Circular economy has gained momentum since the 1970s as a regenerative alternative to the traditional linear economy. However, as the circular economy has gone mainstream, circularity claims have become fragmented and remote, consisting of indirect contributions, such as the life extension of other products and the use of waste as feedstock, without addressing the actual cause of waste. The present study aims to identify the strategic motivations of manufacturers participating in the circular economy and the corresponding relationship to ecological embeddedness. This paper explores the circular economy in manufacturing through existing products on the market and their relationship to eco-design by considering the product, packaging, and its production. Legitimacy is found to be a decisive factor in whether the type of circular economy strategy manufacturers adopt yields ecological benefits. The results from the case study of products clearly indicate the superiority of ecological embeddedness, as a form of circularity supporting strong sustainability. Finally, a novel template is proposed to support the implementation of ecological embeddedness in manufacturing.

Typically, the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and state action is considered to be one of complementing or substitution. However, growing numbers of governments consider CSR as a potential policy tool and attempt to actively shape organizational CSR policies and outcomes. Yet, different types of states exhibit different levels of interventionism and different preferences regarding the means and ends of state intervention in the economy. This suggests that CSR policies and outcomes vary across different types of states. The extant literature has given scant attention to this. In this chapter we seek to remedy this shortcoming. We systematically explore the relationship between varieties of states and corporate social responsibility, by constructing a typology of corporate responsibilities indifferent types of states. We combine existing typologies of states and of government-CSR configurations, to answer the question how different types of state lead to different firm-level CSR practices and overall outcomes. We find that a regulatory state seeks a minimum role in facilitating CSR, largely leaving CSR to the market for self-regulation. A welfare state takes an active role shaping CSR practice through direct affiliations in cross-sector collaboration and mandatory CSR policy. A developmental state also has a direct involvement in CSR practice through frequent partnerships involving social projects or CSR facilitated through subsidies as well as CSR as a form of government. Lastly, we theories that predatory states have little interest in CSR, and when they do it is mostly in an opportunistic fashion with limited social and environmental outcomes.

No abstract