 bn per year

The eco-efficiency idea is central to theand create 700,000 net additional jobs (https://green growth paradigm. It suggests that byellenmacarthurfoundation.org/the-plastics-pact-

improving efficiency in the usage of energy or

network).

resources, we may be able to achieve decou-

This exemplifies the underlying logic of thepling. However, while resource efficiency isMarket rules archetype: the very actors (bigimportant and beneficial for the planet, it can-multinational companies) which are at the origin

not compensate for the large scale effects ofof the problem are also meant to tackle andthe Anthropocene.

solve it through their voluntary commitments
and pledges. The aim of saving the planet

3-2. Circular Economy and Technology fix

comes together with the eternal objective ofIn addition to images of the circular economy

continuing to grow and sustain profit. Whileconveying inspirational relations with Nature,such a market logic is naturally espoused bya different, widespread type of CE representa-

multinational companies and backed by thetion focuses on digitally enabled connections:

Ellen MacArthur Foundation, it is also foun-

the power of digital technologies will allow us

dational in most programs and visions devel-to create and process data and information re-oped by international organizations such asquired for circular business models and thethe OECD, the UN (cf. the Environmental Pro-

complex demands of circular supply chains.

gramme) or the European Commission (cf. Eu-

These images bring together the idea of cir-ropean Green Deal, 2020). These organizations

cularity with the idea of digital transition as

support a CE which rests on the green growth

best allies in the shift towards sustainable fu-

paradigm: it will save and value scarce re-tures. Accordingly, the goals of optimizing

sources, will cut greenhouse gas emissions,functionality on the one hand and developing

will break down silo thinking and promote

products-as-a-service, on the other, directly

cross-policy actions, thus making the economy

call upon digital technologies such as the In-

more competitive, sustainable, and fair.

ternet of Things (IoT) and Blockchain. Furthermore, the aim of dematerialization is asso-

The EU’s transition to a circular economy

ciated with a sustainable transition away fromwill reduce pressure on natural resources

our extractivist/linear economy and is closely

and will create sustainable growth and jobs.

related to the development of digital technolo-

It is also a prerequisite to achieve the EU’s

gies such as digital twins, artificial intelligence10

イントロダクション /Introduction

and virtual reality.

state institutional logic is important although

Other technologies characterize the CE ap-

subordinated to the role of tech-entrepreneurs,

petite for product, service and business model

engineers and experts in innovation. Several

innovation, with eco-design, new materials, quality

national initiatives led by the French govern-

and traceability as the main domains of ex-

ment have been launched to finance and sup-perimentation for both big companies andport the development ― and with a bit ofstart-ups. As revealed by a recent study onluck ― the scaling up of sustainable innova-

CE start-up innovations, the issue of waste

tions. For example, in the “France 2030” in-management is increasingly being addressed:

vestment plan, launched in 2021 to revitalize

solutions include generating resources from

France’s industrial future by the year 2030,

waste, optimized waste collection with IoT,

technological innovations for decarbonizing

and AI-powered waste sorting (https://www.

the economy through CE were explicitly tar-startus-insights.com/innovators-guide/top-8-circu

geted as priority measures. In this, I see anlar-economy-trends-innovations-in-2021/). Besides

implicit assumption that innovation would al-mechanical recycling, one of the biggest circu-

low companies to keep on growing while com-lar economy trends is to upcycle waste into

pensating for their environmental impact, andenergy through incineration, gasification, an-job creation may be an additional bonus.

aerobic digestion, and pyrolysis. Among hun-

Although the number of promising innova-

dreds of initiatives around Europe, SEaB En-

tions for sustainable products, materials andergy is a UK-based startup that offers solutions

processes is increasing, skeptical observers

to generate on-site energy from organic waste.

