From concept to practice: understanding divergent views on circular economy barriers Open Access

Global materials consumption and waste generation are projected to double annually by 2050, making the transformation toward sustainable economic and production systems imperative (Liu et al., 2022). In this context, resource efficiency using fewer of the Earth’s already limited materials has become a central principle of sustainable development. The rational use of scarce resources aligns with the objectives of the circular economy (CE), widely recognised as a leading framework for promoting sustainability. Accordingly, transitioning from a linear to a circular economy is essential to achieving both economic and environmental sustainability and has become a strategic priority across nations.

Despite this momentum, defining and overcoming barriers to CE implementation remains a persistent challenge. While many organisations have begun adapting their business models to integrate circularity principles, the actual adoption of circular economy business models within the manufacturing sector is still limited. Raspini et al. (2022) emphasise that the transition from linear to circular systems is complex, and progress in overcoming the associated barriers has been slow.

This study is particularly motivated by developments in the textiles and fashion sectors, where annual consumption has doubled in recent decades (Shirvanimoghaddam et al., 2020), leading to shorter clothing lifecycles and a dramatic increase in post-consumer textile waste. For instance, in the UK alone, approximately £140 million worth of clothing is discarded in landfills each year. The fast fashion segment poses specific difficulties due to the high volume of production and rapid consumption cycles. Studies suggest that the growth of fast fashion has been largely driven by impulse buying behaviours (Fares and Lloret, 2023; Fares et al., 2023a, b, c).

Within this context, our work builds on the ongoing academic–practitioner paradox, which concerns the limited practical relevance of much academic research. Bartunek and Rynes (2014) argue that academics and practitioners operate under distinct logics: scholars focus on theory-building and methodological rigour, while business organisations prioritise problem-solving and performance outcomes. This divergence highlights the importance of studying how knowledge flows between academia and practice.

Previous research has underscored this divide, often referred to as the “research–practice gap” (Schleper et al., 2021). The growing demand for research that directly benefits society and business has intensified the interaction between scholars and practitioners, but also increased competition and fragmentation between the two communities (Schultz and Hatch, 2005). Several studies have traced this divide to epistemological differences (Bansal et al., 2012). For instance, in supply chain forecasting, researchers have been criticised for overlooking issues of immediate practical relevance, leaving theory lagging behind real-world practice (Syntetos et al., 2016). Hence, this gap represents a tension between those who create knowledge and those who apply it.

To address this conceptual gap, this study draws upon the theory of concepts, which provides an analytical lens for understanding how concepts are structured, acquired, and applied. Rast (2018) explains that concepts are embedded within broader theoretical systems, involving higher-order cognitive processes such as reasoning, inference, explanation, and categorisation. This approach requires attention to formal elements like nominalisation and the assessment of similarity and typicality. Similarly, Hjørland (2009) views concepts as contextually defined within theoretical frameworks, emphasising the causal relationships that underpin conceptual understanding. However, as he notes, consensus remains limited regarding the classification and definition of concepts.

Recent scholarship has further advanced the debate on circular economy adoption in the textile industry. For instance, De Felice et al. (2025) conducted a systematic review on CE practices in textiles, concluding that factors such as technology type, work intensity, and supply chain structure strongly influence CE adoption and sustainable performance. Similarly, Das et al. (2025) proposed a sustainable circular economy model for textile waste reduction and value creation, highlighting strategies like resale, reuse, repurposing, and rental, alongside their environmental and economic benefits. However, despite these contributions, there remains a clear gap in comparing barriers to CE implementation as understood by academics versus those recognised by practitioners. This distinction is vital, as misalignment between theoretical and practical understandings can hinder real progress toward circular transformation.

Based on this, the following research questions guide the present study:

This paper contributes to the circular economy literature by offering an integrated analysis of barriers to CE adoption in the fashion and textile industries, combining insights from both academic research and practitioner experience. It bridges theoretical frameworks with practical realities, advancing understanding of how diverse barriers influence circular implementation.

From a practical standpoint, the study provides industry professionals with an evidence-based overview of the key challenges in transitioning toward circular models, as well as strategies informed by practitioner experience to overcome them. These insights can inform both managerial decision-making and policy development, hence supporting a more effective and equitable shift toward sustainability in the global textile and fashion sectors.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents outlines the research results; Section 3 discusses the findings; and Section 4 concludes with theoretical and practical implications.

