General description
Faced with crises, a global state-directed framework and fragmented economies
In 2035, the world faces an intensification of climate, social and geopolitical crises, forcing governments to adopt a global state-directed framework. Natural disasters multiply, destabilising ecosystems and exacerbating resource shortages. Global climate policies, although present, are ineffective and fragment into regional initiatives, made worse by the rise of protectionism and the race for strategic resources.
Geopolitically, tensions between regional blocs erupt, particularly in Asia, with the conflict between China and Taiwan causing global economic repercussions. Europe, weakened by internal crises and the rise of nationalism, attempts to respond with stricter environmental and industrial regulation. However, the European Union refocuses on its own territories, adopting an autarkic management approach and thereby fragmenting the global economy. This fragmentation pushes nations to adopt protectionist policies, seeking to relocate their production chains and secure their supplies of energy and raw materials.
Industry, despite technological progress, struggles to offset shortages of essential resources. The circular economy, although recognised, is not widespread and remains the preserve of affluent classes or technologically advanced industries. Social inequalities widen and socio-economic tensions worsen, making the management of migration flows more complex because of natural disasters and regional conflicts.
The circular economy imposed: between opportunities and constraints for companies
The multi-factor crises impose a new state-directed order. A global regulatory framework is established with broad guidelines, but applied locally in order to adapt to regional specificities. Laws are designed to encourage the circular economy, and public support, backed by international investment, is deployed to help companies through this transition. However, this regulation also creates strong constraints for manufacturers, who wonder whether they can survive in this new economic environment.
For companies, the regulatory framework imposes strict rules on the reuse of materials and the integration of circular solutions into production processes. This complexity leads manufacturers to question their ability to comply with the new standards while remaining profitable. Nevertheless, the crises accelerate technological change and R&D research. Companies that manage to turn these risks into opportunities gain a competitive advantage on the markets. The most agile adapt quickly, notably by relying on financial aid and public support in order to innovate and differentiate their business models.
At the same time, the technological transition is held back by growing public mistrust. Scandals linked to data breaches and to the health effects of technologies such as 5G fuel consumer fears and slow the adoption of new technologies. Technologies such as blockchain or IoT, although they have shown their potential for improving resource management and traceability, are criticised for their high energy cost. Pressure on energy resources, exacerbated by a major nuclear crisis, leads to a drastic reduction in the use of certain technologies in industrial processes. Investment in cybersecurity takes precedence over efforts to incorporate these technologies into circular economy approaches.
Supply chains are also under pressure. Attempts to relocate production multiply, but they are held back by raw material shortages and rising energy costs. Only large companies manage to navigate this complex context, gradually incorporating circular models, while SMEs struggle to keep pace. Two models coexist: on the one hand, conventional supply chains focused on economic performance and, on the other, circular chains focused on sustainability, with a particular emphasis on recycling and reducing the carbon footprint. This contrast between approaches reinforces inequalities between large companies and smaller players.
Consumption and employment under pressure: exacerbated inequalities
The crises and the introduction of strict regulation have a direct impact on consumer behaviour. Rising prices linked to inflation, environmental taxes and raw material shortages force citizens to adopt more responsible consumption practices. Consumers turn increasingly to refurbished, repairable or recycled products, but this transformation is uneven across social classes. The wealthiest continue to have access to quality new products, while those on lower incomes find themselves buying low-cost alternatives or taking part in bartering and sharing systems.
Sharing and collaborative consumption communities emerge, notably in urban centres, where residents organise to exchange goods or take part in repair workshops. However, scarce and regulated products also fuel a parallel black market, making the management of product flows more complex for the authorities. Inequalities worsen, with a polarisation between consumers able to fund sustainable solutions and those unable to comply because of their low purchasing power.
In the labour market, the circular economy offers new opportunities, but traditional industrial employment continues to decline. Manual occupations, notably those linked to repair, recycling and reuse, are given renewed value, while digital and technical skills become essential for qualified workers. This transition reinforces the polarisation of the labour market. Unqualified workers are increasingly marginalised, while qualified workers benefit from opportunities in circular and technological industries. Training relating to these new skills is insufficient to fill the shortages, thereby exacerbating social inequalities.
Conclusion
In this scenario, multi-factor crises impose state-directed transformations through strict regulation and advanced technologies, but the transition to a circular economy remains incomplete. Manufacturers and consumers must adapt to growing economic and social constraints. Inequalities widen and the polarisation of economic players intensifies, while technological progress, although promising, fails to offset the effects of the crises on global economic fragmentation.