Dear Lucio

I am an admirer of "our common future' publication and a defender of cirdular economy.

I don't think that there is greenwashing in it. What is hidden?

An object is fabricated, used and recycled. Of course there are costs in recycling, but it preserves the utility of the raw material initially employed. It helps in reducing logging, mining, water, energy, that can be put to better uses. It is not the same considering energy and raw materials to fabricate a can of cola, than to use recycled cans, the same for paper, glass, plastic and many other utilities.

Naturally, CE produces externalities, like the reduction of employment in many industries, but also generate work and savings for others. Do not forget that we are not the owners of a country wealth. We must save them for future generations and that is where CE helps.

To find out the net loss or gains, there are tools like MCDM that considers gains and losses and reach a balance.

Think about reductions in landfills, when part of domestic garbage, as high as 30%, is sent to cement plants furnaces, and used as fuel. Think about used cars that are sent to blast furnaces, when they still contain useful parts like tires, engines, and certain mechanisms, as well as plasrtic, which are removed and sold to perople needing them. There is significant and ;positive externality here, and it is the savings for people.

Does it make sense to melt together with the car body, very expesnive parts as catalytic converters, equiped with very expensive platinum?

In domestic garbage, when it is classified from the City Hall, there are multiple elements that arer used by artists, the aninal food industry, and metalurgical industries, and many others

In the current context and for a long time traditional economic thinking and enquiry has brought great steps forward in many fields. However, it has always acknowledged some of its short comings, two in particular, among the many, being the greening and the climate smarting of economies. These two aspects though require not just, for example, expansion of academic courses in these and research outputs, but require a cultural change in how economics is viewed. The circular economy is a good example of this, and how cultural changes are required to not only expand its diffusion, but embedding it in people's minds. It is interesting to see how over the industrialization period of Europe for example, which is still much underway, this circularity conception has been lost. Interestingly, many still practice such an economy, but in dire contexts of poverty, where everything becomes circular out of necessity and need, but also as per an interesting realization that resources are finite. Circularity effectively makes resources a lot less finite, but such a conception, has, and unfortunately be obfuscated, by rampant and extremist neo-liberalism mind-sets, that undermines liberalism itself.

Dear Nolberto, thank you for taking the time to write, so far all those promoting circular economic thinking now have replied with silence.

I am admirer of WCED 1987/Report Our Common Future as it was the FIRST TIME the academic community recognized formally that the externality neutrality assumption under which traditional market thinking works was wrong, and they called formally for going beyond TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC THINKING as usual to address the social and environmental issues they documented head on; and be able to internalize that way social and/or environmental issues using higher level ways of economic thinking where they are endogenous issues, not exogenous issues…WCED 1987 did not say GO CIRCULAR TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC THINKING as CIRCULARITY WAS NOT THE PROBLEM as they knew that TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC THINKING IS AND HAS BEEN CIRCULAR SINCE 1776 BY ASSUMPTION ONLY due to that externality neutrality assumptions mentioned above. I am also a formal academic critic of it as it had a sustainability problem, but they thought or acted as if they had a sustainable development problem.

Nolberto, you need to know what was wrong with traditional economic thinking, to understand why the 1987 WCED told us to leave this thinking behind in order to fix or manage those issues in more responsible ways, and since making traditional economy thinking circular now by RECOGNIZING THAT SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL EXTERNALITIES ARE REAL AND THEY ARE STILL BEING EXTERNALIZED then both the linear traditional market and the circular traditional market are pollution production markets. See externalizing environmental costs when linear by assumption and when externalizing environmental cost when circular knowing now the cost are real you get the same environmental pollution problem the WCED 1987 documented.

Nolberto, to understand what is hidden or left unsaid when using academic tunneling to push this circular economic thinking you need to read outside traditional economic thinking, linear or circular. Have you ever seen any of the following publications?

