Circular Supply Chains as Adaptive Systems

1. Research problem

Which feedback loops determine whether circularity reduces rather than relocates environmental burden? The project would examine this question within complex systems & resilience, where institutional arrangements, measurable outcomes and the costs of implementation may point in different directions. It is designed as a falsifiable research programme rather than a claim that the proposed mechanism has already been demonstrated.

2. Working proposition

Material traceability and demand rebound effects may determine net gains. This is a testable proposition, not an established result. Competing explanations and contexts in which the mechanism fails should be specified before data collection begins.

3. Research theses for examination

1. Mechanism: Material traceability and demand rebound effects may determine net gains.
2. Boundary conditions: Assess whether the proposition remains plausible when jurisdiction, organisational maturity, resource constraints or stakeholder interests change.
3. Disconfirmation: Record which observations would favour an alternative explanation or show that the proposed approach adds no meaningful value.

4. Research design and methods

Construct system dynamics models with lifecycle boundaries. The initial protocol should establish sampling criteria, the unit of analysis, definitions of variables or legal concepts, a transparent source register, and access and ethics approvals where necessary.

5. Evidence horizon and relevant developments

UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report 2025 identifies a continuing divergence between announced climate action and pathways consistent with the Paris Agreement. This is a policy-relevant risk indicator, not a forecast for any one firm.

IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2025 places energy security, critical minerals and electricity-system vulnerability at the centre of economic planning. Its modelled pathways are conditional scenarios.

The cited publications provide current institutional context and candidate sources for the literature review. They do not certify the proposed hypothesis; original empirical work, careful comparison and jurisdiction-specific validation would still be required.

6. Planned work packages

1. Conceptual groundwork: Define the research object, terminology, competing frameworks and decision context.
2. Evidence mapping: Create an auditable inventory of relevant primary evidence, with dates, definitions, strengths and limitations.
3. Evaluation: Construct system dynamics models with lifecycle boundaries; contrast results with alternative specifications, control cases or rival interpretations.
4. Critical review: Report missing observations, conflicting evidence, implementation costs and circumstances that limit transferability.
5. Translation into practice: Prepare the intended practical output and an independent review checklist.

7. Anticipated research product

Circular economy causal-loop and metric framework. The deliverable will be evaluated against the research question and the evidence collected.

8. Limitations, ethics and scholarly integrity

At this stage no original sample, statistical test, clinical cohort or experimental result is claimed. Any future research involving human participants, proprietary data, medical outcomes or regulated activities must obtain the applicable permissions. Publicly accessible official publications are cited for context only; their findings are not represented as findings of BBARTI.

9. Selected institutional reading

• UNEP · Emissions Gap Report 2025 ↗4 November 2025
• IEA · World Energy Outlook 2025 ↗2025