1.1 Book Aims
We live in an economy that is exhausting natural capital: âby 2012, the bio-capacity equivalent of 1.6 earths was needed to provide the natural resources and services humanity consumed in that yearâ (WWF 2016, p. 2). Surely humanity be better off in a capital restoring, and regenerative circular economy (EMF and McKinsey 2012). But what does such an economy look like, and exactly why do we need it? Who are the key players in creating and maintaining a circular economy , and what changes will they need to adopt for such an economy to flourish?
In 2000, Nobel Prize-winning scientists Paul Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer anticipated the emergence of âthe Anthropoceneâ, a new geological epoch in which the scale of the human impact on planet Earth had reached unprecedented levels causing significant alteration of many of the Earthâs ecosystems (Crutzen and Stoermer 2000). Over the years, concordant scientific evidence has supported their claim. Four planetary boundaries (biophysical thresholds): climate change, rate of biodiversity loss, land system change and biogeochemical cycles (phosphorus and nitrogen) have been already exceeded putting future prosperity of humanity under serious threat (Steffen et al. 2015, p. 7). Clearly, significant changes to redirect human activities towards a more harmonious relationship with the natural environment are necessary. There has been significant debate on this for several decades, with much discussion emanating from the concept of sustainable development , defined by the Brundtland Report as âdevelopment that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needsâ (WECD 1987, Our Common Future, Chapter 2). The role of business in sustainable development has been discussed in the management literature under the nomenclature of corporate sustainability . While there are many definitions of precisely what this amounts to, encouragingly attention to social and environmental sustainability has grown significantly within the business community over time (Dillick and Muff 2015), moving away from it being positioned as âheresyâ to mainstream âdogmaâ (Haigh and Hoffman 2014, p. 224). Yet at the same time, ecological sustainability and social equality continue to deteriorate (Gladwin 2012; Haigh and Hoffman 2014; Laszlo 2015).
Given the preamble to this chapter, the reader may be wondering about the nature of this book, maybe concluding that this is just one of the many attempts that fall within the âdoom and gloomâ approach that has characterised many environmental publications and debates so far. This would not be surprising since a negative environmental rhetoric often prevails advanced by environmentalists and amplified by the media with the consequence of often creating confusion and inaction about environmental issues rather than generating an empowering attitude (Hollander 2003; Meyer and Kersten 2016). As Princen as said there is a danger that âsinks of hope convert the resourcefulness of hope to the despair of hopelessnessâ (Princen 2010, p. 184). But let me assure you here: this book has no intention to fall in the âdoom and gloomâ category. Instead it concurs with Princen in believing that we need âa better metaphor (âŠ) a better language (âŠ) that enables living with natureâ (p. 12) to more adequately address environmental problems. What exactly is this book about, then? And which is the âbetter metaphorâ it connects with?
This book is neither about macro, system-level approaches, nor about micro, individual responsibilities in relation to how to address environmental problems more effectively. Rather it is focussed on corporations and the role they might perform in the transition towards a more environmentally friendly economy. This level of investigation can be justified on the following grounds. Firstly, corporations are the most influential organisations within the market, which in turn, is the most dominant coordinating institution on Earth (Hoffman and Ehrenfeld 2015). Consequently, any strategy aiming at increasing ecological or social sustainability cannot be pursued without the involvement of businesses (ibid.). Secondly, our market-based economy and corporations, that dominate economic activity, are accused of contributing to the current ecological crisis (Porter and Kramer 2011; Schaltegger et al. 2016; Schaltegger and Wagner 2011) and thus the proactive involvement of the business community is necessary in the transition towards a more sustainable economy (Hahn and Figge 2011; Schaltegger et al. 2016; Wells 2016). Thirdly, corporations are endowed with resources and capabilities and thus they have the potential to drive the change towards a more sustainable economy (Shrivastava et al. 2013; Winn and Pogutz 2013). A failure to do so can risk greater tensions arising from societal expectations, thereby ultimately affecting their legitimacy to operate (Hart 2010; Naughton et al. 2010; Wells 2013; Winn and Pogutz 2013). Playing an active role in addressing environmental and societal concerns as a matter that is central to doing business rather than as a marginal activity, would contribute to overcoming the separation between businesses and society that the prevalent instrumental logic to sustainability, with a lack of a system perspective, has produced (Gao and Bansal 2013; Porter and Kramer 2011). Corporations are demanded to do âmoreâ given that corporate efforts have mostly reduced negative impact (Gorissen et al. 2016; Hawken et al. 2010; Laszlo 2015), but what exactly is âmoreâ? Has it to be grounded in the concepts of sustainable development and corporate sustainability ? For reasons that will become clearer in its subsequent parts and particularly in Chapter 2, this book believes that the answer to these questions is not within these existing concepts.
On the contrary, maybe our economy can thrive by learning from the cyclical functioning of ecosystems where not only are resources used more efficiently but where the concept of waste does not exist (EMF and McKinsey 2013). These principles are at the heart of the circular economy thinking, which aims at reintegrating economy within ecological limits (EMF et al. 2015), and it is the circular economy the âbetter metaphorâ this book engages with. EMF and McKinsey (2012) describe it well as âan industrial system that is restorative or regenerative by intention and design [that] replaces the end-of life concept with restoration, shifts towards the use of renewable energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals, which impairs reuse and aims for the elimination of waste through the superior design of materials, products, systems, and within this, business modelsâ (p. 7). The implementation of the circular economy could have significant positive impact on production and consumption systems. Notably, it is âan economy that provides multiple value creation mechanisms which are decoupled from the consumption of finite resourcesâ (EMF et al. 2015, p. 23). Pioneering innovators from across the globe have already been motivated to fundamentally rethink their business practi...