Chapter 6: Discussion
6.1 What drives the paradigm shift?
that could jeopardise the transition and allows challengers the space for giving input.
Lastly, our empirial findings also point at changes in the broader field environment and related fields that impacted this shift. However, we suggest that a more sophisticated study is needed to fully address such factors.
6.1.1 Social skill and frame management for systemic change
In addressing the first question, we draw on our empirical findings to argue that a critical factor triggering and maintaing the paradigm shift towards circular economy has been the capacity of some actors to bridge perspectives and mobilize other actors. Fligstein and McAdam (2012) refer to this ability as social skill and note that socially skilled actors induce cooperation by creating “shared meaning and collective identities” (p. 46). This is done by listening empathetically to other actors to frame an issue and a desired course of action in a way that resonates with other actors’ existing perception of themselves. We interpret social skill to be underpinning the first three dynamics identified in our analysis. We elaborate below on each of them and propose a contribution to the theory of fields that would provide a more sophisticated understanding of the type of social skill required for systemic change.
First, we recognize Dame Ellen MacArthur as one of the socially skilled actors crucial for the formation of the circular economy field, because of her ability to both develop an effective frame and to pool fragmented actors and resources to mobilize strategic action. By reframing the environmental issue in a collaborative way, Ellen MacArthur has moved away from blaming elite actors. The frame she created highlights faults in the larger economical system and encourages collaboration to fix these problems. In line with Furnari’s (2017) work on types of issue framing, circular economy, in the interpretation of Ellen MacArthur, is an example of a collaborative frame that mobilizes action and aligns a fragmented
field by emphasizing synergies among diverse actors. Her ability to empathize and understand different views enabled the creation of a new collaborative frame that brings cohesion and unity to the previously unorganized social space.
Secondly, Ellen MacArthur demonstrates social skill by pulling the organizational resources needed to drive the transition towards a circular economy. Through the creation of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, she was able to attract the resources needed (both financial and social capital) to bring powerful actors together and address the wider business community. The organization is maintaining the “constructed narrative account of the new collective identity” (Fligstein & McAdam, 2012, p.110). EMF is working on reproducing this collective identity and focusing on creating new lines of collaboration and partnerships. As such, the field, and with it the shift in paradigm, emerges through a sense of a shared mission rather than through similar interests.
These two dynamics are typical of the emergent mobilization phase as described by Fligstein & McAdam (2012). These processes are driven by skilled actors tapping into the opportunities for entrepreneurship that an unorganized space provides. Fligstein and McAdam state that social skill has its largest impact when a social space is disorganized and pragmatic actors build coalitions and fashion new ways of collaboration that are impossible in other circumstances. Ellen McArthur is what DiMaggio (1988) would call an institutional entrepreneur who
“invent[s] new cultural conceptions to help establish entirely ‘new’ institutions”
(Fligstein & McAdam, 2012, p.109).
However, while the theory of fields recognizes the importance of social skill in building frames that will result in collaboration, we argue that, in the case of systemic change, it is not only frame creation but also frame management that is an essential part of the process. The theory does not account for how such skilled
actors maintain collaboration of the different constituencies that need to adjust and contribute to the systemic change.
In order to provide a more comprehensive framework for explaining systemic change, the theory of fields needs to develop a more sophisticated understanding of different types of social skill. Our empirical evidence illustrates a third dynamic: EMF is crafting and curating tailored information and messaging for different actors. The Foundation is adjusting the frame to the specific audience, knowing which frames to prioritize in order to have the largest impact. We call this act of curating alternative frames in order to resonate with various actors, frame management and propose this as a contribution to the theory of fields. We interpret this act as a sophisticated form of social skill that considers all stakeholders and legitimizes their perspectives to drive systemic change.
6.1.2 Creating an open space for debate to avoid contestation
A fourth dynamic we identified that contributes to a paradigm shift towards circular economy is the creation of an open space that allows for debate. We mentioned in our introduction that one of the theoretical conceptualization scholars have defined for circular economy is the one of “umbrella concept”
(Blomsma and Brennan, 2017). The scholars argue that an umbrella concept creates “a new cognitive unit and discursive space for debate” (Blomsma and Brennan, 2017, p. 606) which facilitates discussion and critical engagement. We resonate with this idea and suggest that such “discursive spaces” need to be complemented by platforms (physical or virtual) that encourage the contribution of contending parties. Our empirical findings illustrate that EMF has been influential in creating these platforms. Additionally, other forums have been created by Sitra and the European Commission and the World Economic Forum bringing together stakeholders from across sector. These spaces are instrumental to avoid open contestation and bring in input from challengers, as illustrated by the Disruption Festival hosted by EMF. Such platforms allow for socially skilled
challengers to hack into the dominant conversation and constructively contribute with their perspectives.
6.1.3 Changes in the broader field environment
Based on the field dynamics presented in the previous chapter, we have limited empirical material to fully understand the implications of other broader field dynamics on the circular economy strategic action field. We acknowledge this as a limitation of our study, as more in-depth interviews and field work would be required to get a more sophisticated understanding of such implications. Our findings so far point towards changes in other interrelated fields such as the larger geopolitical field, and related technological fields. However more research is needed to understand the implications of international agreements such as the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, political priorities such as Europe’s global competitiveness (e.g. in relationship with China which is also undergoing a transition towards circular economy), or developments in related business and technological fields.
Such indications would offer a more sophisticated understanding of the interplay between structural arrangements in which a strategic action field is embedded, and the power of internal actors to fashion their agency to facilitate a shift of paradigm. Since the theory of fields provides a lucrative framework that combines aspects of structural determinism and agency, we suggest that future research should explore this interplay in more detail.