In a world confronted with multiplying ecological, economic, and social crises, the social crises, the limitations of the linear economic model, based on extraction, production, consumption, and disposal, are increasingly revealed as structural. The acceleration of climate change, the scarcity of natural resources, the degradation of ecosystems, and the worsening of socio-territorial inequalities highlight the incapacity of dominant models to ensure the sustainability of human and natural systems (Pörtner et al., 2022; UNEP, 2024). In this context, the circular economy is gradually emerging as a systemic, integrative, and pragmatic response to the failures of the linear system, seeking to close material and energy loops, extend product lifespans, and minimize negative externalities (Geissdoerfer et al., 2023; Kirchherr et al., 2018).
Initially popularized as a waste management or eco-design strategy, the circular economy has undergone a significant conceptual expansion in recent years, broadening its scope to encompass the entire life cycle of goods and services. Today, it constitutes a transdisciplinary paradigm increasingly structuring public policies, business models, innovation systems, and industrial trajectories (Blomsma & Brennan, 2017; Calisto Friant et al., 2020). However, this rise in legitimacy has been accompanied by terminological ambiguity and a diversity of interpretations that reflect the contested nature of the circular economy: a techno-managerial approach for some, a lever for socio-economic transformation for others, or even a green reformulation of productivist logics (Hobson & Lynch, 2016; Korhonen et al., 2018).
The circular economy should therefore not be approached solely as a set of technical solutions, but rather as a strategic and normative framework guiding profound changes in production structures, consumption practices, institutional regulations, organizational configurations, and cultural representations (Mies & Gold, 2021; Murray et al., 2017). It mobilizes a multiplicity of actors (i.e. businesses, states, local governments, researchers, civil society) within a transition process that can neither be uniform nor depolarized.
In the countries of the Global North, the circular economy is often promoted as a driver of green competitiveness, technological innovation, and sustainable growth. National and supranational strategies are deployed around the optimization of material flows, the digitization of value chains, the development of circular material, and the integration of eco-design principles (EC, 2020). By contrast, in the countries of the Global South, circular practices often take informal, adaptive, and context-specific forms: repair, sharing recovery, organic waste valorization, or local reuse (Kumar et al., 2023; Schröder et al., 2019). Although sometimes overlooked by dominant normative frameworks, these practices embody vernacular forms of circularity that deserve to be analyzed, supported, and included in global reflections on transition pathways (Siderius & Zink, 2023).
Tunisia, in this respect, represents a particularly stimulating site of observation. While facing major challenges in waste management, natural resource pressures, and climate vulnerability, Tunisia is nonetheless experimenting with promising initiatives: biogas development from bio-waste, pilot projects in community-based recycling, the gradual structuring of a sustainable tourism offer, and the integration of social and solidarity economy practices into recovery sector (Fersi et al., 2021; World Bank Group, 2023). These dynamics highlight the importance of a contextualized, co-constructed, and plural circular economy, adapted to regional institutional, social, economic, and cultural specificities.
Beyond its environmental dimension alone, the circular economy also raises fundamental questions the future of work, the structuring of skills, governance models, and even the very purposes of development. It calls for jointly addressing innovation and inclusion, material efficiency and social justice, productive relocalization and international cooperation. It thus entails political choices, social trade-offs, and institutional reconfigurations that no single discipline can fully capture (McDonald et al., 2016).
The transition to a circular economy, therefore, cannot be reduced to a green mobilization of the status quo. It requires a critical questioning of dominant frameworks of thought and action, an interdisciplinary openness, and a collective mobilization in favor of systemic change. It is in this perspective that the present conference positions itself, offering a space for critical reflection, knowledge confrontation, and scientific experimentation around the concrete conditions for implementing a circular economy resolutely anchored in the realities of the twenty-first centry.
This international conference offers a critical and transdisciplinary space dedicated to analyzing the concrete conditions for implementing circular transition pathways that are both inclusive and systemic. By bringing together scientific perspectives, local experiments, and organizational innovations, it aims to strengthen collective capacities to design, test, and evaluate sustainable and context-sensitive economic models.
It is addressed to researchers, professionals, public institutions, businesses, associations, and citizens, with the goal of sharing research findings, practical feedback, and forward-looking visions.