Thinking beyond business as usual ARTICLES available in Researchgate and Academia EDU

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 101: What was wrong with the structure of Adam Smith’s traditional market model? What are the main implications of this?. Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.2, February, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2010. What If Markets Have Always Been Distorted? Would It Then Be a Good Fix to Add Fair Trade Margins to Correct Distorted Agricultural Market Prices?, Journal of Sustainability, Issue 2, Number 4(Spring), Rio Rancho, New Mexico USA.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2012. Complex and Man-Made Markets: Are We Currently Approaching Sustainability in a Backward and More Chaotic Way in Terms of Economic Thinking?, In: The Mother Pelican Journal, Vol. 8, No. 8, August, Ed. Luis Gutierrez, PhD, USA.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 109: Linking perfect green market theory to the circular green economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 14 Nº 7, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 107: Comparing the structure of the circular green economy with that of the circular environmental externality management based economy to identify differences as well as to point out the market implications of these differences, Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.6, November, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 110: Linking perfect red market theory to the circular red economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 15 Nº 1, January, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 111: Linking perfect sustainability market theory to the circular sustainability based economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 15 Nº 2, February, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 177: What are environmental pollution production markets, environmental pollution reduction markets, environmental pollution management markets and no environmental pollution production markets? How do they work?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 17, Nº 4, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2000. " An Overview of Some of the Policy Implications of the Eco-Economic Development Market", In: Environmental Management and Health, Prof. Walter Leal Filho/PhD(ed), Vol. 11, No. 2, Pp. 157-174, MCB University Press.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2003. Linking Sustainable Development Indicators by Means of Present/Absent Sustainability Theory and Indices: The Case of Agenda 21, GDS, IIG, Spain

Muñoz, Lucio, 2009. Beyond Traditional Sustainable Development: Sustainability Theory and Sustainability Indices Under Ideal Present-Absent Qualitative Comparative Conditions, En: Mineria Sustentable, REDESMA, Vol.3(1), March, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2010. "Introducing a Simple Qualitative Comparative Dichotomy Approach to State and Clarify Sustainable Development and Sustainability Related Concepts and Issues”, Journal of Sustainability, Issue 2, Number 4(Spring), Rio Rancho, New Mexico USA.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 183: How the structure of a bipolar world where developing countries have dwarf green markets and developed countries have green markets would look like? Which world would collapse first in an open system environment?, In: European Journal of Science, Innovation and Technology(EJCIT), Vol. 3, No. 5, Pp. 178-196, A.L. Publisher, ISSN: 278-4936.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 177: What are environmental pollution production markets, environmental pollution reduction markets, environmental pollution management markets and no environmental pollution production markets? How do they work?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 17, Nº 4, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 176: Plotting the perfect market shifts and dwarf market shifts solutions to distorted traditional market pricing mechanisms in the same plane to point out the nature of remaining sustainability gaps under paradigm shift avoidance processes, In: International Journal of Latest Engineering and Management Research (IJLEMR), ISSN: 2455-4847, www.ijlemr.com, Volume 08, Issue 03, March, Pp. 39-50, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 179: Can we transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmental clean economy with the use of green markets? If Yes, why?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), April-May 2023, Volume 6, Issue 02, Pp. 115-131, ISSN: 2582-0745, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 162: Can we transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmental clean economy with the use of dwarf green markets? If no, why not?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 17, Nº 2, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 175: Contrasting the working of perfect market and of dwarf market solutions to distorted traditional market pricing mechanisms to point out the nature of sustainability black holes created under paradigm shift avoidance processes, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 17, Nº 1, La Paz, Bolivia

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 174: Using the sustainability market price to derive the three imperfect market ways to manage the consequences of distorted traditional market pricing mechanisms under externality cost management, In: International Journal of Latest Engineering and Management Research (IJLEMR), Vol. 8, Issue 1, January, Pp. 01-13, ISSN: 2455-4847, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thought 173: Using the sustainability market price to derive the three perfect market ways to correct distorted traditional market pricing mechanisms under externality cost internalization, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 16, Nº 11, November, La Paz, Bolivia

