ISSN 2953-6367

http://revistainvestigo.com

Julio - diciembre 2026

Vol. 7 No. 20, PP. 529-539

https://doi.org/10.56519/rcw9kn36

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING

NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

Luis Fernando Arboleda Álvarez¹, Nilo Israel Cabezas Oviedo², Manuel Euclides Zurita

León³, Nelly Margarita Padilla Padilla⁴

{luisf.arbileda@espoch.edu.ec¹, nilo.cabezas@espoch.edu.ec², m_zurita@espoch.edu.ec³, npadilla@espoch.edu.ec⁴}

Fecha de recepción: 02/06/2026

/ Fecha de aceptación: 30/06/2026

/ Fecha de publicación: 08/07/2026

ABSTRACT: The circular economy proposes a shift in agro-industrial production processes,

utilizing waste that is normally discarded to transform it into resources with economic value

and reduce environmental impact. This paper analyzes how circular strategies can create

new markets in the agro-industry. A qualitative-descriptive analysis was conducted,

including a review of scientific literature and a study of practical cases implemented in Latin

America and Europe. The results show that valorizing agricultural byproducts allows for the

development of bio-inputs, bioenergy, and bioplastics. This circular model makes the sector

more competitive because it reduces costs and diversifies revenue streams. Companies that

adopt it reduce operating costs by 15-60%, increase their revenue by 8-22%, and gain access

to premium markets with price premiums of 10-35%. Valorizing 1,000 tons of organic waste

prevents emissions of 400-650 tons of CO₂ and reduces water consumption by 60-70%.

However, significant barriers exist: limited access to technology for small and medium-sized

enterprises, high initial costs, fragmented regulatory frameworks, and resistance to change.

Overcoming these requires public policies that include financing, tax incentives, technical

standards, and training. The circular economy not only solves environmental problems but

also drives innovation and creates sustainable business opportunities for the agribusiness

sector.

Keywords: circular economy, agro-industry, sustainability, innovation, emerging markets

INTRODUCTION

For decades, the agro-industrial production model has followed a linear pattern: extract

resources, produce, and discard what is not useful (1). This system has worked, but it is now

showing its limitations in the face of natural resource scarcity and worsening environmental

problems (2). The circular economy posits that waste is not the end of the process, but the

¹Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo/ Facultad de Ciencias Pecuarias, Ecuador, http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5541-

6239

²Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo/ Facultad de Ciencias Pecuarias, Ecuador, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4130-

0347

³Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo/ Facultad de Ciencias Pecuarias, Ecuador, https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3568-

8777

⁴Escuela Superior Politécnica De Chimborazo/ Facultad de informática y Electrónica, Ecuador, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-

2574-3946

529

InvestiGo Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal

Riobamba – Ecuador

Cell: +593 97 911 9620

revisinvestigo@gmail.com

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

beginning of something new (3). In agro-industry, this makes sense because the sector

generates many organic byproducts that traditionally end up as garbage.

Kirchherr et al. (2017) (4) explain that the circular economy seeks to maintain the value of

resources for as long as possible through reuse and recycling, minimizing waste. In agro-

industry, this means transforming fruit peels, sugarcane bagasse, cereal residues, and other

byproducts into valuable materials. The FAO (2021) (5) estimates that approximately one-third

of the food produced globally is lost or wasted, representing a huge opportunity to implement

circular strategies.

The shift towards circular models is not just a response to environmental pressure. It also

opens up new business opportunities. There are interesting experiences in countries like

Ecuador, Mexico, and Spain where agricultural waste has been valorized and transformed into

innovative products with market demand: organic fertilizers, biofuels, biodegradable

packaging, and bioactive compounds for the pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries (Salgado-

Tello et al., 2024 (6); Valdez & Canobbio, 2025 (7)). This demonstrates significant commercial

potential. Implementing the circular economy is not easy. Several obstacles exist: a lack of

adequate infrastructure, technological limitations, insufficient regulatory frameworks, and

resistance to change. Despite these problems, several studies demonstrate that the long-term

economic and environmental benefits outweigh the necessary initial investments (Prieto-

Sandoval et al., 2018 (8)).

