The alarming increase in the volume of waste generated in recent decades worldwide due to rapid technological advances and changing lifestyles has pushed society to an unprecedented crisis and disrupted the delicate balance of ecosystems (Gogoi and Sarma, 2023). In the Waste Management Act, waste is defined as any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard. In essence, waste refers to solid, liquid, or gaseous substances that have been wasted and abandoned, or are no longer functioning, or are thought to have no additional economic, practical, or environmental value (Ayilara et al., 2020). Industrial and household processes, as well as other anthropogenic activities, generate a vast type of waste, which is categorized as construction and demolition (C&D) waste, municipal solid waste (MSW), municipal liquid waste, hazardous waste, electronic waste (e-waste), biological waste, radioactive waste, agricultural waste, plastic waste, and mining waste (Sarma et al., 2024). The inadequate dispersal of wastes triggers an exponential surge in waste generation. A report from the World Bank highlighted the impending global waste crisis, painting a disturbing picture of the future, and projected a worrisome scenario where waste production may reach 3.40×10⁹ t by 2050 (World Bank Group, 2018). To put this into perspective, waste production would be more than twice the population growth rate during the same timeframe (Bhat et al., 2024). Mismanaged waste puts excessive economic pressure on society by taxing public resources (Diggle and Walker, 2022). This financial burden results from improper disposal techniques, waste cleaning expenditures, and healthcare bills. Not only does this financial load slow economic progress, but it also takes away resources that could be used more wisely in other places (Nguyen et al., 2020; Shershneva, 2022). Furthermore, rising global waste production requires even more landfill area, which competes with the community’s desire for more sustainable and inhabitable sites (de Melo et al., 2022). As a result, it lowers the land value even more. This unrestrained waste expansion jeopardizes the planet’s ecosystems by polluting water bodies, strains resources, and seriously threatens public health (Bashir et al., 2020). Due to the severe problems that waste presents worldwide, there is now greater urgency than ever to move towards a circular economy (CE) and implement sustainable environmental practices. The CE proposes a paradigm change from the old linear model of “take-make-consume-dispose” to an innovative and restorative approach in which waste is minimized and resources are retained in continuous use (Kirchherr et al., 2023). The generation of energy from biomass and efficient waste management, two interrelated elements that hold the key to not only reducing environmental degradation but also promoting economic growth and societal well-being, are at the center of this transformation (Zhou and Wang, 2020). The CE’s core resides in its capacity to mirror the Earth’s natural processes, where there is no waste but a constant cycle of production and renewal (Reike et al., 2018). Similarly, biomass is a critical resource in this endeavor. This sustainable energy is obtained from organic materials like wood, agricultural waste, and garbage. Utilizing biomass through various methods, such as combustion, gasification, or fermentation, assists in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and decreasing reliance on fossil fuels, making it a crucial resource (Saleem, 2022). The accomplishment of CE depends not only on biomass energy but also on an effective and creative waste management system. The key to transforming this growing challenge into an opportunity for transformation is effective waste management, which includes recycling, composting, and ethical disposal (Ayilara et al., 2020). It reduces pollution and increases the economic value of waste materials. Therefore, CE and sustainable environmental practices are comprehensive approaches encompassing economic growth, social well-being, and ecological preservation, and it is essential to understand their multifaceted nature (Ferraz and Pyka, 2023).

While various publications have been undertaken, most have focused on specific aspects (Hossain et al., 2024; Oyejobi et al., 2024). Still, they seek to uncover the diverse facets of this transformation, addressing the challenges, opportunities, and implications. As the foundation of CE, an exhaustive understanding of the intricate web of waste management and biomass energy production is urgently required. Furthermore, this study also emphasizes how CE can bolster economies, safeguard ecosystems, and drive innovation. This review explores the core of sustainability, where we address the philosophical and ethical elements of the relationship between the human and environment as well as the practical and technological ones. This review also highlights recent innovations and future advancements in CE field, particularly in waste management and biomass energy production, offering valuable insights into sustainable environmental practices.

