Introduction:

Throughout history, societies have been based on the linear model of an economy. This means that the economy acted and behaved in a straight line, where the phrase take-make-waste was first coined. Resources and supplies were taken from society, made into products, tools or items of need, and then eventually disposed of after they served their purpose. This form of economy is incredibly unsustainable, having immense detrimental effects on our environment and society (Korhonen, 2018). The solution then is the transition to a cyclical model, commonly called a circular economy. This economy is one that is headlined by the increasingly popular phrase, reduce, reuse, recycle. The circular economy is all about sustainability, making sure all resources, products, and materials are continuously reused and remade instead of just thrown away. The change from a linear to a circular economy may seem grand and challenging in practice, but is essential to our environmental and economic health and future.

Connection to STS:

The topic of linear and circular economies has implications in all three aspects of STS, being science, technology, and society. Society is at the center of the economy, with the ways people act and behave directly affecting how an economy grows. Likewise, the foundations of an economy affect all aspects of the society, the way people live, survive, and grow. Technological advancements have paved the way for the transition from a linear to circular economy, much more attainable and much more real. New recycling technologies, manufacturing plants, reusable materials, and so many other new innovations are essential to a circular economy thriving and becoming attainable. Lastly, the science behind both linear and circular economies are essential to understanding how and why they operate. Understanding materials science and overall sustainability science is essential to creating a working circular economy (Korhonen, 2018)

Ensuring Environmental Sustainability:

Environmental sustainability is at the forefront of why the circular economy is a superior alternative to the typical linear economy.  A few examples of things that happen in linear economies are the presence of single-use plastics, fast fashion, construction waste, and waste from electronics and machines (Reconomy, 2025). These practices destroy our environment, with the waste ending up in landfills that pollute the water and soil and emit large amounts of methane. Alternatively, they are incinerated, producing toxic pollutants and creating more CO2 emissions. Linear economies are pioneering the pollution of our world, but there is a better option and future ahead. The circular economy follows something known as the waste hierarchy, a framework used to manage materials and resources effectively and efficiently (Reconomy, 2025). The hierarchy goes, Prevention, Re-use, Recycle, Recover, Dispose. The best way to improve our environment is prevention. Limit the amount of materials used, products made, and consumption of pretty much anything. The least favorable is dispose, a last resort option that is at the forefront of the aforementioned linear economy. The in between is where the circular economy truly operates and flourishes, Re-use, Recycle, Recover. These practices can be seen in a plethora of ways; the repair and refurbishment of products to extend their life, creating dedicated recycling facilities instead of landfills, waste-to-energy facilities that turn non-recyclable products into usable electricity and heat, and just the overall conscious effort to reduce consumption and increase sustainability.

The Economics of it All:

Environmental sustainability is usually the main benefit of the transition from linear to circular, but at the end of the day this is dealing with the economy, and the real costs, needs, and lives of the society it operates within. Linear economies have a plethora of economic destructors, with the main one being the overall inactivity of the economy without further consumption. An economy centered on continuous consumption and waste, will only grow and prosper with further and further consumption. This is not reliable and resistant to changes and external pressures such as environmental regulations, inflation, and societal changes. If a linear economy does not have the ability to consume the next thing, it will not survive. The other prominent stressors against the linear economy are resource costs, waste management and disposal costs, and overall loss of value from materials and products (Reconomy, 2025). Continuous consumption results in continuous need for resources and production expenses, costing millions and millions of dollars every year. When landfills are filled and harmful gases are emitted, this costs an absurd amount of money every year to try and combat the side effects and help clean up the environment. Lastly, when resources and products are used once and then disposed of, money and value is being lost in those things that could be repurposed and reused. Now although a circular economy is not a perfect world at all, it does provide a better outlook and opportunity for the economy. A circular economy practically eliminates all the negatives I previously mentioned, making landfills useless, environmental cleanup costs diminished, and ensuring resources are used to their highest capacity. In a journal article that focuses on the comparisons between the two economies, author Furkan Sriatli states when talking about the economic factors of the circular model, “It means that, by reducing the level of material input needed, the economy may save billions of dollars” (Sariatli, 2017).

The Future:

The transition from a linear to circular economy is riddled with immense challenges and struggles in the way. Linear economies have been rooted in our society for hundreds of years, since around the 18th century when the industrial revolution created new incredible tools and machines, marking the beginning of the path to continuous consumption (Sillanpää and Ncibi, 2019). Changing deeply rooted ideals is challenging, taking many many years to create real results and shift the societal expectations and beliefs. Aforementioned, there are things in the way for a circular economy to exist, the main two being; limitations in infrastructure and overall consumer behavior and practices (Reconomy, 2025). Recycling plants and refurbishment facilities are scarce in most economies, limiting consumers and businesses the ability to even adopt this cyclical model if they wanted to. Likewise, most people in our society don’t see the problem, or if they do they choose to ignore it. They see climate change and environmental sustainability as a joke, not understanding the impacts that we all have on the future of our world. This section sounds all dim and grim but it’s the reality that we currently face, but it doesn’t have to be our future. Governmental policies, decreasing individual consumption, increasing funding for sustainable practices and strategies; these are just a few of the ways that we as a society can make the change and lead to a better future. Change is hard, and this type of change is rooted in societal norms and expectations of consumers and producers. The transition of economies is a prime example of the path dependency theory, as the structure is rooted in deeply held historical beliefs and practices. But there is a future ahead, one that will not be riddled with landfills and polluted air and sea, but one with sustainable practices and a healthier world.

Conclusion:

Switching from a linear to circular economy is easier said than done, a transition that is full of roadblocks and struggles. The benefits however are immense, completely changing the way our society and environment will grow and prosper. Environmental and economic sectors will be benefitted, with more sustainable practices of producing, consuming, and maximizing the use of any and all things. Deeply rooted societal norms and practices are hard to change, but increasing the overall knowledge of the circular economy, the outreach, and benefits will lead to a better future in the end.

References:

Carlaw, K. I., & Lipsey, R. G. (2003). Productivity, technology and economic growth: what is the relationship?. Journal of Economic Surveys, 17(3), 457-495.

File:Linear versus circular economy.png. (2025, September 19). Wikimedia Commons. Retrieved April 25, 2026, from https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Linear_versus_circular_economy.png&oldid=1087959514.

Ghosh, S. K., & Eduljee, G. (Eds.). (2024). The Circular Economy : Meeting Sustainable Development Goals (First edition.). The Royal Society of Chemistry.

Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations. Ecological Economics, 143, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041

Reconomy. (2025, May 12). Linear economy vs circular economy: Why businesses must shift to circularity. https://www.reconomy.com/2025/05/12/linear-economy-vs-circular-economy/

Sariatli, F. (2017). Linear economy versus circular economy: a comparative and analyzer study for optimization of economy for sustainability. Visegrad Journal on Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development, 6(1), 31-34.

Sillanpää, M., & Ncibi, M. C. (2019). The circular economy : case studies about the transition from the linear economy. Academic Press.

AI Use Acknowledgements:

I used Google Gemini  to help me find information about Linear and Circular Economies that fits the goals of this textbook chapter. It gave me overall outlines I could use for my chapter, and base level information on the topic. I then used the other sources I had gathered to apply other elements to the chapter. Google. (2026). Gemini 3 Flash [Large language model]. https://gemini.google.com