Art history essay

 Essay Prompt 1:

Step 1: Imagine you have been asked to redesign one object or process or environment of your choice for the COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 era. Think of something that you think needs to be redesigned. Here’s some inspiration, a web project I contributed to in the summer of 2020. The entries are wide ranging, taking on topics as far afield as healthcare and airports: https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/magazine-friday-cover-redesigning-the-world-coronavirus/ 

Step 2: Make notes for how you would redesign that object or process or environment for the COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 era. 

Step 3: Go through the lecture slides and the readings, choosing at least three significant points of comparison or contrast between your design approach (the philosophy and methods behind your design) and the design approach typical of at least three historical design movements or eras we covered in this course.

Step 4: Write an essay in which you 1) define the problem you want to solve, 2) present your design solution, and 3) discuss its comparison or contrast to at least three past approaches (in philosophy or methods) taken in specific design movements or eras in the history of design we covered in this class. Be sure to explain the general design philosophy or methodology typical of that movement or era and give a specific example from each one. The example can be an individual design or a piece of writing by an author we read.

Suggestion for organizing your paper for prompt 1: 

Follow the order in Step 4 (above). Section 3 should be divided into multiple paragraphs, each one discussing a distinct historical design movement covered in this course.

 

ESSENTIAL ADVICE

There is no one right answer. This is an exercise in critical thinking as well as accurate understanding of and ability to synthesize and summarize course material. The course material provides ample opportunity for students to arrive at their own conclusions. But just because there is no one right answer doesn’t mean that anything is correct. It is very possible to represent the course material inaccurately. Remember that this is a final exam, so you need to show that you understand the course material.

This essay measures your understanding of the course material. It is not a research assignment. 

Because you won’t use sources outside the course materials, there is no need for scholarly citations. If you refer to course readings, simply put the page number of your reference in parentheses at the end of the relevant sentence like this (234).

A good essay will be thorough and varied—incorporating material from the full range of the course. 

A good essay will manifest all of the qualities stated in the “A” column of the Grading Rubric. Your opinions are never graded. 

Assuming students show an accurate understanding of the course material, I will additionally reward students who show especially imaginative—meaning, original—critical thinking about the course material.

  

Approximate length: There is no strict length requirement. Approximately 4-5 pages, which should be double-spaced at 12-point font with one-inch margins 

Welcome to the Experience

Economy

by B. Joseph Pine II and

James H. Gilmore

Harvard Business Review Reprint 98407

HarvardBusinessReview
JULY– AUGUST 1998

Reprint Number

c.k . Prahalad AND
Kenneth Lieberthal

THE END OF CORPORATE IMPERIALISM 98408

Linda hill and
Suzy wetlaufer

LEADERSHIP WHEN THERE IS NO ONE TO ASK:
AN INTERVIEW WITH ENI’S FRANCO BERNABE

98402

B. joseph pine I I and
James h. Gilmore

WELCOME TO THE EXPERIENCE ECONOMY 98407

Robin Cooper and
Robert s. kaplan

THE PROMISE – AND PERIL – OF INTEGRATED
COST SYSTEMS

98403

Thomas h. davenport PUTTING THE ENTERPRISE INTO THE
ENTERPRISE SYSTEM

98401

Nigel Nicholson HOW HARDWIRED IS HUMAN BEHAVIOR? 98406

Regina fazio Maruca HBR CASE STUDY
HOW DO YOU MANAGE AN OFF-SITE TEAM? 98405

Durward k . Sobek i i ,
Jeffrey k. liker, and
Allen C. ward

ideas at work
ANOTHER LOOK AT HOW TOYOTA INTEGRATES
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

98409

Timothy A . Luehrman manager’s tool kit
INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES AS REAL OPTIONS:
GETTING STARTED ON THE NUMBERS

98404

introduction by
richard l . nolan

perspectives
CONNECTIVITY AND CONTROL IN THE YEAR 2000
AND BEYOND

98411

DAVID Warsh BOOKS IN REVIEW
WHAT DRIVES THE WEALTH OF NATIONS? 98410

As goods and services become commoditized,
the customer experiences that companies

create will matter most.

Welcome to the
Experience
Economy

By B. Joseph Pine II and

James H. Gilmore

H
ow do economies change? The
entire history of economic progress
can be recapitulated in the four-

stage evolution of the birthday cake. As a
vestige of the agrarian economy, mothers
made birthday cakes from scratch, mixing
farm commodities (flour, sugar, butter, and
eggs) that together cost mere dimes. As the
goods-based industrial economy advanced,
moms paid a dollar or two to Betty Crocker
for premixed ingredients. Later, when the
service economy took hold, busy parents
ordered cakes from the bakery or grocery
store, which, at $10 or $15, cost ten times
as much as the packaged ingredients. Now,
in the time-starved 1990s, parents neither

B. Joseph Pine II and James H. Gilmore are
cofounders of Strategic Horizons LLP, based in
Cleveland, Ohio. They are coauthors of The
Experience Economy: Work Is Theatre and
Every Business a Stage, to be published by the
Harvard Business School Press in April 1999.
They are the authors of “The Four Faces of Mass
Customization” (HBR January–February 1997)
and can be reached at pine&gilmore@cus-
tomization.com.

make the birthday cake nor even throw the
party. Instead, they spend $100 or more to
“outsource” the entire event to Chuck E.
Cheese’s, the Discovery Zone, the Mining
Company, or some other business that
stages a memorable event for the kids – and
often throws in the cake for free. Welcome
to the emerging experience economy.

Economists have typically lumped expe-
riences in with services, but experiences
are a distinct economic offering, as different
from services as services are from goods. To-
day we can identify and describe this fourth
economic offering because consumers un-
questionably desire experiences, and more
and more businesses are responding by ex-
plicitly designing and promoting them. As
services, like goods before them, increas-
ingly become commoditized – think of
long-distance telephone services sold solely
on price – experiences have emerged as the
next step in what we call the progression of
economic value. (See the exhibit “The Pro-
gression of Economic Value.”) From now
on, leading-edge companies – whether they
sell to consumers or businesses – will find

harvard business review July–August 1998 Copyright © 1998 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved.

https://tomization.com

The Progression of Economic Value

Differentiated

Competitive
Position

Undifferentiated

Market Premium
Pricing

Make
goods

Extract
commodities

Stage
experiences

Deliver
services

welcome to the experience economy

that the next competitive battleground lies in stag-
ing experiences.

An experience is not an amorphous construct; it
is as real an offering as any service, good, or com-
modity. In today’s service economy, many compa-
nies simply wrap experiences around their tradi-
tional offerings to sell them better. To realize the
full benefit of staging experiences, however, busi-
nesses must deliberately design engaging experi-
ences that command a fee. This transition from
selling services to selling experiences will be no
easier for established companies to undertake and
weather than the last great economic shift, from
the industrial to the service economy. Unless com-
panies want to be in a commoditized business,

however, they will be compelled to upgrade their
offerings to the next stage of economic value.

The question, then, isn’t whether, but when – and
how – to enter the emerging experience economy. An
early look at the characteristics of experiences and
the design principles of pioneering experience
stagers suggests how companies can begin to an-
swer this question.

Staging Experiences that Sell
To appreciate the difference between services and
experiences, recall the episode of the old television
show Taxi in which Iggy, a usually atrocious (but
fun-loving) cab driver, decided to become the best
taxi driver in the world. He served sandwiches and
drinks, conducted tours of the city, and even sang
Frank Sinatra tunes. By engaging passengers in a
way that turned an ordinary cab ride into a memo-
rable event, Iggy created something else entirely –
a distinct economic offering. The experience of
riding in his cab was more valuable to his customers
than the service of being transported by the cab –
and in the TV show, at least, Iggy’s customers hap-
pily responded by giving bigger tips. By asking to go
around the block again, one patron even paid more
for poorer service just to prolong his enjoyment.
The service Iggy provided – taxi transportation –
was simply the stage for the experience that he was
really selling.

An experience occurs when a company intention-
ally uses services as the stage, and goods as props, to
engage individual customers in a way that creates
a memorable event. Commodities are fungible,
goods tangible, services intangible, and experiences
memorable. (See the chart “Economic Distinc-

Economic Distinctions

Economic Offering Commodities Goods Services Experiences

Economy Agrarian Industrial Service Experience

Economic Function Extract Make Deliver Stage

Nature of Offering Fungible Tangible Intangible Memorable

Key Attribute Natural Standardized Customized Personal

Method of
Supply

Stored in bulk Inventoried after
production

Delivered on
demand

Revealed over
a duration

Seller Trader Manufacturer Provider Stager

Buyer Market User Client Guest

Factors of Demand Characteristics Features Benefits Sensations

harvard business review July–August 1998 98

welcome to the experience economy

tions.”) Buyers of experiences – we’ll follow the
lead of experience-economy pioneer Walt Disney
and call them “guests” – value what the company
reveals over a duration of time. While prior eco-
nomic offerings – commodities, goods, and services –
are external to the buyer, experiences are inher-
ently personal, existing only in the mind of an indi-
vidual who has been engaged on an emotional,
physical, intellectual, or even spiritual level. Thus,
no two people can have the same experience, be-
cause each experience derives from the interaction
between the staged event (like a theatrical play) and
the individual’s state of mind.

Experiences have always been at the heart of the
entertainment business – a fact that Walt Disney
and the company he founded have creatively ex-
ploited. But today the concept of selling an enter-
tainment experience is taking root in businesses far
removed from theaters and amuse-
ment parks. New technologies, in par-
ticular, encourage whole new genres
of experience, such as interactive
games, Internet chat rooms and multi- experiences is spreading beyond
player games, motion-based simula-
tors, and virtual reality. The growing
processing power required to render
ever-more immersive experiences
now drives demand for the goods and services of
the computer industry. In a speech made at the
November 1996 COMDEX computer trade show,
Intel chairman Andrew Grove declared, “We need
to look at our business as more than simply the
building and selling of personal computers. Our
business is the delivery of information and lifelike
interactive experiences.”

At theme restaurants such as the Hard Rock
Cafe, Planet Hollywood, or the House of Blues, the
food is just a prop for what’s known as “eatertain-
ment.” And stores such as Niketown, Cabella’s,
and Recreational Equipment Incorporated draw
consumers in by offering fun activities, fascinating
displays, and promotional events (sometimes
labeled “shoppertainment” or “entertailing”).

But experiences are not exclusively about enter-
tainment; companies stage an experience whenever
they engage customers in a personal, memorable
way. In the travel business, former British Airways
chairman Sir Colin Marshall has noted that the
“commodity mind-set” is to “think that a business
is merely performing a function – in our case, trans-
porting people from point A to point B on time and
at the lowest possible price.” What British Airways
does, according to Sir Colin, is “to go beyond the
function and compete on the basis of providing an
experience.” (See “Competing on Customer Ser-

vice: An Interview with British Airways’ Sir Colin
Marshall,” HBR November–December 1995.) The
company uses its base service (the travel itself) as
the stage for a distinctive en route experience – one
that attempts to transform air travel into a respite
from the traveler’s normally frenetic life.

Neither are experiences only for consumer in-
dustries. Companies consist of people, and busi-
ness-to-business settings also present stages for
experiences. For example, a Minneapolis computer-
installation and repair company calls itself the
Geek Squad. Its “special agents” costume them-
selves in white shirts with thin black ties and pocket
protectors, carry badges, drive old cars, and turn a
humdrum activity into a memorable encounter.
Similarly, many companies hire theater troupes –
like the St. Louis-based trainers One World Music,
facilitators of a program called Synergy through

Today the concept of selling

theaters and theme parks.

Samba – to turn otherwise ordinary meetings into
improvisational events that encourage breakthrough
thinking.

Business-to-business marketers increasingly cre-
ate venues as elaborate as any Disney attraction in
which to sell their goods and services. In June 1996,
Silicon Graphics, for example, opened its Visionar-
ium Reality Center at corporate headquarters in
Mountain View, California, to bring customers and
engineers together in an environment where they
can interact with real-time, three-dimensional
product visualizations. Customers can view, hear,
and touch – as well as drive, walk, or fly – through
myriad product possibilities. “This is experiential
computing at its ultimate, where our customers
can know what their products will look like, sound
like, feel like before manufacturing,” said then
chairman and CEO Edward McCracken.

You Are What You Charge For
Notice, however, that while all of these companies
stage experiences, most are still charging for their
goods and services. Companies generally move
from one economic stage to the next in incremental
steps. In its heyday in the 1960s and 1970s, IBM’s
slogan was “IBM Means Service,” and the computer
manufacturer indeed lavished services – for free –

harvard business review July–August 1998 99

welcome to the experience economy

on any company that would buy its hardware
goods. It planned facilities, programmed code, inte-
grated other companies’ equipment, and repaired
its own machines; its service offerings over-
whelmed the competition. But eventually IBM had
to charge customers for what it had been giving
away for free, when a Justice Department suit re-
quired the company to unbundle its hardware and

Companies should think about
what they would do differently
if they charged admission.
software. The government order notwithstanding,
IBM couldn’t afford to continue to meet increasing
customer-service demands without explicitly
charging for them. Services, it turned out, were the
company’s most valued offerings. Today, with its
mainframe computers long since commoditized,
IBM’s Global Services unit grows at double-digit
annual rates. The company no longer gives away its
services to sell its goods. In fact, the deal is re-
versed: the company will buy its clients’ hardware
if they’ll contract with Global Services to manage
their information systems. IBM still manufactures
computers, but now it’s in the business of providing
services.

It’s an indication of the maturity of the service
economy that IBM and other manufacturers now
make greater profits from the services than from
the goods they provide. General Electric’s GE Cap-
ital unit and the financial arms of the Big Three
automakers are cases in point. Likewise, it’s an in-
dication of the immaturity of the experience econ-
omy that most companies providing experiences –
like the Hard Rock Cafe, the Geek Squad, or Silicon
Graphics – don’t yet explicitly charge for the events
that they stage.

No company sells experiences as its economic
offering unless it actually charges guests an admis-
sion fee. An event created just to increase customer
preference for the commoditized goods or services
that a company actually sells is not an economic
offering. But even if a company rejects (for now)
charging admission to events that it stages, its man-
agers should already be asking themselves what
they would do differently if they were to charge ad-
mission. The answers will help them see how their
company might begin to move forward into the ex-
perience economy, for such an approach demands
the design of richer experiences.

Movie theaters already charge admission to see
featured films, but Jim Loeks, part-owner of the
Star theater complex in Southfield, Michigan, told
Forbes magazine that “it should be worth the price
of the movie just to go into the theater.” Star
charges 3 million customers a year 25% higher ad-
mission for a movie than a local competitor does
because of the fun-house experience it provides.

Soon, perhaps, with 65,000 square
feet of restaurants and stores being
added to the complex, Star will charge
its customers admission just to get
into the complex.

Some retailers already border on the
experiential. At the Sharper Image or
Brookstone, notice how many people
play with the gadgets, listen to minia-

turized stereo equipment, sit in massage chairs, and
then leave without paying for what they valued,
namely, the experience. Could these stores charge
admission? Not as they are currently managed. But
if they did charge an admission fee, they would be
forced to stage a much better experience to attract
paying guests. The merchandise mix would need to
change more often – daily or even hourly. The stores
would have to add demonstrations, showcases,
contests, and other attractions to enhance the cus-
tomer experience.

With its Niketown stores, Nike is almost in the
experience business. To avoid alienating its exist-
ing retail channels, Nike created Niketown as a
merchandising exposition. It’s ostensibly for
show – to build the brand image and stimulate buy-
ing at other retail outlets – not for selling. If that is
so, then why not explicitly charge customers for
experiencing Niketown? Would people pay? People
have already queued to enter the Niketown on
Chicago’s Michigan Avenue. An admission fee
would force Nike to stage more engaging events
inside. The stores might actually use the basketball
court, say, to stage one-on-one games or rounds of
horse with National Basketball Association play-
ers. Afterward customers could buy customized
Nike T-shirts, commemorating the date and score
of events – complete with an action photo of the
winning hoop. There might be more interactive
kiosks for educational exploration of past athletic
events. Virtual reality machines could let you, as
Nike’s advertising attests, be Tiger Woods. Nike
could probably generate as much admission-based
revenue per square foot from Niketown as the Walt
Disney Company does from its entertainment
venues – and as Disney should (but does not) yield
from its own retail stores. For the premier company
of the experience economy, Disney’s specialty re-

harvard business review July–August 1998 100

welcome to the experience economy

tailing outside of its own theme parks disappoints.
Its mall stores aren’t much different from anyone
else’s, precisely because Disney doesn’t charge ad-
mission to them – and so doesn’t bother creating
the extraordinary experiences it so expertly creates
elsewhere.

An entrepreneur in Israel has entered the experi-
ence economy with the opening of Cafe Ke’ilu,
which roughly translates as “Cafe Make Believe.”
Manager Nir Caspi told a reporter that people come
to cafés to be seen and to meet people, not for the
food; Cafe Ke’ilu pursues that observation to its log-
ical conclusion. The establishment serves its cus-
tomers plates and mugs that are empty and charges
guests $3 during the week and $6 on weekends for
the social experience.

Charging admission – requiring customers to pay
for the experience – does not mean that companies
have to stop selling goods and services. Disney gen-
erates significant profits from parking, food, and
other service fees at its theme parks as well as from
the sale of memorabilia. But without the staged ex-
periences of the company’s theme parks, cartoons,
movies, and TV shows, customers would have
nothing to remember – and Disney would have no
characters to exploit.

In the full-fledged experience economy, retail
stores and even entire shopping malls will charge
admission before they let a consumer even set foot
in them. Some shopping malls, in fact, already do
charge admission. We’re not thinking of the Mall of
America outside of Minneapolis, which contains an
amusement park; it charges for the rides, but the
shopping is still free. We’re referring to the Gilroy
Garlic Festival in California, the
Minnesota Renaissance Festival,
the Kitchener-Waterloo Oktoberfest
in Ontario, Canada, and other sea-
sonal festivals that are really outdoor
shopping malls and do indeed charge
admission. Consumers judge them
worth the fees because the festival op-
erators script distinctive experiences
around enticing themes, as well as stage activities
that captivate customers before, after, and while
they shop. With nearly every customer leaving
with at least one bag of merchandise, these festival
experiences clearly capture shopping dollars that
otherwise would be spent at traditional malls and
retail outlets.

The business equivalent of a shopping mall is a
trade show – a place for finding, learning about, and,
if a need is met, purchasing exhibitors’ offerings.
Trade-show operators already charge admission to
the experiences they create; individual business-to-

business companies will need to do the same, es-
sentially charging customers to sell to them. Dia-
mond Technology Partners for instance, stages the
Diamond Exchange, a series of forums that help
members explore the digital future. Current and
potential clients pay tens of thousands of dollars
annually to attend because what they gain – fresh
insights, self-discovery, and engaging interactions –
is worth it. No one minds that in staging the event,
Diamond greatly improves its chances of selling
follow-up consulting work.

The Characteristics of Experiences
Before a company can charge admission, it must de-
sign an experience that customers judge to be worth
the price. Excellent design, marketing, and delivery
will be every bit as crucial for experiences as they
are for goods and services. Ingenuity and innovation
will always precede growth in revenue. Yet experi-
ences, like goods and services, have their own dis-
tinct qualities and characteristics and present their
own design challenges.

One way to think about experiences is across two
dimensions. The first corresponds to customer par-
ticipation. At one end of the spectrum lies passive
participation, in which customers don’t affect the
performance at all. Such participants include sym-
phony-goers, for example, who experience the
event as observers or listeners. At the other end of
the spectrum lies active participation, in which
customers play key roles in creating the perfor-
mance or event that yields the experience. These
participants include skiers. But even people who

Some companies will eventually
be like trade shows, charging

customers to sell to them.
turn out to watch a ski race are not completely pas-
sive participants; simply by being there, they con-
tribute to the visual and aural event that others
experience.

The second dimension of experience describes
the connection, or environmental relationship,
that unites customers with the event or perfor-
mance. At one end of the connection spectrum lies
absorption, at the other end, immersion. People
viewing the Kentucky Derby from the grandstand
can absorb the event taking place beneath and in
front of them; meanwhile, people standing in the

harvard business review July–August 1998 101

welcome to the experience economy

infield are immersed in the sights, sounds, and
smells that surround them. Furiously scribbling
notes while listening to a physics lecture is more
absorbing than reading a textbook; seeing a film at
the theater with an audience, large screen, and
stereophonic sound is more immersing than watch-
ing the same film on video at home.

We can sort experiences into four broad cate-
gories according to where they fall along the spectra
of the two dimensions. (See the exhibit “The Four
Realms of an Experience.”) The kinds of experi-
ences most people think of as entertainment –
watching television, attending a concert – tend to
be those in which customers participate more pas-
sively than actively; their connection with the
event is more likely one of absorption than of im-
mersion. Educational events – attending a class,
taking a ski lesson – tend to involve more active
participation, but students (customers, if you will)
are still more outside the event than immersed in
the action. Escapist experiences can teach just as
well as educational events can, or amuse just as well
as entertainment, but they involve greater customer
immersion. Acting in a play, playing in an orches-
tra, or descending the Grand Canyon involve both
active participation and immersion in the experi-
ence. If you minimize the customers’ active partici-
pation, however, an escapist event becomes an ex-
perience of the fourth kind – the esthetic. Here
customers or participants are immersed in an activ-

ity or environment, but they them-
selves have little or no effect on it –
like a tourist who merely views the
Grand Canyon from its rim or like a
visitor to an art gallery.

Generally, we find that the richest
experiences – such as going to Disney
World or gambling in a Las Vegas
casino – encompass aspects of all
four realms, forming a “sweet spot”
around the area where the spectra
meet. But still, the universe of possi-
ble experiences is vast. Eventually,
the most significant question man-
agers can ask themselves is “What
specific experience will my company
offer?” That experience will come to
define their business.

Experiences, like goods and ser-
vices, have to meet a customer need;
they have to work; and they have to
be deliverable. Just as goods and ser-
vices result from an iterative process
of research, design, and development,
experiences derive from an iterative

process of exploration, scripting, and staging – capa-
bilities that aspiring experience merchants will
need to master.

Designing Memorable Experiences
We expect that experience design will become as
much a business art as product design and process
design are today. Indeed, design principles are al-
ready apparent from the practices of and results
obtained by companies that have (or nearly have)
advanced into the experience economy. We have
identified five key experience-design principles.

Theme the experience. Just hear the name of any
“eatertainment” restaurant – Hard Rock Cafe,
Planet Hollywood, or the Rainforest Cafe, to name
a few – and you instantly know what to expect
when you enter the establishment. The proprietors
have taken the first, crucial step in staging an expe-
rience by envisioning a well-defined theme. One
poorly conceived, on the other hand, gives cus-
tomers nothing around which to organize the im-
pressions they encounter, and the experience yields
no lasting memory. An incoherent theme is like
Gertrude Stein’s Oakland: “There is no there there.”
Retailers often offend the principle. They talk of
“the shopping experience” but fail to create a
theme that ties the disparate merchandising pre-
sentations together into a staged experience.
Home-appliance and electronics retailers in partic-

The Four Realms of an Experience

Absorption

Passive Active
participation participation

Educational Entertainment

Esthetic Escapist

Immersion

harvard business review July–August 1998 102

welcome to the experience economy

ular show little thematic imagination. Row upon
row of washers and dryers and wall after wall of re-
frigerators accentuate the sameness of different
companies’ stores. Shouldn’t there be something
distinctive about an establishment called Circuit
City, for example?

Consider the Forum Shops in Las Vegas, a mall
that displays its distinctive theme – an ancient
Roman marketplace – in every detail. The Simon
DeBartolo Group, which developed
the mall, fulfills this motif through
a panoply of architectural effects. To create the desired impression,
These include marble floors, stark
white pillars, “outdoor” cafés, living companies must provide cues that
trees, flowing fountains – and even a
painted blue sky with fluffy white afÞrm the nature of the experience.
clouds that yield regularly to simulat-
ed storms, complete with lightning
and thunder. Every mall entrance and every store-
front is an elaborate Roman re-creation. Every hour
inside the main entrance, statues of Caesar and
other Roman luminaries come to life and speak.
“Hail, Caesar!” is a frequent cry, and Roman centu-
rions periodically march through on their way to
the adjacent Caesar’s Palace casino. The Roman
theme even extends into some of the shops. A jew-
elry store’s interior, for instance, features scrolls,
tablets, Roman numerals, and gold draperies. The
theme implies opulence, and the mall’s 1997 sales –
more than $1,000 per square foot, compared with
a typical mall’s sales of less than $300 – suggest that
the experience works.

An effective theme is concise and compelling. It
is not a corporate mission statement or a marketing
tag line. It needn’t be publicly articulated in writ-
ing. But the theme must drive all the design ele-
ments and staged events of the experience toward
a unified story line that wholly captivates the cus-
tomer. Educational Discoveries and Professional
Training International of Orem, Utah, stage a day-
long course on basic accounting skills to nonfinan-
cial managers. Their exquisitely simple theme –
running a lemonade stand – turns learning into an
experience. Students use real lemons and lemon-
ade, music, balloons, and a good deal of ballyhoo
while they create a corporate financial statement.
The theme unifies the experience in the students’
minds and helps make the learning memorable.

Harmonize impressions with positive cues.
While the theme forms the foundation, the experi-
ence must be rendered with indelible impressions.
Impressions are the “takeaways” of the experience;
they fulfill the theme. To create the desired impres-
sions, companies must introduce cues that affirm
the nature of the experience to the guest. Each cue

must support the theme, and none should be incon-
sistent with it.

George Harrop, founder of Barista Brava, a fran-
chised chain of coffee bars based in Washington,
D.C., developed the company’s theme of “the mar-
riage of Old-World Italian espresso bars with fast-
paced American living.” The interior decor sup-
ports the Old World theme, and the carefully
designed pattern of the floor tiles and counters en-

courages customers to line up without the usual
signage or ropes that would detract from that
theme. The impressions convey quick service in a
soothing setting. Furthermore, Harrop encourages
baristas to remember faces so that regular cus-
tomers are handed their usual order without even
having to ask.

Even the smallest cue can aid the creation of a
unique experience. When a restaurant host says,
“Your table is ready,” no particular cue is given. But
when a Rainforest Cafe host declares, “Your adven-
ture is about to begin,” it sets the stage for some-
thing special.

It’s the cues that make the impressions that cre-
ate the experience in the customer’s mind. An ex-
perience can be unpleasant merely because some
architectural feature has been overlooked, under-
appreciated, or uncoordinated. Unplanned or incon-
sistent visual and aural cues can leave a customer
confused or lost. Have you ever been unsure how to
find your hotel room, even after the front-desk staff
provided detailed directions? Better, clearer cues
along the way would have enhanced your experi-
ence. Standard Parking of Chicago decorates each
floor of its O’Hare Airport garage with icons of dif-
ferent Chicago sports franchises – the Bulls on one
floor, the White Sox on another, and so forth. And
each level has its own signature song wafting
through it. “You never forget where you parked,”
one Chicago resident remarked, which is precisely
the experience a traveler wants after returning from
a week of travel.

Eliminate negative cues. Ensuring the integrity
of the customer experience requires more than the
layering on of positive cues. Experience stagers also
must eliminate anything that diminishes, contra-
dicts, or distracts from the theme. Most constructed

harvard business review July–August 1998 103

welcome to the experience economy

spaces – malls, offices, buildings, or airplanes – are
littered with meaningless or trivial messages.
While customers sometimes do need instructions,
too often service providers choose an inappropriate
medium or message form. For example, trash bins
at fast-food facilities typically display a “Thank
You” sign. True, it’s a cue to customers to bus their
own trays, but it also says, “No service here,” a
negative reminder. Experience stagers might,
instead, turn the trash bin into a talking, garbage-
eating character that announces its gratitude when

If airlines truly sold experiences,
more passengers would actually
shop in the seat-pocket catalogs
for mementos of their ßight.

the lid swings open. Customers get the same mes-
sage but without the negative cue, and self-busing
becomes a positive part of the eating experience.

The easiest way to turn a service into an experi-
ence is to provide poor service – thus creating a
memorable encounter of the unpleasant kind.
“Overservicing” in the name of customer intimacy
can also ruin an experience. Airline pilots interrupt
customers who are reading, talking, or napping to
announce, “Toledo is off to the right side of the air-
craft.” At hotels, front-desk personnel interrupt
face-to-face conversations with guests to field tele-
phone calls. In the guestrooms, service reminders
clutter end tables, dressers, and desktops. (Hide
them away and housekeeping will replace these an-
noyances the next morning.) Eliminating negative
cues – by transmitting pilots’ offhand announce-
ments through headsets instead of speakers, by as-
signing off-stage personnel to answer phones, and
by placing guest information on an interactive tele-
vision channel – creates a more pleasurable customer
experience.

Mix in memorabilia. Certain goods have always
been purchased primarily for the memories they
convey. Vacationers buy postcards to evoke a trea-
sured sight, golfers purchase a shirt or cap with an
embroidered logo to recall a course or round, and
teenagers obtain T-shirts to remember a rock con-
cert. They purchase such memorabilia as a physical
reminder of an experience.

People already spend tens of billions of dollars
every year on memorabilia. These goods generally
sell at price points far above those commanded by

similar items that don’t represent an experience.
A Rolling Stones concert-goer, for example, will
pay a premium for an official T-shirt emblazoned
with the date and city of the concert. That’s because
the price points are a function less of the cost of goods
than of the value the buyer attaches to remember-
ing the experience.

If service businesses like airlines, banks, grocery
stores, and insurance companies find no demand
for memorabilia, it’s because they do not stage en-
gaging experiences. But if these businesses offered

themed experiences layered with pos-
itive cues and devoid of negative cues,
their guests would want and would
pay for memorabilia to commemorate
their experiences. (If guests didn’t
want to, it probably would mean the
experience wasn’t great.) The special
agents of the Geek Squad, for exam-
ple, stage such a distinctive computer-
repair experience that customers buy
T-shirts and lapel pins from the com-

pany’s Web site. If airlines truly were in the experi-
ence-staging business, more passengers would
actually shop in those seat-pocket catalogs for ap-
propriate mementos. Likewise, mortgage loans
would inspire household keepsakes; grocery check-
out lanes would stock souvenirs in lieu of nickel-
and-dime impulse items; and perhaps even insur-
ance policy certificates would be considered suitable
for framing.

Engage all five senses. The sensory stimulants
that accompany an experience should support and
enhance its theme. The more senses an experience
engages, the more effective and memorable it can
be. Smart shoeshine operators augment the smell of
polish with crisp snaps of the cloth, scents and
sounds that don’t make the shoes any shinier but do
make the experience more engaging. Savvy hair
stylists shampoo and apply lotions not simply be-
cause the styling requires it but because they add
more tactile sensations to the customer experience.
Similarly, grocery stores pipe bakery smells into
the aisles, and some use light and sound to simulate
thunderstorms when misting their produce.

The mist at the Rainforest Cafe appeals serially
to all five senses. It is first apparent as a sound:
Sss-sss-zzz. Then you see the mist rising from the
rocks and feel it soft and cool against your skin.
Finally, you smell its tropical essence, and you taste
(or imagine that you do) its freshness. What you
can’t be is unaffected by the mist.

Some cues heighten an experience through a sin-
gle sense affected through striking simplicity. The
Cleveland Bicentennial Commission spent $4 mil-

harvard business review July–August 1998 104

welcome to the experience economy

lion to illuminate eight automobile and railroad
bridges over the Cuyahoga River near a nightspot
area called the Flats. No one pays a toll to view or
even to cross these illuminated bridges, but the dra-
matically lighted structures are a prop that city
managers hope will help attract tourist dollars by
making a trip to downtown Cleveland a more mem-
orable nighttime experience.

Not all sensations are good ones, and some com-
binations don’t work. Bookstore designers have dis-
covered that the aroma and taste of coffee go well
with a freshly cracked book. But Duds n’ Suds went
bust attempting to combine a bar and a coin-oper-
ated laundromat. The smells of phosphates and
hops, apparently, aren’t mutually complementary.

Entering the Experience Economy
Using these five design principles, of course, is no
guarantee of success; no one has repealed the laws
of supply and demand. Companies that fail to pro-
vide consistently engaging experiences, overprice
their experiences relative to the value perceived, or
overbuild their capacity to stage them will of
course see pressure on demand, pricing, or both.
One stalwart of the children’s birthday-party cir-
cuit, Discovery Zone, has had a rough few years
because of inconsistent experience staging, poorly
maintained games, and little consideration of the
experience received by adults, who are, after all,

paying for the event. More recently, the Rainforest
Cafe and Planet Hollywood have encountered trou-
ble because they have failed to refresh their experi-
ences. Guests find nothing different from one visit
to the next. Disney, on the other hand, avoids stale-
ness by frequently adding new attractions and even
whole parks such as the Animal Kingdom, which
opened in the spring of 1998.

As the experience economy unfolds, more than a
few experience stagers will exit the business. It’s
hard to imagine, for example, that every one of the
scores of theme-based restaurants operating today
will last into the millennium. Recall that once
there were more than 100 automakers in eastern
Michigan and more than 40 cereal makers in west-
ern Michigan. Now only the Big Three automakers
in Detroit and the Kellogg Company in Battle
Creek remain. The growth of the industrial econ-
omy and the service economy came with the prolif-
eration of offerings – goods and services that didn’t
exist before imaginative designers and marketers
invented and developed them. That’s also how the
experience economy will grow: through the “gales
of creative destruction,” as the economist Joseph
Schumpeter termed it – that is, business innova-
tion, which threatens to render irrelevant those
who relegate themselves to the diminishing world
of goods and services.

Reprint 98407 To place an order, call 1-800-988-0886.

harvard business review July–August 1998 105

Harvard Business Review
CASE STUDIES AND HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE
ARTICLE REPRINTS

United States and Canada
Many readers have asked for an easy way
to order case studies and article reprints or to
obtain permission to copy. In response, we
have established a Customer Service Team
to grant permission, send rush copies in paper
form, deliver files in Acrobat (PDF) format
electronically (Harvard Business Review
articles only), or customize collections.

Please contact the Customer Service Team:

Phone: 617-496-1449
United States and Canada: 800-668-6780
(8 A.M. – 6 P.M. weekdays, voice mail
after hours)
Fax: 617-496-1029 (24 hours, 7 days a week)
E-mail: custserv@hbsp.harvard.edu
(24 hours, 7 days a week)
Web Site: http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu

Prices (minimum order, $10):

Harvard Business Review Reprints
(Discounts apply to multiple copies of the
same article.)

1–9 copies $5 each
10–99 $4
100–499 $3.50
Electronic $3.50 each

Harvard Business School Case Studies
$5 each

For quantity estimates or quotes on
customized products, call
Frank Tamoshunas at 617-495-6198.
Fax: 617-496-8866

PERMISSIONS

For information on permission to quote
or translate Harvard Business School
Publishing material, contact:

Customer Service Department
Harvard Business School

Publishing Corporation
60 Harvard Way
Boston, MA 02163

Phone: 617-496-1449
United States and Canada: 800-668-6780
Fax: 617-495-6985
E-mail: custserv@hbsp.harvard.edu

Phone: 800-274-3214
Rates per year: United States, $85;
Canada, U.S.$95

International and Mexico
Phone: 44-1858-435324
Fax: 44-1858-468969
Rates per year: international, U.S.$145;
Mexico, U.S.$95
Orders, inquiries, and address changes:
Harvard Business Review
Tower House, Sovereign Park
Lathkill Street, Market Harborough
Leicestershire le16 9ef
England

International customer service E-mail
address: harvard@subscription.co.uk

Payments accepted: Visa, MasterCard,
American Express; checks at current
exchange rate payable to
Harvard Business Review.
Bills and other receipts may be issued.

CATALOGS

Harvard Business School Publishing
Media Catalog
This 32-page, full-color catalog features more
than 40 management development video and
interactive CD-ROM programs.

Harvard Business School Press
This latest full-color catalog features books
for the fast-paced business world where you
live and work.

Harvard Business School Publishing
Catalog of Best-Selling Teaching Materials
This collection of teaching materials
contains those items most requested by
our customers.

Harvard Business School Publishing
Catalog of New Teaching Materials
Designed for individuals looking for the
latest materials in case method teaching.

mailto:harvard@subscription.co.uk

mailto:custserv@hbsp.harvard.edu

http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu

mailto:custserv@hbsp.harvard.edu

PSYCHOLOGY
THE SCIENCE OF
SENSORY MARKETING
New research suggests that many industries are missing
opportunities to connect with customers’ senses.

For two decades marketers in a variety of industries have been building ex-pertise in reaching consumers through
the five senses—learning to deploy cues, such
as the sting from a swig of mouthwash and
the scritch-scratch sound of a Sharpie pen,
that can intensify perceptions of brands. The
past year has brought a rush of interest in the
subject among academics. New research sug-
gests that we’re about to enter an era in which
many more consumer products companies
will take advantage of sense-based marketing.

Much of the new research centers on
“embodied cognition”—the idea that without
our conscious awareness, our bodily sensa-
tions help determine the decisions we make.
For example, people who had briefly held a
warm beverage were more likely than peo-
ple who had held a cold one to think that a
stranger was friendly; this was demonstrated
in an experiment by Lawrence E. Williams, of
the University of Colorado at Boulder, and
John A. Bargh, of Yale. And warm ambient
temperatures prompted people to conform

of our brains. The author of the 2013 book
Customer Sense: How the 5 Senses Influence
Buying Behavior, Krishna got into the field
bec ause she was fasc inated by certain
questions: Why does wine taste better in
a wine glass than in a water glass? Why is
an ad showing a piece of cake more engag-
ing when the fork is placed to the right of
the cake? Why does the smell of cinnamon
make a heating pad seem to work better?
Krishna realized that the senses amplify
one another when they are congruent in
some way. Bec ause cinnamon suggests
warmth, it can enhance a heating pad’s ap-
peal and apparent effectiveness. Such influ-
ences are subtle—and that’s exactly why they
are so powerful. Consumers don’t perceive
them as marketing messages and therefore
don’t react with the usual resistance to ads
and other promotions.

Thinking about sensory effects is an
established practice in some consumer in-
dustries, such as food, cosmetics, and hos-
pitality. For example, Hershey’s has long
been aware that the tactile pleasure people
get from unwrapping the foil around a Kiss
transforms an ordinary piece of chocolate
into a special experience. But many com-
panies are taking their thinking much fur-
ther. Consider this campaign by Dunkin’
Donuts in South Korea: When a company
jingle played on municipal buses, an atom-
izer released a coffee aroma. The campaign
increased visits to Dunkin’ Donuts outlets
near bus stops by 16% and sales at those
outlets by 29%. Another example is Olay
Regenerist thermal facial products, which
are engineered to generate heat upon appli-
cation (although heat isn’t necessary to their
functioning) to signal that they are working.

Automakers have paid close attention to
the senses for years: Designers work hard to
optimize the feel of knobs, the solid noise
of a door shutting, and the distinctive new-
car smell. Recently they have turned to ad-
vanced technologies. For instance, in its 2014
M5 model, BMW mikes and amps the engine
sounds through the car speakers, even when
the audio system is turned off. The idea is to
enhance the car’s sporty feel.

to a crowd, a finding of researchers led by
Xun (Irene) Huang, of Sun Yat-sen University
(see the exhibit below).

Marketing researchers are “starting to
realize how powerful the responses to non-
conscious stimuli can be,” says S. Adam
Brasel, an associate professor of marketing
at Boston College. Work on embodied cogni-
tion has begun “blowing up on the academic
side,” he adds. At the 2014 Association for
Consumer Research’s North American con-
ference, Brasel heard more papers on sen-
sory research presented than at any previous
conference. That same year the Journal of
Consumer Psychology published a special is-
sue on embodiment and sensory perception,
with a focus on how sensory inputs can drive
consumer behavior.

Aradhna Krishna directs the Sensory
Marketing Laboratory at the University of
Michigan and is considered the foremost
expert in the field. She says that many com-
panies are just starting to recognize how
strongly the senses affect the deepest parts

WARMTH INDUCES PEOPLE TO CONFORM
Research participants in a warm room (versus a cool but not uncomfortable one)
reported feeling closer to the people around them, and they were more likely to:

say they would buy the TV
remote preferred by most
of the other participants;

match their stock price
predictions to those of
previous participants;

and bet on the “favorite”
in a hypothetical
horse race.

SOURCE “WARMTH AND CONFORMITY: THE EFFECTS OF AMBIENT TEMPERATURE ON PRODUCT PREFERENCES AND FINANCIAL
DECISIONS,” BY XUN (IRENE) HUANG, MENG ZHANG, MICHAEL K. HUI, AND ROBERT S. WYER JR.

28  Harvard Business Review March 2015

IDEA WATCH

Still, in wide swaths of consumer indus-
tries, companies remain focused solely on
visual attributes and give little thought to
other sensory effects. Product developers
and marketers need to change that, Krishna
says. Bank executives should make sure that
branch offices exude the reassuring, wealth-
suggesting aromas of wood and leather.
Manufacturers of products with embedded
motors should think about those products’
sounds—are they tinny whines or solid, low-
pitched hums? Luxury clothing manufactur-
ers doing business online should consider
what message is conveyed when goods are
shipped in bubble wrap versus high-quality
crinkly paper.

For managers looking to learn about
sensory stimuli, the new academic work
reveals striking instances of senses’ affect-
ing attitude, mood, and even memory more
profoundly than words ever could. An ex-
periment Krishna conducted with May O.
Lwin, of Singapore’s Nanyang Technological
University, and Maureen Morrin, then of
Rutgers University, is just one example. The
three found that imbuing pencils with the
unusual scent of tea tree oil dramatically
increased research subjects’ ability to re-
member the pencils’ brand and other details.
Whereas those given unscented pencils ex-
perienced a 73% decline in the information
they could recall two weeks later, subjects
given tea-tree-scented pencils experienced a
decline of only 8%.

“In the past, communications with cus-
tomers were essentially monologues—com-
panies just talked at consumers,” Krishna
says. “Then they evolved into dialogues, with
customers providing feedback. Now they’re
becoming multidimensional conversations,
with products finding their own voices and
consumers responding viscerally and sub-
consciously to them.”

Such conversations, she emphasizes,
should be at the center of product innovation
and marketing for many brands. Every con-
sumer company should be thinking about de-
sign in a holistic way, using the senses to help
create and intensify brand personalities that
consumers will cherish and remember.KY

LE
H

IL
TO

N

Tech company employees who used their firm’s social
platform to chat about leisure interests like food and sports
were less likely to be laid off, according to recent study.

“SOCIAL NETWORK EFFECTS ON PRODUCTIVITY AND JOB SECURITY:
EVIDENCE FROM THE ADOPTION OF A SOCIAL NETWORKING TOOL,” BY LYNN WU

TAKING SENSORY COMMUNICATION
TO A WHOLE NEW LEVEL”
Chuck Jones is the chief design and R&D officer at Newell Rubbermaid, a 112-year-old
maker of tools, pens, and other products. He spoke with HBR about the company’s
new emphasis on sensory marketing and design. Edited excerpts follow.

Why is Newell Rubbermaid investing in sensory
inputs? The field is evolving quickly, and our
corporate growth game plan, which focuses
broadly on design, positions us to take advantage
of the latest research. Last year we opened
a design center next to Western Michigan
University and staffed it with physiologists and
also experts in perception. Someone familiar
only with our past efforts would be stunned.
And we’ve expanded our definition of human
sciences research.

How so? Conventional marketing research
looks at opinions. We also study unconscious
behaviors and human cognitive and physical
processing to extract principles that we can
apply to Sharpie pens or high-performance
pliers, for example.

Pliers? We’re putting a lot of energy into the
heft, feel, and ergonomics of cutting pliers for
skilled trades. There’s a similar effort in packaging.

Why packaging? Many of our fine writing
instruments are given as gifts, so there’s a
ritual quality to opening the package. We
pay close attention to the “hand,” or feel,
of the material; the resistance it
presents (more is better, within
limits); the sounds it makes; and
the way the package opens, as a
series of disclosures—an unveiling
of the product, if you will. Our
thinking about packaging takes
sensory communication to
a whole new level.

THE IDEA IN PRACTICE

“

March 2015 Harvard Business Review 29

HBR.ORG

TRADE
NOT AS GLOBAL AS WE THINK
Our hyperconnected world isn’t as tightly linked
as it was during the peak of globalization, in
2007—just before the financial crisis hit. That’s
the message from the DHL Global Connectedness
Index 2014.

The index uses flows of trade, capital, people,
and information to show how entwined we
citizens of the world are. It measures those flows
along two dimensions: Depth reflects the volume
of international activity, while breadth reflects
its geographic distribution. For example, tourism
in the Bahamas scores high on depth, because
a lot of people travel there, but low on breadth,
because most come from one country, the U.S.

The index calculates the connectedness of each
nation by combining depth and breadth. It also
tracks connectedness on a worldwide level.

MANY LEADERS HAVE LOST GROUND
Fully half the 26 most-connected countries in 2013 have
become less connected since 2007—and often the declines
are steep. The financial crisis and recession caused trade flows
to plummet. Capital has been largely flat, as has the number
of people studying or working outside their home countries.
Information flows have been rising fast, but they started from
a low base; even now less than 20% of internet traffic crosses
borders, and fewer than 5% of telephone calls do.

DEPTH BUT NOT BREADTH
Worldwide, the volume of flows has rebounded since the
recession—but those gains have been offset by continued
declines in geographic distribution.

SOURCE “DHL GLOBAL CONNECTEDNESS INDEX 2014,” BY PANKAJ GHEMAWAT AND
STEVEN A. ALTMAN

1.1

1.0

0.9

2005 LEVELS=1

1.2

’06 ’07 ’08 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’132005

1.0456

Depth
1.2223

GLOBAL CONNECTEDNESS
1.0435

Breadth
0.9630

IDEA WATCH HBR.ORG

30  Harvard Business Review March 2015

THE MOST-CONNECTED COUNTRIES

CONNECTEDNESS SCORE (0–100)

89

84

83

79

78

74

71

69

64

61

77

73

70

68

62

66

59

2007

84 IRELAND

83 SINGAPORE

81 BELGIUM

80 LUXEMBOURG

78 SWITZERLAND

76 UK

DENMARK
GERMANY

72 SWEDEN

70 HONG KONG

67 HUNGARY

UAE

TAIWAN

FINLAND

FRANCE

AUSTRIA

SOUTH KOREA

THAILAND

ITALY

NORWAY

MALAYSIA

64 U.S.

68 ISRAEL

65 ICELAND

SPAIN

73
66

63

2013

69

89 NETHERLANDS

Harvard Business Review Notice of Use Restrictions, May 2009

Harvard Business Review and Harvard Business Publishing Newsletter content on
EBSCOhost is licensed for the private individual use of authorized EBSCOhost users. It is not
intended for use as assigned course material in academic institutions nor as corporate learning
or training materials in businesses. Academic licensees may not use this content in electronic
reserves, electronic course packs, persistent linking from syllabi or by any other means of
incorporating the content into course resources. Business licensees may not host this content
on learning management systems or use persistent linking or other means to incorporate the
content into learning management systems. Harvard Business Publishing will be pleased to
grant permission to make this content available through such means. For rates and permission,
contact permissions@harvardbusiness.org.

OVERVIEW ARTICLE

Circles, spirals, pyramids and cubes: why the circular economy
cannot work

Keith Ronald Skene1

Received: 30 August 2016 / Accepted: 22 May 2017 / Published online: 5 June 2017

� Springer Japan 2017

Abstract The concept of a circular economy has become a

significant school of thought in sustainable economics over

the last 10 years. This paper critically analyses the key

principles underpinning the concept of the circular econ-

omy, specifically examining the thermodynamic and eco-

logical foundations upon which these principles are

apparently rooted. We examine issues related to recycling,

biological and technical nutrients, restoration, energy use,

elimination of waste, eco-efficiency, product lifetime and

economic growth under three headings: the pyramid of

waste, short cycles and eco-inefficiency. We reflect on how

the economy of nature is based on an open system, not a

closed system, that nature operates using short cycles, not

extended lifetimes, that nature is sub-optimal, not optimal

and that nature is eco-inefficient, not eco-efficient. Find-

ings are then discussed, and we explore what we can learn

from the natural world in terms of sustainability.

Keywords Bio-participation � Closed loop economy �
Cradle-to-cradle � Sustainability � Sustainable economics �
Thermodynamics � Biomimicry � Spaceship Earth

Introduction

A circular economy: definitions and foundations

Over recent years, the concept of a circular economy has

become a significant school of thought within sustainable

economics (Murray et al. 2017). Championed by the Chi-

nese government, and integrated into its 5-year plans over

three cycles, Europe has also begun referencing it as a

major set of policies. According to the definition in the

Law to Promote Circular Economy in the People’s

Republic of China, the circular economy is the integration

of activities of reduction, reuse and recycling during pro-

duction, exchange and consumption (Shen and Qi 2012).

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines the circular

economy as an industrial system that is restorative or

regenerative by intention and design. It replaces the ‘end-

of-life’ concept with restoration, moves towards the use of

renewable energy, eliminates the use of toxic chemicals

which impair reuse and aims for the elimination of waste

through the superior design of materials, products, systems

and, within this, business models (EMF 2012). Other

authors also observe that the circular economy is not

merely a preventative approach, reducing pollution, but

also aims to repair previous damage (Cooper 1999;

Nakajima 2000).

The concept of a circular economy is an essential

component of the resource efficiency initiative of the

EU2020 strategy. The EU has written that: ‘‘In a world

with growing pressures on resources and the environment,

the EU has no choice but to go for the transition to a

resource-efficient and ultimately regenerative circular

economy’’ (EU 2012, p 1). Differences between the Chi-

nese and European interpretations of a circular economy

are discussed in Skene and Murray (2015).

Handled by Finn Tarp, University of Copenhagen, UNU-World

Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER), Denmark.

& Keith Ronald Skene
krskene@biosri.org

1 Biosphere Research Institute, 5A The Den,

Letham DD8 2PY, Angus, UK

123

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0443-3

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s11625-017-0443-3&domain=pdf

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s11625-017-0443-3&domain=pdf

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0443-3

Europe, along with nations around the world, has agreed

the 10-year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable

Consumption and Production (10YFP) at the Rio?20

Conference, emphasizing circular economy-like principles

(Tukker et al. 2008). UNEP developed its definition of the

circular economy as featuring low consumption of energy,

low emission of pollutants and high efficiency, using it as a

generic term for an industrial economy which is, by design

or intention, restorative. The aims are to ‘design out’ waste,

to return nutrients and to recycle durables, using renewable

energy to power the economy (UNEP 2006).

Ghisellini et al. (2016) observe that in China, the cir-

cular economy is promoted as a top-down national political

objective and has been installed as its overarching envi-

ronmental policy, while in the European Union, the USA

and Japan, it is a tool to design bottom-up environmental

change. However, this is changing rapidly as can be seen in

recent circular economy literature. For example, the recent

paper by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF 2015),

entitled Growth Within: A Circular Economy Vision for a

Competitive Europe, targets a political, top-down, trans-

national engagement. Proponents of the circular economy

model clearly see it as displacing current approaches, and

as the preferred suite of templates to deliver a sustainable

future.

The circular economy is viewed as a better alternative to

the dominant economic development model (Ness 2008).

The EMF has set out to sign up large multinational com-

panies to its concept of a circular economy and clearly sets

out to put the circular economy forward as the fundamental

set of economic policies at local, national and global levels

(EMF 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015). Ghisellini et al. (2016) p 2

embraces the circular economy as the transcendent

approach, stating that the ‘‘circular economy contributes

positively to reconcile all the elements, thanks to its

underlying rationale, mainly rooted in environmental and

political as well as economic and business aspects’’. Mor-

iguchi (2007) claims that the circular economy is a grand

harmonization between industrialization and its natural

limits. It is described as a business model, a system and a

mode (Wu 2005; Zhijun and Nailing 2007; EMF 2012) and

has been applied across a wide number of fields including

agriculture, design, recycling and product service systems

(Skene and Murray 2015; Murray et al. 2017). Heshmati

(2015, p 5) claims that ‘‘The circular economy presents a

unique policy strategy for avoiding resource depletion,

energy conservation, waste reduction, land management

and integrated water resources management’’.

According to Baily et al (2013), the circular economy is

built on four principles: designing products with their

entire life cycles in mind; maximizing product life cycles;

recycling materials from end-of-life products; and reusing

materials across diverse industries and value chains.

Bakker et al. (2014) and Bocken et al. (2016) further

develop these ideas.

The core foundations of the circular economy are as

follows: recycling (Shen and Qi 2012; Baily et al. 2013);

restoration (Cooper 1999; UNEP 2006; EMF 2012; EU

2012; Nakajima 2000); renewable energy use (UNEP 2006;

EMF 2012; Preston 2012); elimination of waste (UNEP

2006; Shen and Qi 2012); elimination of toxic chemicals

(EMF 2012); eco-efficiency (Schmidheiny 1992; Von

Weizsäcker et al. 1997; UNEP 2006; EU 2012); biological

nutrient return (UNEP 2006); extended product life

(Boulding 1966; Schmidheiny 1992; Stahel 1998; Preston

2012; Baily et al. 2013); and economic growth (Schmid-

heiny 1992; EMF 2012; Stahel 1998).

Origins of the circular economy

In terms of the circular economy, the concept can be seen

to have emerged from established sustainable economics

thinking, including such schools of thought as industrial

ecology (Frosch and Gallopoulos 1989; Allenby 1998),

industrial symbiosis (Babbage 1835 p 217; Ayres and

Simonis 1994; Chertow 2007), biomimicry (Merrill 1982;

Benyus 2002), Cradle-to-Cradle (McDonough and Braun-

gart 2002), eco-efficiency (Schaltegger and Sturm 1989;

Schmidheiny 1992) and waste-is-food (Babbage 1835

p 217; Andersen 2007; Sherwin 2013). Skene and Murray

(2015) trace the genealogy of current schools of sustainable

thinking, exploring the historical lineages that have paved

the way to the circular economy and similar concepts.