CE is an economic model aiming to create value at every operational level by systematically reusing products and their constituent components, recycling materials, and conserving natural resources. Positioned as an innovative form of sustainability, CE addresses the challenges posed by resource abundance, material scarcity, and the evolution of the reuse and recycling framework (de Melo et al., 2022). Governmental agencies, educational institutions, corporations, and the general public increasingly adopt this concept as essential to sustainable development (Sgroi, 2022). CE has received a lot of appreciation for its ability to promote long-term, ecologically responsible growth. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015), CE is inherently restorative by design and aspires to maintain products, components, and materials at their maximum efficacy, emphasizing distinguishing between biological and technical cycles. Geissdoerfer et al. (2017) defined CE as a regenerative system. In this framework, the intentional monitoring, closure, and narrowing of material and energy loops work to minimize resource input, waste, emissions, and energy leakage (Muller et al., 2022).

The primary goal of CE is to minimize adverse environmental impacts while simultaneously optimizing organizational performance and productivity. Despite the development of several frameworks and metrics by governmental bodies, corporations, and researchers aimed at a thoughtful understanding of CE (Corona et al., 2019), the concept of CE has evolved. Many governments have led by establishing objectives and nationally targeted key performance indicators related to sustainable development and CE. These indicators are a strategic tool for policy-makers and decision-makers in pursuing sustainability goals (Lamba et al., 2023). The prevailing literature on CE prominently highlights the 3R principles: reduce, reuse, and recycle (Reike et al., 2018). Reduce is the process of reducing inputs and outputs, which includes waste and raw resources. Meanwhile, reuse involves utilizing a product for the same purpose even after reaching its shelf life. Finally, recycle refers to reusing discarded resources to create new products (Merewether et al., 2023).

To enhance corporate accountability and facilitate a smoother transition to CE, the initial 3R principles have evolved into a more comprehensive 9R framework, including refuse (R0), rethink (R1), reduce (R2), reuse (R3), repair (R4), refurbish (R5), remanufacture (R6), repurpose (R7), recycle (R8), and recover (R9). The interrelation of economy and environment is elucidated through the 9R framework governing CE. Evaluation of CE process is conducted employing the 9R framework, with a system perspective, guiding the identification of CE domains (Rahla et al., 2021). Three pivotal strategies are embedded in the R-list to stimulate product innovation and circularity. The first strategy encompasses three actions—R0, R1, and R2—emphasizing the imperative for inventive product manufacturing (Ang et al., 2021). The second strategy comprises five actions—R3, R4, R5, R6, and R7—facilitating the extension of product lifespan (Ang et al., 2021). The final strategy, considered less preferable, involves two actions—R8 and R9 (Rahla et al., 2021). The 9R framework positions R0 at the top of circularity progression, whereas R9 is situated at the outset of linear output, providing an understanding of the transition from linear economy to CE (de Melo et al., 2022).

Biomass, which is obtained from plants, trees, agricultural wastes, and organic waste, plays a crucial role in promoting sustainable development and contributing to CE (Martini et al., 2023) (Fig. 2). In an era characterized by climate change concerns, falling fossil fuel supplies, and urgent demand for green energy sources, biomass is seen as a feasible alternative with several advantages and great potential. Biomass is crucial to nature’s carbon cycle (Houghton et al., 2009). It represents a sustainable energy source continually renewed through photosynthesis and generates 1.70×10¹¹ t of biomass annually, with 75.00% of that biomass categorized as carbon (Alper et al., 2020; Hawkins et al., 2023). This organic substance contains carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, sulfur, chlorine, and other inorganic elements and holds the primary advantage of carbon neutrality (Chen et al., 2021). As biomass burns and emits CO₂ into the atmosphere, plants and organic materials absorb an equal quantity of CO₂. This graceful interaction creates a closed-loop carbon cycle, distinguishing biomass from the net carbon increase associated with standard fossil fuel burning (Kiehbadroudinezhad et al., 2023). This process also produces valuable by-products, such as hydrogen, nitrogen, and sulfur, contributing to plant growth and development. While addressing environmental issues and promoting agricultural production, biomass plays a pivotal role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the impact of climate change (Thornley et al., 2015). It provides an essential avenue towards global sustainability by using natural processes such as photosynthesis and carbon sequestration.