argue that solutions with technological prom-

The startup’s containerized anaerobic digest-

ise often lack the economic opportunity to beer, called Muckbuster, turns slurry and farmdeveloped on a large scale. Notwithstanding

waste into electricity and heat, generating fer-the dozens of “revolutionizing” techniques fortilizer as a by-product (https://seabenergy.com/

plastic recycling, out of the 9 billion tons of

category/muckbuster-anaerobic-digester-waste-to-plastic waste that we have generated sinceenergy/). In the plastic recycling field, Carbios

we started using plastic, we have only been

is a French biological chemistry company spe-able to recycle 0.5 billion. We mustn’t thinkcializing in the design and development of en-that these new technologies are easy to scale

zymatic processes for the biodegradation andup; there are multiple operational, regulatory,

bio-recycling of plastics. Their revolutionizing

and political hurdles to overcome. Other crit-innovation made the front page of the scientif-

ics point to the resource intensity of several

ic journal Nature (Tournier et al., 2020). Start-

technologies, which may address one problem

ups are also investing in AI to predict de-

while creating a new one, as has been shownmand for perishable products in order tofor the bio-fuel issue, which may increase food

reduce waste.

insecurity in the long run and have controver-

Consistent with the Techno-fix archetype,sial environmental effects (Naylor et al., 2007).

How can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

3-3. Circular Economy and Cultural
re-enlightenment

11

be one of the fastest growing waste streams
in the European Union, growing at 3-5% per

The preceding paragraphs show that the way

year. Since January 2021, manufacturers andCE is framed and practiced resonates clearly

distributors present in the French market, in-with the Market rules and Techno-fix arche-cluding marketplaces, are obliged to publish a

types. Nonetheless, more emergent, local, fru-

"repairability score" for their products, undergal models of circular economy also exist. The

the threat of heavy fines. The main objectives

caring metaphor ― often represented in CEof such measures are to empower consumers

images, through hands holding our planet or

to choose more sustainable products and to

through tools and handcraft activities aimed

foster eco-design practices on the manufactur-at extending the lifespan of our products ―er's side. The underlying philosophy is to fos-

reveals a third way for CE, which echoes theter a frugal relation to consumption, in opposi-“sustainability as flourishing” concept and thetion to the increasing reduction of productCultural re-enlightenment archetype.

lifespans and related negative externalities inTurning our attention to public policies in
Europe and in individual countries, two pillars

terms of resource consumption and amount ofwaste produced.

of a frugal and responsible approach to pro-

A culture of repair is also developing at aduction and consumption are central in recent

community level in the form of “citizen-driven,

regulations: product durability and reparabili-

locally organised public events, in which vol-ty. The "European Green Deal" and the sec-

unteer repairers and people with an object in

ond EU circular economy package (adopted inneed of repair are matched” (van der Velden,

March 2020) institutes for each consumer the2021, p. 1). The first Repair Café took place in"right to repair" in addition to measures seek-

Amsterdam in 2009 and nowadays more thaning to mainstream eco-design and waste pre-2000 Repair Cafés operate in 37 different

vention practices. More ambitiously, the Anti-countries. In this type of initiative, volunteer

Waste for a Circular Economy Act (AGEC), prom‑

repairers and people needing to fix things

ulgated in France in 2020, takes a step fur-meet in a local, non-profit space and together

ther, introducing practical measures on suchtry to solve the problem. In contrast to com-

aspects as mandatory consumer information

mercial repair services, community-building

and the extension of product lifespans. It af-

sharing experiences go hand in hand with re-firms the obligation to display the availability

ducing the environmental impact of consum-of spare parts, the creation of "repair" and "re-erism and fighting against a waste society.

use and recycling" funds, but above all, it in-

Such collectivist and non-profit approaches

troduces a pioneering repairability index forbring new perspectives and values to the cir-several families of electrical and electronic

cular economy, in line with the Cultural re-en-

products (EEE). Waste from electrical and elec-

lightenment archetype.

tronic equipment is currently considered to

Nowadays, “zero waste” has become a new12

イントロダクション /Introduction

lifestyle that is seducing consumers all over

ative and collaborative economic structures

the world, mainly after the publication of theand using open source and grass-roots innova-

book Zero Waste Home: The Ultimate Guide

tions and technologies with low environmental

to Simplifying your Life by Reducing yourimpact.