This paper analyzes the role of the circular economy in creating new markets within the

agribusiness sector. It seeks to identify the most effective strategies, concrete benefits, and

main challenges. The idea is to provide evidence from real-world cases demonstrating how

this approach can make the sector more competitive while contributing to environmental

protection.

MATERIALS Y METHODS

This research used a qualitative-descriptive approach that combined document analysis with

the study of existing case studies. The work was organized into three complementary phases.

First phase: Comprehensive review of specialized literature. Databases such as Scopus and

Web of Science were consulted, as well as documents from international organizations such

as the FAO (5) and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (9). The selection criteria were: scientific

publications, technical reports, or regulatory documents published between 2015 and 2025.

Studies on the valorization of agro-industrial waste, technological innovation applied to the

circular economy, and economic feasibility analysis were prioritized. After applying criteria of

relevance and methodological quality, the most useful documents for the research were

selected.

Second phase: Analysis of case studies selected for being representative successful circular

economy experiences in the agribusiness sector. The cases studied include different

geographical contexts (Latin America and Europe) and sectors (fruit, sugar, cereal, and

horticulture). For each case, the following were evaluated: waste reduction, new products

generated, economic viability, environmental impact, and level of technological innovation.

530

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

The information was obtained from business literature, corporate reports, and scientific

publications.

Third phase: Interviews with sector experts: agribusiness engineers with experience in waste

management, economists specializing in circular models, representatives of producer

associations, and consultants in corporate sustainability. The interviews lasted approximately

45 minutes each and were conducted in person and virtually during September and October

of last year. A guide with open-ended questions was prepared regarding market opportunities,

technical and economic barriers, necessary public policies, and future prospects for the sector.

The conversations were recorded with permission and subsequently transcribed for analysis

Qualitative information was processed using thematic coding with Atlas.ti software,

identifying categories related to types of valuation, business models, success factors, and

recurring obstacles.

The results of the document analysis, case studies, and interviews were compared to validate

findings. Finally, a conceptual framework was developed that integrates the findings with

theories of circular economy, sustainable development, and shared value creation proposed

by Geissdoerfer et al. (2017) (10) and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019) (9).

RESULTS

The systematic analysis of literature, documented cases and interviews with experts made it possible

to identify five central dimensions in the implementation of circular economy in the agroindustrial

sector: technological routes of valorization, typology of products generated, indicators of economic

viability, quantifiable environmental impacts and barriers to scalability.

3.1. Technological Valorization Routes for Agro-industrial Waste

Four main routes for the transformation of agricultural by-products were identified:

Route 1: Bioconversion for agricultural bio-inputs. Includes aerobic composting,

vermicomposting, and solid-state fermentation. The cases analyzed in Ecuador (banana

waste) and Colombia (coffee byproducts) show conversion rates of 60–75% of organic waste

to fertilizer. Processing time ranges from 45–90 days for conventional composting and 30–45

days for vermicomposting with Eisenia foetida. The resulting products have organic matter

contents between 35–50%, variable NPK (1.5–3.2% N; 0.8–2.1% P₂O₅; 1.2–2.8% K₂O), and

stabilized C/N ratios in the 10–15:1 range

Route 2: Energy transformation through thermochemical and biochemical processes. This

includes anaerobic digestion for biogas, alcoholic fermentation for second-generation

bioethanol, and pyrolysis for biochar. Experiences in Mexico (sugarcane bagasse for

bioethanol) report yields of 250–320 liters per ton of dry bagasse. Anaerobic digestion of fruit

and vegetable waste in Spain achieves biogas production of 0.3–0.5 m³ per kg of volatile solids,

with methane contents of 55–70%. Biochar obtained by pyrolysis of rice husks has specific

surface areas of 200–400 m²/g.

Route 3: Extraction of high-value bioactive compounds. It utilizes secondary metabolites

531

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

present in agro-industrial waste through solid-liquid extraction, ultrasound-assisted

extraction, and supercritical extraction. Case studies include: polyphenol extraction from

grape pomace (yields 15–45 mg gallic acid equivalent/g), pectins from citrus peels (yields 18–

25%), lycopene from tomato waste (concentrations 0.8–1.5 mg/g), and anthocyanins from

berry waste (yields 2.5–8.5 mg/g). These compounds have applications in the pharmaceutical,

cosmetic, and nutraceutical industries (Matiacevich et al., 2023).