Biomass is becoming increasingly popular due to its eco-friendliness, wide variety, and accessibility. Unlike finite fossil fuels, biomass offers a practically limitless power reservoir. Its vast range of feedstocks, ranging from forestry scraps to specific energy crops, allows for adaptation across varied geographic locations and local agricultural landscapes (Jang and Woo, 2024). This adaptability adds to its allure as a viable energy source capable of meeting a wide range of energy requirements while avoiding the hazards associated with over-reliance on finite resources. The World Bioenergy Association emphasizes that throughout history, biomass has been a critical resource for civilization, principally used for energy generation (WBA, 2022).

The Earth has enormous potential to produce 3.30×10⁴ EJ of energy, more than 80 times the amount consumed globally yearly (Kalak, 2023). According to Alper et al. (2020), biomass now contributes 50.00 EJ or almost 10.00% of the world’s total energy consumption. Biomass origins include agricultural practices, livestock farming, fishing, horticulture, forestry, orchards, vineyards, and marine ecosystems. This encompasses both primary crops and waste materials, making biomass a resource in both its natural state and as miscellaneous waste (Gavrilescu et al., 2020).

Various agricultural wastes, including crop remnants and by-products, e.g., rice husk and sugarcane bagasse, are effective employees for biomass energy production. According to Di Fraia et al. (2020), agricultural and agro-industrial residues, such as cereals, legumes, potatoes, peaches, hazelnuts, olives, and vines, can generate 0.15×10^-3 EJ of energy annually. Recently, Tolessa (2023) revealed that 6.95×10⁵ to 1.05×10⁸ t of robust gross crop residue biomass can produce 5.59×10^-3 to 1.14 EJ of energy. Simultaneously, India generates 6.86×10⁸ t of gross agricultural residual biomass annually. Approximately 2.34×10⁸ t, or 34.00% of the total outputs, have been recognized as excess and are accessible for bioenergy generation (Hiloidhari et al., 2014). Various published studies present outstanding statistics for gross agricultural residual biomass output and bioenergy potential (Siegrist et al., 2022; Vaish et al., 2022). These findings highlight the importance of using agricultural wastes for sustainable energy practices, which aligns with worldwide initiatives to switch to cleaner and renewable energy sources. Likewise, the forestry industry is critical to biomass generation, providing a sustainable solution to supply about 15.40% of world energy demand through woody waste (Yu et al., 2021; Gogoi et al., 2024). Various sources, such as forests, vineyards, wineries, tree plantations, and public green areas, generate this woody waste. Previously published literature has shed light on the significance of forest waste in the context of biomass energy (IFEU, 2010; Gavrilescu et al., 2020). Furthermore, the abundance and accessibility of forest waste improve the economic viability of using it for bioenergy. The cost-effectiveness, ecological benefits, and financial feasibility make converting forest waste into bioenergy a crucial component of the transition towards a more sustainable and resilient energy future.

MSW is an important biomass source for energy production although frequently overlooked (Nanda and Berruti, 2021). It possesses enormous potential because of its high quantity of biodegradable organic components, such as food scraps, paper, and green detritus, often comprising over 60.00% of its composition (Arelli et al., 2020; Traven, 2023). These organic components are high in energy content, making them a viable resource for bioenergy conversion. Numerous studies have shown that expanding urban populations increases the volume of MSW, establishing it as a stable and plentiful renewable energy source (Chen, 2018; Voukkali et al., 2023). Furthermore, using MSW for electricity coincides with waste management goals by limiting landfill utilization and lessening the environmental effects of traditional waste disposal techniques (Table 1) (Debrah et al., 2021; Alao et al., 2022).

