Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Despite growing scholarly interest in circular business model innovation (CBMI), established frameworks are applied inconsistently: Few empirical studies specify how they conceptualise CBMs or the scope and degree of novelty of the business model changes reported, raising construct validity concerns that limit comparability across studies. We systematically review 101 empirical papers, following PRISMA, to examine how CBMI is conceptualised and theorised, how digital and material technologies enable it and how resource strategies are realised in practice. Although technology and resource‐strategy choices have typically been studied as independent enablers of circularity, our findings reveal interdependencies between technology and resource‐strategy choices and their association with CBM reconfiguration. We also find the reviewed studies are predominantly atheoretical, with material technologies more prevalent than digital ones, and resource strategies typically deployed in combination rather than in isolation, although these strategies compete for the same material flows, a tension the field has yet to theorise. This paper contributes to the CBMI literature by classifying CBMI's scope and degree of novelty, by proposing an integrative framework that aligns theoretical lenses with CBM conceptualisations and by outlining a future research agenda guiding scholarly and managerial decisions on technology and resource‐strategy choices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Banhans et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: