





































 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
https://www.designforsocialchange.org/journal/index.php/DISCERN-J 
 
ISSN 2184-6995 
 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 
International License. 

 

  

 

 
 
Designers as change agents in the Circular Economy  
 
Katja Fleischmann 
 
Published online: November 2020 

 
To cite this article:  
Fleischmann, K. (2020). Designers as change agents in the Circular Economy. Discern: International Journal 
of Design for Social Change, Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 99-118.  



 

100 

Designers as change agents in the Circular Economy  
 
Katja Fleischmann 

 
Griffith University, Queensland College of Art, Southport, QLD, Australia. k.fleischmann@griffith.edu.au 

 

Abstract  

Several global reports have concluded that natural resource extraction at its current levels is unsustainable 

and will lead to the rapid erosion of the environment and tax global economic growth. One of the 

alternative paradigms to conserve those resources is the Circular Economy, a system driven by innovation 

that extends the utility of products as long as possible through a series of strategies that re-use 

resources. Design can act as a bridging tool and a catalyst for the innovation demanded by the Circular 

Economy because of its flexibility as a problem-solving discipline. The intermediary role of design can adapt 

to the complex requirements of Circular Economy stakeholders who want to shift their way of doing 

business to a more sustainable model, despite formidable policies, economic, cultural and political 

obstacles. The author explores the evolution and utility of design from a discipline that shapes objects to 

one that constructs and facilitates complex systems of interactions among collaborators, which in the 

Circular Economy includes consumers, manufacturers, logistics companies, governments, business and 

science entrepreneurs. Several examples of design’s role in this facilitative process are presented that 

showcase the power of design to drive social and cultural transformations and re-cast industrial and 

business processes. Sustainable innovation is the centrepiece of the Circular Economy and design has a 

significant role to play in its adoption, particularly from a human-centred perspective that can address 

formidable constraints to its implementation. 

 

Keywords: Circular Economy, Design-led innovation, Service design, Citizen designer, Sustainable 

innovation, Democratisation of design, Co-creation  

 

Introduction – Why the Circular Economy? 

The strain on natural resources in the world is borne out by alarming trends in unsustainable and 

accelerating resource extraction. The unwelcome by-products of these practices, which are predicted to 

double by 2050 (UN Environment International Resource Panel, 2019) have been global warming, air and 

water pollution and a throwaway consumer culture based on cheap credit and products with limited life 

cycles. The United Nations (UN) Environment International Resource Panel (2019) paints a dire picture of a 

global resource collapse unless Circular Economy practices are employed. Other reports such as the 

Circularity Gap Report (Circle Economy, 2019) and the Finnish Innovation Fund Report (Mead, 2018) also 

conclude that Circular Economy practices can help halve greenhouse gases by 2050 to meet targets agreed 

to by signatories to the Paris Climate Accord (United Nations, 2015). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable 

Development (SDG, 2015) adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015, lists responsible 

consumption and production and climate action as global priorities.  

 

Circular Economy principles are also becoming more imperative during the COVID19 pandemic where 

global supply chain disruptions are slowing down manufacturing, food production, and forcing companies 

to re-think and reorganise their way of doing business. Circular Economy advocates see the pandemic 

fostering opportunities to help local communities source scarce resources like medical equipment, drinking 

water, and face masks through re-tooling of industrial production lines. Sustainability during the pandemic 



 

101 

requires re-thinking of whole systems of delivering goods and services given social distancing and supply 

chain disruptions (Blériot, 2020; Haigh & Bäunker, 2020).  

 

The Circular Economy is part of a sustainable innovation paradigm which is seen as the “next generation of 

economic development thinking” in which the protection of the environment is coupled with the notion of 

business innovation (Saylor Academy, 2012). Reversing destructive natural resource consumption trends is 

the principle aim of the Circular Economy, a systematic re-framing of resource use based on biomimicry 

within closed-loop systems. The Circular Economy model draws on natural cycles where the re-uptake of 

decaying matter feeds the entire ecosystem (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013); in a balanced ecosystem, 

nothing goes to waste. In the Circular Economy, waste in all its forms becomes a feedstock for new 

industrial processes, product development and energy production. The Circular Economy extends this idea 

to products and services through improved product design and moving waste to the top of the supply chain 

where it can be re-purposed and not dumped in landfills. The Circular Economy economic system shifts 

responsibility to achieve its goals to a diverse network of key players: end-users, manufactures, logistics 

companies, governments, and business and science entrepreneurs–who are interconnected and need to 

engage jointly in the complex undertaking to drive systemic change. 

 

Designers have a key role to play in the system-wide economic changes driving the Circular Economy 

(Wastling, Charnley & Moreno, 2018) by facilitating the necessary transformations in human interactions, 

mindsets and relationships. Joore and Brezet (2015) argue that “change actors like designers play a 

strategic role in innovation and transition processes towards a sustainable society” (p. 92). Designers are 

already solving complex problems using human-centred approaches that are evidence-based and rely on 

various forms of user participation when designing for social change (Souleles, 2017). Robinson (2017) 

makes a strong case for a Social Circular Economy, where responsibility to help the socially disenfranchised, 

such as the homeless and unemployed, is part of the business landscape. Robinson (2017) sees design 

uniting “the circular economy and social enterprise concepts to deliver benefits for people, planet and 

profit” (p. 4). Haigh and Bäunker (2020) agree that designers can help a Circular Economy shape “a more 

resilient, socially just and environmentally safe world” (p. 1), however, the building of a socially responsible 

and environmentally sustainable economic system faces well known and formidable obstacles. 

 

The roadblocks stopping the Circular Economy: Vision versus practicalities 

For many years, researchers have explored Circular Economy concepts, such as Cradle-to-Cradle design, 

Regenerative Design, Laws of Ecology, Industrial Ecology, Biomimicry and the Blue Economy. Since 2010, 

the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013; https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/) has played a 

leading global role in unifying these concepts and promoting the Circular Economy model, designed to 

preserve the inherent value of products as long as is feasible (Lewandowski, 2016).  

 

The central concept of the Circular Economy is re-using what is already there and exhausting its utility – a 

process that by necessity is driven by innovative thinking. Design acts as conceptual bridge between the 

exigencies of business and the drive to minimise waste using innovative methods. The Circular Economy’s 

vocabulary reflects this paradigm shift with such terms as ‘reverse logistics’, ‘reuse’, ‘remanufacture’, 

‘extraction of biochemical feedstock, ‘regeneration’. All of these terms derive their inspiration from the 

natural world, where creation and decay form part of a biological cycle that is balanced when healthy and 

generates waste that is re-incorporated into the ecosystem.  

 



 

102 

Productive use of waste in all its forms often requires disruptive, innovative practices throughout the value 

chain (Ritzéna & Sandström, 2017). However, there are substantial impediments to making this vision of an 

‘ecologically’ balanced economy a reality, chief among them are financial incentives for companies, 

particularly in manufacturing, to change their way of doing business to fit a circular model. Operational 

logistics have to be restructured in the Circular Economy and attitudes have to shift to accept that investing 

in circular practices will help companies maintain a profit. Technological barriers also have to be overcome 

as well as policy challenges prompted by shifts in global politics (IMSA Amsterdam, 2013; Ritzéna & 

Sandström, 2017; Van Eijk, 2015).  

 

There are also significant policy framework barriers experienced by all countries in which governments are 

not incentivizing businesses and scientist entrepreneurs through tax breaks, grants and significant seed 

money investment (De Jesus & Mendonça, 2018; Kirchherr et al., 2018; Van Eijk, 2015). Existing policies 

may inhibit businesses that want to adopt Circular Economy practices (R2π, 2018). Current events amply 

demonstrate this reality, particularly with developed nations offshoring mixed recycling for processing 

which is no longer a viable option. China has initiated a new policy rejecting shipments of mixed recycled 

waste from overseas that does not meet its stringent contamination thresholds. The crackdown has 

created an economic crisis among the developed world’s recycling businesses (Cole, 2017; Parker, 2018). 

Countries such as the Philippines and Malaysia have also rejected overseas shipments of recycled waste 

from Canada and Australia (Denyer, 2019). Some forward-thinking waste managers are now actively 

searching for industrial processes that can, for example, convert recycled glass into sand for use in 

roadbeds (Fleischmann, 2019).  

 

The attitude barrier 

In a wide-ranging survey among stakeholders and sustainable development experts in the European Union 

(EU), respondents identified ‘cultural barriers’ as the major impediment to Circular Economy 

implementation (Kirchherr et al., 2018). ‘Cultural barriers’ were identified as low consumer interest and 

awareness of Circular Economy practices and companies hesitant to collaborate in the value chain because 

of low virgin material prices, high upfront investment, and regulatory obstructions and limited funding. A 

lack of urgency and strategic company planning using hard data about the Circular Economy’s benefits were 

also cited as obstacles. The authors also suggest that further Research and Development (R&D) funding will 

not guarantee the Circular Economy’s success in the EU. This finding is supported by Boer (2005), who 

predicted it is risky to invest in environmental technologies that customers do not want and which 

governments are unwilling to support. Other authors acknowledge that shifting to a Circular Economy is as 

much about the shifting mindset of people, as it is about technological innovation (Adrodegari, Pashou & 

Saccani, 2017; Prendeville & Bocken, 2017; Teso & Walters, 2016). 

 

Geographic barriers also impede Circular Economy practices (Fleischmann, 2019). Many Circular Economy 

initiatives are centred in metropolitan areas with high population densities and high innovation indices 

which attract government funding. Regional areas are often geographically isolated, have smaller 

populations and lower innovation indices. In these areas, Circular Economy initiatives face a lack of funding 

and expertise (Fleischmann, 2019) and an often ‘risk-averse’ attitude by businesses and regional 

governments (Coronado, Acosta & Ferñandez, 2008). Ironically, according to Van Eijk (2015), local 

governments can drive policy changes much faster. Van Eijk estimates the period for the implementation of 

regulatory changes on an international level takes about a decade; in the EU policy changes happen in five 

years and on the local level it takes about a year.  



 

103 

 

With all these formidable obstacles it would seem the prospects for widespread adoption of the Circular 

Economy is ultimately unachievable. It is at this point where design can prove its efficacy by helping shift 

cultural resistance to engagement with the Circular Economy and by providing the innovative business 

framework for making it a reality. There are ample examples of how designers can drive these critical 

transitions to a Circular Economy which follows the trajectory of how design has evolved to meet social 

needs. 

 

From product to service design: The changing role of design in servitisation and business  

model innovation  

Design as a discipline has undergone tremendous changes over the past 30 years from being a mere form 

giving or styling activity to “being able to influence a company’s entire business strategy” (Gardien & 

Gilsing, 2013, p. 56). Design’s aesthetic function has evolved into a tool to focus on people and technology 

(user-experience design); as a differentiation tool to support branding; as a business tool for fuelling 

innovation; and finally as a cultural tool enabling transformation (Gardien & Gilsing, 2013; Hernández, 

Cooper, Tether & Murphy, 2018). Activist designers have also been early adopters of the sustainability 

discourse initiated through the seminal work of Victor Papanek with his book “Design for the Real World: 

Human Ecology and Social Change” published in 1971. Since the 1980s, these environmental designers have 

been instrumental thinkers and practitioners in the green design and eco-design movements.  

 

Although designers have been involved in a systematic approach to reducing environmental impact through 

green product design, the emotional or behavioural dimension such as user-product attachment has largely 

been ignored by manufacturers (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2016) – a finding which has a direct bearing on 

‘cultural resistance’ to the Circular Economy. Years before the Circular Economy gained currency as a 

systematic model, Van Nes and Cramer (2005) found that 78% of products still function when they are 

replaced, evidence of the throwaway economy. Products are often discarded due to changing user 

preference and change in fashion (Cooper, 2006). The current so-called ‘linear economy’ is producing 

products with a limited shelf life often achieved through built-in obsolescence. A prominent example is the 

electronic waste created by the purchase of new versions of the same product like mobile phones or smart 

appliances made obsolete by software upgrades that do not work on older products. Despite growing 

secondary markets for purchasing used mobile phones such as the iPhone, the consumer-driven economy 

demands product life spans that are limited and have been decreasing (European Environment Agency, 

2017). Van Nes and Cramer (2005) summed up the disposable product problem this way: “This requires the 

development of dynamic and flexible products, which implies designing for variability and product 

attachment and preparing the product for future repair or upgrading”. Lewandowski (2016) describes this 

way forward as a holistic approach where products are designed within an ecosystem of carefully managed 

and re-used resources where product afterlife is part of the equation. In this system, waste is minimized 

through extended product lifespans in a closed material loop of multiple users rather than individual 

consumers. As a result, toxic and polluting materials are better controlled (De los Rios & Charnley, 2017). 

 

There are many examples where product designers are already taking a more holistic approach and 

designing out waste by increasingly using modular design to lengthen product lifespans (European 

Environment Agency, 2017). A good example of modular production is Fairphone 

(https://www.fairphone.com/en/), an entrepreneurial European company employing modular product 

design to break the cycle of consumers buying new mobile phones every time a new model comes out 



 

104 

(Figure 1). The Amsterdam-based mobile phone manufacturer subscribes to the idea that consumers will 

opt for mobile phones that are designed to last up to five years, are virtually unbreakable, and can be 

updated with simple modular replacements that consumers can do themselves. Fairphone employs Circular 

Economy principles of creating smartphones that can be maintained, repaired and upgraded by end-users, 

are more robust and last much longer than the average smartphone. Next to the modular design, the 

systems thinking approach extends to ethically sourced materials and supply chains. The self-repair and 

maintenance of the phone through owners using basic tools and online available repair tutorials (Mestre & 

Cooper, 2017) are one of the main drivers for increasing product longevity. Fairphone advertises, “if you 

cannot open it you do not own it”. 

 

 
 

Figure 1: Modular Design Fairphone 3, Source (Creative Commons 4.0).         

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fairphone_3_modules_on_display.jpg. 

 

As Fairphone illustrates, business models are no longer following a linear path. Disruption and digital 

technology are re-inventing the way consumers participate in economic activities.  

 

Designers are also helping businesses re-define new models of ownership and use. Several authors have 

suggested that designers can influence business and consumer behaviour and thus meet Circular Economy 

goals. This is clearly illustrated in the concept of servitisation or Product Service Systems (PSS), where a 

product is not bought but essentially leased from a producer who maintains it. The PSS concept can apply 

to anything from office space, to clothing to lighting systems and vehicles. 

 

Rather than re-design an entire production and distribution system, servitisation allows smaller businesses 

to take the first steps toward engaging the Circular Economy without having to make significant financial 

investments (Michelini, et al., 2017; Spring & Araujo, 2017). In particular, the Internet of Things (IoT) has 

lowered the barriers of engagement in circular business model innovation by using technology such as 

sensors, apps and integrated logistics to redefine the relationship between consumers, products and 

manufacturers (Spring & Araujo, 2017). Various circular business models are making use of the IoT, 

especially services as part of the sharing economy like car and bike-sharing (e.g. Bycyclen in Copenhagen, 



 

105 

CitiBike in New York, Mobike in China). Companies such as Lime, which advertises “Micromobility for all” 

offers electric scooters in congested urban environments and has essentially monetised transportation 

using phone apps linked to credit cards. 

 

Designers are now involved in developing such service ideas around products which include a “network of 

actors who produce, deliver and manage the PSS [Product Service System]” (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2016, p. 

131). One well-known example of this innovative business model is Pay-per-Lux, where Phillips offers light 

as a service (ARUP, 2016). The way it works is that companies receive a state-of-the-art smart lighting 

system with no upfront investment. The customer then pays only for the light that is used. Phillips will 

update the light system when out of date and will retrieve the original system for secondary use elsewhere. 

 

The automotive industry is also experimenting with innovative, circular business models. Electric car 

manufacturer Riversimple (https://www.riversimple.com/) is pioneering 'next-generation' electric vehicles 

by basing its company pricing on an expansive leasing model which includes insurance, repair and 

maintenance (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2016). In these comprehensive leasing models, the consumer does not 

‘own’ the vehicle; Riversimple pays for all the ancillary services motivating the company to design an 

electric vehicle with minimal energy usage requiring fewer repairs and thus increasing the car’s lifespan. 

This comprehensive leasing model is an alternative to manufacturers’ dependence on consumers 

purchasing new model vehicles. Many other well-known companies are trialling the ‘access economy’ or so-

called ‘on-demand economy’. For example, IKEA has just announced plans to rent out furniture instead of 

selling its do-it-yourself flat box products (Pownall, 2019). Smaller businesses like Rype Office has moved 

beyond the trialling phase and offers three furniture options for customers for lease or purchase that 

include new, re-made or refreshed furniture with buy-back guarantees (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 

2017b; Rype Office Furniture, n.d.). 

  

Designers are also creating more circular electronic products by creating a service based on user behaviour. 

Gerrad Street (https://gerrardst.nl/), a Dutch company, is combining a modular design with servitisation. 

Two alumni from Delft University in the Netherlands, started the company using the concept of servistising 

a modular design of headphones which they provide to customers on a subscription basis (Looijs, 2017). 

The business model theoretically creates a cheaper and more sustainable product. In this model, customers 

pay to use the headphones on a monthly or yearly basis, which entitles them to upgrades and repairs. “The 

design of their products is modular and no glue is used so they are easy to disassemble, repair or add new 

hardware” (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017c). Gerrard Street leases its headphones for less than 10£ per 

month, which for many users is an attractive financial alternative to buying expensive headphones on the 

open market. 

 

These examples of applying Circular Economy principles to product design clearly illustrate ideas of holistic 

innovation by creating mass consumer products as a service rather than an owned object with limited 

utility. Modular design with interchangeable parts that consumers can swap out creates a closed resource 

loop product system that maximises resources rather than limiting their use. Designers are now engaging in 

extending product lifetime through durable design and design for maintenance as well as increasing 

utilisation through sharing schemes or PSS. 



 

106 

 

Human-centred design for a Circular Economy: The critical role of design-led innovation 

The manufacturing process is being re-defined by smart product design, which is one aspect of the Circular 

Economy. It is an example of design’s innovative capacity. The Cox review commissioned in 2005 in the 

United Kingdom (UK) was the first to articulate clearly that Design is what links creativity and innovation in 

industry (HM Treasury, 2005). “Design has many different definitions, but at its heart, it is about the 

process of translating ideas into reality, making abstract thoughts tangible and concrete” (HM Treasury, 

2005, p. 3). The International Council Societies of Industrial Design (ICSID) describes design as:  

 

“…a creative activity whose aim is to establish the multifaceted qualities of objects, processes, 

services and their systems in whole life cycles. Therefore, design is the central factor of innovative 

humanization of technologies and the crucial factor of cultural and economic exchange.” (DRP, 2013) 

 

The transformational role of design has not been lost on policymakers in many countries. Having identified 

design and designers as major influential contributors to economies (e.g. Design Council, 2011; DMI, 2015; 

DesignSingapore Council, 2009) has led to an increase in government-funded support for design-driven 

innovation programs in countries such as the UK, Denmark and Finland. Countries like Singapore went even 

further and developed a structured design culture through policy-driven design-led innovation to tackle 

innovation challenges and economic development. Government driven design support programmes have 

also powered regional innovation and introduced design-led research methods to non-designers, 

researchers, businesses and educators (Gulari, Melioranski, Er & Fremantle, 2017). 

 

Design-led innovation: The nuts and bolts  

At its heart, design-led innovation is a human-centred process which makes use of real-time research 

through user engagement, collaboration and co-creation. Design-led innovation is “generally considered 

whole systems approach providing the ability to combine empathy for the context of a problem, creativity 

in the generation of insights and solutions, and rationality to analyse and fit solutions to the context” 

(Alexander, 2013). The core principle of design-led innovation as a solutions-based system starts by 

investigating and tracking the end-users, their motivations and requirements. Designers spend time with 

users of products or services to gauge what they want and to discover unarticulated needs through 

observation, interviewing, video or photo-ethnography, and customer journey mapping. The findings and 

developed insights are shared with the stakeholders offering the product or service. The creative process of 

generating new ideas is done collaboratively by integrating various stakeholder perspectives and then 

prototyping and trialling ideas in an iterative process to come up with the most effective solutions. “Design-

led innovation offers methods to drive required business model transformation and is recognized as one of 

the key enablers in the transition to a Circular Economy” (Fleischmann, 2019, p. 382). 

 

A well-known application of design-led innovation is Design Thinking which has been globally adopted in 

the business world to drive radical innovation, create competitive advantage and change business culture 

and behaviour (Brown, 2009; Vianna, et al., 2014). Design Thinking and other design-led innovation 

methods can be applied at a strategic, service, product or on an organisational level by facilitating a design-

driven culture to change the mindsets of employees and customers (Kilian, Sarrazin & Yeon, 2015; 

Matthews, Townsen & Wrigley, 2016). Designers offer an organic process that allows ideas to rapidly 

bubble up to the surface, be tested, and then moulded. In very important ways, design-led innovation is a 

catalyst for ideation between stakeholders along the value chain.  



 

107 

 

As Aminoff, Valkokari and Kettunen (2016) argue, the transition to a Circular Economy “cannot be achieved 

if individual organizations advance their own interest independently...[it] requires new value chain 

partners, or new roles of existing partners and a new kind of collaboration between the participating 

partners” (p. 629). Designers can help to approach problems from a human-centred perspective and design 

methods are being used to better understand customers through a collaborative process (Fraser, 2010; 

Storvang, Jensen, Christensen & Storgaard, 2013).  

 

Examples of design-led innovation are starting to appear in the old economy, state-run businesses such as 

the postal service in Australia. Collaboration is at the heart of an Australia Post initiative that has identified 

the Circular Economy as a way to become a better corporate citizen and implement Circular Economy 

strategies. More importantly, Australia Post (2017) is recognising the role design plays in the process: 

“…you cannot be at arm’s-length in the Circular Economy. It is a co-designed system based on synergies and 

building connections” (p. 4). Concretely, Australia Post cites its collaboration with Nespresso, the coffee 

capsule company and a recycling plant in Nowra, New South Wales, Australia to illustrate the re-

use/recycling loop in the Circular Economy. Nespresso customers can order a pre-paid Australia Post 

satchel online or at a Nespresso store and mail up to 130 capsules to the recycling plant where the coffee 

grounds are composted and the aluminium capsules are made into other products – part of the ‘re-use’ 

closed loop system advocated by the Circular Economy.  

 

While Australia Post illustrates the technical loop of Circular Economy logistics, the EU is incorporating 

design-led innovation into the value chain of the Circular Economy by fostering multidisciplinary scientific 

collaboration – part of the biological loop. The EU has been at the forefront of making scientific 

advancements, particularly in chemistry, an integral part of ‘upcycling’ in the Circular Economy. Upcycling is 

a concept where used materials are converted into something of greater or equal value (LoopedWorks, 

2015). Central to this effort is catalysis, a chemical process that has widespread industrial applications in 

reducing waste on a large scale. Examples of the use of ‘green’ catalytic processes in the Circular Economy 

context are plentiful in a laboratory setting but there has been little large-scale commercialisation of the 

processes that are reducing waste and creating new value. As discussed, the reasons for impediments to 

commercialisation have largely revolved around business scepticism. While the pathways to commercial 

success are not as straightforward as chemical conversions, the commercialisation phase of catalytic 

development is benefitting from design-led collaboration, ideation, prototyping and scalability which can 

map various approaches involving all stakeholders in the process. 