The utilization of biomass offers the possibility of rural rehabilitation and economic development. Communities may support sustainable lifestyles through biomass production, processing, and consumption by developing local biomass resources. Furthermore, its adaptability, renewable nature, and diverse feedstocks position it as a cornerstone in the global transition to cleaner and more resilient energy sources, significantly contributing to CE and alleviating environmental challenges.

Efficient handling of biowaste is crucial for preserving ecosystems and enhancing living conditions. Waste-to-energy transition technologies are vital for the conversion of diverse renewable waste materials derived from agricultural (plant and animal residues), industrial (sugar refinery, dairy, confectionery, pulp and paper, tanneries, and slaughterhouses), and residential (kitchen and garden waste) origins into viable energy forms, such as biohydrogen, biogas, and bio-alcohols.

The primary method for transforming solid biomass into energy involves the utilization of diverse thermochemical processes aimed at synthesizing bioenergy products from a range of biomass sources (Fig. 3) (Malico et al., 2019; Ubando et al., 2019). Combustion, a predominant method within thermochemical processes, is employed for synthesizing bioenergy products from diverse biomass sources (Zabot et al., 2020). While any biomass can undergo combustion, practical feasibility is limited to biomass with less than 50.00% moisture levels unless the material is pre-drying (Kumar et al., 2015). Power plants that traditionally burn coal demonstrate high conversion efficiency, making the co-combustion of biomass from such plants an appealing choice for combustion technology. Duan et al. (2014) reported that peanut shells, after harvesting, are used in combustion in many developing countries, positioning them as a potential alternative fuel amidst the current energy crisis. The study involved the utilization of crushed peanut shells and pelletized peanut shells in a vortex fluidized-bed combustor with flue gas recirculation. Biohydrogen, characterized by its higher energy density and lower greenhouse gas emissions, has emerged as a noteworthy fuel for direct combustion (Table 2). Compared to conventional fuels, biohydrogen has elevated energy content at 1.42×10^-13 EJ/g (Bonatto et al., 2020). Biohydrogen is produced from high-solid organic wastes, such as carbohydrate-rich potato and rice, protein-rich lean meat and egg, and fat-rich chicken skin and meat. Various forms of combustion, including surface combustion, smoldering combustion, decomposition combustion, and evaporation combustion, are employed for different applications. Evaporation combustion involves heating a sample with a low fusion temperature, causing it to vaporize and interact with oxygen in the gaseous phase. Decomposition combustion results from the mixture of gases produced by thermal breakdown with oxygen, leading to flame formation and often leaving behind char residues or biochar. The combustion of these residual char elements is typically managed through surface combustion. Smoldering combustion occurs at temperatures below those where volatile components in reactive biomass samples ignite. Surface and decomposition combustion are standard methods in industrial biomass combustion.

Gasification operates at high temperatures (up to 5000°C) and in an oxygen-deficient environment to convert the heating value of carbonaceous materials into a combustible gas known as synthesis gas or syngas (Zabot et al., 2020; Arpia et al., 2021). The syngas produced in this process contains CO, H₂, CH₄, and various minor gases (Zabot et al., 2020). Syngas can undergo further processing into alkanes, methanol, or hydrogen through methods, such as Fischer-Tropsch, catalysis, or water gas shift. Hu et al. (2016) produced syngas through catalytic-gasification, utilizing wet sewage sludge and pine sawdust. Biomass waste to a steam atmosphere at temperatures between 250°C and 400°C for about 1 h enables successful conversion into biogas (Qin et al., 2021). The versatility of gasification in producing fuels and chemicals alongside heat and electricity presents opportunities to establish gasification-based biorefineries (Malico et al., 2019).

In an oxygen-deprived environment, organic matter undergoes decomposition through a method known as pyrolysis (Dai et al., 2019). Pyrolysis has the unique virtue of releasing a large amount of heat while maintaining a positive energy balance. This method is primarily employed to yield three products: biochar (a solid residue resembling coal), bio-oil (a compressible liquid), and syngas (a non-condensable lightweight gaseous product) (Dai et al., 2019; Ong et al., 2019). Biochar, a carbon-rich by-product of pyrolysis, is garnering interest because of its capacity to improve soil physicochemical and biological qualities (Zabot et al., 2020). Bio-oil, also known as pyrolysis oil, stands out as a significant by-product of pyrolysis and acts as a suitable alternative for fuel oil in heat and electricity generation (WBA, 2022). Bio-oil production through pyrolysis provides advantages in terms of convenience in storage and transportation compared to the fuel gases generated by the gasification process (Dhyani and Bhaskar, 2018).

Biochemical conversion methods are effective for biomass that has a high moisture content (Fig. 4) (Kumar et al., 2015; Mishra et al., 2023). Fermentation is a promising method for converting this biomass into energy, with bioethanol production being a significant application. The primary source for bioethanol synthesis is cellulosic biomass, which can be obtained from various agricultural, industrial, and municipal waste materials (Bonatto et al., 2020). Bioethanol is produced from banana peel waste (Bhatia and Paliwal, 2010) and wheat straw (Bhatia and Johri, 2018). Major innovative breakthroughs in lignocellulose biotechnology have made possible significant opportunities for producing renewable fuels and biochemicals from agro-industrial residues like sugarcane bagasse, rice straw, and corn stover (Bhatia et al., 2019). In addition to being used for biofuel production, sugarcane bagasse can also produce phenolic compounds (Pattnaik et al., 2022).

The fermentation process for biofuel production involves several phases: initially, waste biomass undergoes crushing, then raw materials like cellulose or starch are converted into polysaccharides. The ethanol obtained from this process is then distilled and condensed into high purity. Finally, the high-purity ethanol is further processed through dewatering to create biofuel ethanol. The final step involves blending ethanol fuel and gasoline in specific proportions to produce fuel ethanol. Hydrolysis is a standard method for breaking down simple sugars into ethanol and by-products, such as water and CO₂. In this process, acids, bases, or enzymes are predominantly utilized (Mishra et al., 2023). The energy-intensive distillation process for ethanol purification can yield 450 L from 1000 kg of dry corn (Kumar et al., 2015). Due to its good amalgamating qualities and physical and chemical properties resembling gasoline, ethanol finds application as a novel and clean automotive fuel in automobiles (Qin et al., 2021). Beyond its energy role, bioethanol is a valuable industrial solvent and chemical feedstock (Guerrero et al., 2018). Increasing recognition is observed for the environmental benefits of bioethanol in reducing particle emission levels (Vaish et