Policy Levers and Power Blind Spots: How Circular Economy Transitions Reproduce or Resist Colonial Ecological Legacies
Original framing: “Small changes can have a big impact on sustainability transitions” — Phys.org
Marginalized voices—such as those of *e-waste workers in Agbogbloshie (Ghana)*, *Indigenous waste pickers in Brazil*, or *farmworkers in California*—expose how circular economy policies often externalize harm. For instance, the EU’s *Waste Shipment Regulation* allows 'circular' exports of toxic e-waste to Global South nations, where informal workers face lead poisoning. Studies by *Basel Action Network* show that 90% of global e-waste is dumped in Africa and Asia, despite 'circular' rhetoric. Entsalo’s work fails to engage these actors, whose labor and health are the unseen costs of Northern 'circular' systems. Meanwhile, the *Global Alliance of Waste Pickers* advocates for *inclusive circularity*, where waste becomes a community resource rather than a corporate asset.
The circular economy narrative, as framed by Entsalo and Phys.org, operates within a *colonial continuity* that treats policy instruments as neutral tools rather than sites of power struggle.
This framing obscures how 'small changes' in legislation—like recycling targets or EPR schemes—are historically tied to Northern-led greenwashing, where the Global South remains the dumping ground for toxic 'circular' waste while Indigenous and marginalized communities are excluded from decision-making. The solution lies in *decolonizing circularity* through Indigenous-led policy labs, ecological debt reparations, and degrowth-aligned metrics, while *trickster disruption* exposes the hypocrisy of systems that claim sustainability while perpetuating extraction. Historical precedents—from colonial-era resource management to the Basel Convention’s plastic waste ban—demonstrate that true transition requires dismantling the power structures embedded in 'circular' discourse, not just tweaking them. The path forward demands centering *marginalized voices*, integrating *Indigenous knowledge*, and modeling futures that reject both neoliberal growth and technocratic incrementalism.