The conference particularly welcomes contributions from engineering, economics, management, social sciences and humanities, as well as from fundamental disciplines such as chemistry, biology, and physics, when mobilized in the service of circular transition.
This disciplinary diversity is essential for connecting theoretical approaches with field-based insights, and for designing systemic responses adapted to contemporary environmental, social, and economic challenges.
The conference pursues four major objectives:
- To document concrete and innovative circularity initiatives and analyzing their transferability.
- To examine the socio-cultural and economic levers for transforming consumption behaviors.
- To explore the transformations of professions, skills, and organizational models within a circular economy.
- To question institutional frameworks and governance mechanisms that foster an inclusive and sustainable transition.
Organized in Tunisia, at the crossroads of Euro-Mediterranean and African regions, the conference highlights territorial dynamics that are often rendered invisible and fosters North-South, South-South, and South-North dialogues. It seeks to contribute to the deconstruction of dominant normative models in order to envision contextualized and pluralistic circularity pathways.
In the face of systemic crises, the circular economy is emerging as a strategic framework, still largely plural and marked by tensions. While it has become a global institutional and entrepreneurial reference, its territorial variations, differentiated socio-economic impacts, and conceptual ambiguities call for critical examination.
The conference proposes to approach the circular economy as a situated and problematic space, articulating technical, social, political, and territorial issues. It emphasizes the analysis of internal tensions within the circular paradigm, conflicts of interest, and the differentiated social impacts of transition.
Submissions are invited to address the following questions:
- Which circular mechanisms generate systemic effects on material, energy, and value flows?
- How are circular logics territorialized, and with what governance tensions?
- Which cultural, educational, economic, and digital levers enable the sustainable transformation of behaviors?
- What social, ethical, and political implications underlie circular strategies, and how can a just and inclusive transition be envisioned?
The conference encourages cross-cutting perspectives from ecological economies, social sciences, geography, engineering, law, urban studies, transition studies, and design. Contributions that mobilize hybrid methods (e.g. case studies, ethnographies, modeling, policy analyses, or participatory approaches) are particularly welcome.
Special attention will be given to comparatives (North/South, South/South, urban/rural, industrial sectors) and to reflexivity on power relations and epistemological asymmetries that shape the production of knowledge on the circular economy.
Main axes
Axis 1. Designing and Producing to Reduce Environmental Footprints
Sub-Axis 1.1: Eco-Responsible Design
- Environmental mitigation processes
- Technological Innovations
- Sustainable product design (eco-design, biodegradable packaging)
Sub-Axis 1.2: Sustainable and Circular Production
- Energy management and industrial process efficiency
- Sustainable transport and logistics
- Digitization and automating in support of circularity
- Industrial and territory ecology
Description
This axis brings together upstream life-cycle strategies focused on design and production. Its objective is to reduce the environmental impact of products from their creation and throughout their industrial development. It builds on perspectives of eco-design, technological innovation, and process optimization.
Sub-Axis 1.1: Eco-Responsible Design
This sub-axis addresses innovative solutions aimed at limiting the environmental impact of products from the earliest stages of creation. It includes:
Environmental mitigation processes
Approaches that take into account the environmental impacts of human activities from the outset: improving energy efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and implementing eco-design strategies that integrate environmental criteria into the design of processes, products, and services.
Technological Innovations:
Development and deployment of breakthrough technologies (bioenergy, carbon capture, smart materials) and other technological advances that minimize ecological footprints while ensuring economic performance.
Sustainable product design (eco-design, biodegradable packaging)
Strategies to design products that are repairable, reusable, and recyclable, incorporating ecological materials and resource-efficient manufacturing processes.
Sub-Axis 1.2: Sustainable and Circular Production
This sub-axis focuses on the transformation of production processes to achieve optimal environmental performance. It explores ways for companies to reduce their footprint during manufacturing and associated logistics.
Energy management and industrial process efficiency :
Production processes aimed at optimizing energy consumption and reducing environmental impact, notably through the use of renewable energy sources, intelligent system automation, and reduction of losses during manufacturing.
Sustainable transport and logistics:
Development of strategies to shorten transportation distances and foster the pooling of logistics flows, thereby limiting the carbon footprint of transport activities. These initiatives are often accompanied by the use of alternative fuels and the integration of supply chains into broader circularity strategies.