Waste by a French-American woman, Bea
Johnson. Such a lifestyle positions itself as a4.

Conclusion

clear alternative model to the consumer society, putting frugality and reduced shopping

Let’s go back to my initial question: How canbehavior at the center of a responsible way of

we explain the circular economy momentum

living within planetary boundaries. It is inter-in the political, business, and societal spheres?

esting to note that the Zero waste concept

Through the previous examples, I’ve tried to

was originally linked to recycling, whereas

highlight the plurality of approaches and vi-

this is seen today as a last resort for modern

sions of CE according to its position on funda-

engaged Zero Wasters. Adherents engage inmental social, technological, political and eco-

waste prevention as opposed to end-of-life

logical issues, as typified by the three ar‑waste management. Fighting the "disposable

chetypes of the Anthropocene society. In so

mentality" is at the heart of the Zero Waste

doing, I suggest that circular economy is so

approach. It consists in promoting alternatives

successful because its discourse and main ini-

to daily one-use products, which are responsi-

tiatives resonate with the different arche-

ble for the huge amounts of waste generated

types, and especially with the Market rules

by our wasteful consumption models.

and Techno-fix ones.

On the production side, radical circular

The blissful, win-win framing of circular

economy initiatives question the compatibility

economy, coupled with its promises to cope

between capitalism and sustainability, andwith resource depletion, climate change andabove all the capacity of innovation to achieve

biodiversity loss create a reassuring discourse

a decoupling of economic growth and environ-on the potential of this model to save themental degradation. Permaculture farms (Mol-planet, without threatening business as usual

lison and Holmgren, 1978), for example, propose

nor diminishing our faith in innovation. Biga deep transformation of the agricultural so-companies, governments and policy makers

cio-economic system where individuals would

have made numerous commitments and pro-reconnect in a harmonious way with the Earthmulgated regulations that tend to integrate

and their communities by challenging anthro-

the CE paradigm in the current capitalistic

pocentric, materialistic and productivist ap-

system. However, voluntary commitments

proaches. Similarly, local production is empha-

very often fail to achieve the initial boastfulsized, as a counter-model to the unfair dis‑announcements, as they do not need to com-

tribution of value and resources inherent inply with any form of coercive or punitive

global value chains, especially through cooper-

measures (cf. the engagement on plastic waste /How can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

13

recycling reduction). Moreover, CE seems to betend towards weak sustainability; in order tofocused on rethinking technological innovation

harness the transformative potential of CE toand economic prosperity to include the di-move towards strong sustainability, we would

mensions linked to natural resources and en-

require a much more significant diffusion ofergy waste optimization, but with limited at-the third type of CE. This would entail radical

tention paid to other critical social andchanges and the promotion of frugality andecological components. The diverse uninten-

simple living. It would thus challenge thetional effects generated by technology are

growthist paradigm, which has deeply shaped

certainly overlooked, eclipsed by the fascina-

our societies and is at odds with the physicaltion for and the deeply rooted faith in techno-

planetary boundaries. The flourishing logics

logical innovation, coupled with an anthropo-

underpinning CE as a cultural re-enlighten-

centric approach to it. A typical example ofment would allow us to move beyond thethis phenomenon is the rebound effect of effi-

purely quantitative, “rational” and objective

ciency-oriented measures, where reduced

measures of “progress” to re-consider the ethi-

costs for a given product or service lead to in-cal, experiential and spiritual dimensions of thecreased demand for it, while also creating

immaterial world. The first two forms of CE

savings that incentivize consumption in otherdiscourse and initiatives can easily fit in withareas.