The waste-is-food concept lies at the heart of the cir-

cular economy and has its origins in the distant past.

Underpinning industrial ecology, cradle-to-cradle, the cir-

cular economy, the closed loop economy and many of the

other major schools of modern thinking, waste-is-food can

be traced back to the beginnings of human civilization.

Some of the oldest urban archaeological evidence of

resource recovery comes from the late Stone Age city of

Çatal Hüyük, in central Turkey. Bones left over from food

were used in the manufacture of awls, punches, knives,

scrapers, ladles, spoons, bows, belt hooks, pins and cos-

metic sticks (Mellaart 1967).

As early as 1848, R.W. Hofmann, the first President of

the Royal Society of Chemistry, stated ‘‘In an ideal

chemical factory there is, strictly speaking, no waste but

only products. The better a real factory makes use of its

waste, the closer it gets to its ideal, the bigger is the profit’’

(in Lancaster 2002, p 10). The Danish writer, Peter Lund

Simmonds observed that: ‘‘one of the greatest benefits that

Science can confer on man is the rendering useful those

substances which being the refuse of manufactures are

either got rid of at great expense, or when allowed to

decompose produce disease and death’’ (Simmonds 1862,

480 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

p 10). Karl Marx went further, claiming that industrial

waste recovery was ‘‘the second great branch of economies

in the conditions of production’’, the first being economies

of scale (Marx 1909, p 120–121).

Greyson (2007) claims that Kenneth Boulding was the

originator of the circular economy concept. Boulding

(1966, p 7–8) wrote: ‘‘Man must find his place in a cyclical

ecological system which is capable of continuous repro-

duction of material form even though it cannot escape

having inputs of energy’’. The term circular economy was

first used in the Western literature in 1980s (Pearce and

Turner 1990) to describe a closed system of economy–

environment interactions. More bizarrely, in a brazenly

revisionist swoop, Baily et al. (2013, p 10) accredit the

McKinsey Global Institute for coining the term, stating

‘‘circular economy is another term coined by the McKinsey

Global Institute’’. There is no evidence of this elsewhere in

the literature.

Recent literature has provided analysis of the application

of circular economy thinking to agriculture (Song et al.

2014), design (Bakker et al. 2014), recycling (Prendeville

et al. 2014; Sevignè-Itoiz et al. 2014) supply chain (Zhu

et al. 2010), business models (Bocken et al. 2016) and

product service systems (Tukker 2013). For a detailed

review of the development of the concept of the circular

economy, Hill (2015) and Ghisellini et al. (2016) should be

referenced.

This paper critically analyses the key principles under-

pinning the concept of the circular economy, specifically

examining the thermodynamic and ecological foundations

upon which these principles are apparently rooted. We

examine issues related to recycling, biological and tech-

nical nutrients, restoration, energy use, elimination of

waste, eco-efficiency, product lifetime and economic

growth under three headings: the pyramid of waste, short

cycles and eco-inefficiency. Findings are then discussed,

and we explore what we can learn from the natural world in

terms of sustainability. Sustainability is defined as the

maintenance of capital, be that economic, social or envi-

ronmental capital. Strong sustainability states that natural

capital must be protected at all costs and cannot be

replaced with human-made capital. Weak sustainability

seeks to maintain total capital from generation to genera-

tion, through substitution. Thus, if natural capital declines,

provided that human-made capital increases by the same

amount, then total capital will be maintained (Skene and

Mur

ray 2015).

Not only does this paper question the biological basis

claimed for the principles underpinning the circular econ-

omy, but, further, it explores whether or not these princi-

ples are relevant to meeting the challenges facing the world

at present.

Issues with the circular economy

The pyramid of waste

The Waste Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parlia-

ment (EC 2008) states that ‘‘waste means any substance or

object which the holder discards or intends or is required to

discard’’. In the National Standard of the Russian Federa-

tion, waste is defined as ‘‘residues of products or comple-

mentary products formed during or after certain activities

and are not used in direct connection with this activity’’

(GOST R 53691-2009). Moniruzzaman et al. (2011) define

waste as the unwanted matter coming from the production

and consumption of materials by human and animal

activities. Ezeah (2010) believes that any contemporary

definition of waste is dependent on the nature and source of

the waste, including its characteristics and/or the potential

to cause harm either to humans or the environment.

However, these definitions of waste miss the most sig-

nificant form of waste, which in reality dominates both

economic and biological arenas, that of energetic waste.

Energetic waste such as heat waste or eutrophication is

here defined as any increase in energy flow through the

Earth system as a result of human activity. Energetic waste

is a particularly serious issue, leading to many devastating

consequences for the biosphere, including de-oxygenation

of water bodies. It is often ignored because energy is nei-

ther a substance nor an object, as referenced in most waste

definitions. Ultimately, it is energy that forms the currency

of life and business, and the flow of energy through both

human and natural economics shapes and directs both

spheres (Georgescu-Roegan 1971). Hence ignoring ener-

getic waste is a strategy of doubtful value. Energetic waste

fundamentally underpins the damage potential of human

activity. While human energy use has led to a significant

elevation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it is not

merely the use of energy by humans that creates issues, but

rather the attempts by humans to increase energy flow

through agricultural ecosystems, and the release of exces-

sive fertilizer waste into natural ecosystems. Other ener-

getic waste includes heat energy released in open loop

cooling of thermonuclear power plants, where thermal

plumes decrease the concentrations of dissolved oxygen in

the receiving water and can cause significant changes to the

ecosystems involved, decreasing biodiversity (McDonald

et al. 2012; Madden et al. 2013). Thus, material that can be

recycled is not without cost, since recycling involves huge

associated energy waste. Embodied energy within recy-

cling processes, often ignored operationally within the

circular economy, with the exception of a few authors (e.g.

Allwood et al. 2012; Allwood 2014), is a major waste

issue.

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 481

123

The circular economy is based on the idea of a closed

loop, where materials and energy cycle through the system,

rather than a linear economy, where waste is continually

generated, creating problems of waste management and

resource depletion. This is thought to reflect how the nat-

ural world operates. However, in reality, nature’s economy

does not operate like this. Economists continue to use

antiquated ecological theory and imaginary constructs of

the planet far removed from real science (see Skene and

Murray 2015, for a detailed exegesis on how antiquated

science suffuses modern sustainability thinking). Modern

ecological research recognizes significantly different

underlying principles, including the fact that the Earth is an

open system, not a closed system, that the biosphere is best

understood using an emergent, complex system approach

rather than adopting a reductionist approach, that function

rather than form is central to any understanding of bio-

sphere resilience and recovery, and that dynamic equilib-

rium or non-equilibrium models are preferred to a static

equilibrium approach. While much of the work on the

circular economy has emphasized a ‘Homo habilis’

approach, where we attempt to ‘‘fix’’ nature by interven-

tion, other workers point to the importance of recognizing

systems theory and concentrating on real-time, multi-di-

mensional monitoring, aimed at discovering what impact

any change in human behaviour will have on the system

(e.g. Moriguchi 2007; Rodrigues et al. 2016).

We can refer to this reliance on a static equilibrium

model as the Garden of Eden fantasy. In this imaginary

world, which is a closed system, the equilibrium can be

restored by putting the pieces back in place through

ecosystem restoration. Everything circulates eternally and

balance is maintained as a climax community (Marsh

1965). Perpetual motion exists, and cycles continue, with

no waste, a truly circular economy. Many circular economy

protagonists emphasize the concept of zero waste as a

central plank to the overall concept (e.g. UNEP 2006; EMF

2012; Preston 2012).

What better example for a human economy? Tight

cycling, self-healing, waste-free, continually growing—an

economist’s paradise and an Enlightenment dream.

Spaceship Earth (Boulding 1966) became the dominant

metaphor. However, modern ecology recognizes that

replacing forms will not restore the equilibrium. Rather,

nature is dynamic and emergent, meaning that because of

the countless interactions and pervading laws of thermo-

dynamics, we cannot hope to restore an equilibrium state,

even if it was warranted. Nature continuously changes,

with forms replacing other forms constantly.

Although a few authors (e.g. Allwood et al. 2012; All-

wood 2014) reference flow of materials through the econ-

omy, while Cooper (2005) emphasizes the sufficiency of

resources, at a fundamental level, a circle is a circle, zero

waste means zero waste and a closed loop is a closed loop.

Thus, the terminology associated with the circular econ-

omy is clearly misrepresentative, re-enforcing the idea that

nature can somehow inform a revolution in sustainable

economics, because it is a closed, zero waste, circular

system.

Yet nothing could be further from the truth. Referencing

nature in any attempt to justify zero waste, eco-efficiency,

optimization or circularity is, at best, misleading. Further-

more, sufficiency of resources cannot be considered as an

isolated phenomenon, but must be assessed alongside

energy flows. Energy flow poses the greatest threat to the

planet in terms of sustainability (via eutrophication, cli-

mate destabilization and food web disruption). Without the

flow of energy through the planet continuously, life would

cease to exist, no matter if the material all remained on the

planet. This is because natural recycling depends on

energy-expensive processes, linked to reduction and oxi-

dation processes. Without this energy, the biological cycles

break down.

Earth is not a closed system nor is it a spaceship. Earth is

an open system (Brillouin 1949). Our universe is a closed

system, but all that lies within the universe must obey the

second law of thermodynamics, which states that disorder

(or molecular randomness) will increase within the closed

system up to the point of maximum disorder and a tem-

perature of absolute zero (Clausius 1867). The only reason

we have increasing complexity on Earth at present is

because of the increasing disorder in the Sun, which is

slowly consuming itself, releasing vast amounts of radia-

tion as it does so. Some of this radiation impacts the Earth,

and a small fraction of this is converted into chemical

energy. A tiny amount of radiation is also emitted from the

core of the Earth which is still cooling following its for-

mation and is released through hydrothermal vents and

volcanic activity. However, any constructive activity on

Earth always produces disorder. Indeed, in thermodynamic

terms, complexity represents a means of producing disor-

der. Whether it is growth or maintenance, free energy is

converted to waste.

Hence, the Earth as a whole is generating disorder, or

waste, in accordance with the second law. This applies to

both biological and technical cycles (Ulanowicz 1997;

Kleidon and Lorenz 2004; Kleidon et al. 2010; Martyushev

and Seleznev 2013). Lovelock (1965, p 568) observed that

‘‘Life is one member of the class of phenomena which are

open or continuous reaction systems able to decrease their

entropy at the expense of substances or energy taken in

from the environment and subsequently rejected in a

degraded form’’. As the biosphere becomes more complex,

more energy is required and more waste is produced.

Toussaint and Schneider (1998, p 3) state that ‘‘As

biosystems grow and develop, they should increase their

482 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

total dissipation [waste production]’’. Thus, complexity is

an expected outcome of the second law, provided that

adequate free energy is available (e.g. a neighbouring star).

If energy is not supplied continuously from the Sun, then

complexity is lost. Sixty-five million years ago, through a

combination of dust ejected into the atmosphere from a

colliding comet and a huge volcanic eruption (the Deccan

Plains), sunlight was blocked from the Earth in what is

called an impact winter (Retallack 1996; Yang and Ahrens

1998). The Earth was starved of free energy, with calcu-

lations indicating that solar transmission was reduced to

10–20% of normal for a period of 8–13 years, producing a

decade of freezing and near-freezing temperatures (Pope

et al. 1994).

Thus, Earth is not a closed system or an air-tight

spaceship, as imagined by Boulding (1966). Instead it is an

open system, reliant on a huge river of energy flowing

through it. Cut off the energy supply and the whole thing

collapses. If we were to base our economy on a natural

model, we would have to imagine billions of tons of gold

continually being sent down to Earth from some philan-

thropic alien every day. Nature is a dependent economy,

hooked on sunlight. The only way to reduce waste pro-

duction is by reducing complexity (de Man and Friege

2016). Easily said, but the reality of this would be extre-

mely unpleasant for the human race. A zero waste econ-

omy would require zero complexity.

Some advocates of the circular economy promote the

concept of holonic distribution (Christensen 1994; Lin and

Solberg 1994; Gwamuri et al. 2014), defined as ‘‘a new

pattern of interfirm relationships evolving network-wide

integration by creating different forms of inter-entity pro-

cesses’’ (Kühnle 2010, p 2). Advocates of distributed

manufacturing promise potential benefits over centralized

manufacturing, including reduction in production waste,

maximization of material use efficiency and a contribution

to rural community wealth creation in the developing world

(Gwamuri et al. 2014).

The atom economy, as developed in the green chemistry

approach (Anastas and Warner 1998), focuses on recycling

individual elements, but given the complexity of many

alloys and polymers utilized in manufacturing, the ener-

getic costs, the associated chemistry and the diverse geo-

economic contexts within which the waste material is

generated, this is at present a difficult concept to follow.

In terms of recycling, another central theme in the cir-

cular economy, materials are degraded during this process

and require energy to restore them (e.g. through the oxi-

dation/reduction cycle). But crucially, recycling creates yet

more waste. Wear and tear are unavoidable consequences

of use within an entropic universe. Prevention of degra-

dation requires less recyclable materials, which means that

greater energetic cost is incurred in recycling. Thus,

maintenance is required just to stand still. This is an

important point. For an economy to grow [and remember,

thermodynamics applies equally to human economic

activity as it does to cosmic events (Georgescu-Roegan

1971)] not only must energy be degraded to achieve the

growth, but energy must also be degraded to maintain all of

the previous growth. Over time, energy use continues to

rise since the estate requiring maintenance must increase if

growth [0. Even at zero growth or de-growth, a large
amount of estate previously grown still requires

maintenance.

Meadows et al. (1992) emphasize that a sustainable

society must emphasize sufficiency. Daly (1996) pointed to

a need to move to a steady-state economy, but emphasized

that this could not represent a circular economy because of

thermodynamic considerations (Daly 1977). Princen (2005)

also advocates sufficiency. Lamberton (2005, p 53) high-

lights the problem that exists between a growth-based

economic model and the need to reduce material use,

writing: ‘‘the sustainable sufficiency concept reinforces the

view that neoclassical economic principles provide a bar-

rier to achieving the social and ecological objectives con-

tained within contemporary interpretations of sustainable

development.’’ While the circular economy attempts to de-

materialize growth, it also relies on an economic model

that has been set out to maintain the neoclassical economic

principles so beloved of the dominant advocates of glob-

alization, of which growth is an inherent necessity (Skene

and Murray 2015).

Food pyramids are a clear demonstration that waste

dominates the biosphere. Figure 1 represents the difference

between the natural world and the circular economic

interpretation. In nature, significant inefficiency exists,

wherein 90% of energy is lost at each trophic level,

meaning that a small number of top consumers, such as

humans, require major primary and secondary productivity

to sustain them. Hence, the energy flow through ecosys-

tems diminishes with each level of consumption, with

waste energy far outweighing useful energy at each stage.

Thus, the tropic pyramid tapers sharply. The Garden of

Eden fantasy, as employed by the circular economy, por-

trays nature as a perfect cube, where no waste occurs. This

is simply incorrect. Furthermore, these pyramids are actu-

ally inverted, with humans at the bottom. We rely on the

trickle-down effect, with energy passing from the Sun to

photosynthetic organisms and then through numerous ani-

mals before reaching us. This makes us extremely vul-

nerable to the functioning biosphere above us, whose very

operation is threatened by our activities.

Also, it does not matter whether the energy is green,

blue or black, disorder will still increase, requiring further

energy. Green energy will not deliver any form of solution.

The only way forward is to reduce energy expenditure and

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 483

123

this can only be achieved through de-growth. This is why

we reach asymptotes, or ceilings in nature, be it in popu-

lation size, organismal development, ecological succession

or evolutionary diversification (Skene 2013). There is a

maximum amount of disorder that can be produced at any

level of organization, beyond which the system would

collapse. This is called the maximum entropy production

principle (MEPP), where ‘‘non-equilibrium thermodynamic

systems are organized in steady state such that the rate of

entropy production is maximized’’ (Kleidon et al. 2010,

p 1298). Unless an asymptote is recognized and put in

place early enough, production of disorder will not only

increase the need for more free energy for maintenance, but

the disorder will eventually destabilize the entire system.

This can be seen in a lake where fertilizers applied in

excess to surrounding agricultural fields drain into the

water body. Fertilizers function by increasing productivity

of crops, allowing more solar energy to be converted into

chemical energy (sugar). However, in the lake, the fertil-

izers have the same effect, massively increasing primary

productivity in algae. When the algae die, increasingly

large bacterial populations break them down, consuming

vast amounts of oxygen in a highly energetically wasteful

process, and destabilizing the entire ecosystem. Fish die

and bacterial toxins increase, leaving the lake all but dead.

The fertilizers removed the asymptote formerly limiting

productivity, leading to the demise of the ecosystem as

excessive energetic flow destabilized the system.

The circular economy seeks to maintain an economy

based on growth, energy use and technology, avoiding the

need to challenge the incumbent economic system. How-

ever, sustainability must embrace social, economic and

environmental issues and each of these components must

contribute positively to the others. The circular economy

merely tinkers with the current modus operandi, whereas

this can never deliver an economic model that allows for

environmental and social sustainability. Circles are not

spirals, and for growth to occur, spirals with ever-in-

creasing radii are required. Furthermore, spirals of eco-

nomic growth create equivalent spirals of environmental

damage.

Short cycles, not extended lifetime

Another central theme in circular economy thinking is the

idea of extended lifetimes. Walter Stahel’s concept of

improved durability was drawn directly from Boulding

(1966, p 12) who wrote: ‘‘I suspect that we have under-

estimated, even in our spendthrift society, the gains of

increased durability’’. Stahel (1998) emphasized that long-

lived goods and service-for-life extension combine to close

material loops and reduce the speed of the resource flow,

through prolonged utilization of goods. Furthermore, Sta-

hel suggests that this increased service sector would bring

economic growth. This becomes economically problematic

at the level of geography. Many of the products utilized in

Europe are made in Asia. If we reduce demand for these

goods and increase the service sector to prolong the life of

these products, then the economic benefits (increased

employment in the service sector) will rest in Europe,

whereas the economic costs (reduced sales and employ-

ment in the manufacturing sector) will occur in Asia.