al., 2019). Fermentation, particularly in the context of yeast, is extensively employed for bioethanol production, involving pre-treatment of biomass before anaerobic fermentation. Evcan and Tari (2015) conducted a study on bioethanol production using agricultural residues from coconut, pineapple, and tuna. They found that the bioethanol content varied for each residue, with pineapple juice exhibiting the highest percentage at 22.00%, coconut milk at 12.00%, and tuna juice recording the lowest at 12.00% (Evcan and Tari, 2015). Biogas, predominantly consisting of methane and CO₂, results from the anaerobic digestion of organic matter. This process involves various metabolic stages, including hydrolysis, methanogenesis, acetogenesis, and acidogenesis, performed by diverse microorganisms in environments devoid of oxygen (Kumar et al., 2015; André et al., 2019). Compared to aerobic organic substrate degradation, anaerobic treatment produces more biogas with lower biomass input and generates less waste sludge/slurry (Vaish et al., 2019). Energy crops, including sugar beet, sunflower, maize, and grasses, are gaining recognition for biogas production due to their high energy content, low nitrogen content, rapid biodegradability, and profitability, compared to other crops, which make them suitable for co-digestion to enhance biogas production alongside organic wastes from fermenters (Vaish et al., 2019). Parawira et al. (2008) studied biomethane gas production using sugar beet leaves and solid potato waste. They used digestion and co-digestion methods to obtain methane from volatile solid. The co-digestion method produced up to 60.00% more methane than digestion alone. This demonstrated a favorable synergy within the digestion fluid, contributing to increased methane generation. Microalgae can also serve as a substrate in the bioreactor of anaerobic digestion (de Morais et al., 2020). González-González et al. (2018) emphasized the methane potential and nutrient mobilization of Scenedesmus dimorphus, a microalga. The findings indicate that S. dimorphus yields an average methane output of 199 mL/g volatile solids, making it a viable substrate for anaerobic digestion. Woody crops are rarely employed for anaerobic digestion due to their high lignin concentration, which is inefficiently digested by anaerobic microbes (Balussou et al., 2018). In developing countries such as Brazil, lignocellulosic waste is successfully used in biogas plants. For instance, 3.71×10⁸ W is generated from wood residue, 0.32×10⁸ W from elephant grass, and 0.36×10⁸ W from rice husk (Vaish et al., 2019). Biodiesel is a sustainable fuel that can partially replace diesel and is made through transesterification (de Morais et al., 2020; Mendes and Bordignon, 2020). It comprises methyl esters of fatty acids, and is a more environmentally friendly option due to its lack of sulfur compounds, which contribute to global warming, the greenhouse effect, and acid rain. Biodiesel is also noncorrosive and biodegradable. The most efficient way to derive bioenergy from waste is through the chemical conversion of lipids to biodiesel. This involves extracting lipids and subjecting them to transesterification, which produces fatty acid methyl esters (Uma and Dineshbabu, 2020).

