Home Proceedings Organization Program News Contact
PDF download
Cite article
Share options
Informations, rights and permissions
Issue image
Vol 14, 2025
Pages: 129 - 134
Professional paper
Economics and Management Editor: Darjana Sredić
See full issue

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Metrics and citations
Abstract views: 34
PDF Downloads: 23
Google scholar: See link
Article content
  1. Abstract
  2. Disclaimer
Received: 20.08.2025. >> Accepted: 29.10.2025. >> Published: 21.11.2025. Professional paper Economics and Management Editor: Darjana Sredić

ECOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF CIRCULAR BUSINESS MODELS

By
Andrea Andrejević Panić ,
Andrea Andrejević Panić

Faculty of Business Studies, Educons University , Kamenitz , Serbia

Slobodan Cvetanović ,
Slobodan Cvetanović
Contact Slobodan Cvetanović

Faculty of Business Studies, Educons University , Kamenitz , Serbia

Aleksandar Kostić
Aleksandar Kostić

Faculty of Economics, University of Prishtina , Pristina , Kosovo

Abstract

The need for new business models based on the principles of sustainability and efficient resource use in modern economic conditions is becoming increasingly evident. These business models strive to eliminate the fundamental weaknesses of the linear economy, such as uncontrolled extraction of natural resources, irreversible waste generation, and their inherently weak management potential. At the same time, they must meet increasingly demanding market needs, both on a national and global level.

Depending on the key characteristics and goals of circular business models based on: a) recycling and reuse, b) design for sustainability, c) services, d) closed-loop supply chain processes, e) digitalization, and f) educational and consultancy nature, the study considers their impact on the ecological, economic, and social dimensions of sustainable business. It concludes that recycling and closed-loop supply chain circular business models most significantly advance ecological goals but may carry moderate economic challenges. On the other hand, service-oriented models and digitalization bring high economic benefits, with moderate ecological impact.

References

Abdallah, A. B., Al-Ghwayeen, W. S., Al-Amayreh, E. M., & Sweis, R. J. (2024). The impact of green supply chain management on circular economy performance: The mediating roles of green innovations. Logistics, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics8010001
Bocken, N. M. P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33(5), 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007
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
McKinsey, & Company. (2022). The circular economy: An overview of emerging trends. McKinsey Insights, 34(2), 11–27.
Pagoropoulos, A., Pigosso, D. C. A., & McAloone, T. C. (2017). The emergent role of digital technologies in the circular economy: A review. Procedia Cirp, 64, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.02.047
Stahel, W. R. (2016). The circular economy. Nature, 531(7595), 435–438. https://doi.org/10.1038/531435a
Tukker, A. (2015). Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy – a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.