The concept of ‘product as service’, where a product is

owned by the supplier and the customer rents the use of the

product, is emphasized by some circular economy thinkers

(see Goedkoop et al. 1999; Mont 2002). Product–service

system approaches can create benefits for struggling com-

panies in terms of allowing the supplier to mitigate the

effects of labour costs, leverage any advantages in com-

petencies and in many cases strengthen the relationship

with the customer (Aurich et al. 2010; Andersen et al.

2013). The consumption of scarce resources and environ-

mental degradation can also be minimized through col-

laborative consumption (Baines et al. 2007; Piscicelli et al.

2015), although environmental benefits are not guaranteed,

as seen in car sharing programmes, and requires careful

monitoring (Pigosso and McAloone 2016). However, the

servicing engineers require transport, replacement parts,

longer-lasting materials, service centres and a large support

network globally, all amounting to significant financial and

environmental costs. Furthermore, as mentioned above,

manufacturing rarely occurs in the same locality as sales,

recycling and servicing, meaning that any benefits are

likely to be externalized.

There is also the challenge of whether a greater envi-

ronmental benefit is achieved through extending the life-

time of the product, rather than replacing it with a new,

more energy-efficient model. Comparisons relating to vir-

tual water (Allan 1998) and embodied energy (Costanza

The
amazing

zero-waste,
circular

economy
food cube

a b

Fig. 1 Circular economy and ecological reality. a The circular
economy, like many other schools of sustainability, strives for zero

waste. In this rationale, a food chain would be a cube, with no waste.

b A real ecosystem has a food chain that is a pyramid, with 90% loss
of biomass at each stage, supporting fewer and fewer organisms. The

peak predators are few in number and are reliant on the levels below

for the energy needed. Waste of biomass and energy is de rigueur in

the real natural world From Skene and Murray (2015)

484 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

1980; Miró et al. 2015) are required in order to assess

properly how beneficial extended lifetimes really are rel-

ative to faster turnover. Fundamentally, ecosystem func-

tioning [i.e. the combined study of solar energy flow,

mineral cycling, water cycling and ecological succession

(see Loreau et al. 2001)] is the only way to test the overall

impact of this and any other approach, and so system-based

studies must be carried out, rather than reductive laboratory

studies (Skene and Murray 2015). Given that nature is an

emergent system, it is only at the ecosystem level that the

true impact of production choices can be assessed and thus

ecosystem level indicators are central to any such analysis.

Yet again, nature does not follow the circular economy

script here. In fact, the long cycle is eschewed in the bio-

sphere. We find that fast cycling is the most common

approach (Vogt et al. 1986). Material is quickly recycled

for immediate use in most cases. Soils are particularly good

at this. In rainforests, soil is shallow (10–15 cm deep), yet

huge amounts of material rapidly flow through it (Vitousek

and Sanford 1986). This is important otherwise these

nutrients would be washed away in the large volumes of

rainwater (Likens et al. 1970).

Speed is of the essence. Fast turnover is also observed in

coral reefs and many other ecosystems. This is why

eutrophication (the leakage of fertilizers from agricultural

fields into natural ecosystems) has such a rapid and dev-

astating effect (Jessen et al. 2013). Rapid recycling leaves

natural systems extremely vulnerable to change in energy

flow, a direct impact of fertilizers (which, after all, are

designed to increase energy flow in agricultural systems).

The key truth is that the biosphere has existed on a limited

set of nutrients until recent times and has evolved to

recover and circulate them rapidly.

We often consider resources to be of two types: tech-

nical (i.e. synthetic materials not normally found in the

biosphere, such as plastics) and biological nutrients (pro-

duced by, cycling within and consumed by living organ-

isms). However, when this material, either biological or

technical, is inherently toxic or toxic at unnatural levels,

the biosphere suffers. So not only do we need to try to

avoid releasing technical nutrients into the environment,

but the release of biological nutrients must also be carefully

done so as not to exceed the appropriate levels (Reijnders

2008). The circular economy emphasizes recycling of

biological nutrients, but if this is not done carefully, at a

tempo in resonance with the natural order, it will seriously

disrupt our ecosystems. Tempo is particularly significant in

seasonal latitudes, because the addition of biological

nutrients at different times of the year will have signifi-

cantly different impacts (Rheuban et al. 2014).

Another circular economy mantra stresses the need for

renewable energy. Yet the jolly green giant of renewable

energy, while low in carbon, casts its own shadow upon the

biosphere. Rare earth metals, central to wind power,

require complex and toxic processes to release and con-

centrate them from their source materials (Li et al. 2013),

but their chemistry makes them irreplaceable in terms of

alternatives (Skene and Murray 2015). Solar panel pro-

duction also produces significant pollution (Jacobs 2011).

Palm oil production has devastating impacts on habitats

(Mukherjee and Sovacool 2014). Many renewable energy

approaches also use huge vast amounts of water (Dom-

inguez-Faus et al. 2009). Thus, renewable energy may not

be as green as generally perceived, and since it forms a

central part of the circular economy, this is concerning. To

be low on carbon dioxide production does not mean it is

ecologically sustainable.

Excessive energy use is a signature of the current human

condition and underpins much of the environmental dam-

age that we have delivered. Thus, an emphasis upon the

reduction in energy use, rather than the use of alternative

energy sources, must be prioritized, while full ecological

analysis is needed in order for consumers to understand the

ecological impact of alternative energy sources.

One interesting application of energetics is in the field of

sustainable transitions. The Viennese school of social

ecology proposes the use of socio-metabolic profiling,

focusing on resource use within social structures and

exploring how these structures correspond to human modes

of subsistence. According to the Viennese approach, the

key to a transition is a society’s energy system or meta-

bolism. Major changes in socio-metabolic profiles were

characterized by substantial increases in metabolic rates,

corresponding, in turn, to substantial increases in entropic

output (Fischer-Kowalski and Rotmans 2009; Haberl et al.

2011, 2016).

Eco-inefficiency, not eco-efficiency

Another central tenet of circular economy thinking is that

nature is extremely efficient, and that by increasing effi-

ciency we can attain greater sustainability. Eco-efficiency

is defined as a reduction in material intensity, a reduction in

energy intensity, reduced dispersion of toxins, improved

recyclability, maximum use of renewable resources,

greater durability and increased service intensity (Sch-

midheiny 1992).

Problems arise with this approach. As we have noted,

nature is extremely wasteful, converting low entropy

resources into high entropy waste, which requires vast

amounts of energy to recycle, and, in turn, produces further

high entropy waste. Nature has high energy intensity and it

does not generally work towards greater durability, but,

rather, fast recycling.

Eco-efficiency flies in the face of modern ecological

knowledge. The biosphere is a system, made up of a

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 485

123

number of subsystems, each working sub-optimally for the

overall functioning of the system. System theory demands

this, and we see it throughout the natural world (Skene

2011). Squirrels do not remember where they hid all of the

nuts (Crawley and Long 1995; Steele and Smallwood

2001). DNA does not perfectly correct itself, allowing for

mutations and consequent variation, while foxes do not eat

all of the rabbits. Indeed, inefficiency and sub-optimality

are both central to the functioning of any ecosystem (Ab-

bott and Quink 1970; Forget 1992; Tomback 2001).

Sub-optimality arises in any situation involving mul-

tiple challenges. Farnsworth and Niklas (1995) point out

that as the number of challenges increase upon a pro-

cess, only solutions that are increasingly sub-optimal for

each challenge will work. Thus, the idea that increased

optimization at the level of the human organism will

bring sustainability to the biosphere is wholly incorrect

and dangerous.

Discussion

This paper set out to examine two premises. Firstly, that the

circular economy is rooted in the same set of principles that

underpin the natural world, and, secondly, that the princi-

ples underpinning the circular economy will increase the

probability of a sustainable future. The Ellen MacArthur

Foundation (EMF) clearly states that ‘‘The concept of the

circular economy is grounded in the study of nonlinear

systems, particularly living ones’’ (EMF 2012 p 22).

However, this current paper clearly demonstrates that the

natural world operates in a very different way from that

portrayed in the circular economy literature. Table 1 sums

up the findings, presenting the ‘natural’ principles adopted

by circular economy thinkers (with references to where

each principle is identified) and then contrasting this with

the scientific research which clearly refutes the validity of

these contrived principles.

The biosphere works very differently to any notion of a

circular economy, primarily because of thermodynamic

and system-related issues. In thermodynamic terms, the

Earth is an open system and bears no similarity to any

concept of spaceship Earth, closed loop nor circularity.

Rather there is a massive flow of energy through the planet,

and life works to convert free energy to waste energy,

under the auspices of the second law of thermodynamics.

Indeed, life is ultimately concerned with waste production.

Increasing complexity requires increasing waste. There-

fore, the concept of ‘‘zero waste’’ has no place in the

natural world. More fundamentally, the concept of waste

cannot be limited to considerations of materials and

objects, but energy. The production of energetic waste lies

at the base of ecosystem and economic functioning.

The idea stated by the EMF that biological components

‘‘are at least non-toxic and possibly even beneficial’’ (EMF

2012 p 22) lies at the heart of another significant error in

much circular economic thinking (with exceptions such as

the cradle-to-cradle approach) that technical and biological

waste can be considered separately, the former requiring

greater attention than the latter because of the differences

in toxicity. Yet some of the greatest threats to the

ecosystem services of our planet come from biological

nutrients. Eutrophication threatens much of the biosphere

and is the direct outcome of increased levels of biological

nutrients, while climate destabilization is mostly

attributable to biological nutrients, as is ocean acidification.

Furthermore, biological nutrients are often non-renewable,

since cycling relies on appropriate diversity and fluxes,

which are damaged upon initial harvesting. The New-

foundland cod collapse did not recover despite fishing

quotas, partly because the remaining, weakened popula-

tions became displaced by different species, which conse-

quently altered the entire nutrient cycle (Hutchings and

Reynolds 2004).

The return of nutrients to the biosphere will not neces-

sarily precipitate recovery or restoration, a core objective

of the circular economy. Furthermore, the concept of eco-

effectiveness, set out by the EMF, claims that ‘‘The goal is

not to minimize the cradle-to-grave flow of materials, but

to generate cyclical, cradle-to-cradle ‘metabolisms’ that

enable materials to maintain their status as resource’’ (EMF

2012, p 23). However, in the global market, few products

are made, bought, disposed of and recycled in the same

geographic location, and thus there is a vast export and

import of nutrients associated with products across the

globe. The problem here is that the biosphere consists of

many local metabolic ecosystems, and if we do not return

materials to the same geographic location from which we

took them, then no form of localized metabolism can exist.

Complete circles do not exist in manufacturing. Vast

amounts of materials are farmed in one location and

divested across the globe. Furthermore, the tempos of

extraction and re-deposition rarely match, and there is no

consideration of seasonal changes, so important in natural

metabolic cycling.

In nature, cycling requires vast amounts of energy, yet

considerations of cycling in the circular economy fail

completely to account for the energetic waste production

associated with such processes, particularly in terms of

‘renewable’ energy. A fixation with carbon also fails to

take account of the broader ecological footprint of such

processes (Skene 2010).

Having clarified that the self-proclaimed principles of

the circular economy bear no resemblance to those that

underpin the natural world, we must then consider if the

circular economy could still be a useful human-generated

486 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

Table 1 Key principles of the circular economy discourse, and issues
related to these, with relevant literature

Element Issue

Recycling1,2 Renewable resources are actually less

recyclable than non-renewable

resources and pose a greater risk.

Ecosystem services are central to the

recycling of natural resources. Soil,

forest, fisheries and coral reefs

cannot be recycled. Recycling is

energy-expensive3,4

Restoration5,6,7,8,9 As an emergent system, the biosphere

is self-healing and cannot be

reconstructed by humans.

Reductionist, enlightenment

thinking will not work10,11,12,13

Renewable energy use6,9,14 Most renewable technology (wind,

photovoltaic, green fuel) is highly

polluting in its manufacture and

recycling or destroys habitats. Many

approaches also use vast amounts of

water (green fuels,

nuclear)15,16,17,18,19,20,21,39

Elimination of waste1,9 Defeats waste-is-food concept if waste

is reduced during production. It is

thermodynamically impossible to

grow economically while reducing

waste. Energetic waste is as

damaging as material waste. Nature

operates as a waste pyramid, not as a

perfect cube. Biological waste is as

damaging as technical waste (e.g.

eutrophication)22,23

Eliminating toxic

chemicals6
Periodic table dictates that many toxic

elements, either directly or in the

process of mining and purifying,

have unique physico-chemical

properties that make them

irreplaceable e.g. rare earth

metals4,24,25

Eco-efficiency7,9,26,27 Nature is eco-inefficient. This is a

consequence of systems theory,

where each level is sub-optimal in

order that the overall system

functions. Optimality at the human

level threatens all other levels28,29

Biological nutrient cycling9 Biological nutrients, at inappropriate

concentrations and at the wrong

times, are highly toxic to ecosystems

(e.g. eutrophication and climate

destabilization). There is a lack of

awareness of this. They cannot just

be poured back into nature30,31

Extended product

life2,14,26,32,33
The long cycle is eschewed in the

biosphere. Rapid turnover is key.

Long-lived products cannot be easily

replaced by greener new

technology34,35

Table 1 continued

Element Issue

Economic growth6,26,33 Circles cannot deliver growth, only

spirals can. Furthermore, increased

service industry sector comes at a

geographically separated cost to

manufacturing4,36,37,38

1 Shen and Qi (2012)
2 Baily et al. (2013)
3 Homer-Dixon et al. (1993)
4 Skene and Murray (2015)
5 Cooper (1999)
6 EMF (2012)
7 EU (2012)
8 Nakajima (2000)
9 UNEP (2006)
10 Harrisson and Buchan (1934)
11 Trosper (2005)
12 Skene (2011)
13 Cai et al. (2015)
14 Preston (2012)
15 Gardner (2007)
16 Zhang et al. (2000)
17 Farigone et al. (2008)
18 Fitzherbert et al. (2008)
19 Hurst (2010)
20 Jessen et al. (2013)
21 Li et al. (2013)
22 Talbot (1920)
23 Andersen (2007)
24 Cohen (2007)
25 Reller (2011)
26 Schmidheiny (1992)
27 Von Weizsäcker et al. (1997)
28 Farnsworth and Niklas (1995)
29 Tomback (2001)
30 Reijnders (2008)
31 Binzer et al. (2016)
32 Boulding (1966)
33 Stahel (1998)
34 Vitousek and Sanford (1986)
35 Vogt et al. (1986)
36 Torras and Boyce (1998)
37 Dietz et al. (2012)
38 Fujii and Managi (2013)
39 Dominguez-Faus et al. (2009)

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 487

123

concept in terms of delivering sustainability. Problems

immediately arise here. Firstly, not only do the founding

principles find no place in nature, but they actually work in

the opposite direction. Take for example the concept of

efficiency. Technological solutions tend towards efficiency,

and target an optimized human condition. As this paper

emphasizes, nature is sub-optimal at every level of orga-

nization, since complex systems require sub-optimality to

function. If we accept that a sustainable future relies on the

continuance of ecosystem services, then any move towards

efficiency will threaten the very fabric of the biosphere.

Indeed, as Table 1 indicates, almost all of the principles

underpinning the circular economy have the potential to

destabilize the biosphere if they are applied in the real

world. The consideration of biological nutrients as non-

toxic is a dangerous error. The emphasis on renewable

energy greatly threatens many ecosystems around the

world. A proper ecological footprint, not solely reliant on

carbon, needs to be calculated in order to assess how

‘green’ and renewable much of this energy is, while sig-

nificant issues exist concerning water use in ethanol pro-

duction, rare earth metals in wind turbines, a shortage of

graphite and lithium for battery-powered vehicles and a

shortage of uranium for nuclear reactors (Skene and Mur-

ray 2015).

Fundamentally, we must realize that the circular econ-

omy works against both the laws of thermodynamics and

the underpinning principles of nature. Given this, it is

highly unlikely that this concept will pave the way to a

sustainable future.

Conclusions

We conclude by considering what a school of sustainability

truly ‘‘grounded in the study of nonlinear systems, partic-

ularly living ones’’ (EMF 2012 p 22) would look like.

Given that the biosphere has existed as a functioning entity

for over three billion years, proving resilient across at least

five mass extinction events and the snowball Earth of the

Varangian glaciation, and that we have only been a part of

this system for 0.001% of its existence (three million years

compared to its three billion years), then it would seem

sensible to view sustainability as an emergent biosphere

property rather than a human construct. Our re-engagement

with the biosphere requires us to embrace a number of its

pivotal properties that have proved central to its longevity.

1. Sub-optimality: given that the biosphere is a system

made up of a number of interacting levels of organi-

zation, each of these levels is expected to be sub-

optimal and constrained by system-based asymptotes

within which a sustainable system emerges.

Optimization at the human level is therefore a strategy

of doubtful value. Artificial intelligence (the branch of

computer science concerned with making computers

behave like humans) constrains computing systems to

reinforce the failings of humans in terms of our

detrimental impact on the planet. Artificial intelligence

also tends towards the optimization of a process.

Instead, we suggest that new technology should adopt

ecological intelligence as its mentor, in terms of

referencing sub-optimality rather than task-oriented

optimization.

2. Pyramids, not cubes: nature is a waste-generating

entity, and the cycling and re-energizing processes

must be within natural limits. While recycling of

biological nutrients is important, it must be at a rate

and tempo that resonates with the natural world in

order to avoid serious, toxic repercussions. Embodied

energy relating to recycling must be included in any

assessment of ecological footprints.

3. Bio-participation, not biomimicry, must be the over-

arching philosophy, where context is king. Bio-partic-

ipation advocates the re-integration of humans within

the biosphere system, representing strong sustainabil-

ity, where participation rather than knowledge transfer

ensures deeper symbiosis, as opposed to biomimicry,

an example of weak sustainability, where natural

processes, knowledge and designs are lifted into a

new context for human use as substantive technology

(Skene and Murray 2015). Transferring pieces of the

biosphere into human activity and espousing this as a

means to a sustainable future fails to grasp that the

biosphere is an emergent system, not some tower made

of little bricks. A reductionist approach will not resolve

the issues facing us.