A systematic literature review (SLR) was used due to its capacity to methodically address the formulated questions while mitigating biases related to content evaluation and source selection (Senali et al., 2022). Specifically, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework for its ability to precisely identify and evaluate existing published research. Moreover, PRISMA ensures transparency and robustness throughout the analysis process, encompassing stages such as identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion.

Records were identified using the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The “AND” operator was employed to combine the keywords under investigation: “barrier,” AND “circular,” AND “fashion.” For Scopus, the research encompassed the article title, abstract, and keywords, while Web of Science used the “Topic” search, covering the title, abstract, and keywords. Following the PRISMA protocol (Figure 1), eligibility criteria were established early in the process. Table 1 delineates the inclusion and exclusion criteria formulated for this study. Journals are depicted in Figure 2. The Sustainability journal holds the top ranking, followed by the Journal of Cleaner Production. It is noteworthy that papers included in the study were published since 2019, affirming the emergence of the topic. In fact, when conducting research on Scopus by using the keywords: “circular” AND “economy” AND “fashion” AND “green”, we found that the first paper was in 2017, with a maximum number of publications in 2022 (Figure 3). That is why we focused on papers between 2019 and 2023 (Figure 4). Scopus is chosen because it is one of the largest and most reputable abstract and citation databases for peer-reviewed literature, covering a wide range of disciplines. It ensures high-quality and up-to-date sources, making it ideal for comprehensive and credible literature reviews. Additionally, Scopus provides advanced search tools and citation analysis features that support rigorous academic research.

One hundred seventeen published papers were initially identified. Duplications were deleted during the screening process, reducing the number of records to 70. No restrictions were imposed on the type of paper to be included (empirical, theoretical, or case study). Finally, taking the eligibility criteria into account, 41 records were included in the review.

The collection of qualitative data was performed using surveys and interviews. The surveys and interviews were conducted over a period of several months to allow sufficient time for participant engagement. Participation was entirely voluntary, which contributed to a relatively low response rate. Despite extended availability, many potential respondents chose not to take part, reflecting common challenges in voluntary data. To frame the open questionnaire, the questions were designed using the PEST framework. The PEST framework has been used to analyse the barriers to circular economy adoption in the fashion textile industry because it helps systematically examine external macro-environmental factors, namely, political, economic, social, and technological, that influence industry practices. This approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of how regulations, market dynamics, consumer behaviour, and technological innovation impact the transition to circular models. By identifying these external pressures and limitations, PEST supports more informed strategic planning and policy development. Twenty-six experts took part, with 18 surveys distributed remotely and eight interviews conducted, five in person and three via calls. All interviews were performed on an individual basis, except for two experts who were interviewed simultaneously.

To achieve a coherent connection between the systematic literature review and the primary investigation, a triangulation method was employed. The systematic literature review served as the starting point of the research, which enabled the identification of a comprehensive list of 204 obstacles to adopting a circular economy in the fast fashion sector. This list laid the groundwork for developing the survey and interview tools focused on key thematic areas (governmental, financial, consumer, market, technical, and organisational). In the primary investigation, practitioners were encouraged not only to validate this list but also to share their own definitions and views of barriers to circularity based on their professional experiences. This method allowed the research to capture both explicit and implicit variations in how barriers are perceived in practice compared to academic perspectives. The qualitative data were subsequently analysed through an inductive approach and contrasted with the literature-derived list to pinpoint similarities, differences, and new emergent barriers. This iterative integration assured that the empirical findings enhanced and enriched the literature review, offering a more nuanced and validated comprehension of the barriers to a circular economy within the fast fashion context.

This section presents the qualitative investigations of the barriers to circular fast fashion from the perspective of both study groups. Tables 2 and 3 outline the barriers to findings from the literature and the empirical investigation, respectively. After content analysis and a summative investigation, 204 barriers were identified from the literature, and the relevant references are presented in Table 2. 37 barriers were found from the empirical inspection. Thus, a total of 241 barriers will be discussed. In this research, content analysis involves a thorough review of practitioners’ qualitative feedback to determine how they perceive and articulate the obstacles to adopting a circular economy. This analysis was succeeded by a summative review, which included compiling and contrasting the prevalence and significance of the identified categories of barriers. These procedures facilitated the alignment of the practitioners’ viewpoints with the 204 barriers identified in the literature, ensuring an integration of both scholarly and practical perspectives in the findings.

One expert mentioned that “The eco responsibility from consumers is absent, as they are not aware if the material is recycled or not, and will look for the cheapest one, regardless of the reuse” This comment highlights a common barrier to advancing sustainable consumption: the gap between environmental values and actual consumer behaviour. It suggests that without greater awareness or incentives, many consumers prioritise cost over circular practices like reuse or recycling, which can hinder the effectiveness of circular economy initiatives.

