THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND INSTITUTIONAL-ENTREPRENEURIAL CONCEPTUALIZATION OF THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to provide a theoretical and methodological synthesis of the genesis, systematize leading academic schools of thought, and conceptualize the categorical framework of the circular economy with a focal emphasis on its entrepreneurial and institutional dimensions. The methodological framework of the study relies on a comprehensive set of scientific methods: chronological and bibliometric analysis (to differentiate the evolutionary stages of the circular paradigm); comparative analysis (to juxtapose foundational theoretical schools); semantic content analysis of definition corpuses (to identify structural asymmetries in the conceptualization of circularity); and the method of ascending from the abstract to the concrete (to substantiate the author's definition). The evolution of the circular economy (1966–2026) is periodized into four qualitative phases: philosophical-theoretical, terminological-conceptual, operationalization, and systemic-normative. The seminal priority and foundational contribution of R. Frosch and N. Gallopoulos (1989) to establishing the principles of industrial ecology have been historically attributed. The conceptual postulates of seven leading schools of thought are systematized, corroborating an academic consensus that the circular model cannot be realized within an isolated, single enterprise. The critical academic debate between technological optimism regarding absolute decoupling and the critical school concerning the risks of the circular rebound effect is articulated. An original polycomponent definition of the circular economy is proposed, framing it as a systemic model of societal production, distribution, exchange, and consumption based on the principles of preventive waste elimination through ecodesign, retention of products, components, and materials at their highest level of functional utility, and regeneration of natural capital, thereby shaping a specific institutional entrepreneurial environment where open innovations, strategic partner networks, platform co-opetition, and end-to-end digitalization serve as systemic drivers of economic value creation and competitiveness. The heuristic potential of this definition is unveiled through a triad of multi-actor cross-sectoral coverage, institutional interpretation of governance rules, and partner-network determination of innovation rent generation.