We have the capacity to monitor impact on ecosystem

functioningwith technologies such as remote sensing and

thus can evaluate the emergent consequences of our

actions upon the planet. Remote sensing and other related

Earth observation technologies offer a synoptic view of

the Earth’s surface, with records going back 30 years.

These satellite sensors present new frontiers for biodi-

versity observations offering unprecedented global cov-

erage at high spatial resolution with sophisticated

measurements of the structure, composition, biochemical

and biophysical properties of the Earth’s ecosystems.

It is a mistake to think that remote sensing technology is

limited to monitoring net photosynthetic primary pro-

duction. Satellite remote sensing can contribute signifi-

cantly to four of the key areas in monitoring progress in

sustainability: essential biodiversity variables, natural

capital, biodiversity indicators and ecosystem services

(Strand et al. 2007; Ayanu et al. 2012; Skidmore et al.

2015). Applications include species traits (leaf nitrogen,

488 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

phosphorus and chlorophyll content, specific leaf area),

species populations (occurrence, demography, disease

prevalence), ecosystem structure (distribution, fragmen-

tation, heterogeneity, land cover, vegetation height) and

ecosystem function (productivity, vegetation phenology,

inundation and fire occurrence), while measurement of

atmospheric dust content acts as a proxy for erosion

(Nagendra et al. 2013; LaRue et al. 2014; O’Connor et al.

2015; Pettorelli et al. 2016). Acoustic remote sensing

sensors allow for production of detailed maps of

bathymetry as well as the geological and biological

components of the seabed, providing a wealth of infor-

mation for mapping and analysing benthic habitats

(Brown et al. 2011).

4. Appropriate asymptotes: as a system, each level of

organization should operate within limits set by the

overall system. This requires sensitive feedback.

Again, technologies such as remote sensing can help

here. Natural ceilings should be respected.

5. Real-time feedback: Nature is in constant communi-

cation with itself. Short cycles allow rapid change, and

function predominates, rather than structure. Remote

sensing offers the potential for appropriate feedback,

allowing us to assess the impact of our actions at a

system level. In an emergent system, you cannot

predict what will happen, but you can measure it. It is

essential to prioritize such ecological feedback as the

central priority in terms of assessing the benefits or

otherwise of our sustainability efforts.

The circular economy relies on tight loops, zero waste,

extended lifetimes and a closed system, built on the Garden

of Eden fantasy established by Boulding (1966) and rein-

forced in later work. But these observations of an imagi-

nary garden are a fantasy and can never deliver

sustainability. It is like believing in a flat Earth. No one can

sail around a flat Earth. Ironically, circles can also never

deliver growth. You need ever-increasing spirals for that.

For economic growth requires maintenance respiration and

growth respiration, and the more growth, the more

expenditure is required to maintain the ever-expanding

estate (Daly 1977). This is important and extremely con-

cerning because it undermines the use of the circular

economy concept as a means to a sustainable end, even in

economic terms.

References

Abbott HG, Quink TF (1970) Ecology of eastern white pine seed

caches made by small forest mammals. Ecology 51:271–278

Allan JA (1998) Virtual water: a strategic resource. Ground Water

36:545–546

Allenby BR (1998) Industrial ecology: policy framework and

implementation. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

Allwood JM (2014) Squaring the circular economy: the role of

recycling within a hierarchy of material management strategies.

In: Worrell E, Reuter MA (eds) Handbook of recycling: state-of-

the-art for practitioners, analysts, and scientists. Elsevier,

Amsterdam, pp 445–477

Allwood JM, Cullen JM, Carruth MA, Cooper DR, McBrien M,

Milford RL, Moynihan MC, Patel AC (2012) Sustainable

materials—with both eyes open: future buildings, vehicles,

products and equipment—made efficiently and made with less

new material. UIT Cambridge, Cambridge

Anastas PT, Warner JC (1998) Principles of green chemistry. In:

Anastas PT, Warner JC (eds) Green chemistry: theory and

practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 29–56

Andersen MS (2007) An introductory note on the environmental

economics of the circular economy. Sustain Sci 2:133–140

Andersen JAB, McAloone TC, Garcia i Mateu A (2013) Industry

specific PSS: a study of opportunities and barriers for maritime

suppliers. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on

engineering design (ICED13): design for harmonies, design

society. Vol. 4, pp. 369–378

Aurich JC, Mannweiler C, Schweitzer E (2010) How to design and

offer services successfully. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol

2:136–143

Ayanu YZ, Conrad C, Nauss T, Wegmann M, Koellner T (2012)

Quantifying and mapping ecosystem services supplies and

demands: a review of remote sensing applications. J Environ

Sci Technol 46:8529–8541

Ayres RU Simonis UE (1994) Industrial metabolism: restructuring

for sustainable development, vol 376. United Nations University

Press, Tokyo

Babbage B (1835) On the economy of machinery and manufactures.

Charles Knight, London, p 217

Baily MN, Manyika JM, Gupta S (2013) US productivity growth: an

optimistic perspective. Int Prod Monit 25:3–12

Baines TS, Lightfoot HW, Evans S, Neely A, Greenough R, Peppard

J, Roy R, Shehab E, Braganza A, Tiwari A, Alcock JR (2007)

State-of-the-art in product-service systems. Proc Inst Mech Eng

Part B 221:1543–1552

Bakker C, Wang F, Huismann J, den Hollander M (2014) Products

that go round: exploring product life extension through design.

J Clean Prod 69:10–16

Benyus JM (2002) Biomimicry: innovation inspired by nature. Harper

Collins Publishers Inc., New York

Binzer A, Guill C, Rall BC, Brose U (2016) Interactive effects of

warming, eutrophication and size structure: impacts on biodi-

versity and food-web structure. Glob Change Biol 22:220–227

Bocken NM, de Pauw I, Bakker C, van der Grinten B (2016) Product

design and business model strategies for a circular economy.

J Ind Prod Eng 33:308–320

Boulding KE (1966) The economics of the coming spaceship Earth.

In: Jarrett H (ed) Environmental quality in a growing economy.

Resources for the future. Johns Hopkins University Press,

Baltimore, pp 3–14

Brillouin L (1949) Life, thermodynamics, and cybernetics. Am Sci

37:554–568

Brown CJ, Smith S, Lawton P, Anderson JT (2011) Benthic habitat

mapping: a review of progress towards improved understanding

of the spatial ecology of the seafloor using acoustic techniques.

Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 92:502–520

Cai Y, Judd KL, Lenton TM, Lontzek TS, Narita D (2015)

Environmental tipping points significantly affect the cost—

benefit assessment of climate policies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

112:4606–4611

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 489

123

Chertow MR (2007) Uncovering industrial symbiosis. J Ind Ecol

11:11–30

Christensen JH (1994) Holonic manufacturing systems: initial

architecture and standards directions. In: Marik V, Strasser T,

Alois Zoitl A (eds) Proceedings of the 1st European Workshop

on Holonic Manufacturing Systems. HMS Consortium, Han-

nover, Germany

Clausius R (1867) The Mechanical theory of heat: with its applica-

tions to the steam engine and to the physical properties of bodies.

John van Voorst,

London

Cohen D (2007) Earth’s natural wealth: an audit. New Sci

2605:34–41

Cooper T (1999) Creating an economic infrastructure for sustainable

product design. J Sustain Prod Des 8:7–17

Cooper T (2005) Slower consumption reflections on product life

spans and the ‘‘throwaway society’’. J Ind Ecol 9:51–67

Costanza R (1980) Embodied energy and economic valuation.

Science 210:1219–1224

Crawley MJ, Long CR (1995) Alternate bearing, predator satiation

and seedling recruitment in Quercus robur L. J Ecol 83:683–696

Daly HE (1977) The steady-state economy: what, why and how? In:

Pirages D (ed) The sustainable society: implications for limited

growth. Praeger, New York, pp 107–114

Daly HE (1996) Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable

development. Beacon Press, Boston

de Man R, Friege H (2016) Circular economy: European policy on

shaky ground. Waste Manage Res 34:93–95

Dietz T, Rosa EA, York R (2012) Environmentally efficient well-

being: is there a Kuznets curve? Appl Geogr 32:21–28

Dominguez-Faus R, Powers SE, Burken JG, Alvarez PJ (2009) The

water footprint of biofuels: a drink or drive issue? Environ Sci

Technol 43:3005–3010

EC (2008) Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of

the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain

directives. Official Journal of the European Union L 312/3,

22/11/2008, 0003–0030

EMF (2012) Towards the circular economy Vol. 1—An economic

and business rationale for an accelerated transition. Ellen

MacArthur Foundation, Cowes

EMF (2013) Towards the circular economy: opportunities for the

consumer goods sector. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Cowes

EMF (2014) Towards the circular economy: accelerating the scale-up

across global supply chains. World Economic Forum, Geneva

EMF (2015) Growth within: A circular economy vision for a

competitive Europe. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Cowes

EU (2012) Manifesto for a resource-efficient Europe. Available at:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-989_en.htm

(Accessed 8 March 2017)

Ezeah C (2010) Analysis of barriers and success factors affecting the

adoption of sustainable management of municipal solid waste in

Abuja, Nigeria. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wolverhampton.

Available at: http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/handle/2436/

110155 (Accessed 8 March 2017)

Farigone J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land

clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–1238

Farnsworth KD, Niklas KJ (1995) Theories of optimization, form and

function in branching architecture in plants. Funct Ecol 9:355–363

Fischer-Kowalski M, Rotmans J (2009) Conceptualizing, observing,

and influencing social–ecological transitions. Ecology and

Society, Vol. 14(2) Available at: http://www.ecologyandsoci

ety.org/vol14/iss2/art3/ (Accessed 8 March 2017)

Fitzherbert EB, Struebig MJ, Morel A, Danielsen F, Brühl CA,

Donald PF, Phalan B (2008) How will oil palm expansion affect

biodiversity? Trends Ecol Evol 23:538–545

Forget P-M (1992) Seed removal and seed fate in Gustavia superba

(Lecythidaceae). Biotropica 24:408–414

Frosch RA, Gallopoulos NE (1989) Strategies for manufacturing. Sci

Am 266:144–152

Fujii H, Managi S (2013) Which industry is greener? An empirical

study of nine industries in OECD countries. Energy Polic

57:381–388

Gardner G (2007) Shrinking fields: cropland loss in a world of eight

billion. Worldwatch Institute,

Washington

Georgescu-Roegan N (1971) The entropy law and the economic

process. Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, MA

Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S (2016) A review on circular

economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of

environmental and economic systems. J Clean Prod 114:11–32

Goedkoop MJ, Van Halen CJ, Te Riele H, Rommens PJ (1999)

Product service systems, ecological and economic basics. Report

for Dutch Ministries of environment (VROM) and economic

affairs (EZ), Vol. 36, pp 1–122

Greyson J (2007) An economic instrument for zero waste, economic

growth and sustainability. J Clean Prod 15:1382–1390

Gwamuri J, Wittbrodt BT, Anzalone NC, Pearce JM (2014) Reversing

the trend of large scale and centralization in manufacturing: the

case of distributed manufacturing of customizable 3-D-print-

able self-adjustable glasses. Chall Sustain 2:30–40

Haberl H, Fischer-Kowalski M, Krausmann F, Martinez-Alier J,

Winiwarter V (2011) A socio-metabolic transition towards

sustainability? Challenges for another great transformation.

Sustain Dev 19:1–14

Haberl H, Fischer-Kowalski M, Krausmann F, Winiwarter V (eds)

(2016) Social ecology: society-nature relations across time and

space (Vol. 5). Springer, Switzerland

Harrisson TH, Buchan JN (1934) A field study of the St Kilda wren

(Troglodytes troglodytes hirtensis), with especial reference to its

numbers, territory and food habits. J Anim Ecol 3:133–145

Heshmati A (2015) A Review of the circular economy and its

implementation. IZA discussion paper No. 9611, Forschungsin-

stitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit, Bonn

Hill JE (2015) The circular economy: from waste to resource

stewardship, part I. Waste Resour Manag 168:4–14

Homer-Dixon TF, Boutwell JH, Rathjens GW (1993) Environmental

change and violent conflict. Sci Am 268:38–45

Hurst C (2010) China’s rare earth elements industry: what can the

west learn?. Institute for the Analysis of Global Security,

Washington

Hutchings JA, Reynolds JD (2004) Marine fish population collapses:

consequences for recovery and extinction risk. Bioscience

54:297–309

Jacobs A (2011) China shuts solar panel factory after antipollution

protests. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/

world/asia/china-shuts-solar-panel-factory-after-anti-pollution-

protests.html (Ac

cessed 08 March 2017)

Jessen C, Roder C, Lizcano JFV, Voolstra CR, Wild C (2013) In-situ

effects of simulated overfishing and eutrophication on benthic

coral reef algae growth, succession, and composition in the

Central Red Sea. PLoS One 8(6):e66992

Kleidon A, Lorenz RD (2004) Entropy production by earth system

processes. In: Kleidon A, Lorenz RD (eds) Non-Equilibrium

thermodynamics and the production of entropy: life, earth, and

beyond. Springer, Germany, pp 1–20

Kleidon A, Malhi Y, Cox PM (2010) Maximum entropy production in

environmental and ecological systems. Proc Royal Soc Lond B

365:1297–1302

Kühnle H (2010) Distributed manufacturing: paradigm, concepts,

solutions and examples. In: Kühnle H (ed) Distributed manu-

facturing: paradigm, concepts, solutions and examples. Springer,

London, pp 1–9

Lamberton G (2005) Sustainable sufficiency—an internally consistent

version of sustainability. Sustain Dev 13:53–68

490 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-989_en.htm

http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/handle/2436/110155

http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/handle/2436/110155

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art3/

http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art3/

Lancaster M (2002) Principles of sustainable and green chemistry. In:

Clark J, Macquarrie D (eds) Handbook of green chemistry and

technology. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 10–27

LaRue MA, Lynch HJ, Lyver POB, Barton K, Ainley DG, Pollard A,

Fraser WR, Ballard G (2014) A method for estimating colony

sizes of Adélie penguins using remote sensing imagery. Polar

Biol 37:507–517

Li X, Chen Z, Chen Z, Zhang Y (2013) A human health risk

assessment of rare earth elements in soil and vegetables from a

mining area in Fujian Province, Southeast China. Chemosphere

93:1240–1246

Likens GE, Bormann FH, Johnson NM, Fisher DW, Pierce RS (1970)

Effects of forest cutting and herbicide treatment on nutrient

budgets in the Hubbard Brook watershed-ecosystem. Ecol

Monogr 40:23–47

Lin GY, Solberg JJ (1994) Autonomous control for open manufac-

turing systems. In: Joshi S, Smith J (eds) Computer control of

flexible manufacturing systems. Springer Netherlands,

pp 169–206

Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Bengtsson J, Grime JP, Hector A,

Hooper DU, Huston MA, Raffaelli D, Schmid B, Tilman D

(2001) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowl-

edge and future challenges. Science 294:804–808

Lovelock JE (1965) A physical basis for life detection experiments.

Nature 207:568–570

Madden N, Lewis A, Davis M (2013) Thermal effluent from the

power sector: an analysis of once-through cooling system

impacts on surface water temperature, environmental research

letters, Vol. 8, p 035006. Available at: http://iopscience.iop.org/

article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035006/meta;jsessionid=C939D404

1284BD2EC307C9A239B2D6A0.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org (Ac-

cessed 08 March 2017)

Marsh GP (1965) Man and Nature. Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, MA

Martyushev LM and Seleznev VD (2013) ‘Maximum entropy

production principle (MEPP). Comment about restrictions and

typical misconceptions of critics of MEPP’. arXiv:1311.2068v1.

Accessed 29 May 2017

Marx K (1909) In: Engels F (ed) Capital: a critique of political

economy. Volume III: the process of capitalist production as a

whole. Charles H Kerr, Chicago (Trans. from the 1st German

edition by Untermann E)

McDonald RI, Olden JD, Opperman JJ, Miller WM, Fargione J,

Revenga C, Higgins JV, Powell J (2012) Energy, water and fish:

biodiversity impacts of energy-sector water demand in the

United States depend on efficiency and policy measures. PLoS

One 7(11):e50219. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050219

McDonough W, Braungart M (2002) Design for the triple top line:

new tools for sustainable commerce. Corp Environ Strategy

9:251–258

Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J (1992) Beyond the limits:

confronting global collapse, envisioning a sustainable future.

Chelsea Green Publishing Company, Post Mills

Mellaart J (1967) Çatal Hüyük. A Neolithic town in Anatolia.

McGraw-Hill, New York

Merrill CL (1982) Biomimicry of the dioxygen active site in the

copper proteins hemocyanin and cytochrome oxidase. Part I:

copper (i) complexes which react reversibly with dioxygen and

serve to mimic the active site function of hemocyanin. Part II: l-
imidazolato binuclear metalloporphyrin complexes of iron and

copper as models for the active site structure in cytochrome

oxidase. Doctoral thesis, Rice University, Houston

Miró L, Oró E, Boer D, Cabeza LF (2015) Embodied energy in

thermal energy storage (TES) systems for high temperature

applications. Appl Energy 137:793–799

Moniruzzaman SM, Bari QH, Fukuhara T (2011) Recycling practices

of solid waste in Khulna City Bangladesh. J Solid Waste Technol

Manag 37:1–15

Mont OK (2002) Clarifying the concept of product–service system.