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thoughts 143: Pointing out the different roads towards sustainability markets when placing the traditional market model of Adam Smith under the Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm transformation loop analytically and graphically, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 16, Nº 10, October, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thoughts 140: How can the consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?, In: International Journal of Latest Research in Engineering and Technology(IJLRET), Vol. 8, Issue 10, Pp. 05-17, October, ISSN: 2454-5031, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thoughts 139: How can the 2012 road to transition from environmental pollution based traditional economies to the environmentally clean economies that the world never built be pointed out?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), Vol. 5, No. 05, Pp. 65-77, ISSN: 2582-0745, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 179: Can we transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmental clean economy with the use of green markets? If Yes, why?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), April-May 2023, Volume 6, Issue 02, Pp. 115-131, ISSN: 2582-0745, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2023. Sustainability thought 162: Can we transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmental clean economy with the use of dwarf green markets? If no, why not?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 17, Nº 2, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thought 171: How to state the structure of the Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm evolution loop for the traditional market of Adam Smith when shifting to sustainability markets, to red markets, and to green markets under academic integrity?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 16, Nº 8, August, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thought 170: What happens to the Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm evolution loop under willful academic blindness? What are the implications of this?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), Vol. 5, No. 04, Pp. 251-260, ISSN: 2582-0745, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 128: How can the thinking behind sustainability based market expansions and traditional market based economic expansions be contrasted using pareto optimality thinking? How are these expansions linked to sustainability gap dynamics?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), March – April 2021, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pp. 37-57, ISSN: 2582-0745, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 126: Are environmental externality management based production and consumption bundles inconsistent with green pareto efficiency and with pareto efficiency principles at the same time? If yes, why?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 15 Nº 2, February, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 127: Pareto optimality under the sustainability eye: Is the traditional pareto efficient bundle the second most undesirable bundle on the pareto optimality sustainability line? If yes, why?, In: International Journal of Management studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR), Vol. 3, Issue 1, January-February, Pp 180-196, ISSN: 2582-0265, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. If Going From Free Markets to Free Markets Is the Science Based Approach: What is Then the Model Structure, Price Structure, Choice Structure and the Knowledge Structure and Related Gaps of the 2012 Paradigm Shift From Perfect Traditional Market to Perfect Green Market Thinking?, In: Insights into Economics and Management ,Vol. 5, Chapter 1, Pp 1-17, Book Publisher International, January 21, ISBN: 978-93-90516-50-6 (Print), ISBN: 978-93-90516-51-3(eBook), London, UK.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 130: Can green economies and green growth exist without green markets? If not, why not? What is the current main development implication of this?, In: International Journal of Management studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR), vol.-3, issue-1, January-February, Pp 50-65, ISSN: 2582 - 0265, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 106: Can we solve an environmental sustainability problem by managing the consequences of that problem? If not, why not?, Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.5, May, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 104: How the shift from traditional markets to red markets would have looked like had the 1987 Brundtland Commission recommended then a social sustainability fix?, In: International Journal of Management studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR), Vol. 2, Issue 2, March-April, Pp 127-137, ISSN: 2582-0265, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 103: How the shift from traditional markets to green markets would have looked like had the 1987 Brundtland Commission recommended then an environmental sustainability fix?, Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.3, March, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020. Sustainability thoughts 102: How the shift from traditional markets to sustainability markets would have looked like had the 1987 Brundtland Commission recommended then a sustainability fix?, In: International Journal of Business Management and Economic Review, Pp. 110-120, Vol. 3, No. 02, ISSN: 2581-4664.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2019. The Flipping of Traditional Economic Thinking: Contrasting the Working of Dwarf Green Market Thinking with that of Green Market Thinking to Highlight Main Differences and Implications, In: Global Journal of Management and Business Research: E Marketing, Volume 19, Issue 4, Version 1.0 , Framingham, Massachusetts, USA.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2017. Is Environmental Externality Management a Correction of Adam Smith’s Model to Make it Environmentally Friendly and Shift it Towards Green Markets or is it a Distortion on Top of Another Distortion?. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Studies, 4(1): 1-16.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2016. Beyond Traditional Market Thinking: What is the Structure of the Perfect Green market?, In: International Journal of Science Social Studies Humanities and Management (IJSSSHM), Vol. 2, No. 5., May, Ed. Dr. Maya Pant, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2019. From Traditional Markets to Green Markets: A Look at Markets Under Perfect Green Market Competition, Weber Economics & Finance (ISSN:2449-1662), Vol. 7 (1) 2019, Article ID wef_253, 1147-1156

Muñoz, Lucio, 2016. Beyond Both Red Socialism Thinking and Traditional Market Thinking: What Is the Structure of the Perfect Red Market. In: International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management Research(IJAEMR), Vol.1, Issue 5, Pp 546--568, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2019. From Traditional Markets to Red Markets: A Look at Markets Under Perfect Socially Friendly Market Competition, In: International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR), Volume 1, Issue 2, March-April, Ed. Dr.Vishal Muvel, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2016. Beyond Green Market Thinking: What would be the Structure of the Perfect Sustainability Market?, In: International Journal of Science Social Studies Humanities and Management (IJSSSHM), Vol. 2, No. 5, May, Ed. Dr. Maya Pant, India.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2019. From Traditional Markets to Sustainability Markets: A Look at Markets Under Perfect Sustainability Market Competition, In: International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR), Volume 1, Issue 1, January-February, Ed. Dr.Vishal Muvel, India.

