I completely agree. Regarding the main question, this happens in part because recycling is already widely understood and supported by existing infrastructure. It’s relatively easy to implement, communicate, and measure. For many organisations, it becomes the most convenient way to show progress or commitment without having to change how products are designed, manufactured, or delivered. In a way, it enables action within the current system's boundaries.

According to www.bain.com, www.sirconsulting.com, and ycp.com, recycling remains the main focus for many circular economy experts because it offers a practical, low-risk entry point into sustainable practices. Many organizations already possess the necessary infrastructure and familiarity with waste management, so integrating recycling initiatives involves leveraging existing systems rather than completely overhauling product design or supply chain operations. This approach allows companies to realize quick, measurable environmental and financial benefits, which is critical for securing stakeholder buy-in when transitioning from a linear to a circular model.

Moreover, recycling is often seen as easier to implement than more transformative strategies such as product redesign, remanufacturing, or developing completely closed-loop supply chains. These more ambitious initiatives typically demand significant upfront investments, entail complex changes in organizational processes, and require industry-wide collaboration and sometimes new regulatory frameworks. In contrast, recycling initiatives can be scaled relatively quickly and offer immediate returns, making them a favored "low-hanging fruit" in the early stages of circular economy transformation.

It's also important to note that focusing on recycling does not mean that companies are ignoring other circular strategies. Rather, recycling often serves as a stepping stone; by establishing a reliable recycling system, businesses can build the necessary experience, metrics, and stakeholder trust to gradually move toward more systemic and transformative changes. Many consultants advocate starting with recycling to demonstrate a tangible impact before embarking on a full-scale transformation toward more advanced circular practices like remanufacturing or service-based models.

While recycling might be easier to implement initially, it is just one component of a broader circular economy strategy. The incremental success gained through recycling can pave the way for deeper changes in product design, business models, and resource management practices. As more companies gain experience and witness the benefits of early circular initiatives, there is a natural progression toward integrating more transformative, system-level changes that can fundamentally reshape how resources are used and valued.

Consider exploring how complementary strategies—like designing products for durability, establishing remanufacturing systems, or shifting to product-as-a-service models—can work alongside recycling to create even more robust circular economies. This balanced approach mitigates risks and accelerates the transition from a waste-centric mindset to one that re-envisions the entire product lifecycle.

Jaime A Mesa

Although the circular economy encompasses a broader range of strategies, many experts and consultants, known as "circular economists," still primarily focus on recycling, while other key strategies such as reuse, repair, or redesigning products are often overlooked. Recycling, although important, often receives more attention because it is easier to implement and explain. However, an excessive focus on recycling can limit the potential for deeper and more sustainable changes that the circular economy requires, such as reducing waste production and optimizing the product lifecycle. Circularity is not about "end-of-pipe" solutions; it is about changing the way products are designed, produced, and consumed, thereby promoting sustainability at all levels, from product design to its final disposal.