The categorisation of barriers into governmental, financial, and consumer perspectives emerged directly from the analysis of the collected data. Through thematic analysis of interviews and survey responses, recurring patterns and concerns were identified and grouped based on their nature and origin. These themes were not predetermined but developed inductively, allowing the data to guide the structure of the findings. This grounded approach ensures that the categories reflect the actual experiences and viewpoints of participants.

This section discusses the similarities and differences between both study groups (Table 4).

At the governmental level, practitioners stated that there is a lack of jurisdiction (b2). Silva et al. (2023) also noted the absence of government support and public policies. Manshoven and Van Opstal (2022) stated that there is a lack of enforceable regulations and laws to promote circularity throughout the supply chain, a trend that occurs more often in less developed countries (b1). Abdelmeguid et al. (2022) agreed that fashion outsourcing occurs in countries with fewer ecological priorities. Additionally, manufacturers face limitations (b3), including issues such as tax exemption (b4) and funding for recycling infrastructure (b5). This aligns with the observation that Value Added Tax does not favour used materials and products over newer ones (Peleg Mizrachi and Tal, 2022), as second-hand and recycled products are taxed in B2C transactions. Finally, experts have emphasised that decarbonisation is a political choice (b6). Rosenbloom et al. (2018) discussed how changes in political situations can facilitate a more fundamental reorganisation of ownership models, allowing decision-makers to adopt new priorities for market rules instead of government-directed investments.

From a financial perspective, the investment costs associated with production recycling (b7) and recycled material (b8) are notably high. Consistent with findings in the literature, Pedersen et al. (2019) confirm that price remains a crucial determinant of sustainability. Consequently, Saccani et al. (2023) argue that the cost of circular products may exceed that of conventional ones (b12), given the comparatively lower cost of virgin materials (Pedersen et al., 2019). Experts also highlight financial barriers related to the high costs of textile waste treatment (b10) and the energy expenses for fibre production (b13). In this context, Sharkey and Coggins (2022) confirm that the presence of specific chemical additives can hinder textile recycling operations by rendering end-of-life materials hazardous. Mainly, the authors point out that, in 2018, the European Union generated an estimated minimum of 1.7 million tonnes of hazardous and unrecyclable textile waste. Lastly, challenges associated with reverse logistics costs (b9) and uncertainty regarding the return on investment in circularity (b11) pose significant obstacles to developing a closed-loop supply chain network and a reverse logistics environment. These challenges necessitate new approaches to customer involvement, as customers transition into suppliers (Pedersen et al., 2019).

In terms of consumer behaviour, practitioners emphasise the limited engagement observed in activities such as swapping (b15), collecting old items (b19), and wearing garments crafted from used materials (b20). Aligning with existing literature, Arrigo (2021) categorises the primary forms of collaborative consumption in the fashion industry as swapping, resale, and rental. Swapping involves the permanent transfer of ownership of unwanted or underused fashion items, enhancing their utilisation and lifespan. Resale entails the selling of second-hand fashion products to other consumers, thereby diminishing the demand for newly manufactured items. Fashion rental involves providing another party with an item for a fixed period in exchange for a fee without a transfer of ownership. Furthermore, there exists a limited consumer awareness of sustainable initiatives (b16), with consumption largely driven by fashion lifestyle (b18), as consumers exhibit a consistent eagerness to adopt the latest fashionable trends (b17). This aligns with the findings of McNeill and Moore (2015), who observed that some consumers perceive sustainable fabrics as less fashionable. Lastly, practitioners argue that consumers tend to prefer buying new items over repairing old ones (b14). This inclination may be attributed to both possessing the necessary skills for repair and a negative perception associating visibly mended clothing with poverty and economic hardship, as indicated by Diddi and Yan (2019) and McQueen et al. (2023).

Examining the market and the broader business environment, practitioners argue that the adoption of the charity shop concept remains limited (b21), particularly within liberal economies (b24). This constraint may be attributed to both the immaturity of the market, as noted by Silva et al. (2023), and resistance from the traditional industry to deviating from established practices, as highlighted by Piller (2023). Additionally, the swift pace of fashion changes poses a challenge for products designed to last, as they struggle to keep up with continuous technological advancements (Saccani et al., 2023). Meanwhile, the prevalent business model of fast fashion, characterised by low-quality products, accelerates the shortening of the product life cycle (b22). Moreover, most international brands tend to outsource their production to smaller textile factories (b23), primarily due to challenges associated with sourcing raw materials for production within circular practices (Ostermann et al., 2021).