the current capitalistic model and the Carte-

Nonetheless, we have also highlighted CE

sian mechanistic view of our societies, which

discourse and initiatives resonating with the

may explain their success, while the third

Cultural re-enlightenment archetype. These

form would require profound institutional, cul-require massive socio-cultural change that CE

tural and political change in our societies.

could trigger by transforming the dominantThis paper has no intention to be prescriptive

consumption and production models based on

about a definitive hierarchy among these var-materialism, convenience, and ownership to

ied CE models, but it does call for a more in-ones based on collaborative consumption,clusive and comprehensive discussion on CE,

community engagement and frugal lifestyles.

which opens up possibilities regarding the

The main idea underpinning this less devel-

many circular futures that might exist. The

oped vision of CE is that a “general economic

cross-fertilization of strategies, policies and so-

downscaling and a philosophy of sufficiency

lutions would be beneficial and help us toleads to simpler, slower and more meaningful

evolve towards strong sustainability and avoid

lives” (Friant et al., 2020, p. 11).

the risk of embarking on a circular transition

Generally speaking, the first two prevailingthat lacks the substantial sustainable impact

and widespread forms of CE initiatives es-

needed to cope with Anthropocene existential

pouse a vision of sustainability where techni-

challenges.

cal and human capital can compensate for theloss of natural capital. This means that they（1）

I will mainly develop my analysis from a Euro-

14

イントロダクション /Introduction

pean perspective, which I know better than otherrealities in the rest of the world.

Hoffman, A. J. and Devereaux-Jennings, P. (2018) Reengaging with sustainability in the Anthropocene
era: An Institutional Approach, Cambridge Ele-

〈References〉
Benyus, Janine M. (1997) Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature, New York: Morrow.

ments, Organization theory, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
IPBES (2019) in Díaz, S., Settele, J., Brondízio, E., Ngo,

Bowen, A. and Hepburn, C. (2014) Green growth: an

H., Guèze, M., Agard, J., ... and Zayas, C. (eds.), The

assessment, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 30

global assessment report on biodiversity and eco-(3), pp. 407-422.

system services: Summary for policymakers.

Circle Economy (2021) The circularity gap report 2021,

Johnson, B. (2013) Zero waste home: The ultimate

World Resource Institute Ed. https://www.circu

guide to simplifying your life by reducing yourlarity-gap.world/2021

waste, Simon and Schuster.

Crutzen, P. J. (2006) The “Anthropocene,” In EarthKjaer, L. L., Pigosso, D. C., Niero, M., Bech, N. M., andSystem Science in the Anthropocene (pp. 13-18),

McAloone, T. C. (2019) Product/service-systems

Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

for a circular economy: The route to decoupling

Davies, G. R. (2013) Appraising weak and strong sustainability: Searching for a middle ground, Consilience, (10), pp. 111-124.
Ehrenfeld, J. R. (2008) Sustainability by Design, Yale
University Press.

economic growth from resource consumption?,
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 23 (1), pp. 22-35.
Mollison, B. C. and Holmgren, D. (1978) Permaculture
One: A perennial agriculture system for humansettlements, Hobart: University of Tasmania.

Elhacham, E., Ben-Uri, L., Grozovski, J., et al. (2020)

Moore, Jason W. (ed.) (2016) Anthropocene or capitalo-

Global human-made mass exceeds all living bio-

cene?: Nature, history, and the crisis of capitalism,

mass, Nature, 588, pp. 442-444. https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41586-020-3010-5

Pm Press.
Naylor, R. L., Liska, A. J., Burke, M. B., Falcon, W. P.,

EllenMacArthurFoundation_PolicymakerToolkit.pdf

Gaskell, J. C., Rozelle, S. D., and Cassman, K. G.

