The e-book Circular Economy for Social Transformation: Multiple Paths to Achieve Circularity is one of the outcomes of A Just Transition to the Circular Economy (JUST2CE). This European Union Horizon 2020 funded project concluded this summer (2024), its aim being to understand the implications of the transition to a circular economy on the environment, economy and society.

The project aimed to assess the state of transition towards the circular economy in relevant economic sectors and analyze possible transition scenarios as well as their outcomes and impacts, identifying key factors that can stimulate or hinder this transition.

The (free to download) e-book aspires to be a map of ‘CE plurality’ by means of an overview of the current applications of CE in the international context with a particular focus on combining CE with theories of global environmental justice, social justice, gendered innovation and labour.

This is a comprehensive document (26 chapters covering 440 pages) and each chapter stands alone, so there really are a wealth of easy to read perspectives and critiques on offer.

As we might imagine, the book’s focus is on a just transition to a more circular economy. It contains a host of interesting case studies from across the globe (from Brazil, Italy, China and India, as well as an overview of the African continent and the European Union), alongside chapters that raise lots of fundamental questions and points about current and future CE practices and visions.

Throughout the publication, the authors find that a more comprehensive and socially aware model of CE is required to help overcome current challenges, proposing more focus on social justice-oriented models in order to move beyond the present focus on economic activities and environmental protection.

A focus on decolonialization runs though the project and the e-book, as does the celebration of local knowledge, while ties to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) processes are clear to see and underlined (alongside tensions between decolonialization questions and RRI and EU funding and practices). This should not be a surprise to attentive readers, as well-known scholars (whose work we have frequently mentioned on the website) Mario Pansera and Tess Doezema are part of the Action Network and Richard Owen is on the Advisory Board, all working together towards what is described as a ‘responsible approach to the CE transition’.

One of the main criticisms raised of current implementation of CE initiatives is that they lack democratic participation, transparency, and citizen engagement, very much reflecting arguments that run through responsible innovation and RRI literature. Following the line supported at the Bassetti Foundation, the book promotes democratization, through which ‘citizens could better understand a variety of institutional, social, economic, cultural, political, educational, and organizational tools, innovations, and approaches that enable their inclusion and empowerment to decide about their society and the much-needed circularity transition’.

Drawing on STS (Science and Technology Studies) and influenced by the work of Sheila Jasanoff, this approach is summarized beautifully in “the questions we should ask of almost every human enterprise that intends to alter society: what is the purpose; who will be hurt; who benefits; and how can we know?”

Any answer to this question requires the definition of the social and justice dimension at play and its role, the development of methodologies and assessment techniques and the construction of a framework to help in its analysis, all of which (and more) is developed in Part I, Basics of the Circular Economy and State of the Art.

In Part II, Measuring a Just Transition to Circular Economy, authors raise questions around how to develop and choose indicators for measuring CE, and how these choices fit within and co-construct a narrative of different forms of CE.

Authors seem to agree that that combining different indicators and approaches offers the most scope for developing CE. Included are some of the ideas and frameworks that that have been developed in support of RRI and RI, but the limitations of using a ‘pillar’ approach and policy-based understanding (we might say at the Foundation more RRI than RI) understate its close relationship to CE, given how much of broader RI thinking runs throughout this document.

The book also investigates whether CE can be used as an overarching framework to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and add increased momentum to sustainable development in Africa,  offering an overview of the most widely used approaches and tools used in macroeconomic modelling.

PART III offers a Roadmap to a Just CE: Key Concepts, Geographical Areas, National Paths and Scenarios.

Authors turn the lens on understanding the intersections between CE and Environmental Justice (EJ) in a global context, highlighting the need to address social and environmental inequalities in the pursuit of a just transition to a circular economy. They criticize current CE formulations which may perpetuate global environmental injustice by generating unequal social and territorial impacts, highlighting the need to consider environmental justice and address historical inequalities in CE policies and practices.

They point out that mainstream CE models generally focus on resource efficiency and technocratic projects, while non-value based circular practices remain unnoticed. This includes subsistence-oriented practices, unpaid labor, and marginalized workforces. To achieve a just transition to the circular economy, it is crucial to recognize and include these overlooked aspects and reorient CE around the ethics of care in order to develop adequate policies.

There are many other questions raised in this section: Are workers’ subjectivity and trade-unions’ agency taken into account in CE models and practices? What would CE look like from the labour’s point of view?

We learn of a marginal Improvement in circularity rate in Europe over the last ten years, but while the EU allocated over 10 billion Euros between 2016 and 2020 for green innovation and aiding businesses in embracing the circular economy concept, member states predominantly spent this funding on waste management rather than preventing waste through circular design, a strategy that likely would have had a more substantial impact.

Discussions around the situations in China and India are fascinating. The implementation of CE in China is described as leading to various economic, social and environmental benefits. China’s environmental approach is seen as broader than that of the EU, China’s policymaking efforts toward the CE described as enduring and incremental, leading to a comprehensive set of related policies and state actors.

Perhaps for me the most interesting topic in this section is the envisioning of different circular futures. 4 examples are proposed and described that very much resonate today: technocentric Circular Economy, Reforminst Circular Society, Transformational Circular Society and the Fortress Circular Economy. The authors conclude however that the Technocentric Circular Economy (which is a common imaginary that we would all recognize) is illusional, and that the majority of people prefer a more transformative and socially inclusive transition. Economic growth is seen as incompatible to CE approaches.

In the conclusion we find one final reference to RRI: Socio-ecological systems should be guided by concepts of common good, public happiness, and quality of life. To meet this crucial task, any socially desirable CE should conform to the concept and practices of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI).

The e-book Circular Economy for Social Transformation: Multiple Paths to Achieve Circularity is an open access publication and free to download here. It offers a wonderful overview of critical thought around Circular Economy and we recommend it to all of our readers.