From a technical point of view, practitioners raise various concerns, including the absence of substitutes for synthetic materials (b25) and challenges related to recyclability (b27 and b29), as confirmed in the literature. Recycling processes often produce fibres that are too short for effective yarn spinning, contributing to the potentially low quality of recycled materials (b28). Moreover, fibres derived from recycled materials are frequently too short (b32). Thinakaran et al. (2022) elaborate on the difficulties arising from the mixed material composition of fashion items, hindering their use in circular economy (CE) practices and resulting in poor-quality second-hand materials collected for CE purposes. The quality and quantity of inputs also play a crucial role in production, influencing the final product’s quality, with issues such as the frequent maintenance problems of textile machines (b26) impacting the production process (Silva et al., 2023). Additionally, challenges in translating positive environmental attitudes into practical actions (Guo, 2022) contribute to the limited adoption of 3D printing (b31) and AI (b33) in the textile industry for circularity objectives. Lastly, there are concerns about the inefficiency of recovery processes from a technological perspective (Saccani et al., 2023), leading to a lack of industrial infrastructure for the treatment and reuse of textile waste (b30).

From an organisational point of view, there is a noticeable absence of research and development in textile factories concerning waste management (b34) and a deficiency in expertise (b35). This deficiency can be attributed to a lack of emphasis on circular economy practices in educational programs, favouring assumptions in support of sustainable fashion (Sehnem et al., 2023), and the limited execution capabilities of individual organisations (Jain et al., 2021). Practitioners also highlight the insufficient collaboration with other industries for benchmarking circular practices (b36) as a significant barrier, given that many supply chains are not originally designed for circularity (b37). According to the literature, this may stem from a lack of awareness regarding the benefits of the circular economy and the challenges of managing independent behaviours within an organisation (Abdelmeguid et al., 2022; Manshoven and Van Opstal, 2022). It has been argued that sustainability and circularity pose dilemmas and a perceived risk of bias, with businesses often fearing that transitioning to a new model would necessitate a drastic overhaul of organisational structure and functioning (Thinakaran et al., 2022).

The results of this research make a meaningful contribution to the theoretical comprehension of obstacles to adopting a circular economy in the fashion sector by incorporating perspectives from both scholarly literature and industry practitioners. By methodically juxtaposing the barriers noted in existing literature with empirical insights from industry professionals, this study validates, expands upon, and in some cases, questions current theoretical assumptions.

To begin with, the findings support previous research that highlights the essential role of governmental assistance, regulatory frameworks, and policy alignment in promoting circular transitions (Pedersen et al., 2019; Silva et al., 2023). Insights from practitioners, particularly regarding the absence of jurisdiction, tax incentives, and political decision-making, strengthen the literature’s claim that governmental support is crucial for facilitating circular practices, particularly in developing regions (Manshoven and Van Opstal, 2022; Abdelmeguid et al., 2022). This congruence reinforces the theoretical assertion that adopting a circular economy involves more than just technical or managerial hurdles; it is significantly influenced by the socio-political landscape.

Secondly, the study enhances knowledge concerning financial and operational barriers. While earlier research points to high investment costs and the uncertainty of returns as significant challenges (Saccani et al., 2023; Pedersen et al., 2019), perspectives from practitioners offer deeper insights into how these financial limitations directly impact decision-making across various levels, from recycling infrastructure to reverse logistics. This illustrates that financial factors are a key mechanism influencing organisational behaviour and strategy, thereby supporting theories of resource dependency and economic decision-making in sustainability transitions.

Thirdly, the findings provide advancements in theoretical understanding of consumer behaviour within circular models. Prior studies have indicated that low awareness, limited engagement, and preference for fashion hinder sustainable consumption (McNeill and Moore, 2015; Arrigo, 2021). The empirical results confirm and add nuance to this comprehension by uncovering specific consumer actions, such as hesitance to repair, swap, or wear second-hand garments, that interact with both organisational and market-level constraints. This highlights the necessity of merging consumer behaviour theories with frameworks of the circular economy to craft more comprehensive models of adoption.

Fourth, this research contributes to the theoretical debate on technical and organisational barriers. The existing literature has explored challenges relating to materials, technology, and institutional capabilities (Thinakaran et al., 2022; Guo, 2022; Saccani et al., 2023). Insights from practitioners reveal how practical limitations, like mixed-material textiles, short fibre lengths, and insufficient collaboration, offering empirical support for theories surrounding organisational learning and innovation within circular contexts. These insights highlight the relationship between technical viability and organisational capacity in advancing or impeding circular practices.