 

A company already practicing design-led innovation as a path to large scale commercialisation and moving 

Circular Economy practices beyond the prototype stages is Bolt Threads (2019), a bio-design company in 

the U.S. The bioeconomy company unifies science with business and design when using biotechnology to 

develop and promote consumer goods. The company bases its consumer products on engineered yeast to 

produce a spider silk protein which is spun into yarn and marketed as fast fashion. Bolt Thread focuses “on 

the consumer in the messaging and design of its products” (Ginsberg & Chieza, 2019, p. 4) and is a good 

example of a start-up with the potential to scale up its production while having a reduced environmental 

footprint, a primary Circular Economy goal. Designers also help the company to overcome “a widespread 

public aversion to genetically modified organisms” (Ginsberg & Chieza, 2019, p. 4) through a design-led 

innovation process that brings science and business interests together. This unifying characteristic of the 

design process is clearly producing results in business innovation. 



 

108 

 

Helping stakeholders to move forward: Circular Economy toolkits  

Understanding the Circular Economy and how to make it work within a business or governmental context 

presents formidable challenges. Bringing so many diverse groups together is being facilitated by Circular 

Economy ‘toolkits’ which designers use to help stakeholders map the processes involved in designing 

Circular Economy initiatives. Toolkits, like those offered by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the design 

consultancy IDEO, reveal the key steps needed to implement Circular Economy principles (Ellen MacArthur 

Foundation, 2015, 2017a; The Circular Design Guide, 2017). The Circular Economy toolkits are a relatively 

new way to address social and economic complexities using a process of interviewing, mapping, iterating 

solutions, and tools for recording results. 

 

Toolkits have a variety of ways of translating the Circular Economy’s new vocabulary into meaningful 

metrics and graphics that illuminate critical components of the Circular Economy closed loop value-chain of 

product design and service innovation. Toolkits also employ step-by-step methods for selecting 

stakeholders and increasing their participation in ideation. Some toolkits focus on generating data that 

helps companies decide on the most sustainable way to source raw materials by comparing 'circularity' of 

individual products as well as evaluating company-level circularity. Still, others suggest financial models 

encourage entrepreneurial Circular Economy start-ups (e.g. Evans, et al., 2013; Zero Waste, 2016). 

 

There are currently various open-source Circular Economy toolkits available for companies and policymakers 

wanting to learn more about how to implement Circular Economy practices. However, there is limited 

research into the effectiveness of the design and use of these toolkits. Simonchick et al. (2015) highlight that 

“the choice of a specific toolkit (both visual representation tools and user-research techniques) is highly 

situation-dependent (e.g. level of access to customer’s organization, level of initial insight, time limitations 

and the needed level of detail etc.)” (p. 8) hence selecting the appropriate toolkit can already influence the 

level of success. Reigado et al. (2017) explored the Circular Design Guide developed by Ellen MacArthur 

Foundation and IDEO as an alternative to improve the application of product-service-systems methodologies; 

the researchers reported the toolkit’s strength lies in the process of understanding the problem context and 

stakeholder engagement, however, the Circular Design Guide lacks practical aspects such as identifying the 

competitors.  

 

As more toolkits are offered to help implement the Circular Economy, a key question remains underexplored: 

How effective are the tools inside the toolkit when compared to standard business practices such as due 

diligence, benchmarking and market scans? It is difficult to measure design’s innovation outcomes and 

quantify how a company’s design culture contributes to innovation, including Circular Economy toolkits. 

Work needs to be done to analyse the effectiveness of these toolkits from a design-led innovation standpoint. 

 

The citizen designer: Co-creating a sustainable future  

Consumers are key stakeholders in achieving the Circular Economy vision. The role of the citizen designer 

was foreshadowed by Lipson and Kurman (2010) who wrote “we will witness a growing amount of 

consumer-led product development and modification across a wide range of industries that manufacture 

physical objects” (p. 55). Opportunities for user-customized products have increasingly emerged over the 

past decade. Shoe and sportswear manufacturers such as Converse, Nike, Adidas and Puma allow their 

customers to customize products through the use of online services. Customers can influence the final 

design of their shoes by selecting colours for the outsole, sole or laces and can further personalise their 



 

109 

product by adding a name or a flag (in case of Adidas). Some car manufacturers such as Toyota or VW leave 

the final stages of design to their customers through an online configuration tool. Customers can configure 

their car to their needs and unique tastes and ultimately can buy a more satisfying product. This kind of 

participation in the creation process has seen its latest manifestation in crowdsourcing innovations (Howe, 

2006; Lipson & Kurman, 2010). Companies or organisations post creative briefs or challenges on the 

Internet seeking input or solutions from their customers, employees, partners or the wider community 

(Hammon, & Hippner, 2012; Libert, Spector & Tapscott, 2008; Maher, Paulini & Murty, 2010). This “open-

source dialogue” invites the wisdom of crowds to “collective design” and the customer/citizen being able to 

influence the outcome and drive change (Duffy & Partners, 2008; Maher, Paulini & Murty, 2010). 

 

Participatory design as a strategic business tool to develop better products, improve brand communication 

or services has been utilized in the business world for many years. It is best known for involving customers 

to participate in value-creating activities, such as user-testing products or prototypes to develop new or 

improved products. Crowdsourcing and co-creation are two newer participatory practices which give a 

voice to the user and wider public who can add valuable feedback to Circular Economy practices from a 

public angle. On a large scale, the City of Glasgow, for example, aims to globally crowdsource Circular 

Economy innovations and wants to implement the winning solutions that the online challenge generates 

(University of Strathclyde, 2019). 

 

Co-creation, broadly defined as “any act of collective creativity, i.e. creativity that is shared by two or more 

people” (Sanders & Stappers, 2008, p. 6), differs from crowdsourcing as it allows the end-user or customer 

to become actively involved and an equal partner in the creation process (Bason, 2010; Sanders & Stappers, 

2008). Therefore, the people who benefit from a service, product or process to be developed or improved 

are actively participating in the creation process and receive expert status in the creative team (Sanders & 

Stappers, 2008). Co-creation “is the difference between people creating a great idea for you and people 

working with you to make a good idea great” (Williams, 2013).  

 

Co-creation has become increasingly popular in the social and public innovation sectors to address 

complex, global problems from a sustainable perspective (Bason, 2010; European Commission, 2013; Mahy 

& Zahedi, 2010). Co-creation is seen by many as a central factor of a Circular Economy (Leube & Walcher, 

2017) because the “social value of co-creation is fuelled by aspirations for the longer term, humanistic, and 

more sustainable ways of living” (Sanders & Simons, 2009). Fablabs, for example, provide fruitful ground 

for shifting the responsibility of creation to the citizen or community groups (Fleischmann, Hielscher & 

Merritt, 2016). The community-based digital fabrication workshops are often run voluntarily and can 

generally be freely accessed by the wider public. Ideas and initiatives for change can therefore emerge from 

the bottom-up and can lead to grassroots innovations – thus being more aligned with the needs of the 

community (Chilvers & Longhurst, 2013; Seyfang & Smith, 2013). Fablabs can facilitate a creation process 

that is opposed to the usual top-down approach leading to what Hippel (2005) sees as democratizing 

innovation. 