J Clean Prod 10:237–245

Moriguchi Y (2007) Material flow indicators to measure progress

toward a sound material-cycle society. J Mater Cycles Waste

Manag 9:112–120

Mukherjee I, Sovacool BK (2014) ‘Palm oil-based biofuels and

sustainability in southeast Asia: a review of Indonesia, Malaysia,

and Thailand. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 37:1–12

Murray A, Skene K, Haynes K (2017) The circular economy: an

interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a

global context. J Bus Eth 140:369–380

Nagendra H, Lucas R, Honrado JP, Jongman RH, Tarantino C,

Adamo M, Mairota P (2013) Remote sensing for conservation

monitoring: assessing protected areas, habitat extent, habitat

condition, species diversity, and threats. Ecol Indic 33:45–59

Nakajima N (2000) A vision of industrial ecology: state-of-the-art

practices for a circular and service-based economy. Bull Sci

Technol Sci 20:154–169

Ness D (2008) Sustainable urban infrastructure in China: towards a

Factor 10 improvement in resource productivity through integrated

infrastructure systems. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 15:288–301

O’Connor B, Secades C, Penner J, Sonnenschein R, Skidmore A,

Burgess ND, Hutton JM (2015) Earth observation as a tool for

tracking progress towards the aichi biodiversity targets. Remote

Sens Ecol Conserv 1:19–28

Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and

the environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead

Pettorelli N, Owen HJF, Duncan C (2016) How do we want Satellite

Remote Sensing to support biodiversity conservation globally?

Methods Ecol Evol 7:656–665

Pigosso DC, McAloone TC (2016) Maturity-based approach for the

development of environmentally sustainable product/service-

systems. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 15:33–41

Piscicelli L, Cooper T, Fisher T (2015) The role of values in

collaborative consumption: insights from a product-service sys-

tem for lending and borrowing in the UK. J Clean Prod 97:21–29

Pope KO, Baines KH, Ocampo AC, Ivanov BA (1994) Bio- spheric

effects of sulphuric acid aerosols produced by the Chicxulub

Cretaceous/Tertiary impact. Earth Planet Sci Lett 128:719–725

Prendeville S, Sanders C, Sherry J, Costa F (2014) Circular economy:

is it enough? Ecodesign centre. CMU, Cardiff

Preston F (2012) A global redesign? Shaping the circular economy

energy, environment and resource Governance. Chatham House,

London

Princen T (2005) The logic of sufficiency. MIT, Cambridge

Reijnders L (2008) Are emissions or wastes consisting of biological

nutrients good or healthy? J Clean Prod 16:1138–1141

Reller A (2011) Criticality of metal resources for functional materials

used in electronics and microelectronics. Physica Status Solidi

(RRL) 5:309–311

Retallack G (1996) Acid trauma at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary

in eastern Montana. GSA Today 6:1–7

Rheuban JE, Berg P, McGlathery KJ (2014) Multiple timescale

processes drive ecosystem metabolism in eelgrass (Zostera

marina) meadows. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 507:1–13

Rodrigues VP, Pigosso DC, McAloone TC (2016) Process-related key

performance indicators for measuring sustainability performance

of ecodesign implementation into product development. J Clean

Prod 139:416–428

Schaltegger S, Sturm A (1989) ‘Okologieinduzierte Entschei-

dungsprobleme des Managements. Ansatzpunkte zur Ausgestal-

tung von Instrumenten [Ecology induced management decision

Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492 491

123

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035006/meta%3bjsessionid%3dC939D4041284BD2EC307C9A239B2D6A0.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035006/meta%3bjsessionid%3dC939D4041284BD2EC307C9A239B2D6A0.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035006/meta%3bjsessionid%3dC939D4041284BD2EC307C9A239B2D6A0.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050219

support. Starting points for instrument formation]’, WWZ

Discussion Paper No. 8914. Basel: WWZ

Schmidheiny S (1992) Changing course. MIT, Cambridge

Sevignè-Itoiz E, Gasol CM, Rieradevall J, Gabarell X (2014)

Environmental consequences of recycling aluminium old scrap

in a global market. Resour Conserv Recycl 89:94–103

Shen X, Qi C (2012) Countermeasures towards circular economy

development in west regions. Energy Procedia 16:927–932

Sherwin C (2013) Sustainable design 2.0: new models and methods,

The Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/sustain

able-business/blog/sustainable-design-models-methods-biomimi

cry-cradle (Accessed 08 March 2017)

Simmonds PL (1862) Waste products and undeveloped substances.

R. Hardwicke, London

Skene KR (2010) After the Copenhagen Conference: carbon is not the

planet’s greatest threat. Contemp Rev 292:15–22

Skene KR (2011) Escape from bubbleworld: seven curves to save the

earth. Ard Macha Press, Angus

Skene KR (2013) The energetics of ecological succession: a logistic

model of entropic output. Ecol Model 250:287–293

Skene KR, Murray A (2015) Sustainable economics: context,

challenges and opportunities for the 21 century practitioner.

Greenleaf, Sheffield

Skidmore A, Pettorelli N, Coops NC, Geller GN, Hansen M, Lucas R,

Mücher CA, O’Connor B, Paganini M, Pereira HM, Schaepman

ME, Turner W, Wang T, Wegmann M (2015) Agree on

biodiversity metrics to track from space. Nature 523:403–405

Song Z, Zhang C, Yang G, Feng Y, Ren G, Han X (2014) Comparison

of biogas development from households and medium and large-

scale biogas plants in rural China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev

33:204–213

Stahel WR (1998) Selling performance instead of goods: the social

and organizational change that arises in the move to a service

economy. Paper presented at eco-efficiency: a modern feature of

environmental technology, Dusseldorf. 2–3 March, 1998

Steele MA, Smallwood PD (2001) Acorn dispersal by birds and

mammals. In: McShea WJ, Healy WM (eds) Oak forest

ecosystems: ecology and management for wildlife. John Hopkins

University Press, Baltimore, pp 182–195

Strand H, H}oft R, Strittholt J, Miles L, Horning N, Fosnight E, Turner
W (2007) Sourcebook on remote sensing and biodiversity

indicators, vol 32. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological

Diversity, Montreal

Talbot FA (1920) Millions from waste. J.B. Lippincott Company,

Philadelphia

Tomback DF (2001) Clark’s nutcracker: agent of regeneration. In:

Tomback DF, Arno SF, Keane RE (eds) Whitebark pine

communities: ecology and restoration. Island Press, Washington,

pp 89–104

Torras M, Boyce JK (1998) Income, inequality, and pollution: a

reassessment of the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ

25:147–160

Toussaint O, Schneider ED (1998) The thermodynamics and evolu-

tion of complexity in biological systems. Comp Biochem Physiol

A 120:3–9

Trosper RL (2005) Emergence unites ecology and society. Ecol Soc

10:14

Tukker A (2013) Product services for a resource-efficient and circular

economy—a review. J Clean Prod 30:1–16

Tukker A, Emmert S, Charter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E, Andersen MM,

Geerken T, Tischner U, Lahlou S (2008) Fostering change to

sustainable consumption and production: an evidence based

view. J Clean Prod 16:1218–1225

Ulanowicz RE (1997) Ecology, the ascendent perspective: Robert E.

Ulanowicz. Columbia University Press, New York

UNEP (2006) Circular economy: an alternative for economic

development, UNEP. DTIE, Geneva

Vitousek PM, Sanford RL (1986) Nutrient cycling in moist tropical

forest. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 1:137–167

Vogt KA, Grier CC, Vogt DJ (1986) Production, turnover, and

nutrient dynamics of above-and belowground detritus of world

forests. Adv Ecol Res 15:303–378

Von Weizsäcker E, Lovins AB, Lovins LH (1997) Factor four:

doubling wealth, halving resource use. Earthscan, London

Yang W, Ahrens TJ (1998) Shock vaporization of anhydrite and

global effects of the K/T bolide. Earth Planet Sci Lett

156(3):125–140

Yong R (2007) The circular economy in China. J Mater Cycles Waste

Manag 9:121–129

Wu JS (2005) New circular economy. Tsinghua University Press,

Beijing

Zhang H, Feng J, Zhu W, Liu C, Xu S, Shao P, Wu D, Yang W, Gu J

(2000) Chronic toxicity of rare-earth elements on human beings.

Biol Trace Elem Res 73:1–17

Zhijun F, Nailing Y (2007) Putting a circular economy into practice in

China. Sustain Sci 2:95–101

Zhu Q, Geng Y, Lai KH (2010) Circular economy practices among

Chinese manufacturers varying in environmental-oriented supply

chain cooperation and the performance implications. J Environ

Manag 91:1324–1331

492 Sustain Sci (2018) 13:479–492

123

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/sustainable-design-models-methods-biomimicry-cradle

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/sustainable-design-models-methods-biomimicry-cradle

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/sustainable-design-models-methods-biomimicry-cradle

• Circles, spirals, pyramids and cubes: why the circular economy cannot work

Abstract
Introduction
A circular economy: definitions and foundations
Origins of the circular economy
Issues with the circular economy
The pyramid of waste
Short cycles, not extended lifetime
Eco-inefficiency, not eco-efficiency
Discussion
Conclusions
References

• Sacreen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.56.29 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.52.55 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.52.59 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.01 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.02 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.04 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.06 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.07 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.09 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.10 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.12 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.14 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.16 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.17 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.19 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.21 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.23 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.53.25 PM

1980s—2000s:

Impacts of Computerization, Digital
Networking, Interoperability + the Rise of

Interface/Interaction Design

Frank Owen Gehry (b. Canadian, 1929), Richard B. Fisher Center for the Performing Arts, Bard
College, NY, 2003.
IMPACT OF COMPUTERIZATION ON ARCHITECTURE:
-Gehry was among the first to use CAD (computer-aided design) to generate complex +
organic (non-orthogonal) forms + reduce discrepancies (+ cost) in process from original
drawings to end product.
-G. has used CATIA, a modeling + analysis software allowing mathematical description of
complex drawings, so that builders + fabricators can read + execute forms previously
untranslatable.

Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Bilbao, 1997. Bilbao, Spain.

First completed project using CATIA = Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao.

Toyo Ito in collaboration with Cecil Balmond, Serpentine Pavilion, 2002. London.

-Architect Ito collaborated w/ Balmond, a pioneer in the early 2000s of computational design. It
allows one to use the computational powers of computers to simulate many iterations of a set of
variables (too many for most humans to do w/o the computer) until one arrives at a desired
pattern.
-Here, Ito wanted a bldg. w/ irregular, criss-crossing beams. Balmond helped Ito find a system
that had eccentric order but would not need a secondary system of supports to hold it up.

Toyo Ito in collaboration with Cecil Balmond, Serpentine Pavilion, 2002. London.

-Balmond came up w/ a simple rule (algorithm) that the computer can model: drawing a line
from the halfway point of one side of a square to a point 1/3 the way along the adjacent line. The
patter repeated, creating a mesh-like network of lines. These he could cut + fold + form into the
bldg., made of steel.

-All intersecting lines are mutually supporting.

Interface + Interaction Design

• Interface = point of contact between human +
machine. (For screen-based design, think of the
display.)

• Interaction design = the design of the entire
experience w/ the machine over the period of
engagement. It includes the design of interfaces.

Interface + Interaction Design

• Interaction design is as old as the abacus, compass +
clock. In the digital age, its role has increased
dramatically.

• It has expanded to include designing conditions for 2-
way or many-way communications (responsive objects,
user-input).

• In the 2000s, fields known as “user-experience design,”
“Interaction design,” + ”information design” have
grown in importance.

Key Early Development in User-Friendliness + Seamlessness

• A significant historical trend in interaction design =
user-friendliness + seamlessness—a type of
suppressive design that allows the user to ignore
the technology making it possible.

• 1983 saw the first GUI (Graphical User Interface) for
commercial use (for Lisa [1983] + Macintosh [1984]
computers). It featured pointing + clicking to
“desktop icons” w/ a “mouse.”

April Greiman (U.S., b. 1948), poster,
1986.

In graphic design, use of computers to
generate digital type + manipulate
images = 1st w/ 1984 Apple Mac GUI.

Apple GUI used terms familiar to
graphic designers + amateurs (“cut” +
“paste”).

Trends: amateur publishing,
professional graphic design using ditital
tools to generate forms distinctive to
digital technology of the time

(as in L.A.-based April Greiman’s work
here: pixelated typeface inspired by
low-res technology; incorporating
digital photos + simple abstraction of
images made w/ MacDraw).

Zuzana Licko (b. Chechosolovakia, 1961), typefaces styled after computer pixelations, 1980s.

-San Francisco-based magazine Émigré, fnd. 1984 by Dutch-born Rudy VanderLans,
published work by international graphic designers using new media.

-VanderLands worked w/ Czech-born Zuzana Licko, whose pixilation-inspired typefaces
are below.

Barry Deck, Template Gothic typeface, for Émigré, 1990s.

-New software + higher resolution eliminated pixilation + made possible new fonts
(published in Émigré, 1990s).

-This one breaks the traditional opposition between serif + sans-serif, the mechanical +
the calligraphic.

Ad for Sharp Corp., flat-screen TV, in The
New Yorker (May 2001).

Over the 1990s: the computer became a
standard tool for graphic designers.
Students entering the field made
projects using software packages such
as Quark Xpress + Adobe Photoshop;
universities replaced drafting tables w/
computer stations, scanners + high-res
printers.

It became possible to create persuasive
graphic + filmic illusions, ever more
seamlessly integrating animation +
photography, complex layering of
images + using a wide range of colors +
tonal subtleties.

W/ the rise of the WWW in the mid-
1990s, web-page design emerged as a
new multimedia field.

Key Early Developments in User-Friendliness + Seamlessness:
Design for Networked Technology

• 1993: Marc Andreessen develops Mosaic, the GUI
that made the WWW available.

• 1995: the first commercial web browser w/ totally
interconnected network (Netscape, introd. 1994)
dominated the market. It worked w/ IBM, PC, Mac
+ Unix. Its use of open protocols (like HTML) made
different digital systems able to communicate.
Before this, corporate networks, including email
systems = incompatible.

Key Early Developments in User-Friendliness + Seamlessness:
Design for Networked Technology

• 1995: Along w/ Netscape, Windows 95, which
became the most popular OS worldwide, sparked
what we now know as the Internet + digitization
revolution (conversion of all types of data—text,
pictures, music, film—into bits + bytes,
combinations of 1s + 0s, to be stored on
microprocessors or transmitted via satellites +
fiber-optic lines). Had built-in Internet support,
making PC apps., not just browsers, recognize +
interact w/ the Internet.

Key Early Developments in User-Friendliness + Seamlessness

• 1996: Telecommunications Act. Allowed local + long-distance companies
to compete w/ each other in the same markets. This sparked
competition, driving the global fiber-optic-laying boom in which
companies extended infrastructural capacity.

• Late 1990s: Development of XML (data encryption language) + SOAP
(related transport protocol). These became Internet standards, allowing
softwares to interoperate—thus enabling web-enabled work flow
(exchange of digital info. between programs).

• Late 1990s: Development of meta-search engines (Google, Yahoo!, MSN
Web Search). This democratized research.

Cellular phone, 2000. Manufactured by Nokia,
Finland.

Developments in miniaturization + wireless
technology extended + further integrated all
previous developments + allowed increasing
flexibility of usage, further “naturalizing” user
experience.

2006 magazine ad for Cingular-plan
cell phones.

By. C. 2005, cell phones become
miniature offices, recording devices,
libraries + entertainment centers.

Aesthetic trends in design of these
devices include variable
combinations of

1) Miniaturization

2) Bundling target-market-desirable
combinations of features,
including other mobile devices
such as cameras + MP3s

3) Personalization (customized
covers, ringtones, wallpapers—
after 2007, apps).

Ad for iMac desktop computer,
manufactured by Macintosh
Corporation, 1998.

Apple products, from iMac computers

to mobile devices such as iPod (2001-)

were in the forefront of the

development of aesthetic design tactics

that reinforced user-friendliness +

seamlessness:

1) Association of computers w/ leisure,

not just work (“fun” colors make the

computer a fashion accessory) and…

Apple Industrial Group, Apple Pro Mouse, 2000.

2) minimalism: reductive design of visual elements.
Apple’s minimalism visually reinforced ease of use.

In this case, ease of use is also visually reinforced by
transparency.

Apple Industrial Group, Apple iPod
Shuffle, 2005.

3) miniaturization. This is evident w/
Apple’s sequential release of iPod
variants in smaller sizes.

4) Design of device interfaces to
match intuitive, or “natural,” human
language, metaphors, or bodily
movements.

The first iPhone (2007) furthered
these developments w/ multi-touch.

So did the tablet metaphor for iPad
(2010).

Key Early Developments in User-Friendliness + Seamlessness

• 2005-: John Underkoffler’s “g-speak” gestural
interface first appears in commercial products such
as Guitar Hero (2005), Nintento Wii (2006) +
Microsoft Kinect (2010).

• 2006: Jeff Han develops multitouch screens, which
CNN anchors used to cover 2008 presidential
elections. Multitouch screens appeared also on
Apple’s iPhone (2007) + iPad (2010).

Jan Edler (German, b. 1970) + Tim Edler (b. 1965), BIX Communicative Display Skin, 2002, for
Kunsthaus Graz, Austria (bldg. designed by Peter Cook + Colin Fournier).

RESPONSIVE ARCHITECTURE:
a product of recent emphasis on communication + interaction in all design areas.

Detail of Jan Edler (German, b. 1970) +
Tim Edler (b. 1965), BIX Communicative
Display Skin, 2002, for Kunsthaus Graz,
Austria (bldg. designed by Peter Cook +
Colin Fournier).

This permanent installation of
fluorescent light fixtures adapts to
the institution’s communication
needs.

Architectural space physically
merges w/ screen space (going
beyond the traditional mounting
of signs on buildings).

Literal space has merged w/
screen space more recently w/
GPS-based mobile apps that offer
reviews of products or places in
one’s vicinity.

Doris Sung, Bloom, 2012. 6 m. @ Materials + Applications, Los Angeles. [Also see video.]

-Another approach to “responsive architecture” = the pneumatic façade Walls adjust
shape or permeability as desired to changes in air, light, temperature.

-Biomimicry = design inspired by organisms.

Another innovator in “breathable skin” biomimicry in architecture:

Tobias Becker Breathing Skins Showroom, est. 2015, in Mandelbachtal, Germany.
[See video introduction + demonstration of the technology.]

Apple, iPhone 4s featuring Siri , October
2011.

