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

Table of contents

Bibliographic information


Cover of Volume: Swiss Journal of Business Volume 79 (2025), Issue 3
Open Access Full access

Swiss Journal of Business

Volume 79 (2025), Issue 3


Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2025
ISSN-Online
2944-3741
ISSN-Print
2944-3741

Chapter information


Open Access Full access

Volume 79 (2025), Issue 3

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


Authors:
ISSN-Print
2944-3741
ISSN-Online
2944-3741


Preview:

Current growth-oriented efforts to build economies are not on a sustainable and inclusive path: the well-being of the entire population of the planet remains unattainable while planetary boundaries are exceeded. Thus, instead of focusing on economic growth, a more holistic approach to building economies needs to be taken. Here, the concept of sufficiency as an organizing principle that recognizes enoughness and excess is challenging the growth paradigm. This article begins by discussing the circular economy as part of the green growth approach but outside the post-growth agenda. Next, two key criticisms of the circular economy raised by the sufficiency-focused degrowth approach are reviewed: the limits to decoupling and inequality. This article ends with an outlook on how the sufficiency-focused approach has been embedded into policy proposals and organizational activities, and how the circular economy could foster sufficiency-focused economies.

Bibliography


  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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294
  8. Ekins, P. (2000). Economic growth and environmental sustainability: The prospects for green growth. Routledge. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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. Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar 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 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2944-3741-2025-3-294

Citation


Download RIS Download BibTex