Route 4: Development of biomaterials and bioplastics. It produces biodegradable materials

from starches, cellulose, and residual proteins. Research in Italy on biodegradable films

derived from potato starch shows mechanical properties comparable to low-density

polyethylene (tensile strength 8-15 MPa, elongation 80-200%), with complete biodegradability

in 60-90 days. Packaging made with sugarcane bagasse fibers exhibits compressive strengths

of 2-4 MPa.

3.2. Business Models and the Creation of Emerging Markets

The analysis revealed three circular implementation models in agro-industries:

Model A: Vertical integration within the production chain. Processing companies incorporate

internally generated waste valorization units. This model was observed in 45% of cases.

Examples include citrus processing plants that integrate pectin and essential oil extraction

lines, reducing disposal costs by 40-60% and generating additional revenue equivalent to 8-

15% of main revenue.

Model B: Companies specializing in valorization. Independent organizations that collect

waste from multiple producers for centralized processing. This model represents 35% of

cases. A composting plant in Ecuador processes 15,000 tons of waste annually from 47

producers, generating 6,000 tons of compost sold at prices 30-40% lower than synthetic

fertilizers.

Model C: Integrated Biorefineries. Facilities that implement multiple valorization routes

through a cascade of processes. This model, present in 20% of cases, maximizes value

extraction through sequential fractionation. One Spanish biorefinery processes olive waste

through: extraction of hydroxytyrosol, enzymatic hydrolysis for fermentable sugars,

fermentation for bioethanol, anaerobic digestion for biogas, and composting of the digestate.

This processing achieves valorization rates exceeding 85%.

3.3. Economic Viability and Return on Investment

The projects analyzed show variable payback periods depending on scale and technological

route. Small-scale composting projects (capacity 500-2,000 tons/year) have payback periods

of 2.5-4.5 years with internal rates of return of 18-28%. Medium-scale anaerobic digestion

plants (capacity 5,000-15,000 tons/year) show payback periods of 5-8 years and rates of 12-

18%, improving with tariff incentives for renewable energy.

The extraction of bioactive compounds has the highest margins (61-150% over costs) but

requires higher initial investments (USD 150,000-500,000 for pilot plants) and access to

specialized markets. The cost-benefit analysis of four phenolic compound extraction projects

indicates positive net present values, with benefit-cost ratios between 1.8-3.4 over a 10-year

532

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

horizon.

3.4. Quantified environmental impacts

The cases studied document significant reductions:

Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Composting 1,000 tons of fruit and vegetable waste

prevents emissions equivalent to 400-650 tons of CO₂eq annually compared to landfill

disposal. Replacing synthetic fertilizers with compost reduces CO₂eq by 0.8-1.2 tons per ton

of nitrogen replaced.

Conservation of water resources. The production of second generation bioethanol from

bagasse consumes 60-70% less water than first-generation ethanol. The extraction of

bioactive compounds using green technologies reduces the consumption of organic solvents

by 75-90%.

Reduction of pollutant load. Processing olive mill effluents through anaerobic digestion

reduces chemical oxygen demand by 85-95%, generating biogas with an energy potential of

250-400 m³/ton of COD removed. Integrated systems reduce environmental management

costs by 50-70%.

3.5. Barriers Identified for Scaling Up

The analysis identified five categories of recurring barriers:

Technological barriers. Limited access to appropriate technologies for small and medium-

sized enterprises (SMEs), which represent 85% of the agribusiness sector in Latin America.

Technologies for extracting bioactive compounds and bioplastics require specialized

equipment with investments between USD 200,000 and 2,000,000. Only 12% of the SMEs

analyzed implement valorization processes beyond basic composting.

Economic and financial barriers. High initial costs, payback periods longer than SMEs'

planning horizons (typically 2-3 years), and limited access to green financing. 68% of

respondents identified capital availability as the main obstacle. Interest rates for agribusiness

financing in Ecuador range from 9-14% annually.

Regulatory and institutional barriers. Fragmented regulatory frameworks that do not

recognize waste-derived products (difficulties in obtaining health registration for organic

fertilizers, lack of standards for bioplastics), complex bureaucratic procedures, and a lack of

coordination between sectoral policies. The lack of specific tax incentives limits

competitiveness compared to conventional alternatives.