RESPONSIVE OBJECTS: another frontier in
interactive design called User Interface/User
Experience, or UI/UX design.

Siri = voice-activated “intelligent assistant”
for Apple iPhone 4s. It converts voice into
text + allows one to send messages, schedule
meetings, make calls, do dictation +
searches.

Siri talks back + learns/adapts to one’s use of
language, customizing responses in the
process.

Responsiveness distinguishes this phase of
interface design from prior communication
design (e.g., signage).

Violet, Karotz, 2011.

THE “INTERNET OF THINGS” (IOT) =

one outcome of wi-fi-using
“intelligent” Internet assistants like
Siri.

This Android-OS device can surf the

web, sort + select email + social-
media updates + RSS feeds; play
music on when asked; wake one up;
facilitate live chats; or watch
(camera) one’s home while one is

away.

Speak directly to it or to one’s
smartphone or PC.

Amazon Echo (3rd generation) on Amazon.com November 2019.
First generation was 2015.

-MIT’s Fluid Interfaces Group (http://fluid.media.mit.edu/vision) works not only on ”responsive
objects” but also on…

-”augmented reality”: enhancing one’s experience of physical spaces w/ digitized info. +
interfaces
-”collaborative interactions”: interfaces for interaction among users
-”programmable materials”: interfaces + machines for control + manipulation of materials

-A stated goal (of 2017) was to make interfaces (beyond the screen) that feel “seamless” +
“natural.”

http://fluid.media.mit.edu/vision

Interface/Interaction Design: Possibilities, Concerns

• UI/UX designers are uniquely challenged to address
the subtleties of interpersonal communication:
personality, tone, phrasing, inflection, spontaneity.

• What interaction designs do you love or find
frustrating? Why?
• Examples to consider: ATMs, the CPP website, Google

search, GPS devices, social-media apps, VR devices,
Domino’s Pizza ordering apps (add your favorites or least
favorites).

Interface/Interaction Design: Possibilities, Concerns;
Discussion of Marc Miquel Ribé reading:

• Designers + consumers of UI/UX design today are
uniquely challenged to address concerns of privacy +
ownership of user data.

• There is also the matter of ”dark UX,” the subject of
Marc Miquel-Ribé’s article, “Dark User Experience”
(2020).

1. How does he define dark UX?
2. Explain what he means by practices of “manipulation” +

how they are different from practices of ”deception.”
3. Examples you’ve personally encountered?
4. Do you agree with the author about the ethical implications

of dark UX?

1960s-1980s:

The Emergence of
Environmentally Conscious Design,

from Fringe to Mainstream

Growing Dissatisfaction w/ Industrial
Design + International Style

• In the late 1950s + the 1960s, design
professionals were growing increasingly
dissatisfied w/ industrial design’s response to
global problems of economic inequity,
disease + environmental pollution.

• The Milan Triennale of the 1960s became
occasions for exhibitions + conventions
about design moving beyond the
obsolescence imperative.

Growing Dissatisfaction w/ Industrial
Design + International Style

• By the early 1970s, there was also a widespread loss
of faith in International Style aesthetics to solve
social problems.

• The failure to build community w/in the many low-
cost, high-density housing projects built in this style
in the 1950s + the 1960s in US cities = symbolic.

• Amid a climate of critique, the 1960s + 1970s was a
fertile period for experiment in alternatives to
mainstream industrial design + International Style.

Victor Papanek (b. Austrian, active Britain, 1926-98) + James Hennessey, prototype for cooling
unit for perishable foods using no electricity, c. 1971. Published in Papanek, Design for the Real
World: Human Ecology and Social Change (1971).

Papanek advocated environmental conservation + addressing basic needs in developing
countries so people could depend less on major external technological investment.

Cover of Nomadic Furniture (1973), the
first in a series of two such titles
published by Papanek + Hennessey.

Note the subtitle of Papanek + Hennessey’s
book: “How to Build and Where to Buy
Lightweight Furniture That Folds, Inflates,
Knocks Down, Stacks, Or Is Disposable and
Can Be Recycled—with Many Easy to Follow
Illustrations.”

This project reveals not only a conservation-
minded approach to design but also one
that emphasizes self-reliance (DIY) rather
than dependence on what the authors saw
as a wasteful consumerist culture +
economic system.

ADHOCISM (1960s-1970s)

• The Adhocism movement, to which the Nomadic
Furniture series partly belongs, advocated improvised
building by people who don’t need to be professional
architects from resources ready at hand.

• Architectural critic + historian Charles Jencks defined it
in a book: Adhocism: The Case for Improvisation (1972).

• Adhocism advocated self-reliance, conservation,
creativity + decentralization of power to define one’s
environment + life (independence from big corporations
+ government).

Drop City, U.S.A., 1965-77. Colorado. Dome housing fabricated by artists + others who “dropped
out” of mainstream society, using tops of cars from scrapyards for 25 cents each.

-An example of adhocism in practice: recycled materials to cut down waste + DIY.

-Drop City, an experimental housing project begun mostly by artists, also exemplified the
amateurism of the movement—encouraging people to embrace DIY despite not being
professional architects.

Joan Grossman, dir. Drop City. Film trailer. 2012.

Richard Buckminster Fuller (U.S., 1895-
1983), patent drawing of the Dymaxion
(“dynamic” + “maximum” + ”tension”)
Bathroom, 1940

Papanek + Adhocists alike were inspired by
the self-taught architect Buckminster
Fuller: early pioneer of environmentally
conscious design. He had critical acclaim +
attention in the 1960s, but most of his
ideas were much earlier (beginning 1930s)
+ were unrealized.

Intended for mass production, but never
so produced, his “Dymaxion Bathroom” =
complete w/ fixtures + plumbing in only 5
sq.ft. of floor space. It weighed only 420
lbs. + had 2 sections: sink + toilet, bath +
shower.

Maximum economy in $ + materials.

R. Buckminster Fuller, Geodesic Dome model, 1952. Elastic cord + metal. H: 20 ¼ “. Diam: 39”.
Model makers = students of Buckminster Fuller. MoMA, NYC.

His most influential design = the “geodesic dome,” made from triangulated rods to be
strong yet light + allow customized divisions of space.

R. Buckminster Fuller, Geodesic dome as United States Pavillon of the Milan Triennale, 1957.

-The geodesic dome design was flexible in working w/ a variety of other materials.
-Here, fabric = suspended from the structure. In on next slide, plastic panels were used.
-Flexible also in scale of execution. This one is relatively small-scale w/ 1 triangle layer.

R. Buckminster Fuller, Montral: United States
Pavilion for EXPO 67: Man and His World,
1967. Given as gift to Montreal. Destroyed by
fire 1976. Restored 1992.

This one shows just how complex the geodesic dome
could be.

This one = as tall as a 20-storey building.

By 1967, “Bucky” = media star (lectures @
universities, TV + magazine interviews) in addition to
being the Counterculture’s inspiration for “drop
cities.”

In early 1960s, he was chosen to design this
structure, the US Pavilion @ EXPO ‘67 (the World’s
Fair).

It housed an exhibition, entitled Creative America,
featuring art + technology.

R. Buckminster Fuller,
door of US Pavilion @
Montreal World
Exposition, 1967.

Detail showing the
complex construction
of triangulated rods in
this example of a
geodesic dome.

R. Buckminster Fuller, Montreal: World Exposition, US Pavilion at night, 1967.

-Light was controlled by mechanically operated shades.
-Exhibits were on 6 floors of platforms accessible by escalators.
-In 1968, it received a design award from the American Institute of Architects (AIA).

1980s: The Rise of “Green Design”

• By the mid-1980s, environmentally conscious
design, newly called “green design,” was
becoming more popular. Businesses began to
recognize eco-conscious design as a potential
market niche AKA “green capitalism.”

• A symptom of this mainstreaming: Beginning in
the late 1980s, there was a proliferation of
exhibitions + publications on “green design,”
which suggest its acceptance by more consumers
+ businesses.

• Examples: the landmark Green Designer exh. @
Design Center, London, 1986, + publications The
Green Consumer Guide, 1988, + The Green
Capitalists, 1989.

Body Shop store, 1980s. Toiletrees + cosmetics company.

-Pioneering example of what was popularized as “green design” + “green capitalism.”
-Success story of the green corp., founded 1976 in UK by Anita Roddik, inspiring other
companies.
-Note refillable container station in store!

Organic cereal packaging, c. 1988.
Cardboard. 8 x 10”. Manufactured by
New England Organic Produce Center.

In the 1970s, organic food industries
began as part of the rise of intertwined
movements of environmentalism + health
consciousness, esp. concern about the
effects of industrialized agriculture on
health.

In the 1980s + 90s, the label “organic”
gained popularity + became part of a
growing convenience-food market.

As “organic” became a lucrative market
niche, organic products attracted top
talent + resources for design + marketing.

To attract a larger market, aesthetics
would increasingly become as important
as appeal to ethics in eco-conscious
design.

Lush “shampoo bars,” c.
2018.

Here is a recent example of
the merger of successful
business + eco-conscious
product via sensual appeal.

Lush designed a shampoo
that is its own container. It
is supposed to last as long
as 3 medium shampoo
bottles (c. $10.45–$14.95
as of 2018).

Lush store display of the
package-free, long-lasting
product “shampoo bars,” c.
2018.

This store display design
makes evocative use of
language + the product
appeals to multiple senses
(w/ color, texture, scent),
thus making an eco-
friendly product attractive
(+ marketable) to
consumers who may or
may not be eco-conscious.

Impossible Foods, Impossible Burger. Launched 2016.
-Here is the ultimate convergence of aesthetic design, eco-consciousness + marketing savvy!
-A massive market success, sold first through select fast-food restaurants, such as Burger King.
-Craftily advertised as “plant-based,” rather than the more alienating “vegan” or “vegetarian,” and
designed to replicate ground beef in every sensory respect.

Discussion of Readings

Victor Papanek (1971):
1. According to Papanek, what is the problem

with industrial design, and what is(are) his
solution(s)?

2. How does Papanek define design, and why do
you think, in the context of his argument, he
defines it that way?

3. Why do you think, in the context of his
argument, he is against patents + copyrights?
Do you agree with him?

Iván Asin (2020):
1. What does Asin consider essential to “D4S”?
2. Which of Asin’s suggestions for D4S can be

most easily implemented today? Which are
harder? Why?

1980s—2000s:

Early “Branding”

1980 to c. 2004: Early “Branding”

• The mid-1980s saw the beginning of a paradigm
shift among corporations in advanced consumer
economies: to define themselves no longer as
producers of goods but as producers of brands
(identities + identifications in the form of concepts
images + consumer experiences)–thus making
marketing the core activity + financial investment of
corporations.

• This shift –as aided by postmodern conditions of
outsourcing + use of part-time or temp. labor, which
increasingly meant the cheapest offshore
production.

View of 42nd Street, “Times Square,” NYC, c. 2000.

The power + value of brands (independent of their products) was demonstrated
famously in 1988: Philip Morris bought Kraft for $12.6 billion, 6 X what the company
was worth on paper. Price = for the word Kraft. This sale quantified what was earlier
intangible.

”Branding” v. Advertising

• Another temporal marker of branding’s ascent: The
1998 United Nations Human Development Report
stated that growth in global ad spending ($435
billion) had outpaced the growth of the world
economy by 1/3.

• However, advertising, like celebrity endorsements,
cultural sponsorships + logo licensing = only a small
part of branding, which encompasses the entire
process of defining + popularizing the brand.

• In an increasingly competitive marketplace of
brands, branding knows no boundaries + has
required colonizing new frontiers of cultural +
physical spaces not yet branded but open to
privatizing/corporate influences.

Late 1990s article reporting on the trend toward
turning airport concourses into shopping mals
featuring outlets by major brands from Gap to
Victoria’s Secret to Starbucks.

In recent decades, branding operations have
extended to or have become more elaborated
in institutional spaces previously unbranded….

Airports + airplanes (as malls)

Train stations (same)

Museums (beyond gift shops, as museums
become more like malls)

Schools (branded educational materials or
research in exchange for funding, food service, et.)

Libraries
Churches
Military bases
Hospitals…etc…..

Claritas (precision marketing) Company’s PRIZM system for breaking down “lifestyle clusters”—
defined by variables including demographics, psychographics, consume preferences, activities,
cultural + political outlooks—by zip code.

-Branding has relied increasingly on market segmentation.
-This has accelerated + been refined since the late 106-s w/ evolution of market
research, as in Claritas’s development of “lifestyle cluster” analysis in the 1980s.
-By 2004, Claritas could break down cluster data to residential block + household levels.

Common Early Branding Tactics
(Before Social Media)

View outside Niketown, London, c. 2000.

Branding tactic 1: Making associations:
Example: architecture of Niketowns, beg. early 1990s. A longstanding technique of
upscale marketing = drawing formal analogies between a brand’s retail spaces +
institutions of high culture (e.g., art galleries).

Niketown stores were developed in cities w/ relatively high median incomes + were
designed like museums to appeal to upscale targets: “exhibits” w/ pedestals, displays of
collectible memorabilia among items for sale, display niches w/ curatorial explanatory
texts + more space given to display than merchandise.

From 2006 brochure for Mini Cooper, obtained from Universal City, California.

Branding tactic 2: Storytelling:
To identify brand w/ particular people + lifestyle types, use of narrative techniques.

From 2006 brochure for Mini Cooper, obtained from Universal City, California.

-The narrative(s) = constructed not only in single spreads but throughout the brochure.
-Narrative techniques: scene setting, character development, plot.

From 2006 brochure for Mini Cooper, obtained from Universal City, California.

How does this two-page spread in the brochure tell a story?

Branding Tactic 3: Creation of
Media Formats

• Creating formats gives media brands (all types:
TV, web, etc.) their “personalities.” Formats
encompass qualities of setting (wardrobes,
décor), plot (pacing, sequences + their length,
kinds of action), p.o.v. (camera angles,
perspectives, “voice”) + graphics (including
animation).

• Formats = crucial to the definition of media
brands.

• In the era of branding, formats = designed as
much to repel audiences outside the target
market as to attract the targeted.

Branding Tactic 4: Environmental
Theming

• Theming = design of spaces to evoke other
places or times. Involves theatrical techniques
of scene-setting + designing spaces to “stage”
the special events (e.g., entertainments) or
normal activities (e.g., shopping) to be
encouraged.

• Like the other branding tactics, theming = not
invented in the contemporary period (recall:
World’s Fairs, followed by theme parks). But it
is a powerful tool in branding.

Branding Tactic 4: Environmental
Theming

• Theming may be more or less overt.

• Overt theming makes symbolic
representations of the theme.

• Less overt theming makes formal
analogies to a theme w/o iconic
resemblances to it.

Jon Jerde, City Walk, Universal City, California, developed 1992.

Urbanism = a (less overt) theme in some suburban mall design, as here.

Interior with restaurants inside The Venetian Hotel and Casino, Las Vegas, 2007.

-Example of overt theming: The Venetian (here simulating Piazza San Marco in Venice,
Italy). Also an example of the overtly-themed environment functioning as a mall.

Interior with shopping strip within
The Venetian Hotel and Casino, Las
Vegas, 2007.

There must be a spatial progression,
as here, that extends the theme in a
way that incorporates distinct
component brands w/ their own
aesthetics w/o disrupting the mall
theme or the components’ styles.

Important to this negotiation =
placement of pedestrian
passageways, seating, advertising,
stores + restaurants.

Interior of shopping strip within The
Venetian Hotel and Casino, Las Vegas,
2007

Transitions between the architectural
style of the themed environment +
that of the branded component (here:
store) show designers’ attempt avoid
conflict between the themed mall’s
aesthetics + those of its branded
components.

This conflict is partly avoided well
before the architectural design phase.
In the market research phase,
developers choose mall stores +
restaurants, etc., for compatibility of
their brand images + target markets.

Designing Branded Experiences

• The theming (overt or less overt) of spaces
is a way of designing branded experiences.
(brand-distinctive fusions of entertainment
shopping).

• This involves construction of “scenes”
(overtly symbolic or not) + transitional
passages. Movement is propelled by scenic
“landmarks” (unique stand-out features)

Designing Branded Experiences

• Ultimately, the consumer’s relation to
the environment is a loosely “scripted”
interaction + navigation (parallels in non-
architectural space: video games or web
sites as ”cybermalls”).

• Disneyland is the prototypical historical
example of theming used for branding
via the mall type.

Hayden Saunders of marketing firm Epsilon EMEA, from PPT presentation of 2011.

-Experience Design/Experience Marketing: emerges mid-1990s.

-It represents the next level of collaboration between design + marketing. From a marketing
perspective, experience is engagement w/ a brand via a system of “touch points”—product,
packaging, message, consumer service, social media, etc.

Capital One Bank lobby-as-café. Image from Capital One website, December 2018.

-From a design perspective, experiences must be “staged” to create interactions between
consumer + brand so that the experiences are positive + memorable.

-Brand managers B. Joseph Pine II + James H. Gilmore were early + influential theorists of
experience design + experience marketing. Their 1998 article “Welcome to the Experience
Economy” defined the historical origins + basic tenets of so-called “experience design.”

Discussion of Reading: B. Joseph Pine II + James
H. Gilmore, “Welcome to the Experience
Economy” (1998):

1. The authors briefly explain the historical origins of the
“experience economy.” What is the ”experience economy
+ what did it evolve from?

2. According to the authors what is the goal of designing
”experiences”?

3. After considering what the authors say are

a. the 2 dimensions of “experiences,”
b. the 4 realms of “experiences,” and
c. the 5 key principles of “experience design,”

come up with a contemporary example of “experience design”
that you think is successful. Present to the class what it is, how
the “experience” was designed + why the group thinks it’s
successful. (If the group disagrees, present the disagreement
for class discussion.)

• Sacreen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.56.30 PM 1
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.34 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.38 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.39 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.41 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.46 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.47 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.48 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.50 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.52 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.53 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.55 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.57 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.49.58 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.00 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.01 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.03 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.06 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.08 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.09 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.11 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.13 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.14 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.16 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.17 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.19 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.20 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.22 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.24 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.26 PM
• Screen Shot 2020-07-04 at 2.50.27 PM