Journal of Circular Economy

Circular Ecosystems: Origins, Significance and Implications for the Future of Sustainable Business

Editors: Matthew Coffay¹, Nancy Bocken^1,2, Lars Jacob Tynes Pedersen¹, Sveinung Jørgensen¹, Melanie Valencia³

¹ Centre for Sustainable Business, NHH Norwegian School of Economics
² Maastricht Sustainability Institute
³ Interamerican Development Bank, IDB Lab

This Special Issue of the Journal of Circular Economy explores the concept of circular ecosystems and their critical role in advancing sustainable business. We identify some key issues related to the concept and topic of circular ecosystems and its appearance and usage in academic research: concept divergence, the lack of empirical work, and the lack of implementation of circular ecosystems in practice which logically leads to the lack of empirical studies in this field. As a truly emerging area of research and practice, the time is right to scope the state-of-the-art in research in Circular Ecosystems through this Special Issue.

First, while business ‘ecosystems’ have gained prominence as a strategic framework within sustainability and circular economy discussions, the term is often used interchangeably with other concepts like industrial clusters, networks, and value chains. Competing and often conflated concepts include innovation networks (e.g., Granovetter, 1973; Powell & Grodal, 2006), socio-technical systems (e.g., Trist, 1981; Mumford, 2000); innovation systems (e.g., Freeman, 1987; Lundvall, 1992), clusters and hubs (e.g., Saxenian, 1994; Porter, 1998; Cohen & Fields, 1999), innovation precincts (e.g., Clark et al., 2000; Katz & Wagner, 2014), and place-based approaches (e.g., Barca et al., 2012; Busso et al., 2013). Clarity is needed around how ecosystems can be differentiated from these competing concepts and where the concept can provide unique value and insight, particularly with respect to the circular economy and the deployment of circular business models (Aarikka-Stenroos et al, 2021; Kanda et al., 2021; Pietrulla, 2022; Kanda, 2023).

Second, there is a lack of longitudinal research which examines the sustainability impacts of ecosystems vis-à-vis business models (Snihur & Bocken, 2022). This is especially relevant in circularity contexts, where by definition sustainable business models must connect with those of other organizations in order to deliver on circularity improvements (Pizzi et al, 2022; Bocken & Coffay, 2023).

Third, with nascent CE strategies across the world, particularly in the Global South, the role of strengthening those ecosystems in developing the proposed CE strategies is still poorly understood (Samaniego et al, 2022). Some roundtables and networks are being formed but their impact on the ground is not yet clear (see African Circular Economy Network https://acen.africa/, Coalición de Economía Circular en América Latina y el Caribe https://coalicioneconomiacircular.org/) among others. Furthermore, given the informal contexts in which CE develops in the Global South, ecosystem support organizations tend to be unexpected actors, such as peers and suppliers (Mitchell et al, 2022). Therefore understanding the actors involved and how alternative and frugal ecosystems are evolving is relevant to promote context-relevant research and policy.

Fourth, behavioral foundations within circular ecosystems can be pivotal for translating circular principles into action at scale. While much of the focus has been on structural and technological aspects of circular ecosystems, understanding the role of individual behaviors remains critical. Nudging interventions, for instance, can influence recycling and resource-conscious behaviors in high-density public environments, providing practical insights into how circular practices can be encouraged and normalized across various social settings (e.g., Varotto & Spagnolli, 2017; White et al., 2019). This approach highlights the importance of investigating individual behavioral impacts as foundational elements that scale to support the larger, systemic goals of circular ecosystems.

Fifth, robust frameworks for measuring circularity are essential for validating circular practices and enabling data-driven innovation in business models. To implement and scale circular ecosystems, there is a need for standardized tools, such as life cycle assessment (LCA) and resource accounting methods, which can accurately capture circularity metrics and provide actionable insights (Jørgensen et al., 2023; WBCSD, 2024). Properly measuring circularity allows businesses to assess the sustainability impact of their operations and adapt their models for greater efficiency and resource optimization. This focus on measurement supports the continuous improvement and accountability required to maintain and expand circular ecosystems.

Finally, the concept of circular ecosystems has various connections to topics like collaboration and open innovation, experimentation and the creation of ‘minimum viable products and ecosystems’, and digitalisation and platformization (Fehrer et al., 2024; Konietzko et al., 2020). This provides ample opportunity for future research at the intersection of these research and practice areas.

This issue seeks to clarify and enhance our understanding of circular ecosystems, examining their origins, mechanisms, and contributions to sustainable innovation and resilience. It will help clarify and better anchor circular ecosystems as a foundational concept in sustainable business strategy. Through this issue, we seek to advance the theoretical and practical understanding of circular ecosystems, exploring their significance in promoting collaboration, resource efficiency, and systemic transformation for the future of sustainable business.

---

Topics

We invite submissions that explore a range of topics, including but not limited to:

Conceptual Foundations of Circular Ecosystems

Historical and theoretical analysis of the business ecosystem concept, examining its differentiation from related frameworks such as clusters and networks.

Contributions that highlight how circular ecosystems uniquely support sustainable innovation and circular business practices.

Drivers and Processes of Innovation and Resilience within Circular Ecosystems

Research examining the mechanisms that enable circular ecosystems to foster resource-efficient, collaborative, and waste-minimizing business models.

Case studies and comparative analyses on how circular ecosystems drive systemic change in diverse industries.

Technological and Digital Enablers of Circular Ecosystems

Studies on the role of digital transformation (e.g., IoT, blockchain, AI) in shaping and scaling circular ecosystems.

