Key Takeaway:
The circular economy is gaining momentum worldwide as a sustainable alternative to the traditional “take, make, waste” model. It aims to keep resources in use for as long as possible through strategies like reducing consumption, reusing products, recycling materials, and recovering resources. However, the benefits of the circular economy have not been evenly distributed, with some sectors benefiting while others may lose ground. This disconnect between global sustainability narrative and local realities is becoming harder to ignore. To bridge this gap, experts are calling for a more inclusive and participatory approach, acknowledging grassroots innovators and entrepreneurs in resource-scarce regions, rethinking business partnerships with communities, prioritizing decent working conditions and fair wages in circular supply chains, and requiring international cooperation. Partnerships between universities, businesses, and NGOs are helping build local capacity and design new business models.
Around the world, the idea of a circular economy is gaining momentum. It’s being hailed as a smarter, more sustainable alternative to the traditional “take, make, waste” model of production and consumption. Instead of generating ever-growing mountains of waste, the circular model aims to keep resources in use for as long as possible through strategies like reducing consumption, reusing products, recycling materials, and recovering resources.
This shift is not just about reducing pressure on the environment. At its best, the circular economy promises a win-win scenario: environmental sustainability coupled with innovation, job creation, and economic opportunity. Replacing fossil-based plastic packaging with recyclable biomaterials, turning agricultural waste into fabric, or building homes from repurposed construction materials are just a few examples of how this vision is being put into practice.
But while the promises of the circular economy are many, the benefits so far have not been evenly distributed. As industries, governments, and tech firms race to scale circular strategies, a growing number of voices are warning that the social dimensions of this transformation are being left behind.
A global transition that overlooks equity risks deepening inequality – especially for workers and communities in developing countries, many of whom already exist on the margins of global supply chains. As more businesses pivot toward sustainable materials and design, there’s a looming question: who gains, and who bears the cost?
Despite the headlines, the global pivot to a circular economy is still in its early stages. But as investment flows in and new technologies gain traction, the power dynamics between regions and industries are shifting. While some sectors stand to benefit – such as recycling, renewables, and circular design – others, like traditional utilities or primary raw material producers, may lose ground. For many workers in developing economies, this transition is not just about green growth. It’s about survival.
In many low-income regions, systemic challenges like underfunded infrastructure, limited access to finance, and skills shortages can make it harder to adopt circular strategies. Meanwhile, the growing push for slower consumption in wealthier nations – such as buying fewer clothes or embracing minimalist lifestyles – could have unintended consequences for workers thousands of miles away.
Take the fashion industry, for instance. While campaigns in wealthy countries champion second-hand clothing and slow fashion as ways to reduce environmental impact, factory owners and workers in garment hubs across Asia or Africa may see these trends as a threat to their livelihoods. One textile factory manager in India remarked that while recycling could offer some opportunities, reusing garments may undercut demand for new production and jeopardize employment in the long run.
The result is a patchwork of mixed outcomes. In one region, circular strategies might invigorate a local recycling sector, while in another, they might put cotton farmers or garment workers out of business. This disconnect between the global sustainability narrative and local realities is becoming harder to ignore.
To bridge that gap, experts are calling for a more inclusive and participatory approach. Research shows that across nearly 170 studies on circular economy strategies, democratic planning and community engagement are often overlooked – particularly in regions already struggling with economic instability. Without meaningful input from the people most affected, the circular economy could end up replicating the same patterns of exploitation and exclusion that define today’s linear model.
What would a more inclusive circular economy look like? For starters, it would acknowledge and support the role of grassroots innovators and entrepreneurs in resource-scarce regions. From informal e-waste collectors to community-based repair networks, local actors often develop practical, context-specific solutions. Investing in their capacity and recognizing their contributions isn’t just ethical – it’s smart strategy.
It would also involve businesses rethinking how they partner with communities. That means not only sourcing materials responsibly, but also sharing knowledge, training, and profits. It means prioritizing decent working conditions and fair wages in circular supply chains – whether those chains involve electronics recycling in Ghana, textile production in Bangladesh, or biodegradable packaging in Brazil.
Crucially, it requires international cooperation. Multilateral frameworks and funding mechanisms must be designed to support circular practices in the Global South. Climate finance, green bonds, or development aid could be reoriented to fund circular infrastructure, education, and innovation in places that need it most. The idea is not to impose a one-size-fits-all model, but to co-create solutions that reflect regional challenges and opportunities.
There are already efforts pointing in this direction. Partnerships between universities, businesses, and NGOs are helping to build local capacity and design new business models. Digital platforms are connecting circular entrepreneurs across borders. But much more is needed to ensure that the circular economy truly works for everyone.
Because ultimately, a circular economy is not just about how we use materials. It’s about how we relate to one another in the process. The move away from extraction and waste should also be a move toward fairness and inclusion. If the circular economy is to be more than just a green rebrand of the same global systems, it must grapple with the hard questions of justice and inequality.
As the circular revolution accelerates, the world faces a choice. Continue down a path where the benefits accrue to a few, while others are left to absorb the costs. Or create a new model that shares risks and rewards more evenly – one that is not only circular, but also just.
