A Critique of the Circular Economy from the Perspective of Sufficiency: Decoupling and Inequality

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Bibliographische Infos

Cover der Ausgabe: Swiss Journal of Business Jahrgang 79 (2025), Heft 3
Open Access Vollzugriff

Swiss Journal of Business

Jahrgang 79 (2025), Heft 3

Autor:innen:
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyrightjahr
2025
ISSN-Online
2944-3741
ISSN-Print
2944-3741

Kapitelinformationen

Open Access Vollzugriff

Jahrgang 79 (2025), Heft 3

A Critique of the Circular Economy from the Perspective of Sufficiency: Decoupling and Inequality

Autor:innen:
ISSN-Print
2944-3741
ISSN-Online
2944-3741
Kapitelvorschau:

Derzeitige wachstumsorientierte Bemühungen zum Aufbau von Volkswirtschaften befinden sich weder auf einem nachhaltigen noch inklusiven Pfad: Das Wohlergehen der gesamten Weltbevölkerung bleibt unerreichbar, während planetare Grenzen überschritten werden. Daher braucht es, anstelle eines Fokus auf Wirtschaftswachstum, einen ganzheitlicheren Ansatz für den Aufbau von Volkswirtschaften. In diesem Zusammenhang stellt das Konzept der Suffizienz als Ordnungsprinzip, welches ein „Genug“ sowie Übermass anerkennt, das Wachstumsparadigma infrage. Dieser Artikel beginnt mit einer Diskussion über die Kreislaufwirtschaft als Teil des Green-Growth-Ansatzes, jedoch außerhalb der Postwachstumsagenda. Anschließend werden zwei zentrale Kritikpunkte an der Kreislaufwirtschaft beleuchtet, welche aus der suffizienzorientierten Degrowth-Bewegung hervorgehen: die Grenzen der Entkopplung und die Ungleichheit. Der Artikel schließt mit einem Ausblick darauf, wie der suffizienzorientierte Ansatz in politische Vorschläge und organisatorische Aktivitäten eingebettet wurde und wie die Kreislaufwirtschaft suffizienzorientierte Wirtschaftssysteme fördern könnte.