Research on the impact of technology in enabling sustainable practices within ecosystems.

Governance and Policy Implications

Analyses of policy frameworks, governance structures, and regulatory supports necessary for nurturing circular ecosystems.

Challenges related to governance, stakeholder coordination, and resilience in circular ecosystems.

Future Directions and Emerging Trends

Perspectives on critical gaps, emerging trends, and future directions for research on circular ecosystems.

Implications of circular ecosystems for long-term sustainability and the transition to circular business models.

Behavioral Microfoundations for Circular Ecosystems

Research exploring how individual behavioral shifts, such as nudges, can support circular practices in high-density public settings.

Insights into measuring the effectiveness and scalability of these behaviors to establish them as essential components within broader circular ecosystems.

Measurement of Circularity for Business Model Design and Innovation

Studies on frameworks and metrics, such as life cycle assessment (LCA), to quantify circularity in products and systems and their promotion and adoption by circular ecosystems.

Research on how accurate circularity measurements can inform the design of circular business models and drive sustainable innovation across industries.

---

Format and word count:

• Review: 4500-6000 words
• Research Papers: 3500-6000 words
• Perspectives: 800-1000 words

All excl. tables, illustrations, and references.

Submission deadlines:

Extended Abstracts (500-750 words) should be submitted before January 15, 2025.

Authors submitting accepted abstracts will be notified by around February 15, 2025 and invited to submit full papers.

Full papers must be submitted by September 1, 2025.

To submit your extended abstract or full paper, please click here.

For questions, please write: editor@circulareconomyjournal.org

All submissions must adhere to the Journal of Circular Economy's guidelines and rules.

---

References

Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Ritala, P., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2021). Circular economy ecosystems: A typology, definitions, and implications. In S. Teerikangas, T. Onkila, K. Koistinen, & M. Mäkelä (Eds.), Research Handbook of Sustainability Agency (pp. 260–276). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789906035.00024

Barca, F., McCann, P., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2012). The case for regional development intervention: Place-based versus place-neutral approaches. Journal of Regional Science, 52(1), 134–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9787.2011.00756.x

Bocken, N., & Coffay, M. The circular experimentation Workbench – a lean and effectual process. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 3(3), 1361-1383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00239-w

Busso, M., Gregory, J., & Kline, P. (2013). Assessing the incidence and efficiency of a prominent place-based policy. American Economic Review, 103(2), 897–947. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.2.897

Clark, J., Feldman, M., & Gertler, M. (2000). The Oxford handbook of economic geography. Oxford University Press.

Cohen, S. S., & Fields, G. (1999). Social Capital and Capital Gains in Silicon Valley. California Management Review, 41(2), 108-130. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165989

Fehrer, J. A., Kemper, J. A., & Baker, J. J. (2024). Shaping circular service ecosystems. Journal of Service Research, 27(1), 49-68.

Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter.

Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469

Jørgensen, S., Pedersen, L. J. T., & Skard, S. (2023, October). Resource accounting for a circular economy: evidence from a digitalised waste management system. Accounting Forum, 47(4), 553-582. Routledge.

Kanda, W., Geissdoerfer, M., & Hjelm, O. (2021). From circular business models to circular business ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(6), 2814–2829. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2896

Katz, B., & Wagner, J. (2014). The rise of innovation districts: A new geography of innovation in America. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-rise-of-innovation-districts-a-new-geography-of-innovation-in-america/

Konietzko, J., Bocken, N., & Hultink, E. J. (2020). Circular ecosystem innovation: An initial set of principles. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048

Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter.

Mitchell, W., Wu, Z., Bruton, G. D., & Gautam, D. K. (2022). Microlevel Analysis of Institutional Intermediation in a Rudimentary Market-Based Economy: Entrepreneurship in Kathmandu’s Indrachok Market. Organization Science, 33(6), 2106–2134. https://doi.org/10.1287/ORSC.2021.1531

Mumford, E. (2000). A socio-technical approach to systems design. Requirements Engineering, 5(2), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00010345

Patala, S., Albareda, L., & Halme, M. (2022). Polycentric governance of privately owned resources in circular economy systems. Journal of Management Studies, 59(6), 1563–1596.

Pietrulla, F. (2022). Circular ecosystems: A review. Cleaner and Circular Bioeconomy, 3, 100031. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLCB.2022.100031

Pizzi, S., Leopizzi, R., & Caputo, A. (2022). The enablers in the relationship between entrepreneurial ecosystems and the circular economy: the case of circularity.com. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 33(1), 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-01-2021-0011/FULL/XML

Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review.

Powell, W. W., & Grodal, S. (2006). Networks of Innovators. In Jan Fagerberg and David C. Mowery (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford UP. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.003.0003

Samnaniego J, et al. (2022). Panorama de las hojas de ruta de economía circular en América Latina y el Caribe. Documentos de Proyectos (LC/TS.2022/235), Santiago, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard University Press.

Snihur, Y., & Bocken, N. (2022). A call for action: The impact of business model innovation on business ecosystems, society, and planet. Long Range Planning, 102182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102182

Trist, E. (1981). The evolution of socio-technical systems: A conceptual framework and an action research program. Ontario Ministry of Labour, Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre.

Varotto, A., & Spagnolli, A. (2017). Psychological strategies to promote household recycling. A systematic review with meta-analysis of validated field interventions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 168–188.

WBCSD (2024). Global Circularity Protocol for Business. Landscape Analysis of Circularity-related Corporate Performance & Accountability and Policy & Regulation. Summary Report. https://www.wbcsd.org/resources/gcp-landscape-analysis/

White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22-49.

---