“Systemic, deep and transformative, in the EU and beyond” : Examining the discursive, material and subjectification effects of the EU’s Circular Economy Action Plan

The circular economy (CE) is one of the main pillars of the European Union’s (EU) Green Deal and has gained significance as an integral part of 21st century sustainability transitions worldwide. The European Commission adopted EU’s first CE action plan in 2015 and came out with an updated version in 2020 - A new Circular Economy Action Plan For a cleaner and more competitive Europe (CEAP). The circular economy has multiple contested interpretations which is reflected by the emerging academic literature on the topic. While both the circular economy and EU’s understanding of it have received critical scrutiny in recent years, calls for more critical research and more diverse perspectives on the topic have been made. Especially the fact that the EU’s chosen interpretation of the CE is only one of many needs more attention considering that the goal is to spread it beyond the EU. In addition, concerns have been raised about whether the type of circular economy described in the CEAP - which is focused on technological progress and ensuring continued growth and competitiveness - goes into the core of the challenges it claims to respond to. The CEAP describes the CE transition it aims for as just, fair, and transformative both within and beyond the EU. This thesis leans on the Barcelona School of Ecological Economics and Political Ecology’s key pillars in order to critically study the CEAP’s claims and their possible effects. This process is aided by Carol Bacchi’s “What’s the problem represented to be” (WPR) approach to policy analysis, which encourages studying policies through their problem representations. The purpose of this thesis is to point out that which is not problematized in the CEAP from the Barcelona School perspective. Alternative problematizations that can be used to evaluate future CE policies are created based on the results of this study. This study finds that there are significant deficiencies in the CEAP that should lead to challenging the validity of some of its claims and questioning its assumed universality. Firstly, this thesis affirms the claims pointed out in previous research that the CEAP does not holistically consider the biophysical realities of our planet. Secondly, further concerns arise when studying the EU’s aspiration of setting off a global CE transition. In this context, this thesis highlights the necessity of addressing power imbalances and using a decolonial lens in order not to replicate injustices such as ecological debt and erasure of alternative and marginalized knowledges and ways of life both within and outside of the EU.