Digitization and automating in support of circularity :
The deployment of digital technologies such as digital twins, the Internet of Things, and advanced automation enhances the traceability of industrial processes. These tools also enable real-time adaptation of production lines and increased flexibility within a sustainability framework.
Industrial and territory ecology :
The establishment of inter-firm synergies at the local scale allows waste of the reused as resources within circuits. It also contributes to the pooling of infrastructures and to more efficient management of production means.
Axis 2. Promoting Sustainable Consumption and End-of-Life Circularity
Sub-Axis 2.1: Sustainable Consumption and Use
- Functional economy
- Services instead of goods
- Consumer behavior and awareness campaigns
Sub-Axis 2.2: End-of-Life Management and Cycle Closure
- Renewable resources and recycled materials
- End-of-life management (recycling, reuse)
- Feedback from circular models
Description
This second axis addresses the downstream phases of the life cycle, focusing on product use, end-of-life management, and consumer responsibility. It highlights the levers for extending product lifespans, reducing their footprint during the use phase and ensuring their reintegration into circular cycles.
Sub-Axis 2.1: Sustainable Consumption and Use
This sub-axis explores how product and service offerings can be transformed to foster more sustainable resource use and reduce environmental impacts during the usage phase. It includes:
Functional economy :
An economic model privileging use over ownership (rental, sharing, subscription), allowing the decoupling of value creation from resource consumption.
Services instead of goods :
The development of dematerialized or shared service offerings (sharing platforms, predictive maintenance), reducing material footprints while meeting consumer needs.
Consumer behavior and awareness campaigns :
The role of educational and awareness initiatives in encouraging responsible, sustainable, and conscious consumption practices.
Sub-Axis 2.2: End-of-Life Management and Cycle Closure
This sub-axis focuses on the sustainable management of products at the end of their life cycle optimal circularity. It includes:
Renewable resources and recycled materials :
Promotion of the use renewable raw materials and the integration of recycled materials into industrial processes.
End-of-life management (recycling, reuse) :
Development of collection, sorting, repair, refurbishment, and recycling systems to valorize products and prevent premature disposal.
Feedback from circular models :
Analysis of concrete examples of circular initiatives, identifying best practices, challenges encountered, and possible avenues for improvement.
Axis 3. Skills, Entrepreneurship, and SMEs for a Sustainable Transition
Sub-axis :
- New professions, retraining, and training
- The role of SMEs, entrepreneurship, and sustainable innovation
- The influence of digital technologies and artificial intelligence
- Sustainable management and performance models
Description
This axis focuses on transformations in the world of work, the emergence of new professions, training and professional retraining, and the role of entrepreneurship and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). It also addresses the contribution of artificial intelligence and digital technologies to green jobs, as well as the integration of environmental challenges withing sustainable management models. de gestion durable.
New professions, retraining, and training :
With the transformation of economic models, new professions are emerging (circular designers, reverse logistics managers, resource managers). This requires the development of initial and continuing education pathways, as well as professional retraining schemes.
The role of SMEs, entrepreneurship, and sustainable innovation :
Smaller structures are often more agile and innovation. They play a key role in experimentation, design, innovation, and the dissemination of circular practices, particularly within niche markets or specific territorial contexts.
The influence of digital technologies and artificial intelligence :
Digital tools help optimize flow management (traceability, logistics), develop new services (collaborative platforms, predictive maintenance), and analyze behaviors to anticipate trends. Artificial intelligence can also support eco-innovation.
Sustainable management and performance models :
This involves integrating environmental and social concerns into the overall strategy of organizations, through performance indicators, charters, or standardization and certification systems.
Axis 4. Public Policies, Governance, and Inclusion in the Circular Economy
Sub-axis :
- Policies and regulations (drivers and barriers)
- CSR governance
- Public-private partnerships and social inclusion
Description
This axis examines public policies, regulatory levers, obstacles to the implementation of the circular economy, and public-private partnerships. It also addresses skills governance and support strategies for ensuring a just and inclusive transition.
Policies and regulations (drivers and barriers) :
This theme explores legislative frameworks that support (or hinder) the implementation of the circular economy (e.g. laws against planned obsolescence, subsidies, green taxation, technical standards). The focus is on analyzing their coherence, impact, and blind spots.
