Publications
From elite folk science to the policy legend of the circular economy Journal Article
Giampietro, Mario; Funtowicz, Silvio O.
In: Environmental Science & Policy, 109 , pp. 64–72, 2020, ISSN: 14629011.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Circular economy, Decoupling, Life-support system, Policy legend, Post-normal science, Uncomfortable knowledge
@article{Giampietro2020,
title = {From elite folk science to the policy legend of the circular economy},
author = {Mario Giampietro and Silvio O. Funtowicz},
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1462901120302033},
doi = {10.1016/j.envsci.2020.04.012},
issn = {14629011},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-07-01},
journal = {Environmental Science & Policy},
volume = {109},
pages = {64--72},
publisher = {Elsevier Ltd},
abstract = {This paper explores the implications of the widespread success of the term circular economy in the institutional and public debate. The concept of circular economy in itself implies a logical contradiction: on the one hand, the concept acknowledges the dependence of the economy on biophysical flows; on the other hand, the proposed solution\textemdasha business model guaranteeing a full decoupling of the economy from natural resources\textemdashseemingly ignores that biophysical processes are subject to thermodynamic constraints. A biophysical view of the sustainability predicament\textemdashthe flows exchanged between the technosphere and the biosphere \textemdash is depicted to show that the idea of a full decoupling is simply due to ignorance of the knowledge generated in (inter)disciplinary scientific fields other than the dominant economic one. The success of economics as an ‘elite folk science' is explained by the need of the establishment to ignore uncomfortable knowledge that would destabilize existing institutions. The success of the term circular economy can be seen as an example of socially constructed ignorance in which folk tales are used to depoliticize the sustainability debate and to colonize the future through the endorsement of implausible socio-technical imaginaries. A strategy that can lead to an irresponsible management of expectation: implausible master narratives are impossible to govern. Rather than continuing to impose technocratic plans, as if we knew the optimal thing to do, Post-Normal Science suggests that it is much more effective and responsible to adopt a flexible management approach, exploring the ability of self-organization of social-ecological systems.},
keywords = {Circular economy, Decoupling, Life-support system, Policy legend, Post-normal science, Uncomfortable knowledge},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This paper explores the implications of the widespread success of the term circular economy in the institutional and public debate. The concept of circular economy in itself implies a logical contradiction: on the one hand, the concept acknowledges the dependence of the economy on biophysical flows; on the other hand, the proposed solution—a business model guaranteeing a full decoupling of the economy from natural resources—seemingly ignores that biophysical processes are subject to thermodynamic constraints. A biophysical view of the sustainability predicament—the flows exchanged between the technosphere and the biosphere — is depicted to show that the idea of a full decoupling is simply due to ignorance of the knowledge generated in (inter)disciplinary scientific fields other than the dominant economic one. The success of economics as an ‘elite folk science' is explained by the need of the establishment to ignore uncomfortable knowledge that would destabilize existing institutions. The success of the term circular economy can be seen as an example of socially constructed ignorance in which folk tales are used to depoliticize the sustainability debate and to colonize the future through the endorsement of implausible socio-technical imaginaries. A strategy that can lead to an irresponsible management of expectation: implausible master narratives are impossible to govern. Rather than continuing to impose technocratic plans, as if we knew the optimal thing to do, Post-Normal Science suggests that it is much more effective and responsible to adopt a flexible management approach, exploring the ability of self-organization of social-ecological systems.
On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth Journal Article
Giampietro, M.
In: Ecological Economics, 162 , pp. 143–156, 2019, ISSN: 09218009.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Bioeconomy, Circular economy, Decoupling, Fund-flow model, Linearization, Metabolic pattern, Social-ecological ystem, Sustainable growth
@article{Giampietro2019,
title = {On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth},
author = {M. Giampietro},
doi = {10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.05.001},
issn = {09218009},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-08-01},
journal = {Ecological Economics},
volume = {162},
pages = {143--156},
publisher = {Elsevier B.V.},
abstract = {This paper explores the existing confusion around the conceptual definitions and interpretations of the term circular bioeconomy. The co-existence of diametrically opposite interpretations of the concept indicates lack of a serious discussion of its theoretical foundations. Two narratives on circular bioeconomy are explored in depth: (i) the new economic paradigm based on technological progress (the economics of technological promises) that seeks perpetual economic growth; (ii) an entropic (thermodynamic) narrative that reflects on the limits on economic growth imposed by nature. The latter narrative makes a distinction between primary, secondary and tertiary resource flows and helps to identify what can and cannot be re-circulated within the metabolic pattern of social-ecological systems. Adopting the biophysical view, it becomes clear that the industrial revolution represented a linearization of material and energy flows with the goal to overcome the low pace and density of biological transformations. The required level of productivity of production factors in contemporary developed economies (flows per hour of labor and per hectare of land use) is orders of magnitude larger than the pace and density of supply and sink capacity of natural processes. Relying on nature to ‘close the loop' will simply slow down the economic process.},
keywords = {Bioeconomy, Circular economy, Decoupling, Fund-flow model, Linearization, Metabolic pattern, Social-ecological ystem, Sustainable growth},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This paper explores the existing confusion around the conceptual definitions and interpretations of the term circular bioeconomy. The co-existence of diametrically opposite interpretations of the concept indicates lack of a serious discussion of its theoretical foundations. Two narratives on circular bioeconomy are explored in depth: (i) the new economic paradigm based on technological progress (the economics of technological promises) that seeks perpetual economic growth; (ii) an entropic (thermodynamic) narrative that reflects on the limits on economic growth imposed by nature. The latter narrative makes a distinction between primary, secondary and tertiary resource flows and helps to identify what can and cannot be re-circulated within the metabolic pattern of social-ecological systems. Adopting the biophysical view, it becomes clear that the industrial revolution represented a linearization of material and energy flows with the goal to overcome the low pace and density of biological transformations. The required level of productivity of production factors in contemporary developed economies (flows per hour of labor and per hectare of land use) is orders of magnitude larger than the pace and density of supply and sink capacity of natural processes. Relying on nature to ‘close the loop' will simply slow down the economic process.
AGAUR Grant ID 2017 SGR 230 / Copyright © 2023