Market barriers. Low willingness to pay premiums for sustainable products in local markets,

information asymmetries regarding the properties and benefits of circular products,

competition from subsidized products, and insufficient marketing channels. Only 23% of the

bio-based products analyzed access premium markets. The marketing of compost faces

competition from synthetic fertilizers with prices reduced by subsidies.

533

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

Cultural and training barriers. Resistance to organizational change, limited technical

capabilities in bioprocess management and negative perceptions about the quality of waste-

derived products. 54% of respondents reported internal resistance to modifying established

processes. 71% of composting system operators lack specific training in controlling critical

parameters, resulting in inconsistent product quality.

DISCUSSION

The results confirm the transformative potential of the circular economy for the agro-

industrial sector, highlighting three dimensions of impact: business competitiveness,

environmental sustainability, and territorial development (17).

4.1. Competitiveness and Productive Diversification

The valorization of agro-industrial waste constitutes a competitive differentiation strategy

through three mechanisms.

First, the reduction of operating costs derived from lower final disposal expenses and partial

substitution of external inputs. The cases document savings of 15-40% in fertilization costs by

replacing agrochemicals with on-farm compost, and reductions of 30-60% in waste

management costs.

Second, the creation of additional business lines that diversify portfolios and reduce

vulnerability to fluctuations in primary markets. Fruit processing companies that incorporate

the extraction of bioactive compounds report increases of 8-22% in total revenue, with higher

margins (45-80%) than conventional products (15-25%). This diversification is strategic in

sectors with high price volatility.

Third, access to premium market segments that value sustainability attributes. The analysis

identified growing demand in European and North American markets for products with

environmental certifications (18). Exporters who document circular practices through

traceability access premiums of 10-35% in fair trade and organic markets.

Technological innovation is emerging as a critical determinant of competitiveness. Companies

that invest in R&D for process optimization develop competitive advantages through patents

and proprietary know-how. The development of appropriate technologies adapted to

operational scales, local waste characteristics, and socioeconomic conditions represents an

opportunity for research institutions.

4.2. Contribution to environmental sustainability objectives

The quantified environmental impacts validate the circular economy as an effective

instrument for climate change mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable resource

management. The magnitude of GHG emission reductions is 400-650 tons of CO₂eq avoided

for every 1,000 tons of waste valued resources position circular management as a cost-

effective mitigation alternative, with frequently negative abatement costs (generating

simultaneous economic benefits) (19).

534

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

Water resource conservation is strategic in contexts of increasing water stress. Reductions in

water consumption (60-70% in second-generation bioethanol) and nutrient recovery that

prevents eutrophication generate quantifiable ecosystem benefits.

However, a holistic assessment requires life cycle analyses that consider potential trade-offs.

Anaerobic digestion, while reducing methane emissions from uncontrolled decomposition,

can generate emissions during operation. Bioplastics production can increase pressure on land

use if it competes with food production. Comparative LCA studies are needed to substantiate

environmental superiority over alternatives (20).

4.3. Territorial Development and Job Creation

The circular economy in agro-industry presents potential for the development of rural

territories through three avenues (21).

First, the generation of direct employment in value-added activities. Estimates indicate the

creation of 0.8–1.5 direct jobs for every 1,000 tons processed annually, multiplying by a factor

of 2.5–3.5 when indirect jobs are included.

Second, the retention of added value in territories of origin through local waste processing.

Cooperative value-added models in producing areas allow economic benefits to be distributed

among small producers. Community composting experiences in Ecuador demonstrate

increases of 12–18% in the net income of participating small farmers.

Third, strengthening the technical and organizational capacities of rural communities.

Bioprocess management training programs generate human capital that transcends specific

projects. 63% of participants in training programs reported applying their knowledge in other

productive initiatives.

4.4. Role of Public Policies and Institutional Frameworks

Comparing cases between countries demonstrates the centrality of enabling institutional

frameworks for scaling up. Countries with integrated waste management policies, tax

incentives, sustainable public procurement, and concessional financing show higher adoption

rates. Spain and Italy have favorable institutional ecosystems: regulatory frameworks that

facilitate the recognition of waste-derived products, subsidies for investment in technologies,

guaranteed tariffs for renewable biomass energy, and programs for green public

procurement. These instruments reduce investment risks and accelerate payback periods.

Latin America shows fragmented frameworks. Isolated initiatives exist (biodigester programs

in Colombia, green credit lines in Brazil) but lack systemic articulation. The absence of

technical standards for organic fertilizers (only 4 of the 11 countries analyzed have specific

regulations), bioplastics, and biofuels generates regulatory uncertainty that inhibits

investment. Effective implementation requires integrated policy packages that address

technological dimensions (support for R&D, technology transfer), economic dimensions

(concessional financing, tax incentives) (22), regulatory dimensions (quality standards,

expedited procedures), and informational dimensions (certifications, labeling, awareness

campaigns).

535

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

4.5. Scalability and replicability of circular models

The analysis identified critical success factors:

•

Volume and stability of waste supply. Successful projects ensure a constant supply

through long-term contracts with multiple generators. Aggregating waste from small

producers through cooperatives solves problems of scale and seasonality.

Technological adaptation to local contexts. Uncritical transfer of technologies

developed for different contexts is a frequent cause of failure. Robust, easy-to-operate,

low-maintenance, appropriate technologies show greater sustainability in SMEs.

Articulation of value chains. Successful projects establish links with bioproduct

demanders, ensuring commercialization. Long-term supply contracts reduce

commercial risks and facilitate financing.

Associative models and participatory governance. Community valorization experiences

show greater resilience when they incorporate inclusive governance mechanisms and

equitable distribution of benefits. Models driven exclusively by external agents present

higher abandonment rates.

4.6. Limitations of the Study and Future Directions

This research has limitations. The qualitative approach based on case studies, while allowing

for a deep understanding of dynamics, limits statistical generalization. Quantitative studies

with representative samples are needed to validate identified patterns. The availability of

detailed economic data was heterogeneous, hindering rigorous comparisons of financial

viability. Future research should employ standardized cost-benefit analysis and life cycle

assessment methodologies.

The analysis focused on technical, economic, and environmental dimensions, insufficiently

addressing sociocultural aspects that condition long-term sustainability (23). Ethnographic

approaches would complement the findings.

Priority directions for future research include: longitudinal studies of circular projects,

distributional impact analysis, assessment of systemic effects in territories with a high

concentration of circular initiatives, development of decision support tools for selecting

valorization routes, and research on innovative financing models.

CONCLUSIONS

The circular economy represents a viable and necessary strategy for the sustainable

transformation of the agro-industrial sector (24).

The valorization of agro-industrial waste through diversified technological routes generates

products with growing demand in specialized markets. Technical feasibility has been

demonstrated in multiple geographical contexts and subsectors, with competitive conversion

536

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

yields, product qualities, and environmental performance indicators. Scalability requires

technological adaptation to local conditions, robust technical capacities, and access to

appropriate financing.

The circular economy generates tangible economic benefits through reduced operating costs

(15-60% in waste management and input procurement), revenue diversification (8-22%

additional turnover), and access to premium markets with markups of 10-35%. Financial

viability is positive in most cases, with payback periods of 2.5-8 years depending on the

technology route and scale.

The environmental impacts are substantial and quantifiable. The valorization of organic waste

avoids emissions of 400-650 tons of CO₂ equivalent for every 1,000 tons processed, reduces

water consumption by 60-70% for second-generation processes, and decreases pollutant

loads by 85-95%. These benefits generate positive externalities that, if internalized through

appropriate economic instruments, would improve the competitiveness of circular projects.

The consolidation of the circular economy faces multidimensional barriers that require

systemic interventions (25). Technological, economic-financial, regulatory-institutional,

market, and cultural barriers cannot be resolved through isolated actions. Integrated public

policy packages are required, including: development and transfer of appropriate

technologies, concessional financing with investment guarantees, regulatory frameworks that

recognize waste-derived products, differentiated tax incentives, green public procurement

that generates assured demand, and sustained training and awareness programs. The

articulation of actors—businesses, producers, institutions of research, governments, and civil

society organizations—through collaborative platforms is a necessary condition to overcome

fragmentation and build circular innovation ecosystems.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES

1.

2.

