Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This perspective calls for building greater understanding of overlapping and conflicting considerations between the sustainability principles that inform current conceptions of circular economy and degrowth. We contend that scholars and practitioners need to be pragmatic and to recognize evident ideological differences, but simultaneously to acknowledge beneficial similarities and complements. The common aim of both frameworks – to change business-as-usual and to enable human society to operate within ecological planetary boundaries – will likely engender opportunities to formulate new solutions. Management of the inherent tensions, such as the scale and scope of rebound effects, will continue to pose challenges. However, with thoughtful dialogue, commitment to respectful discourse, and more refined articulation we are confident that progress will be made. By building on synergies and seeking holistic strategies, the academic community, along with its transdisciplinary partners, can advance strong global sustainability efforts.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Patrick Schroeder
Chatham House
Magnus Bengtsson
University of Borås
Maurie J. Cohen
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Resources Conservation and Recycling
University of Manchester
University of Sussex
Manchester Metropolitan University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Schroeder et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a212cd34900b5cb0d9d1921 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.038
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: