ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ

How does consumer behaviour shape the impact of circular business models—and what does that mean for sustainability? In this conversation, Michał Bączyk, a PhD candidate at the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, discusses the practical realities behind techno-optimist narratives, what has surprised him in his research, and how businesses can better align sustainability with everyday behavior.

Let’s start at the beginning. Can you tell us a bit about yourself and your academic background?

I’m originally from Poland, where I also grew up. My academic journey began in aerospace engineering. While working in the aerospace industry, I saw firsthand that the transition to sustainability wasn’t progressing as expected. There was a lack of viable sustainable fuel alternatives, and even though there were improvements in lightweight design, air travel kept increasing.

A desire to deepen my understanding of relationship between technology and sustainability brought me to the Master’s in Sustainable Business and Innovation at Utrecht ľ¹Ï¸£ÀûÓ°ÊÓ. Coming from an engineering background, I enjoyed approaching sustainability from a different perspective. After graduating I wanted to explore a specific topic in more depth. That’s how I ended up doing a PhD focused on consumer behavior in circular business models.

What motivated you to dive into this topic specifically?

I was really attracted to its critical approach to the circular economy. I had come across many techno-optimist narratives that presented circularity as a flawless solution, assuming that making everything circular would automatically yield great results. But there wasn’t much empirical evidence to support that. I wanted to look deeper and examine both the benefits and possible pitfalls.

And the recently published paper on consumer behavior in circular business models is the first part of that research?

A big part of my work also involves assessing the environmental impact of circular business models, particularly considering rebound effects which are unintended consequences of those models. In my first paper, I reviewed what we know about consumer behavior in empirical cases, and how environmental impacts are assessed. I also pointed out areas where there’s still room for improvement.

Were there any findings that really surprised you?

Some findings confirmed my initial skepticism—that the overly optimistic narratives around circularity really are too good to be true. But we also found strong evidence that circularity can genuinely support sustainability. It’s a balancing act. Interestingly, the main driver of consumer engagement with circular business models wasn’t necessarily pro-environmental values, it was convenience. People engage with circular businesses because they met their needs practically, not because of sustainability concerns.

So, even though the intention is sustainability, behavior doesn’t always follow?

Exactly. Some people do make more sustainable choices—but others end up using more, which cancels out the benefits. These patterns are shaped by economic systems and what’s seen as normal in society. Circular businesses still need to be profitable, so they often try to offer more value than conventional ones. And since people really value convenience, that can lead to using more, not less. A good example is car-sharing. It’s meant to reduce car ownership, but in some cases, it actually leads to more driving because it’s so easy and accessible.

What surprised me most was how much the local context matters. The same circular business model can work very differently in different places. A great example is shared laundromats. In Thailand, where many people live in small homes without washing machines, laundromats help reduce the total number of machines. But in Japan, most households already have a washing machine. There, laundromats made it easier to wash bulky items, which actually led to more washing overall.

How can companies use your insights to improve their business models?

Companies need to find a balance between doing what’s good for the environment and what makes sense financially. They should also involve consumers more—really understand what people need and design their services in a way that encourages sustainable behavior. It helps to test ideas with real users to spot any unexpected problems early on.

One example is a Dutch company that offered washing machines as a service. Instead of selling them, they remained the owner and customers paid per wash. Lower-temperature washes were cheaper, encouraging eco-friendly choices. But people ended up washing less frequently, which created financial issues for the company. Eventually, they had to switch to a monthly subscription. That shows how difficult it can be to keep a business both sustainable and financially successful.

Is there something that makes people more conscious about overconsumption?

There’s no single answer, it depends on the type of consumer and the situation. When people buy things they really need, they’re less likely to overconsume. But when it comes to luxury or status items, people often end up buying more. It’s not just about individual responsibility though. Businesses should create environments where the sustainable choice is the easiest and most attractive option.

What’s next for your research?

Right now, I’m developing an agent-based model of secondhand clothing consumption. It simulates how new and secondhand clothes are produced, bought, and discarded. We’re looking at whether secondhand options really reduce overall consumption and testing policies like incentivizing sustainable behavior or requiring retailers to offer resale services.

Later on, I’ll be doing lifecycle assessments to compare different scenarios and see which ones produce the greatest environmental benefits.

That sounds exciting. Thanks for sharing your insights.