Stahel, W. R. (2016). The circular economy. Nature, 531(7595), 435-438.

https://doi.org/10.1038/531435a

Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A review on circular economy: The expected

transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. Journal of

Cleaner Production, 114, 11-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007

3.

4.

Blomsma, F., & Brennan, G. (2017). The emergence of circular economy: A new framing

around prolonging resource productivity. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 603-614.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12603

Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An

analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221-232.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005

5.

6.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2021). Circular economy and

food systems. https://www.fao.org

Salgado-Tello, I., Sánchez-Herrera, T., Oleas-López, J., & Vaca-Cardenas, M. (2024).

Economía circular para el desarrollo agroindustrial y social en Ecuador. Telos: Revista de

537

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

Estudios

Interdisciplinarios

en

Ciencias

Sociales,

26(1),

297-322.

https://doi.org/10.36390/telos261.19

7.

8.

Valdez, I., & Canobbio, C. (2025). Economía circular en empresas exportadoras

agroindustriales en Sinaloa, México: grado de implementación y desafíos. Estudios de la

Gestión, (17). https://doi.org/10.32719/25506641.2025.17.6

Prieto-Sandoval, V., Jaca, C., & Ormazabal, M. (2018). Towards a consensus on the

circular

economy.

Journal

of

Cleaner

Production,

179,

605-615.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.224

9.

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2019). Completing the picture: How the circular economy

tackles climate change. https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org

10.

Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Circular

Economy - A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757-768.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048

11.

12.

13.

De Souza, R., Prates, D. F., Silva, C., & Gomes, L. (2021). Agroindustrial waste valorization

pathways and technological applications: A systematic review. Waste Management,

121, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.11.041

Matiacevich, S., Soto, D., & Gutiérrez, M. (2023). Economía circular: obtención y

encapsulación de compuestos polifenólicos provenientes de residuos agroindustriales.

RIVAR, 10(28). https://doi.org/10.35588/rivar.v10i28.5343

Bocken, N. M. P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design

and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and

Production

Engineering,

33(5),

308-320.

https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124

14.

Urbinati, A., Chiaroni, D., & Chiesa, V. (2017). Towards a new taxonomy of circular

economy business models. Journal of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.047

Cleaner Production, 168,

487-498.

15.

16.

17.

Lewandowski, M. (2016). Designing the business models for circular economy - Towards

the conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010043

Nußholz, J. L. K. (2017). Circular business models: Defining a concept and framing an

emerging research field. Sustainability, 9(10), 1810. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101810

Almeida-Guzmán, M., & Díaz-Guevara, C. (2020). Economía circular, una estrategia para

el

desarrollo

sostenible.

Estudios

de

la

Gestión,

(8),

35-57.

https://doi.org/10.32719/25506641.2020.8.10

18.

19.

Borrello, M., Pascucci, S., & Cembalo, L. (2020). Consumers' perspective on circular food

systems: A review. Sustainability, 12(19), 7831. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197831

Moraga, G., Huysveld, S., Mathieux, F., Blengini, G. A., Alaerts, L., Van Acker, K., de

Meester, S., & Dewulf, J. (2019). Circular economy indicators: What do they measure?

Resources,

Conservation

and

Recycling,

146,

452-461.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.045

538

THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AS A STRATEGY FOR CREATING NEW MARKETS IN THE AGRO-INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

20.

21.

Potting, J., Hekkert, M. P., Worrell, E., & Hanemaaijer, A. (2017). Circular economy:

Measuring innovation in the product chain. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment

Agency.

García-Barragán, J. F., Eyckmans, J., & Rousseau, S. (2019). Circular economy in

agriculture: An integrated analysis of waste valorization pathways. Journal of

Environmental

Management,

236,

1-15.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.01.104

22.

23.

Linder, M., & Williander, M. (2017). Circular business model innovation: Inherent

uncertainties. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(2), 182-196.

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1906

Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., & Seppälä, J. (2018). Circular economy: The concept and its

limitations. Ecological Economics, 143, 37-46.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041

24.

25.

Romero-Sáez, M. (2022). Los residuos agroindustriales, una oportunidad para la

economía circular. TecnoLógicas, 25(54). https://doi.org/10.22430/22565337.2505

Murray, A., Skene, K., & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: An interdisciplinary

exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics,

140(3), 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2

539