Elms, D. K. and Low, P. (2013) Global value chains in a(2007) The ripple effect: biofuels, food security,changing world, WTO: World Trade Organization.

and the environment, Environment: Science andEMF (2015) Delivering the Circular Economy: A Tool­

Policy for Sustainable Development, 49 (9), pp. 30-

kit for Policymakers. https://www.ellenmacar
thurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publica
tions/

43.
Peña, C., Civit, B., Gallego-Schmid, A., Druckman, A.,
Pires, A. C., Weidema, B., ... and Motta, W. (2021)

Friant, M. C., Vermeulen, W. J., and Salomone, R. (2020)

Using life cycle assessment to achieve a circular

A typology of circular economy discourses: Navi-economy, The International Journal of Life Cycle

gating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm, Resources, Conservation and Recycling,Vol. 161, 104917.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M., and Hultink, E. J. (2017) The Circular Economy―A newsustainability paradigm?, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 143, pp. 757-768.
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., and Ulgiati, S. (2016) A review

Assessment, 26 (2), pp. 215-220.
Porter, M. E. and Kramer, M. R. (2011) Creating sharedvalue: Redefining capitalism and the role of thecorporation in society, Harvard Business Review,
89 (1/2), pp. 62-77.
Raworth, K. (2017) Doughnut economics: seven ways tothink like a 21st-century economist, Chelsea Green
Publishing.

on circular economy: the expected transition to a

Rhein, S. and Sträter, K. F. (2021) Corporate self-com-balanced interplay of environmental and economic

mitments to mitigate the global plastic crisis: Re-systems, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 114,

cycling rather than reduction and reuse, Journal

pp. 11-32.

of Cleaner Production, Vol. 296, 126571.

Greenwood, R. and Hinings, C. R. (1993) Understanding

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å.,strategic change: The contribution of archetypes,

Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E., ... and Foley, J. (2009)

Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, No. 5,

Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operat-

pp. 1052-1081.

ing space for humanity, Ecology and Society, 14 (2).

How can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?
Rosa, P., Sassanelli, C., and Terzi, S. (2019) Towards
Circular Business Models: A systematic literature
review on classification frameworks and arche-

15

and recycle plastic bottles, Nature, 580 (7802),pp. 216-219.
van der Velden, M. (2021) ‘Fixing the World One

types, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 236,

Thing at a Time’: Community repair and a sus-

117696.

tainable circular economy, Journal of Cleaner Pro-

Steffen, W., Broadgate, W., Deutsch, L., Gaffney, O., andLudwig, C. (2015) The trajectory of the Anthropocene: the great acceleration, The Anthropocene
Review, 2 (1), pp. 81-98.
Tournier, V., Topham, C. M., Gilles, A., David, B., Folgoas, C., Moya-Leclair, E., and Marty, A. (2020) An
engineered PET depolymerase to break down

duction, Vol. 304, 127151.
Weber, M. (1949) Max Weber on the methodology of thesocial sciences, Free Press.
York, R. and Clark, B. (2010) Critical materialism: Science, technology, and environmental sustainability,
Sociological Inquiry, 80 (3), pp. 475-499.

16

イントロダクション /Introduction

抄訳：本論文の結論（編集部）

人新世におけるサーキュラーエコノミーの成功と，それがもたらす社会変革力の考察

本論文の目的は，サーキュラーエコノミー

リサイクリングへのコミットメント）。さらに CE（CE）の推進力を，政治，ビジネス，そして社

は，技術革新や経済的繁栄に対し，天然資源や会的側面から説明しようとすることである。本エネルギーの浪費を解消する視点を組み込むよ論では，Hoffman & Jennings による人新世社

うに修正を促すことはあっても，それ以外の社会 の 5 つ の 型（archetypes） の 内，「拒絶」と会的・生態学的な重要な観点に十分な配慮を払「システム崩壊」を除く 3 つの型：
「市場ルーわない傾向があるようだ。その結果，技術革新

ル」，「技術による解決」，「文化的復興（ルネッへの誘惑と深い信頼，そして人間中心主義ともサンス）」を活用し，CE の位置づけをそれら人相まって，技術が引き起こす多様な意図せざる

