Martin Calisto Friant

There are many competing visions regarding what a circular economy transition entails and how it would transform our social, economic, environmental, technological, and political systems. This paper sheds light on these different circular discourses by asking the following research questions: what future would different circularity discourses envision for 2050? To answer this question, this paper uses scenario planning methods to explore how four circular discourses developed in a 2x2 typology of circularity thinking would imagine the future. Results examine how these four discourses would organise and operationalise circular transport, energy, agriculture, and industrial systems in 2050. Results also explore the political systems and governance processes they would establish and the type of society, culture, worldview and lifestyles they would create. Moreover, the paper analyses each scenario’s desirability (in terms of their potential to foster socio-ecological well-being) and ecological plausibility, as well as the level of societal change potentially needed to bring them about. The paper concludes that there is a real danger in following growth-based circular discourses and scenarios because their visions cannot be implemented within the biophysical boundaries of the Earth. Indeed, over 50 years of academic research have demonstrated that decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation fast enough to prevent climate breakdown and biodiversity collapse is impossible. On the other hand, degrowth-oriented approaches to circularity might shed light on circular futures that can allow all present and future generations to live a good life within the ecological boundaries of the Earth. This research recommends fostering democratic transformations such as citizen assemblies, participatory budgeting and worker-owned non-profit cooperatives as potential avenues to more inclusive, sustainable and socially just futures. This paper is thereby valuable to researchers, citizens and practitioners who seek to better understand the socio-ecological implications of different circular futures and envision desirable and viable alternatives.

Although the Japanese government is an early adopter of Circular Economy (CE) policies and developed the concept of the Sound Material-Cycle Society in the early 2000s, its CE policies have nonetheless been poorly researched and understood, especially in English academic literature. This article addresses this research gap by answering the following questions: What are the dominant discourses of key stakeholders in Japan regarding CE? And to what extent does the current CE policy in Japan relate to that? Methodologically, this paper conducted a discourse analysis through a mix of policy analysis, media analysis, stakeholder interviews, keyword mining, qualitative content analysis, and analysis of stakeholder presence. Results show that, while CE discourses in Japan are rather diverse, they mostly fall within the Reformist Circular Society discourse type, with some smaller Technocentric Circular Economy and Transformational Circular Society elements. Results also show that businesses and academics were over-represented in policy meetings and the media, compared to NGOs and local government actors, which are more likely to hold transformational circularity discourses. Most circularity discourses in Japan are thus focused on a growth-optimistic narrative that emphasises innovative technologies and lacks a stronger understanding of social justice and planetary boundaries. Based on these findings, this article suggests recommendations, such as revisiting Japanese ecological thinking and Buddhist philosophy, which can inspire degrowth-oriented circularity approaches, as well as encompassing more participation of neglected societal groups in the development and implementation of CE policies and practices. By highlighting the challenges in current CE discourse and implementation in Japan, this study presents implications for a more socially inclusive and ecologically sustainable path towards a circular society.

While the conceptual underpinnings of the circular economy (CE) date back to the 1970s, the concept has recently become a major discourse in contemporary sustainability debates. The idea of CE, as it is now understood, is thus rather new and remains in conceptual development. Moreover, it is a contested concept with many different circular visions competing in the discursive sphere. Many researchers have evidenced that dominant CE propositions focus on technocentric solutions and do not address crucial social, political, and ecological implications. This opinion paper seeks to help address this gap by going to the root of the CE metaphor and asking: What do circles, cycles, and flows mean for an economy and a society? To answer this question, this article unpacks the idea of cycles, loops, and flows by analysing what socio-ecological cycles are most relevant for sustainability and circularity. It thus finds a set of seven cycles that are key to better understanding CE and its relation to human and planetary well-being (biogeochemical, ecosystem, resource, power, wealth, knowledge, and care cycles). This article then analyses how and whether dominant CE discourses currently address these cycles. This paper proposes the idea of a circular society as an umbrella concept that can help us better address the critical ecological, social, and political implications of a circularity transition. Moreover, this article develops a set of interrelated strategies to operationalise the circular society concept. This paper thus hopes to contribute to expanding the imaginary regarding the concept of circularity that can help the cross-pollination of ideas, solutions, and approaches to face the manyfold socio-ecological challenges of the twenty-first century.

Cities play a central role in the circular economy (CE) as they are important centres of production and consumption, responsible for 80% of global GDP. European cities are particularly important due to their position of power in the global economy as major markets, and places of industrial and social innovation. Yet urban CE policies and discourses remain poorly researched and understood. This paper addresses this research gap by analysing and comparing the CE policies and discourses in different European cities to draw critical insights and recommendations. It does so by first reviewing academic literature on urban CE policies to develop a new conceptual framework to analyse CE discourses and policies. This framework is then used to analyse and compare the CE policies of three European cities: Glasgow, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen. Results show that technocentric approaches to CE are dominant in the three cities. Moreover, they have very limited social justice policies for a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of a CE transition. Key policy recommendations to address these shortcomings are thus proposed. The insights brought about by this paper are valuable for both practitioners and academics seeking to improve urban CE policies. Key policy highlights

The authors would like to make the following corrections to the published paper

The circular economy (CE) has become a key sustainability discourse in the last decade. The Netherlands seeks to become fully circular by 2050 and the EU has set ambitious circularity targets in its CE Action Plan of 2015. The plastics sector, in particular, has gained a lot of attention as it is a priority area of both the EU and Dutch CE policies. However, there has been little research on the different and often contested discourses, governance processes and policy mechanisms guiding the transition to a circular economy and society. This paper aims to fill these gaps by asking what circular discourses and policies are being promoted in the Netherlands and what sustainability implications and recommendations can be drawn from it. It does so through a mix of media analysis, policy analysis, semi-structured interviews, and surveys using Q-methodology. Results indicate a dominance of technocentric imaginaries, and a general lack of discussion on holistic, and transformative visions, which integrate the full social, political, and ecological implication of a circular future. To address those challenges, this research brings key policy insights and recommendations which can help both academics and practitioners better understand and implement the transition towards a sustainable circular plastics economy.

This paper analyses the practice of participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil, through an interdisciplinary lens that combines the theories of right to the city, environmental justice and deliberative democracy. It examines the democratic and deliberative nature of the participatory process as well its social, environmental and ecological outcomes. While participatory budgeting has been widely studied and internationally recognised, it has rarely been assessed in its ability to bring about urban sustainability. This analysis demonstrates that it is principally the deliberative nature of the participatory process that has allowed it to have a positive impact on the urban environment. In doing so, this article proposes key recommendations to successfully replicate this mechanism in order to face the various environmental and social challenges of the Anthropocene and contribute towards achieving the sustainable development goals.