LIST OF PANELS

The ‘circular economy’ (CE) is an old concept, rooted in well-researched concepts like resource efficiency, cleaner production, or reverse logistics. Despite a long-standing scholarly (Boulding, 1966) and political tradition (e.g. 1990s ‘circular waste economy’ legislations of Germany or Japan), the CE was prominently placed on the EU’s political agenda only a few years ago (European Commisssion, 2015). This political move triggered an exponential growth of scientific studies on the topic (Ghisellini et al., 2016).

Large portions of these recent studies and political initiatives focus on technical and business aspects of a circular economy while research on political, social, ecological, and ethical aspects is still emerging (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017; Ghisellini et al., 2016; Hobson, 2015; Hobson and Lynch, 2016; Leipold and Petit-Boix, 2018). From a natural resource perspective, however, these aspects are crucial for conceptualizing and practicing a circular economy. A natural resource perspective on a circular economy implies that the socioeconomic system operates within the Earth’s carrying capacity (Steffen et al., 2015) and preserves natural capital by reducing resource extraction and emissions (Pearce and Turner, 1990). The ecological and social principles underpinning a sustainable CE remain underdeveloped in current CE concepts (Pauliuk 2018, Murray et al. 2017, Korhonen et al., 2018). Furthermore, we know next to nothing about the political rationales and power struggles that drive CE policies, their social, ecological and practical benefits and drawbacks (Lazarevic and Valve, 2017; Murray et al., 2017) and how existing corporate opinions and initiatives may (not) serve as a means to achieve a socially just and environmentally sustainable circular economy (Leipold and Petit-Boix, 2018). Political and stakeholder rationales are likely to be of great influence for CE enactment. For instance, Kirchherr et al. (2018) demonstrate that cultural aspects play a more crucial role in CE implementation than technological barriers. Hence, we require (1) better insights into the rationales and opinions behind political and corporate initiatives for a CE, and (2) CE concepts that allow evaluating these initiatives’ outcomes along the lines of social justice, ethics and ecological sustainability.

To foster such development, we invite contributions that address the following questions or related aspects and questions moving research on an ecologically sustainable and socially just circular economy forward: 

1. How can we conceptualize a socially just and environmentally sustainable circular economy?

2. What role do power and politics play in the conceptualization and realization of a circular economy?

3. (How) Do policies and laws promote or undermine transformation into a socially and ecologically sustainable circular economy?

4. What are the benefits and drawbacks of corporate circular economy initiatives?

We believe that by shedding light on political and business rationales and power struggles, much can be learned regarding the prospects, potentials, and limitations of CE initiatives for sustainability. Conceptual accounts of a socially just and ecologically sustainable CE can address some of the less desirable aspects of these developments and open new thought spaces for academic, political and practitioner debates. Ultimately, we hope that the contributions to this panel will open the current circular economy debate more towards social justice and environmental sustainability.