CSR governance :
This sub-theme examines how stakeholders’ theory and the ethical management of tensions between actors are integrated. It considers collective mechanisms that can anticipate and accompany transformations in the labor market, such as observatories, sectoral strategies, strategic monitoring, and territorially grounded.
Public-private partnerships and social inclusion :
The transition cannot be achieved without collaboration. This theme addresses alliances between local authorities, businesses, educational institutions, and citizens to support innovation, guarantee equitable access to green jobs, and strengthen social cohesion.
Bibliography
Blomsma, F., & Brennan, G. (2017). The emergence of circular economy : A new framing around prolonging resource productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 603‑614. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12603
Calisto Friant, M., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Salomone, R. (2020). A typology of circular economy discourses : Navigating the diverse visions of a contested paradigm. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 161, 104917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104917
European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, 2020 Circular Economy Action Plan – International aspects, Publications Office of the European Union, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/085517
Fersi, C., Ben Salah, I., & Medimagh, R. (2021). Circular economy in tunisia. In S. K. Ghosh & S. K. Ghosh (Éds.), Circular Economy : Recent Trends in Global Perspective (p. 113‑144). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0913-8_4
Geissdoerfer, M., Santa‐Maria, T., Kirchherr, J., & Pelzeter, C. (2023). Drivers and barriers for circular business model innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(6), 3814‑3832. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3339
Hobson, K., & Lynch, N. (2016). Diversifying and de-growing the circular economy : Radical social transformation in a resource-scarce world. Futures, 82, 15‑25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.05.012
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028
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
Kumar, M., Raut, R. D., Jagtap, S., & Choubey, V. K. (2023). Circular economy adoption challenges in the food supply chain for sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 1334‑1356. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3191
McDonald, M., Normandin, D., & Sauvé, S. (2016). L’économie circulaire : Une transition incontournable. Presses de l’Université de Montréal. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pum.4151
Mies, A., & Gold, S. (2021). Mapping the social dimension of the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 321, 128960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128960
Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy : An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369‑380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2
Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D. C., Tignor, M. M. B., Poloczanska, E. S., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Craig, M., Langsdorf, S., Löschke, S., Möller, V., Okem, A., & Rama, B. (Éds.). (2022). Climate change 2022 : Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group ii to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.
Schröder, P., Anggraeni, K., Anantharaman, M., & Foxon, T. J. (2019). The circular economy and the Global South. London: Routledge.
Siderius, T., & Zink, T. (2023). Markets and the future of the circular economy. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 3(3), 1569‑1595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00196-4
United Nations Environment Programme (2024). Annual Report 2023 | UNEP – UN Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/annualreport/2024
World Bank Group. (2023). Tunisia Country Climate and Development Report (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO). CCDR Series. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/40658
Le Forum mondial sur l’éducation, tenu en mai 2015 à Incheon sous l’égide de l’UNESCO et ses partenaires, s’est conclu par la Déclaration d’Incheon pour l’Éducation 2030, un engagement historique de transformer la vie grâce à une nouvelle vision de l’éducation et à des actions courageuses et innovantes pour la réaliser. Le Cadre d’action Éducation 2030, qui établit cette nouvelle vision de l’éducation pour les 15 années à venir, a été adopté par plus de 180 états membres de l’UNESCO. Quatre ans plus tard, à la 9e Réunion mondiale de la Consultation collective des ONG pour Éducation 2030 (CCONG-Éducation 2030), qui s’est tenue en Tunisie en 2019, les organisations participantes ont affirmé que le monde est confronté à une crise éducative, causée par un manque de volonté politique, une faible priorisation de l’éducation et un financement insuffisant. De plus, elles ont constaté une tendance croissante à la commercialisation de l’éducation, ce qui contribue à creuser davantage les inégalités. Les systèmes éducatifs mondiaux ne semblaient pas respecter l’engagement pris dans le programme Éducation 2030. Le ministre de l’Éducation de la Tunisie d’alors avait, à la même occasion, souligné que la plupart des pays n’avancent pas suffisamment pour atteindre les objectifs fixés pour 2030. Il a appelé à une reconnaissance de l’importance stratégique de l’éducation pour toutes les nations et a encouragé la société civile à jouer un rôle majeur dans la mobilisation pour y parvenir.