 

Although Fablabs have been criticised for non-sustainable practices (Brown, 2015; Fleischmann, Hielscher & 

Merritt, 2016) – as part of community-based production such as repair cafes and hacker and maker spaces 

– they are perceived as convergent with the Circular Economy (Ede, 2016). For example, The Great 

Recovery (2016) project which looked at the Circular Economy from a designer’s perspective (2012-2016) 

used a Fablab to encourage re-use by fixing objects like a broken handle with 3D printing technology 



 

110 

instead of buying a new product. Here the community-based production challenges the planned 

obsolescence of products through the ‘right to repair’ credo. Fablabs are also seen as “hotspots for Arduino 

and sensor technology development, and circular thinking needs this to help unlock the data flows that 

accompany our products” (The Great Recovery, 2016, p. 29). The Fab City in Barcelona which is seen as 

“building bridges for circular networks of fabrication” (Sicar, 2018, p. 18) recently opened up a Fab Market to 

promote distributed manufacturing “where designers can fabricate for low cost and sell their open-source 

designs globally” (Ede, 2016, p. 10). This new way of production follows a paradigm of ‘design global, 

manufacture local’ which “means the ‘light’ things (bits, information, shared/open source design) travel, but 

the ‘heavy’ things (atoms, the physical, manufacturing) stay local” (Ede, 2016, p. 10). 

 

Distributed manufacturing systems, such as Fab Labs, are one way to challenge the mass manufacturing 

system in a linear economy. These new disruptive business models shorten manufacturing supply chains 

and are based on low volume, on-demand and bespoke manufacturing. These disruptive models 

incorporate new modes of interactions via customer-led designs. One such company is Disrupt Sports 

(2018) which offers bespoke designed sports gear. Customers design their surfboard, skateboard or 

snowboard. The motto of Disrupt Sports is: “You design, we create, you shred”. As a result, instead of 

producing hundreds of similar surfboards, that may or may not sell, Disrupt Sports produces on-demand, 

customized products aligned to customer's specifications which guarantee sales and at the same time saves 

resources instead of manufacturing solely based on marketing. 

 

The democratisation of Design (Fleischmann, 2015), is an important agent in the transition to a Circular 

Economy. The rise of the prosumer (proactive consumer) and citizen designer is central to the collaborative 

design process in the Circular Economy. The democratisation of design gives people an agency in making 

the Circular Economy work. Critics of this process, however, fear “the blurring of the boundaries between 

amateur and professional design practice” (Massanari, 2012). Advocates see the advantages in co-creation 

or the user-centred design participation process and welcome the “‘open-source’ dialogue that invites the 

audience into the creative process” (Duffy & Partners, 2008). Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO has famously 

declared “Design is everywhere, inevitably everyone is a designer…” (Brown, 2014). Not everyone agrees; 

Treder (2015), for example, defines the citizen designer more concretely as a “design participant” – he 

argues, perhaps everyone is a designer… but not everyone should design. 

 

Conclusion: Future trends 

As a discipline, design is a catalyst for change. Designers have always used a flexible, iterative approach to 

problem-solving, which is an instrumental process in re-imagining the future. The Circular Economy posits a 

paradigm of a more sustainable world that saves natural resources using nature’s ecosystems as a 

roadmap. The Circular Economy envisions a complete re-ordering of economic and social priorities 

designed to preserve the world’s dwindling natural resources, increase product longevity, reduce waste and 

phase out the endless cycle of cheap consumer credit fuelling non-stop consumption. There are still 

formidable policy and economic obstacles blocking the path of this radical transition to a circular way of 

doing business. Designers and citizen designers as change agents can help remove those obstacles and 

accelerate the transition to a Circular Economy. However, it is often difficult to communicate the value of 

design to stakeholders because of intangible qualities such as facilitating collaboration and strategic 

planning (Bletcher, 2017). There is a lack of understanding about the expansive role designers can take in 

the transformation to the Circular Economy (Bletcher, 2017). 

 



 

111 

Tonkinwise (2015) argues that designers are futurists because they deal in fiction, speculation, provocation 

and discourse — all elements of successful design practices. It is these disruptive traits that allow designers 

to shape the way we live and how we act, fundamental to the changes the Circular Economy demands of its 

stakeholders. New Design disciplines, such as Transition Design, incorporate these futurist qualities 

demanded by the Circular Economy. As an emergent way of addressing large-scale problems, practitioners 

of Transition Design play a key role in re-framing global problems (Irwin, 2015). The social impact of large-

scale changes, such as reducing reliance on fossil fuels for energy, is part of the transitional designers’ 

toolkit. Irwin (2015) argues that Transitional Design is dynamic and by its very nature open-ended and 

speculative which results in a circular, iterative problem-solving approach. 

 

Designers have taken on a variety of crucial roles which are demanded by the Circular Economy: product 

designers encourage collaboration and co-creation between experts and amateurs to re-define product life 

cycles and respond to end-user needs; transition designers are facilitators between key stakeholders; 

fiction designers re-imagine our future and its possibilities; designers marry technology with logistics; and 

graphic designers help the world visualise the way to a sustainable future by mapping relationships, 

information and data. 

 

All these design roles use systems thinking that lies at the heart of the Circular Economy where current 

patterns of consumption and production are supplanted by sustainable business models such as 

servitisation and modular products that are leased instead of owned. Time in this leased world becomes a 

commodity while manufacturers can focus on sustainable product production. These transitions do not 

happen in a vacuum but require consumers to take ownership of changes with designers leading the 

discourse. In the Circular Economy, designers become co-creators in designing with the people. Designers 

adapt their roles to encompass citizen participation in the iterative process. 

 

As Fleischmann (2015) predicted, “the democratisation of design will not go away but will allow more ‘non-

designers’ to become involved in idea generation, development and production of products, services or 

processes” (p. 103). In the Circular Economy, non-designers are crucial to its large-scale adoption. 

Approaching social challenges and complex problems such as creating a sustainable future has seen the 

empowerment of the end-user, citizen or community group by engaging them in the problem-solving 

process. Designers can unify stakeholders, including the public, governmental agencies, and the business 

and scientific communities in a common vision that can realise the goals of the Circular Economy. Educators 

must also adopt a leading role in training the new generation of designers who will have the future tools, 

creativity and vision to construct the Circular Economy.  

 

References 
Adrodegari, F., Pashou, T., & Saccani, N. (2017). Business Model Innovation: Process and Tools for Service 
Transformation of Industrial Firms. Procedia CIRP, 64, 103-108.  
 
Alexander, H. (2013). Is design-led thinking the secret weapon in today’s Australian workplace? Retrieved 

from https://www.smartcompany.com.au/business-advice/innovation/is-design-led-thinking-the-
secret-weapon-in-todays-australian-workplace/ 
 
Aminoff, A., Valkokari, K., & Kettunen, O. (2016). Mapping multidimensional value (s) for co-creation 
networks in a circular economy. Paper presented at the Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises. 
 



 

112 

ARUP. (2016). Circular Economy in the Built Environment. Retrieved from 
https://www.arup.com/publications/research/section/circular-economy-in-the-built-environment. 
 
Australia Post. (2017). Transitioning to a Circular Economy: Insights from the frontline Retrieved from 
https://auspost.com.au/content/dam/auspost_corp/media/documents/circular-economy-white-paper.pdf 
 
Bason, C. (2010). Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-Creating for a Better Society. Bristol: Policy Press. 
 
Blériot, J. (2020). The Covid-19 recovery requires a resilient circular economy. Medium. Retrieved from 
https://medium.com/circulatenews/the-covid-19-recovery-requires-a-resilient-circular-economy-
e385a3690037 
 
Bletcher, J. (2017). The Constellation: A framework for conceptualising design as a process of innovation. 
The Design Journal, 20(sup 1), S4552-S4564. doi:10.1080/14606925.2017.1352952. 
 
Boer, F. P. (2005). Research is an investment, not an expense. Applied Catalysis A: General, 280, 3-15.  
 
Bolt Thread. (2019). Way Better Materials for a Way better World. Retrieved from https://boltthreads.com/ 
 
Brown, T. (2014). IDEO CEO Tim Brown: 'Everyone Is A Designer'. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from 
https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2014/01/24/tim-brown-davos_n_4635681.html?ri18n=true 
 
Brown, P. (2015). Circular Economy Innovation Project: Feasibility of reusing Waste Electrical and Electronic 
Equipment (WEEE) for 3D printing. Retrieved from 
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/schmidt/CEIP-formatted-Article-Final-Phil-
Brown.pdf 
 
Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires 
Innovation. New York: HarperCollins. 
 
Ceschin, F., & Gaziulusoy, I. (2016). Evolution of design for sustainability: From product design to design for 
system innovations and transitions. Design Studies, 47, 118-163.  
 
Chilvers, J., & Longhurst, N. (2013). Participation in transition(s): emergent engagement, politics and actor 
dynamics in low carbon energy transitions. Paper presented at the Ecological Economics and Institutional 
Dynamics: 10th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE), Lille, 
France. http://esee2013.sciencesconf.org/conference/esee2013/boa_en.pdf 
 
Circle Economy. (2019). The Circularity Gap Report 2019. Retrieved from 
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/ad6e59_ba1e4d16c64f44fa94fbd8708eae8e34.pdf 
 
Coronado, D., Acosta, M., & Ferñandez, A. (2008). Attitudes to innovation in peripheral economic regions. 
Research Policy, 37, 1009–1021.  
 
Cooper, T. (2006). The value of longevity: Product quality and sustainable consumption. Paper presented at 
the Sustainable Consumption and Production: Opportunities and Threats, Wuppertal, Germany. 
https://proyectaryproducir.com.ar/public_html/Seminarios_Posgrado/Material_de_referencia/cooper-
Longer%20Lasting%20Products%20Chapter%201.pdf 
 
Cole, R. (2017). Increased China 0.5 per cent contamination limit a ‘very challenging target’. Retrieved from  
https://resource.co/article/increased-china-05-cent-contamination-limit-very-challenging-target-12253  
 

https://www.arup.com/publications/research/section/circular-economy-in-the-built-environment
https://auspost.com.au/content/dam/auspost_corp/media/documents/circular-economy-white-paper.pdf
https://medium.com/circulatenews/the-covid-19-recovery-requires-a-resilient-circular-economy-e385a3690037
https://medium.com/circulatenews/the-covid-19-recovery-requires-a-resilient-circular-economy-e385a3690037
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/schmidt/CEIP-formatted-Article-Final-Phil-Brown.pdf
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/schmidt/CEIP-formatted-Article-Final-Phil-Brown.pdf
http://esee2013.sciencesconf.org/conference/esee2013/boa_en.pdf
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/ad6e59_ba1e4d16c64f44fa94fbd8708eae8e34.pdf
https://proyectaryproducir.com.ar/public_html/Seminarios_Posgrado/Material_de_referencia/cooper-Longer%20Lasting%20Products%20Chapter%201.pdf
https://proyectaryproducir.com.ar/public_html/Seminarios_Posgrado/Material_de_referencia/cooper-Longer%20Lasting%20Products%20Chapter%201.pdf


 

113 

De los Rios, I. C., & Charnley, F. J. (2017). Skills and capabilities for a sustainable and circular economy: The 
changing role of design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 160, 110-122.  
 
De Jesus, A., & Mendonça, S. (2018). Lost in Transition? Drivers and Barriers in the Eco-Innovation Road to 
the Circular Economy. Ecological Economics, 145, 75-89.  
 
Denyer, S. (2019). Malaysia’s Mahathir tells rich nations to take back their plastic garbage. Washington 
Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/malaysias-mahathir-tells-rich-
nations-to-stop-dumping-their-plastic-on-poor-countries/2019/05/30/29b99a32-82b5-11e9-95a9-
e2c830afe24f_story.html?utm_term=.c57884a146bd 
 
Design Council. (2011). Design for Innovation: Facts, figures and practical plans for growth. Retrieved from 
https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/DesignForInnovation_Dec2011.pdf 
 
DesignSingapore Council. (2009). Dsg-II: Strategic Blueprint of the DesignSingapore Initiative, 2009 > 2015. 
Retrieved from https://issuu.com/micasingapore/docs/blueprint_of_the_designsingapore_initiative 
 
DMI. (2015). Design Value Index Results and Commentary. Design Management Institute. Retrieved from 
https://www.dmi.org/page/2015DVIandOTW/2015-dmiDesign-Value-Index-Results-and-Commentary.htm 
 
Disruptive Sports (2018), https://www.disruptsports.com/ 
 
DRP. (2013). Design Research Portal – Official Definition of Design. Retrieved from 
https://designresearchportal.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/icsids-definition-of-design/ 
 
Duffy & Partners. (2008). Why the Democratization of Design is a Good Thing -- Really. AdWeek. Retrieved 
from http://www.duffypov.com/duffy-article/1505/why-the-democratization-of-design-is-a-good-thing-
really 
 
Ede, S. (2016). The Real Circular Economy. Retrieved from http://postgrowth.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/The-Real-Circular-Economy-Sharon-Ede-December-2016.pdf 
 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). Towards a Circular Economy: Economic and Business Rational for an 
Accelerated Transition. Retrieved from 
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/TCE_Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation_9-Dec-
2015.pdf 
 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015). Delivering the Circular Economy: A Toolkit for Policymakers. Retrieved 
from 
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/EllenMacArthurFoundation_P
olicymakerToolkit.pdf 
 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017a). New Circular Design Guide launched by the Ellen MacArthur 
Foundation and IDEO at Davos. Retrieved from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/new-
circular-design-guide-launched 
 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017b). Circular economy options in once furnishing. Retrieved from 
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/circular-economy-options-in-office-furnishing 
 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017c). Gerrard Street: A more circular music experience. Retrieved from 
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/modular-design-and-a-new-business-model-
create-a-circular-music-experience 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/malaysias-mahathir-tells-rich-nations-to-stop-dumping-their-plastic-on-poor-countries/2019/05/30/29b99a32-82b5-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html?utm_term=.c57884a146bd
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/malaysias-mahathir-tells-rich-nations-to-stop-dumping-their-plastic-on-poor-countries/2019/05/30/29b99a32-82b5-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html?utm_term=.c57884a146bd
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/malaysias-mahathir-tells-rich-nations-to-stop-dumping-their-plastic-on-poor-countries/2019/05/30/29b99a32-82b5-11e9-95a9-e2c830afe24f_story.html?utm_term=.c57884a146bd
https://issuu.com/micasingapore/docs/blueprint_of_the_designsingapore_initiative
https://www.dmi.org/page/2015DVIandOTW/2015-dmiDesign-Value-Index-Results-and-Commentary.htm
https://designresearchportal.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/icsids-definition-of-design/
http://www.duffypov.com/duffy-article/1505/why-the-democratization-of-design-is-a-good-thing-really
http://www.duffypov.com/duffy-article/1505/why-the-democratization-of-design-is-a-good-thing-really
http://postgrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/The-Real-Circular-Economy-Sharon-Ede-December-2016.pdf
http://postgrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/The-Real-Circular-Economy-Sharon-Ede-December-2016.pdf
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/TCE_Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation_9-Dec-2015.pdf
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/TCE_Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation_9-Dec-2015.pdf
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/new-circular-design-guide-launched
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/news/new-circular-design-guide-launched
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/circular-economy-options-in-office-furnishing


 

114 

 
European Commission. (2013). Guide to Social Innovation. Retrieved from 
http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10157/47822/Guide%20to%20Social%20Innovation.pdf 
 
European Environment Agency. (2017). Circular by design: Products in the circular economy. Retrieved 
from https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/circular-by-design 
 
Evans, J., Bocken, D., & University of Cambridge & Institute for Manufacturing. (2013). Circular Economy 
Toolkit – Resources for an Evolving World. Retrieved from www.CircularEconomyToolkit.com 
 
Fleischmann, K. (2015). Democratisation Of Design And Design Learning - How Do We Educate The Next-
Generation Designer. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 8(6), 101–108. Retrieved from 
http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0806/pdf/B5R188.pdf 
 
Fleischmann, K. (2019). Design-led Innovation and Circular Economy Practices in Regional Queensland. 
Local Economy, 34(4), 382–402. doi:10.1177/0269094219854679. 
 
Fleischmann, K., Hielscher, S., & Merritt, T. (2016). Making things in Fab Labs: a case study on sustainability 
and co-creation. Digital Creativity, 27(2), 113-131. doi:10.1080/14626268.2015.1135809. 
 
Fraser, H. M. A. (2010). Chapter 4: Designing Business: New Models for Success. In T. Lockwood (Ed.), 
Design Thinking: integrating innovation, customer experience and brand value (pp. 35-46). New York: 
Allworth Press. 
 
Gardien, P., & Gilsing, F. (2013). Walking the Walk: Putting Design at the Heart of Business. Design 
Management Review, 24(2), 54-66. doi:10.1111/drev.10242. 
 
Ginsberg, A. D., & Chieza, N. (2019). Editorial: Other Biological Futures. Journal of Design and Science, 4. 
Retrieved from https://jods.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/issue4-ginsberg-chieza 
 
Gulari, M. N., Melioranski, R.-H., Er, O., & Fremantle, C. (2017). THE FUTURE OF DESIGN SUPPORT: What 
Can We Learn From Design Support Experience in the UK, Estonia and Turkey? Paper presented at the 
Design for Next, 12th EAD Conference, Sapienza University of Rome.  
 
Haigh, L., & Bäunker, L. (2020). Covid-19 and the circular economy: opportunities and reflections. Medium. 
Retrieved from https://medium.com/circleeconomy/covid-19-and-the-circular-economy-opportunities-
and-reflections-7c2a7db70900 
 
Hammon, L., & Hippner, H. (2012). Crowdsourcing. Business & Information Systems Engineering(3), 163-
166. doi:10.1007/s12599-012-0215-7. 
 
Hernández, R. J., Cooper, R., Tether, B., & Murphy, E. (2018). Design, the Language of Innovation: A Review 
of the Design Studies Literature. she ji - The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 4(3), 249-273. 
 
Hippel, E. v. (2005). Democratizing Innovation: MIT Press. 
 
HM Treasury (2005). Cox Review of Creativity in Business: building on the UK’s strengths, 2005. Retrieved 
from www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/cox 
 
Howe, J. (2006). The Rise of Crowdsourcing. WIRED, June, 2006. Retrieved from 
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html. 
 

http://www.circulareconomytoolkit.com/
https://jods.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/issue4-ginsberg-chieza
https://medium.com/circleeconomy/covid-19-and-the-circular-economy-opportunities-and-reflections-7c2a7db70900
https://medium.com/circleeconomy/covid-19-and-the-circular-economy-opportunities-and-reflections-7c2a7db70900
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/cox
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html.


 

115 

Irwin, T. (2015). Transition Design: A Proposal for a New Area of Design Practice, Study, and Research. 
Design and Culture, 7(2), 229-246. doi:10.1080/17547075.2015.1051829. 
 
IMSA Amsterdam. (2013). Unleashing the Power of the Circular Economy. Retrieved from 
https://mvonederland.nl/system/files/media/unleashing_the_power_of_the_circular_economy-
circle_economy.pdf 
 
Joore, P., & Brezet, H. (2015). A Multilevel Design Model: the mutual relationship between product-service 
system development and societal change processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 92-105.  
 
Kilian, J., Sarrazin, H., & Yeon, H. (2015). Building a design-driven culture. Retrieved from 
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/building-a-design-driven-
culture 
 
Kirchherr, J., Piscicelli, L., Bour, R., Kostense-Smit, E., Muller, J., Huibrechtse-Truijens, A., & Hekkert, M. 
(2018). Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics, 
150, 264–272. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028 
 
Leube, M., & Walcher, D. (2017). Designing for the next (Circular) Economy. An appeal to renew the 
Curricula of Design Schools. The Design Journal, 20(sup 1), S492-S501.  
  
Lewandowski, M. (2016). Designing the business models for circular economy—Towards the conceptual 
framework. Sustainability, 8(43), 1-28. doi: 10.3390/su8010043 
 
Libert, B., Spector, J., & Tapscott, D. (2008). We Are Smarter Than Me: How to Unleash the Power of 
Crowds in Your Business. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey Pearson Education, Inc. 
 
Lipson, H., & Kurman, M. (2010). Factory @ Home: The Emerging Economy of Personal Fabrication. 
Retrieved from http://issuu.com/gfbertini/docs/factory_home_-_the_emerging_economy_of_personal_ma 
 
Looijse, K. (2017). Headphones as a service. (Master). Delft University of Technology. Retrieved from 
https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3A591c9491-fdbc-40e3-9b99-a69ff488682c 
 
LoopedWorks. (2015). Upcycling, downcycling and recycling explained. LoopedWorks. Retrieved from 
https://www.looptworks.com/blogs/looptworks-blog/34391171-upcycling-downcycling-and-recycling-
explained 
 
Maher, M. L., Paulini, M., & Murty, P. (2010). Scaling up: From Individual Design to Collaborative Design to 
Collective Design. Paper presented at the 4th international conference on design computing and cognition 
(DCC), , 12–14 July 2010, Stuttgart, Germany. 
 
Mahy, I., & Zahedi, M. (2010, 7-9 July). When artists and designers inspire collective intelligence practices: 
Two case studies of collaboration, interdisciplinarity, and innovation projects. Paper presented at the 
DRS2010: Design and Complexity, Montreal, Canada. 
 
Massanari, A. (2012). DIY design: How crowdsourcing sites are challenging traditional design practice. First 
Monday, 17(10). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4171/3331. 
 
Matthews, J., Townsen, P., & Wrigley, C. (2016). Changing Mindsets through Design-Led Innovation: An 
example of Entrepreneurial Learning? Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting 
Proceedings. https://blogs.qut.edu.au/australian-centre-for-entrepreneurship/files/2015/12/015-Judy-
Matthews-354332821491646263-paper.pdf 

https://mvonederland.nl/system/files/media/unleashing_the_power_of_the_circular_economy-circle_economy.pdf
https://mvonederland.nl/system/files/media/unleashing_the_power_of_the_circular_economy-circle_economy.pdf
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/building-a-design-driven-culture
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/building-a-design-driven-culture
http://issuu.com/gfbertini/docs/factory_home_-_the_emerging_economy_of_personal_ma
https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3A591c9491-fdbc-40e3-9b99-a69ff488682c
http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4171/3331
https://blogs.qut.edu.au/australian-centre-for-entrepreneurship/files/2015/12/015-Judy-Matthews-354332821491646263-paper.pdf
https://blogs.qut.edu.au/australian-centre-for-entrepreneurship/files/2015/12/015-Judy-Matthews-354332821491646263-paper.pdf


 

116 

 
Mead, L. (2018). Sitra Report Highlights Circular Economy as Critical to Achieving Paris Agreement Goals. 
Retrieved from http://sdg.iisd.org/news/sitra-report-highlights-circular-economy-as-critical-to-achieving-
paris-agreement-goals/ 
 
Mestre, A., & Cooper, T. (2017). Circular Product Design. A Multiple Loops Life Cycle Design Approach for 
the Circular Economy. The Design Journal, 20(1), S1620-S1635. doi:10.1080/14606925.2017.1352686 
 
Michelini, G., Moraes, R. N., Cunha, R. N., Costa, J. M. H., & Ometto, A. R. (2017). From linear to circular 
economy: PSS conducting the transition. Paper presented at the The 9th CIRP IPSS Conference: Circular 
Perspectives on Product/Service-Systems. 
 