新世の 3 つの型について社会，技術，政治，お副次的効果は看過されてしまう。こうした現象

よび生態学的観点から検討し，その多面性を明の典型例は，効率主義的測定指標が持つリバウらかにした（Table 1）。その結果，CE の成功

ンド効果である。つまり，ある製品やサービスを支えているのは，それが人新世社会の型の中のコストが低下するとそれら製品・サービスへ

でも「市場のルール」と「技術による解決」にの需要が高まったり，他の財を新たに消費する

とりわけ共鳴するからだ，ということが明らか

ための資金源を逆に増やしてしまうのである。

になった。

とはいうものの，CE の考え方は人新世の 3

資源の枯渇，気候変動，そして生物多様性のつ目の型，文化的復興にも共鳴している。CE

減退に抑制効果をもたらすであろう CE の考えと文化復興を関わりあるものにするためには，方は，至福でありウィンウィンのモデルであ巨大な社会文化的変化を引き起こすことが必要る。このモデルには，日々の企業活動やイノになる。それは現代を支配する物質主義，利便ベーションへの信頼に脅威をもたらすことなく性，所有権に基づいた消費と生産のモデルを，この地球という惑星を救うポテンシャルがあ

共同消費，地域レベルの取り組み，節約型のラる。大企業，政府，そして政策策定者たちは，

イフスタイルに基づくモデルにシフトさせるこ

既存の資本主義的システムに CE 的パラダイムとである。この未だ十分な発展を見ていないを統合するような幾多の活動に取り組み，無数

CE の側面は，いわば広範にわたる人類の経済の規則を設定してきた。しかしながら，そうし活動の縮小と，足るを知ることによる単純で，た活動が自発的な取り組みに委ねられ，規則がより低速度で，より意義深い生活を希求する哲

強制力と罰則を伴わない場合，当初の自慢げな学に基づいている。

目標を達成することはほぼ間違いなく失敗に終

一般的に言って，人新世の最初の 2 つの型，わる（例：廃プラスチック問題への取り組みや，「市場ルール」，「技術による解決」をベースにHow can we explain the success of Circular Economy and assess its transformative potential in the Anthropocene Era?

17

した CE 活動はすでに広く受け入れられていの型の CE（「市場ルール」や「技術による解決」

る。しかしそこでは，技術と人間資本が自然資に親和性のある CE） は，現代の資本主義モデ

本の棄損を補填するという「弱い」持続可能性

ル，および現代社会をデカルト的にメカニズム（weak sustainability） が追求されているに過ぎとして捉える思想と整合的であり，それがそれない。では「強い」持続可能性（strong sustain­

ら 2 つの型の CE の現在の成功を説明していability） を目指すには何が必要なのか。それはる。その一方で，第 3 の型の CE を成功させる

第 3 の型（文化的復興：ルネッサンス）に基づく

ためには，制度的，文化的，政治的な根本的変CE の強力な伝播・普及，すなわち劇的な変革

革を社会に生じさせる必要がある。本論文は，を伴う節約とシンプルライフの奨励である。

これら 3 種類の CE の間に階層的な序列をつけ現代社会を深く規定している成長主義的（growth­

る意図はないが，より包括的かつ総体的な CEist） パラダイムは，地球の惑星限界（人間が安の議論を行えば，さらに多様な循環型未来の可

全に生存可能な境界線）に明確に反しているが，能性が開拓されていくであろう。そして，戦

新たな第 3 の CE の奨励は，この成長パラダイ

略，政策，そして解決策が相互に育みあい，そムへの抵抗である。文化復興的・啓蒙的な CE

れらが私たちを「強い」持続可能性の実現に向の考え方は，純粋に定量的で，合理的で，進歩けて導いてくれること，さらにはわれわれの経を客観的指標で捉えるわれわれの態度を改めさ

済社会における循環が，持続可能なインパクト

せ，その代わりに非物質的世界の持つ倫理的，を持たないような類のものに進化するリスクを経験的，精神的側面を考えさせる。最初の 2 つ

回避させてくれることを願う。