This presentation contains three sections. First I shortly state what is my 'circular economics' book is about; then I infer that in fact the question revolves around problems of economic valuations (here I discuss them in terms of 'economy-merit relations'). I will discuss four sympathetic models that engage with this problem and inventory their strengths and weaknesses - briefly. Then I argue why I think that the capital-commons dichotomy will help us make our case.

1. The circular economy:
Capital vs Commons,
and how to start winning
Socrates Schouten, 19 April 2016
WUR Development & Social Change
www.socrates.nu // @soc_sch

2. Outline
1. My book in short
2. Economy-merit relations
3. Capital vs Commons

3. • Why the rapid uptake of ‘circular
economy’?
• Nice discourse for business & gov’t
• Inspiring vocabulary for the ecologically
minded
My book / The question

4. 1. Economy — finitude — growth
2. New business models
3. The society, city, and policy perspective
4. Capitalism in the 21st century
5. Circularity beyond the economical
My book / Chapters

5. • Circular economy: change of discourse
offers opportunity
• But already well on its way of
reaffirming economic liberalism and
corporate action
• We need our own narrative, and I like to
call it ‘the commons’
My book / Main message

6. • pro: It puts economics into clever perspective
• con: Economics inevitably in the middle
• con: Means—ends dichotomy not very ecologist
Economy—merit relations / 1 / Daly’s ends
ultimate
means
intermediate
means
intermediate
ends
ultimate
ends
economicsnatural sciences humanities

7. • pro: Vivid concept, putting
‘humanity’ center stage
• pro: ‘Ends’ more critically
expressed in human rights terms
• con: Is there such a space, and
can economic development
mediate it?
• con: Again, dissociation of people
and nature
Economy—merit relations / 2 / Doughnut economics

8. • pro: Strong and straightforward proposition
• con: Perhaps a bit too business friendly
Economy—merit relations / 3 / Environmental fiscal reform
extracted
value
added
value

9. • pro: Strong and straightforward proposition
• pro: Citizen entitlements; business auctions
• con: Perhaps a bit too… clever?
• My guess: Need to strengthen ‘merit’ logic
Economy—merit relations / 4 / Cap-auction-share

10. a merit logic?
1. New ‘organic economy’
2. Decoupling? Or recoupling?
3. Common, reciprocal, goods
4. The economical and the ecological

11. the Common(s)

12. Barnes 2006: Capitalism 3.0

13. Barnes 2006: Capitalism 3.0

14. Barnes 2006: Capitalism 3.0

15. • process: extraction, accumulation,
trickle-down
• pro: strong, legible, ‘taxable’
• con: amoral, evasive, depleting
Same dichotomy, different take
capital commons
• process: creation, circulation,
emergence
• pro: resilient, generative, lateral
• con: complex, latent

16. • process: extraction, accumulation,
trickle-down
• pro: strong, legible, ‘taxable’
• con: amoral, evasive, depleting
Same dichotomy, different take
capital commons
• process: creation, circulation,
emergence
• pro: resilient, generative, lateral
• con: complex, latent
limited extraction
taxing: share rents
cultivate
formalize

17. • Multinationals: keep detailed records of their use of the commons & pay
• Sme’s: subject to simpler tax scheme
• Citizens: organize in commons institutions and get gov’t support
Economy—merit relations / The commons ‘solution’
commons: describes and delineates the ‘merit’ domain of people & nature
… Does this survive critical scrutiny?

18. • My big fat proposition: it is possible to
bring to life a broad concept of the
commons that provides a vocabulary with
which ‘capital-first’ institutions are avoided
www.socrates.nu // @soc_sch
Commons first!