Parker, L. (2018). China's ban on trash imports shifts waste crisis to Southeast Asia. National Geographic. 
Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/11/china-ban-plastic-trash-
imports-shifts-waste-crisis-southeast-asia-malaysia/ 
 
Prendeville, S., & Bocken, N. (2017). Sustainable Business Models through Service Design. Paper presented 
at the 14th Global Conference on Sustainable Manufacturing, Stellenbosch, South Africa. 
 
Pownall, A. (2019). IKEA to begin renting furniture as part of wider sustainable push. DeZeen. Retrieved 
from https://www.dezeen.com/2019/02/20/ikea-rental-furniture-circular-economy-design/ 
 
R2π. (2018). Enablers and Barriers to a Circular Economy: Stakeholder Views Report. Retrieved from 
http://www.r2piproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/R2pi-stakeholders-report-sept-2018.pdf 
 
Reigado, C. R., da Costa Fernandes, S., Saavedra, Y. M. B., Ometto, A. R., & da Costa, J. M. H. (2017). A 
Circular Economy Toolkit as an Alternative to Improve the Application of PSS Methodologies. Procedia CIRP, 
64, 37-42.  
 
Ritzéna, S., & Sandström, G. Ö. (2017). Barriers to the Circular Economy – integration of perspectives and 
domains. Paper presented at the 9th CIRP IPSS Conference: Circular Perspectives on Product/Service-
Systems, Copenhagen. 
 
Robinson, S. (2017). Social Circular Economy – opportunities for people, planet and profit. Retrieved from 
https://www.socialcirculareconomy.com/publications.html 
 
Rype Office Furniture, https://www.rypeoffice.com/ 
 
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign: 
International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, 4(1), 5-18. doi:10.1080/15710880701875068 
 
Sanders, L., & Simons, G. (2009). A Social Vision for Value Co-creation in Design. Technology Innovation 
Management (TIM) Review, (December). Retrieved from http://timreview.ca/article/310 
 
Saylor Academy. (2012). Sustainability, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship, Chapter 2: Defining Sustainability 
Innovation. Retrieved from https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_sustainability-innovation-and-
entrepreneurship/index.html 
 
SDG. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from 
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld 
 

https://www.socialcirculareconomy.com/publications.html
https://www.rypeoffice.com/
http://timreview.ca/article/310
https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_sustainability-innovation-and-entrepreneurship/index.html
https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_sustainability-innovation-and-entrepreneurship/index.html


 

117 

Seyfang, G., & Smith, A. (2013). Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new 
research and policy agenda. Environmental Politics, 584-603.  
 
Simonchik, A., Iriarte, I., Hoveskog, M., Halila, F., & Justel, D. (2015). Bridging service design tools and 
business model innovation (BMI) for servitization in B2B context. Paper presented at the The Spring 
Servitization Conference (SSC 2015), Servitization: the theory and impact, 18–19 May 2015, Aston Business 
School, Aston University, UK. 
 
Sicar, S. (2018). Fab CITY: The Mass Distribution of (Almost) Everything (T. Diez Ed.). ISSUU. 
 
Souleles, N. (2017). Design for social change and design education: Social challenges versus teacher-centred 
pedagogies. The Design Journal, 20, S927-S936. doi:10.1080/14606925.2017.1353037 
 
Spring, M., & Araujo, L. (2017). Product biographies in servitization and the circular economy. Industrial 
Marketing Management, 60, 126-137.  
 
Storvang, P., Jensen, S., Christensen, P., & Storgaard, M. (2013). Facilitating Innovation through Design in a 
Danish Context - a framework for design capacity. Paper presented at the 2nd Cambridge Academic Design 
Management Conference, Cambridge, England. 
 
The Circular Design Guide. (2017). Ellen MacArthur Foundation and IDEO. Retrieved from 
http://circulardesignguide.com/ 
 
The Great Recovery. (2016). Designing for a circular economy: lessons from the Great Recovery (2012-
2016). Retrieved from https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/the-great-recovery---designing-
for-a-circular-economy.pdf 
 
Teso, G., & Walters, A. (2016). Assessing Manufacturing SMEs’ Readiness to Implement Service Design. 
Procedia CIRP, 47, 90-95.  
 
Tonkinwise, C. (2015). Just Design: Being Dogmatic about Defining Speculative Critical Design Future Fiction. 
Medium: Visual Design. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@camerontw/just-design-b1f97cb3996f 
 
Treder, M. (2015). Why everyone is a designer… but shouldn’t design. TNW (The Next Web). Retrieved from 
https://thenextweb.com/dd/2015/07/28/why-everyone-is-a-designer-but-shouldnt-design/. 
 
UN Environment International Resource Panel. (2019). Global Resource Outlook 2019. Retrieved from 
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27518/GRO_2019_SPM_EN.pdf?sequence=1&is
Allowed=y 
 
United Nations. (2015). What is the Paris Agreement? Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/process-and-
meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreement 
 
University of Strathclyde. (2019). The City of Glasgow aims to crowdsource circular economy innovations. 
Institute for Future Cities. Retrieved from http://ifuturecities.com/the-city-of-glasgow-aims-to-
crowdsource-circular-economy-innovations/ 
 
Van Eijk, F. (2015). Barriers & Drivers towards a Circular Economy. Retrieved from 
https://www.circulairondernemen.nl/uploads/e00e8643951aef8adde612123e824493.pdf 
 

https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/the-great-recovery---designing-for-a-circular-economy.pdf
https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/the-great-recovery---designing-for-a-circular-economy.pdf
https://medium.com/@camerontw/just-design-b1f97cb3996f
https://thenextweb.com/dd/2015/07/28/why-everyone-is-a-designer-but-shouldnt-design/
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27518/GRO_2019_SPM_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27518/GRO_2019_SPM_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreement
https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreement
http://ifuturecities.com/the-city-of-glasgow-aims-to-crowdsource-circular-economy-innovations/
http://ifuturecities.com/the-city-of-glasgow-aims-to-crowdsource-circular-economy-innovations/
https://www.circulairondernemen.nl/uploads/e00e8643951aef8adde612123e824493.pdf


 

118 

Van Nes, N., & Cramer, J. (2005). Influencing product lifetime through product design. Business Strategy 
and the Environment, Special Issue: Sustainability and Design, 14(5), 286-299. 
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.491 
 
Vianna, M., Vianna, Y., Adler, I. K., Lucena, B., & Russo, B. (2014). Design Thinking - Business Innovation: 
MJV Press. 
 
Wastling, T., Charnley, F., & Moreno, M. (2018). Design for Circular Behaviour: Considering Users in a 
Circular Economy. Sustainability, 10, 1-22. doi:10.3390/su10061743. 
 
Williams, J. (2013). 'Co-creation' is the New Crowdsourcing. The Best Awards 2013. Retrieved from 
http://www.theguardian.com/best-awards/co-creation-is-the-new-crowdsourcing 
 
Zero Waste. (2016). Circular Economy Business Toolkit. Retrieved from http://www.nzwc.ca/focus/circular-
economy/toolkit/Pages/default.aspx 
 

doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.491
http://www.theguardian.com/best-awards/co-creation-is-the-new-crowdsourcing
http://www.nzwc.ca/focus/circular-economy/toolkit/Pages/default.aspx
http://www.nzwc.ca/focus/circular-economy/toolkit/Pages/default.aspx

	Designers have a key role to play in the system-wide economic changes driving the Circular Economy (Wastling, Charnley & Moreno, 2018) by facilitating the necessary transformations in human interactions, mindsets and relationships. Joore and Brezet (2...
	The roadblocks stopping the Circular Economy: Vision versus practicalities
	Designers are now involved in developing such service ideas around products which include a “network of actors who produce, deliver and manage the PSS [Product Service System]” (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2016, p. 131). One well-known example of this innov...
	Human-centred design for a Circular Economy: The critical role of design-led innovation