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Banerjee, S. B. (2012). A climate for change? Critical reflections on the Durban United Nations Climate Change Conference. Organization Studies, 33(12), 1761–1786. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612464609 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  2. Bocken, N. M. P., Niessen, L., & Short, S. W. (2022). The sufficiency-based circular economy—An analysis of 150 companies. Frontiers in Sustainability, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2022.899289 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  3. Buch-Hansen, H., & Koch, M. (2019). Degrowth through income and wealth caps? Ecological Economics, 160, 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.001 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  4. Cassiers, I., & Maréchal, K. (2018). The economy in a post-growth era: What project and what philosophy? In I. Cassiers, K. Maréchal, & D. Méda (Eds.), Post-growth economics and society: Exploring the paths of a social and ecological transition (pp. 1–12). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315145334 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  5. Corvellec, H., Stowell, A. F., & Johansson, N. (2022). Critiques of the circular economy. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26(2), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13187 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  6. Costanza, R. (2025, February 3). Towards an integrated system and consolidation [Conference presentation]. MERGE kick-off event: Measuring what matters – Economy that would improve wellbeing for all now and in the future, online. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  7. Dengler, C., & Lang, M. (2022). Commoning care: Feminist degrowth visions for a socio-ecological transformation. Feminist Economics, 28(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2021.1942511 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  8. Ekins, P. (2000). Economic growth and environmental sustainability: The prospects for green growth. Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  9. European Commission. (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions: A new Circular Economy Action Plan for a cleaner and more competitive Europe (Document 52020DC0098). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0098 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  10. European Commission. (2023). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions: A Green Deal Industrial Plan for the net-zero age (Document 52023DC0062). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52023DC0062 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  11. Finnish Government. (2021). New directions: The strategic programme to promote a circular economy (Publications of the Finnish Government 2021:1). http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-383-658-7 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  12. Haapanen, L., & Tapio P. (2016). Economic growth as phenomenon, institution and ideology: A qualitative content analysis of the 21st century growth critique. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3492–3503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.024 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  13. Hagens, N. J. (2020). Economics for the future – Beyond the superorganism. Ecological Economics, 169, 106520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106520 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  14. Hankammer, S., Kleer, R., Mühl, L., & Euler, J. (2021). Principles for organizations striving for sustainable degrowth: Framework development and application to four B Corps. Journal of Cleaner Production, 300, 126818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126818 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  15. Heikkurinen, P. (2024). Degrowth: An experience on being finite (1st ed.). Mayfly Books. https://mayflybooks.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Degrowth_An_Experience_of_Being_Finite_ONLINE45-1.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  16. Heikkurinen, P., Ruuska, T., Wilén, K., & Ulvila, M. (2019). The Anthropocene exit: Reconciling discursive tensions on the new geological epoch. Ecological Economics, 164, 106369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106369 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  17. Hickel, J. (2021). The anti-colonial politics of degrowth. Political Geography, 88, 102404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102404 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  18. Hickel, J., & Kallis, G. (2020). Is green growth possible? New Political Economy, 25(4), 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  19. Houtbeckers, E. (2022). Ekofeministinen kohtuutalous ja ekososiaaliset kriisit [Ecofeminist degrowth and ecosocial crises]. Poliittinen talous, 10(2), 66–88. https://doi.org/10.51810/pt.111959 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  20. International Resource Panel. (2024). Global resources outlook 2024: Bend the trend – Pathways to a liveable planet as resource use spikes. United Nations Environment Programme. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/44901 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  21. Jungell-Michelsson, J., & Heikkurinen, P. (2022). Sufficiency: A systematic literature review. Ecological Economics, 195, 107380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107380 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  22. Kallis, g., Hickel, J., O’Neill, D. W., Jackson, T., Victor, P. A., Raworth, K., Schor, J. B., Steinberger, J. K., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2025). Post-growth: The science of wellbeing within planetary boundaries. The Lancet Planetary Health, 9(1), e62–e78. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  23. Khmara, Y., & Kronenberg, J. (2018). Degrowth in business: An oxymoron or a viable business model for sustainability? Journal of Cleaner Production, 177, 721–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.182 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  24. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 127, 221–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  25. Kongshøj, K. (2023). Social policy in a future of degrowth? Challenges for decommodification, commoning and public support. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02255-z Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  26. Laurent, É. (2024). Sufficiency as a confluence for post-growth streams – Report on the integrated analysis of the different schools of thought. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13682536 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  27. Lehmann, C., Delbard, O., & Lange, S. (2022). Green growth, a-growth or degrowth? Investigating the attitudes of environmental protection specialists at the German Environment Agency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 336, 130306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130306 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  28. Leinonen, H., & Lappalainen, R. (2023). Kiertotalous ponnahduslautana kohtuutalouteen: Suosituksia kestävään organisoitumiseen [A circular economy as a springboard to degrowth: Recommendations for sustainable organizing]. Wisdom Letters, 2023(2). https://doi.org/10.17011/wl/9 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  29. Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  30. Nesterova, I. (2020). Degrowth business framework: Implications for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 262, 121382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121382 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  31. Parrique, T. (2019). The political economy of degrowth [Doctoral dissertation, Université Clermont Auvergne, Stockholm University]. Centre d'Études et de Recherches sur le Développement International. https://theses.hal.science/tel-02499463 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  32. Parrique, T., Barth, J., Briens, F., Kerschner, C., Kraus-Polk, A., Kuokkanen, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2019). Decoupling debunked – Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. The European Environmental Bureau. eeb.org/decoupling-debunked Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  33. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  34. Pla-Julián, I., & Guevara, S. (2019). Is circular economy the key to transitioning towards sustainable development? Challenges from the perspective of care ethics. Futures, 105, 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.001 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  35. Princen, T. (2003). Principles for sustainability: From cooperation and efficiency to sufficiency. Global Environmental Politics, 3(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1162/152638003763336374 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  36. Raworth, K. (2017). A doughnut for the anthropocene: Humanity's compass in the 21st century. The Lancet Planetary Health, 1(2), e48–e49. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196%2817%2930028-1/fulltext Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  37. Richardson, K., Steffen, W., Lucht, W., Bendtsen, J., Cornell, S. E., Donges, J. F., Drüke, M., Fetzer, I., Bala, G., von Bloh, W., Feulner, G., Fiedler, S., Gerten, D., Gleeson, T., Hofmann, M., Huiskamp, W., Kummu, M., Mohan, C., Nogués-Bravo, D., Petri, S., Porkka, M., Rahmstorf, S., Schaphoff, S., Thonicke, K., Tobian, A., Virkki, V., Wang-Erlandsson, L., Weber, L., & Rockström, J. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances, 9(37), eadh2458. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  38. Rising, J. (2023). Loss and damage today: How climate change is impacting output and capital. Gerard J. Mangone Climate Change Science and Policy Hub Report. https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.udel.edu/dist/5/11885/files/2023/11/Report-Loss_and_Damage_Today.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  39. Scheidel, A., & Schaffartzik, A. (2019). A socio-metabolic perspective on environmental justice and degrowth movements. Ecological Economics, 161, 330–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.02.023 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  40. Schneider, F., Kallis, G., & Martinez-Alier, J. (2010). Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this special issue. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(6), 511–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.01.014 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  41. Stoknes, P. E., & Rockström, J. (2018). Redefining green growth within planetary boundaries. Energy Research & Social Science, 44, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.04.030 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  42. Vadén, T., Lähde, V., Majava, A., Järvensivu, P., Toivanen, T., & Eronen, J. T. (2020a). Raising the bar: On the type, size and timeline of a ‘successful’ decoupling. Environmental Politics, 30(3), 462–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2020.1783951 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  43. Vadén, T., Lähde, V., Majava, A., Järvensivu, P., Toivanen, T., Hakala, E., & Eronen, J. T. (2020b). Decoupling for ecological sustainability: A categorisation and review of research literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 112, 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.016 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  44. Vadén, T., Lähde, V., Majava, A., Toivanen, T., Eronen, J. T., & Järvensivu, P. (2019). Onnistunut irtikytkentä Suomessa? [Successful decoupling in Finland?]. Alue ja Ympäristö, 48(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.30663/ay.76338 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  45. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2011). Environment versus growth – A criticism of “degrowth” and a plea for “a-growth”. Ecological Economics, 70(5), 881–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.035 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  46. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., & Kallis, G. (2012). Growth, a-growth or degrowth to stay within planetary boundaries? Journal of Economic Issues, 46(4), 909–920. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEI0021-3624460404 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  47. Wright, C., Nyberg, D., Rickards, L., & Freund, J. (2018). Organizing in the Anthropocene. Organization, 25(4), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508418779649 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  48. Young, W., & Tilley, F. (2006). Can businesses move beyond efficiency? The shift toward effectiveness and equity in the corporate sustainability debate. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(6), 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.510 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294

Zitation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download Kapitel (PDF) Download kompl. Werk (PDF)

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Per E-Mail teilen

Medien