Martin, thank you for writing. You did not try to answer the question,, but based on your comment I would say:

I used to think in similar ways about economic thinking and its evolution, science based evolution a la Thomas Kuhn, but I stopped thinking that way since 2012 RIO +20/the future we want/UNCSD as then consensus was built to give priority to the environmental issue and they indicated they were going GREEN MARKETS, GREEN GROWTH AND GREEN ECONOMIES to finanly address this environmenal sustainability issue, but then soon later they went the way of dwarf green markets, dwarf green growth, and dwarf green economies, where GREENWASHING was normalized, formally and informally By this time 2012 TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC THINKING, CIRCULAR OR NOT, was left behind as due to paradigm shift knowledge gaps it does not work neither in green markets and in dwarf green markets.

If you know what a perfect green market is you can see what a dwarf green market is, and then is easy for you to see greenwashing at work formally and informally.

If you know what is wrong with the traditional market pricing mechanism a la Adam Smith in terms of socio-environmentally unfriendliness, you know what you need to do to correct that market failure, and if you know that the same problem exist in Circular economic thinking and you know that nothing is or has been done to correct that market failure and you know that is the case and you do not mention it when promoting circular economic thinking then you have the situation when QUIETLY THE ROOTCAUSE OF THE PROBLEM is being offer as the solution to the same problem, which is WHY the WCED told us to go beyond traditional economic thinking AS USUAL to solve these issues embedded in traditional market thinking.

In short, pushing circular economic thinking now like the period 1987/WCED /sustainable development to 2012/RIO + 20 /GREEN market thinking aimed among other things at solving the environmental crisis WHERE TRADITIONAL MARKET THINKING WAS LEFT BEHING did not happen is contrary to Thomas Kuhn.s paradigm evolution loop as the ADNORMALITY the 1987 WCED report and RIO + 20 conference WAS TRYING TO CORRECT IS STILL EMBEDDED IN CIRCULARE ECONOMIC THINKING.

Notice that going circular economy thinking means making the socio-environmental market failure PERMANENT with no incentive to go to pollution reduction markets and no incentives to transition to the environmentally clean markets.

I suspect the HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT will go from traditional economic thinking to circular economic thinking ignoring what it actually has happened since 1987 just to preserve the status economic thought contrary to Thomas Kuhn's expectations.

If you have a view on the possible answer to the question:Why circular economy thinking is more than greenwashing?, please share it.

Otherwise, I will leave it here,.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Lucio, who are you to tell me, what i should write or not write and if i should answer the question or not ...and all with a lecturing tone that is not only arrogant, but definitely alienates from any form of scientific discussion....further what you write is so narrow and mostly euro-centric in nature its beyond belief! Open your mind and critically think before letting go on your cacophony of nonsense

Dear Lucio

Thank you for your answer but it does not convince me.

Obviosly, your ample knowledge on Economics and the long list of papers published - that seems like you are submitting a CV - and your different theories, that I am in no condition to discuss, since I am not an economist, allows me to act as somebody only using common sense.

You are a Bolivian, if circular economy or common sense, were applied many decades ago, you would have now a thriving industry derived from the tin that was exploted by nationals (Patiño), and foreigners, and exported crude, even without concentration. What did you get? An enormous externality, of course - never accounted for - derived from the depletion of that natural resource.Please, consider that I am not crticizing your country policies, only commenting an historic fact.

I support Martin words that reflect reality, as when he says that poor people use and reuse. They do not care about what Adam Smith or Maynard Keynes say, they use common sense.

Your words do not explain anything, albeit perhaps they make sense to economists, but not to the common people like the thousands that read it in RG. Pls, tell me, what can we extract from them?

You talk about dwarf markets. Curiously, in December 16, 2022, you asked the question in RG " What is a dwarf market?"

I am curious of this phrase of yours: "Notice that going circular economy thinking means making the socio-environmental market failure PERMANENT with no incentive to go to pollution reduction markets and no incentives to transition to the environmentally clean markets."

Could you please explain without technicisms what this sentence mean? "Notice that going circular economy thinking means making the socio-environmental market failure"

Martin, I decided to comment on your comment because I used to think like you when you said “In the current context and for a long time traditional economic thinking and enquiry has brought great steps forward in many fields.”, but I changed my mind since 2012 Rio +20.

My apologies if my comment on your comment led you to this angry reaction, I should have not replied to your comment as it was not directly related to the specific question relevant here to avoid reactions like this.

I usually keep focus on those who take the time to first share their views on the answer to the posted question to avoid moving away from what is relevant to the question, and I made a mistake here by extending my comments unnecessarily, So again my apologies.

Let’s leave it here Martin.

Have a nice day!

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Nolberto, I noticed “common sense” as your driver when you said “I am an admirer of "our common future' publication and a defender of circular economy. I don't think that there is greenwashing in it. What is hidden?”

And this told me that you cannot see why circular economic thinking may be greenwashing because you cannot see what is hidden.

An admirer of 1987 WCED/Our Common Future knows or should know what was wrong with traditional market thinking then, which had led to the social and environmental issues the WCED commission documented then, and which they tried to address through sustainable development thinking.

If you cannot see what the issues traditional market thinking had and how they can be fixed or just patched as the WCED saw it, you cannot see too those issues in circular market thinking.

Since to know what is hidden you need to know what was and what is wrong with traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith in 1987 and now, I took the liberty to share with you material you may have not seen, some of which are focused on what was wrong and how to fix it or how it has been patched.

My apologies as it seems that sharing work in good faith with you made you think I was showing off. I did it because common sense when you are inside the box does not help you to see what you can only see from outside the box.

Common sense will not help you here to see what is hidden or what leads to greenwashing.

By the way I am Canadian, not Bolivian if that is relevant to you. I publish all over the world, UK, EU, Asian/India, Latin America and the USA., where ever editors are interested in outside the box ideas.

I will leave it here Nolberto to avoid moving away from the core aspects of this question.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Dear Lucio

Sorry for my delay in answering you. I had not seen your response until yesterday

LM- Nolberto, I noticed “common sense” as your driver when you said “I am an admirer of "our common future' publication and a defender of circular economy. I don't think that there is greenwashing in it. What is hidden?”

NM. You are asking the question, not me

LM- And this told me that you cannot see why circular economic thinking may be greenwashing because you cannot see what is hidden.

NM. May be, please illustrate me on what is hidden

LM- An admirer of 1987 WCED/Our Common Future knows or should know what was wrong with traditional market thinking then, which had led to the social and environmental issues the WCED commission documented then, and which they tried to address through sustainable development thinking.

If you cannot see what the issues traditional market thinking had and how they can be fixed or just patched as the WCED saw it, you cannot see too those issues in circular market thinking.

NM. You are repeating yourself; this is said in your first paragraph.

LM- Since to know what is hidden you need to know what was and what is wrong with traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith in 1987 and now, I took the liberty to share with your material you may have not seen, some of which are focused on what was wrong and how to fix it or how it has been patched.

NM. You continue eluding the matter. By the way ‘The wealth of Nations’ was written in 1776. There has been a lot of changes in the more that two centuries interval, a lot of things that did not exist at that time. Whatever Adam Smith believed or thought maybe right or wrong. It was not a physic law. Remember that during 16 centuries the world was made to believe that the Sun travelled around the Earth, until Copernicus and Galilei demonstrated that it was the opposite

LM- My apologies as it seems that sharing work in good faith with you made you think I was showing off.

NM. Well, to be honest, yes. I am also a writer, but I believe that in my 10 years in RG I never have seen something like it.

If you want to to see my writings I suggest entering in Google with my name

LM- I did it because common sense when you are inside the box does not help you to see what you can only see from outside the box.

NM. I do not think that I am inside the box, when precisely, as you can verify, I was and I am against many structured ideas and procedures

LM- Common sense will not help you here to see what is hidden or what leads to greenwashing.

NM. What is the point, Lucio? Give me reasons, examples, as I did with you. If you want to discuss, do not dodge the issue.

LM- By the way I am Canadian, not Bolivian if that is relevant to you.

