Cited by 1,077Bioeconomy and Sustainability DevelopmentSustainable Development and Environmental ManagementSustainable Supply Chain Management

Green, circular, bio economy: a comparative analysis of sustainability avenues

Open access
D'Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Lähtinen, K., Korhonen, J., Leskinen, P., Matthies, B.D. +1 more·2017·Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract

Despite their evidently different assumptions and operationalization strategies, the concepts of Circular Economy, Green Economy and Bioeconomy are joined by the common ideal to reconcile economic, environmental and social goals. The three concepts are currently mainstreamed in academia and policy making as key sustainability avenues, but a comparative analysis of such concepts is missing. The aim of this article is thus to comprehensively analyse the diversity within and between such concepts. The results are drawn from a bibliometric review of almost two thousand scientific articles published within the last three decades, coupled with a conceptual analysis. We find that, for what concerns environmental sustainability, Green Economy acts as an ‘umbrella’ concept, including elements from Circular Economy and Bioeconomy concepts (e.g. eco-efficiency; renewables), as well as additional ideas, e.g. nature-based solutions. In particular, Circular Economy and Bioeconomy are resource-focused, whereas in principle Green Economy acknowledges the underpinning role of all ecological processes. Regarding the social dimension, Green Economy is more inclusive of some aspects at local level (e.g. eco-tourism, education), while there is an emerging discussion in Bioeconomy literature around local processes in terms of biosecurity and rural policies. When considering weak/strong sustainability visions, all concepts remain limited in questioning economic growth. By comparing the different sustainability strategies promoted by these concepts we do not advocate for their substitutability, but for their clarification and reciprocal integration. The findings are discussed in light of the concepts' synergies and limits, with the purpose to inform research and policy implementation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.053

Cites

69 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both the circular economy and the bioeconomy are resource-oriented concepts that fail to address synergies and conflicts with broader ecological processes and ecosystem services such as water, carbon and nutrient cycles, quality of energy source and efficiency in production and use, and maintenance of biodiversity, ecosystems, and related services.

    “Moreover, both the circular economy and the bioeconomy are resource-oriented concepts (e.g., renewable materials, material recycle), which essentially fail to address synergies and conflicts with broader ecological processes and ecosystem services such as water, carbon and nutrient cycles (including emissions and waste), quality of energy source and efficiency in production and use, and main”

    From Circular Bioeconomy Concepts—A Perspective (2021) · cites this paper as D'Amato et al., 2017

    The Abstract and Discussion describe circular economy and bioeconomy as resource-focused, contrasting them with green economy’s broader attention to ecological processes and ecosystem services. The source does not say they fail to address all the listed matters: the Discussion identifies bioeconomy work on biosecurity and ecological concerns, while Table 6 includes energy and emissions among the concepts’ overlaps. The claim overstates a comparative limitation as a categorical failure. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The circular bioeconomy should be viewed as an emerging concept aiming to address the debate on the definite contribution of the circular economy and the bioeconomy to resolving sustainability challenges.

    “We agree with some researchers that the circular bioeconomy should be viewed as an emerging concept aiming to address the debate on the definite contribution of the circular economy and the bioeconomy to resolving sustainability challenges (D'Amato et al., 2017, 2018).”

    From Circular Bioeconomy Concepts—A Perspective (2021) · cites this paper as D'Amato et al., 2017

    The Discussion (section 4; page unavailable) says scholars have recently advocated integrating circular-economy principles into bioeconomy and describes a ‘circular bioeconomy’ intended to improve resource efficiency. It does not present that emerging concept as a way to settle the debate over either economy’s definitive contribution to resolving sustainability challenges. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Hetem€ aki, L. (Ed.), 2014. Future of the European Forest-Based Sector: Structural Changes towards Bioeconomy. What Science Can Tell Us, No. 6. European Forest Institute.
  2. OECD, 2011. Towards Green Growth. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/ 9789264111318-en. · DOI
  3. USA, 2012. National bioeconomy blueprint. Ind. Biotechnol. 8, 97e102. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1089/ind.2012.1524. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Lähtinen, K., Korhonen, J., Leskinen, P., Matthies, B. D., & Toppinen, A.
Affiliations
  • Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (DE)
  • Institute For European Environmental Policy (GB)
  • University of Vaasa (FI)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • European Forest Institute (FI)
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
168
Pages
716-734
ISSN
0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2753436765
Cited by
1,077
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 100 · 2025: 114 · 2024: 127 · 2023: 153 · 2022: 174 · 2021: 152 · 2020: 130 · 2019: 87 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 3
FWCI
185.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cleaner Production (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • Osuva (University of Vaasa) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Metsäteollisuustuotteiden Vientikaupan Edistämissäätiö
  • Academy of Finland, Strategic Research Council (293380)
  • EU 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development (278363)
  • Academy of Finland
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Bioeconomy and Sustainability Development
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Sustainable Development and Environmental Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Keywords
circular economy, green economy, bioeconomy, sustainability concepts, eco-efficiency, nature-based solutions, weak and strong sustainability, economic growth, local sustainability, biosecurity, rural policy, ecotourism, conceptual blending

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review