Lastly, by weaving insights from both literature and practitioners, this study addresses the ongoing gap between theoretical models of circular economy adoption and practical implementation. It demonstrates that many barriers proposed in theory are encountered in practice; however, the nuances vary based on organisational size, market position, and regional context. Consequently, the research offers a more contextually nuanced theoretical background for understanding circular adoption, paving the way for future studies to formulate models that are informed by empirical evidence and relevant to practical scenarios.

The present research and its findings can benefit companies and industries by identifying the specific barriers hindering the adoption of circular economy practices, allowing them to develop targeted strategies to overcome these challenges and enhance sustainability performance. For policymakers, the insights offer evidence-based guidance to design supportive regulations, incentives, and frameworks that facilitate circular transitions in the fashion and textile sector.

Unless stakeholder barriers are addressed, circular systems are unachievable. Because of the financial pressures of implementing the circularity concept, it is a debate of money versus planet. There are two takeaways for practitioners: first, with performance tracking. Circularity strategies should be in line with the C-indicators. C-indicators (Circularity Indicators) are metrics or tools used to measure and assess the circularity performance of products, companies, industries, or economies. They help determine how well an entity is applying circular economy (CE) principles, such as reducing waste, keeping materials in use, and regenerating natural systems. Factors such as Product-Level Circularity Metric (PLCM), Material Reutilisation Score (MRS) and Material Circularity Indicator (MCI) (Syu et al., 2022) could be relevant to efficient circularity performance.

The second takeaway is associated with the net-zero goals; it is time to rethink carbon. To truly push the fashion industry towards carbon circularity and ensure long-term sustainability and resilience, current approaches are insufficient. It is therefore crucial to analyse the relationship between society, energy, and chemistry. The textile industry’s shift to achieve net-zero emissions (NZE) by 2050 is a remarkable step towards tackling climate change. By taking this bold initiative, the industry is committing to reducing its carbon footprint and leading the way for other industries.

This study provides a comprehensive examination of the barriers to adopting circular economy practices in the fast fashion industry by integrating insights from both academic literature and industry practitioners. By revealing the overlapping and complementary nature of these barriers, the research bridges the gap between theoretical concepts and real-world challenges, offering a nuanced understanding of the complexities hindering circularity in fashion. Practically, the findings equip companies and policymakers with targeted strategies to address financial, technical, organisational, and consumer-related obstacles, thereby facilitating more effective circular transitions. Theoretically, the study advances circular economy scholarship by emphasising the need for context-specific, actionable frameworks that reflect industry realities, encouraging future research to focus on multidisciplinary and systemic approaches. Hence, this work contributes to accelerating sustainable transformation in fashion by aligning academic knowledge with practical solutions, paving the way for a resilient and low-carbon textile sector.

Several important limitations need consideration in this study. Firstly, the open questions employed did not cover the subject of recycling, an important point in waste reduction and sustainability. Future discussions should address this. Additionally, the distribution of practitioners across regions lacked balance, warranting efforts to ensure global parity in prioritising sustainability. Moreover, it is crucial to acknowledge potential variations in findings among the studies included because of their unique features and the challenges of generalising them to other contexts.

Future research should adopt a holistic approach to circular ecosystems, emphasising a comprehensive perspective to effectively promote sustainability. This would involve a thorough examination of the assumptions guiding consumer awareness, policy and regulation, and investor behaviour. A specific area requiring attention is the issue of certifications for circularity. Analysing similarities and differences between industries and avoiding unnecessary overlap in certification programs is essential. Establishing a more streamlined and effective system for promoting sustainability across diverse sectors can then be achieved. This study provides a comprehensive examination of the barriers to adopting circular economy practices in the fast fashion industry by integrating insights from both academic literature and industry practitioners. By revealing the overlapping and complementary nature of these barriers, the research bridges the gap between theoretical concepts and real-world challenges, offering a nuanced understanding of the complexities hindering circularity in fashion. Practically, the findings equip companies and policymakers with targeted strategies to address financial, technical, organisational, and consumer-related obstacles, thereby facilitating more effective circular transitions. Theoretically, the study advances circular economy scholarship by emphasising the need for context-specific, actionable frameworks that reflect industry realities, encouraging future research to focus on multidisciplinary and systemic approaches. Hence, this work contributes to accelerating sustainable transformation in fashion by aligning academic knowledge with practical solutions, paving the way for a resilient and low-carbon textile sector.