NM. Why should it be relevant for me? I was born, raised and educated in Argentina, and I am as well a Canadian and European citizen. Obviously, I wrongly assumed that you were Bolivian, considering your very strong Spanish name and surname (Did you know that Spanish is the only language that uses the letter ‘ñ’ ), and because, digging in Internet, there are a lot of your publications in Bolivia and India

LM. I publish all over the world, UK, EU, Asian/India, Latin America and the USA., where ever editors are interested in outside the box ideas.

NM. Good for you. However, if I may, I would like to remind you that what is really important is how many people read and cite your papers, or how many university libraries have a copy of them

LM- I will leave it here Nolberto to avoid moving away from the core aspects of this question.

NM. In my opinion you should, since up to now you said nothing. Sorry Lucio, I am not convinced with words, I work with facts. For instance, tell me why you are against circular economy

Best regards

If you want, and since I live in Kingston, Ontario, we can talk over the phone (613 770 7123). It good be nice to speak in Spanish if you want

Nolberto

Thank you for taking the time to write Nolberto.

I am glad to know you were born and educated in Argentina, some of my first publications appeared in Revista THEOMAI, Argentina.

If in your first posting you would have said something like in your view circular economic thinking is not, and therefore, it can not be more than greenwashing using greenwashing thinking and provide the environmental reasons you think so, then the sharing of ideas would have been very easy. But technically answer a question with another question when you wrote “I don't think that there is greenwashing in it. What is hidden?

I made a mistake providing you information that could help you see what is hidden inside a traditional market theory that sounds NICER in environmental terms when you call it circular, I should have instead just ask you “Why do you think circular economic thinking is not greenwashing? And go from there.

My apologies Nolberto, I will leave it here and let’s agree to disagree.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Fine

I respect your point of view, but as I said, I am not convinced

Glad to have discussed with you

Best regards

NolberTO

Greenwashing refers to marketing strategies or practices designed to create a more positive environmental picture than it actually is, often used to conceal unsustainable practices. or to gain commercial benefits from environmental reputation. However, the circular economy is more than just greenwashing because it is designed to solve real environmental and economic problems, not just focusing on an image change without bringing about real change . Here are some benefits of a circular economy:

• Reduce waste: The circular economy focuses on neutralizing waste, reducing emissions and reusing raw materials.

• Increase the efficiency of resource labor: The circular economy focuses on reusing raw materials and used materials, reusing them in business operations.

• **Reduce the use of raw materials: The circular economy focuses on dynamically targeting the use of raw materials.

• **Dynamic development of raw materials: The circular economy focuses on the mobilization of raw materials.

Ngian you use raw materials. The circular economy is a raw material resource. Raw material economy. Raw material economy. The financial economy is in danger. The financial economy is in danger. The financial economy is in danger. Economy raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials dynamic raw materials raw materials raw materials raw materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials Dangerous materials

Circular economy thinking is not just about greenwashing for a number of reasons:

• Unequal impacts: While there may be some environmental benefits from applying circular economy principles, their impacts are not always uniform. There may be unwanted fluctuations or unexpected negative impacts on the environment.

• Risk and cost management: Implementing measures that comply with circular economy principles often require large initial investments and can increase costs for businesses and consumers. This can create economic pressure and increase production costs, not only for businesses but also for consumers.

• Technological challenges: Sometimes, implementing circular economy solutions requires significant technological advancement and investment in research and development. This can be challenging for countries or businesses that do not have the necessary resources to implement these measures.

• Regulatory and policy challenges: Effective regulations and policies are needed to promote and protect circular economy activities. However, establishing regulations and policies can be complex and require cooperation among stakeholders.

• Changing culture and consumer behavior: To promote circular economic thinking, it is necessary to change people's culture and consumption behavior. This can be a time-consuming process and requires significant support and education from government and civil society organizations.

In conclusion, while circular economy thinking can bring a number of environmental benefits, it is also necessary to consider and address the challenges and negative impacts that may arise from implementing measures This.

Trung, good day. Can you please take the time to read the context on which this question is based?

I see you understand the concept of greenwashing, but keep in mind that the part "more than" means "worse than" as greenwashing is a NEGATIVE CONCEPT. Hence, you need to think a little bit more carefully.

Keep in mind, greenwashing works becomes the the word GREEN sounds good.

We know since 1987 WCED that traditional economic thinking has led the social and environmental issues of the day and that is why we haven been trying(1987 to 2023) to leave it behind, the circular economy has the same problems, BUT THE WORD CIRCULAR SOUNDS GOOD.

Respectfully yours;