Abstract
The notion of circular economy (CE) has been trending among policymakers, businesses, and academia for over a decade. Sometimes poorly understood and often misrepresented as a one‐size‐fits‐all solution to environmental problems without economic trade‐offs, the concept has recently drawn considerable criticism. According to its critics, the CE (1) rebrands existing concepts without clarity, (2) makes unrealistic environmental promises, (3) oversimplifies and overlooks critical factors, (4) clashes with societal values and norms, (5) fails in practical business applications, and (6) serves as a capitalist tool for Western interests. In this paper, we critically review these criticisms of the CE, many of which are not based on empirical realities, are obsolete, or originate in oversimplified interpretations of the circle metaphor. We argue that CE is an “umbrella” framing for existing concepts with a relatively concrete definition. Formerly corporate led, CE has matured into an academically dominated field, backed by substantial technical literature, new sub‐fields led by social scientists, and an increasingly advanced and detailed understanding of previous simplifications. Empirical evidence is emerging that CE can be operationalized and scaled, provide considerable environmental benefits, and can align with societal values and priorities. While easy to criticize, the hope and momentum that the CE has sparked is creating tangible benefits over other sustainability‐oriented concepts. Further research is required to establish its long‐term advantages, drawbacks, and complementarities with alternative approaches.