This transesterification technique includes the interaction of short-chain alcohols, usually methanol or ethanol, with vegetable or animal triglycerides predominantly produced from waste oils. This process yields glycerol, methyl-esterified molecules, and monoglycerides. Various catalysts, such as enzymes (Ali et al., 2017), metal oxides (Chang et al., 2017), alkalis (Nayak and Vyas, 2019), or acids, can be employed in transesterification. This approach can efficiently produce biodiesel due to a catalyst or the interaction of triglycerides with short-chain alcohol (Mendes and Bordignon, 2020). Base-catalyzed transesterification, unlike acid-catalyzed transesterification, rapidly produces significant amounts of fatty acid methyl ester under moderate conditions of reaction, which makes it a popular commercial approach. Despite the eco-friendly and cost-effective benefits of enzymatic catalysts, their commercial application is still in development. Approaches, such as whole-cell catalysts, immobilized enzymes, and protein engineering, are being explored to enhance the efficiency of enzyme catalysis (Mishra et al., 2023).

Municipal wastewater has enormous promise as an energy resource, and the nascent sector of green energy generation from municipal sewage is rapidly expanding. However, traditional municipal wastewater treatment methods, such as activated sludge, membrane filtration, trickling filters, and reverse osmosis, have limitations in terms of both economic and energetic efficiency. The construction of municipal wastewater treatment plants is associated with significant costs and demands substantial energy. Besides, technology like combustion releases a lot of CO₂ into the atmosphere, one of the key greenhouse gases with potentially hazardous effects on the climate (Chaturvedi and Verma, 2016). MFC plays a crucial role in mitigating the economic challenges of municipal wastewater treatment, simultaneously contributing to enhancing renewable energy generation sustainability. This technology is a cost-effective, clean, and efficient process that uses renewable energy sources and produces no hazardous by-products when used as a substitute source of electricity. MFC technology effectively converts organic contaminants found in municipal wastewater into electrical energy. This is accomplished by employing electrogenic microbes, which concurrently produce energy and remediate various kinds of sewage (Singh et al., 2019). Numerous MFC designs are intended to produce electrical energy. Single-chambered and dual-chambered MFCs are regarded as the most popular designs (Vishwanathan, 2021). The dual-chambered MFC is often deliberated, wherein an anode compartment and a cathode compartment are separated by a proton exchange membrane (cationic membrane) (Chaturvedi and Verma, 2016). Microorganisms play an essential role in MFC because they accelerate the release of electrons from organic substrates’ energy-rich bonds in an anaerobic environment (Vishwanathan, 2021). Municipal wastewater, the habitat of innumerable microorganisms, is stored in the negative terminal’s anode chamber. The microbes that digest organic substances like glucose serve as an electron donor. These organic compounds produce protons and electrons during their metabolism. Subsequently, the liberated electrons are then transferred to the anode surface. Protons flow via the electrolyte, and afterward, electrons travel from the anode to the cathode through the external electrical circuit connected by a conductive material, which may include a resistor; through this mechanism, electricity is generated (Pandey et al., 2016). This technology is considered the most useful in electricity production, where waste is converted into bioenergy at a low cost with low energy. Therefore, this method can be utilized to attain CE by achieving sustainability through the production of green energy.

Numerous intellectual researchers have identified an assembly of barriers posing challenges to the successful implementation of CE (Durdyev et al., 2023; Holly et al., 2023). The barriers of CE encompass legal restrictions, regulations, and other limitations, which act as disincentives to realizing a particular concept, innovation, or technology (Hilson, 2000). Ye et al. (2020) further elaborated that difficulty or barrier manifests as a problem hindering the advancement of a specific technique, discouraging individuals from embracing a particular idea, invention, or technology. Govindan and Hasanagic (2018) conducted a detailed investigation and discovered 39 obstacles, 10 of which were external and 29 of which were internal. Building on this research, Osei-Tutu et al. (2022) characterized barriers as “specific disincentives inhibiting, dissuading, or discouraging the implementation of CE principles in the construction industry”. Remarkably, their study identified 79 barriers impeding the adoption of CE, with particular emphasis on economic, technical, and social barriers.

Economic barriers pose formidable challenges to enterprises in impacting the transition from linear economy to CE, primarily due to insufficient economic incentives (Govindan and Hasanagic, 2018). In the case of monetary/financial barriers, prevalent obstacles cover the excessive expenses associated with recycled resources, diminished market valuation, minimal landfill costs, constrained market dynamics for reclaimed materials, economic considerations such as budget and upfront fees, and design expenditures (Osei-Tutu et al., 2022). The raised costs necessitated in waste processing contribute to a growth in the pricing of recycled materials, thereby constituting a recognized hindrance to the extensive adoption of CE.

Technical challenges in the implementation of CE include limited design codes focused on reclaimed materials, the lack of building design standards for minimizing C&D waste, and a lack of policy incentives (Ghisellini et al., 2016; Govindan and Hasanagic, 2018; Osei-Tutu et al., 2022). The recovery and reuse of items and components face significant challenges due to the growing number and complexity of products. Maintaining product quality throughout its lifecycle is an intimidating task. Ensuring the quality of items manufactured from recycled materials is a challenging aspect. The design complexities of creating durable, reusable, and recyclable products contribute to the difficulties. Challenges also arise in the effective separation of materials, requiring technology for a cascading agreement with applications or a safe return to the biosphere. Considerations regarding efficient processes, technology, and involvement of all stakeholders can enhance the likelihood of successful CE implementation (Peñate-Valentín et al., 2021).

Regarding social barriers to CE adoption, prominent challenges include insufficient client demand, limited awareness, knowledge gaps, knowledge of CE practices, and a deficient demand for composite construction. Additionally, there is a recognized deficit in education among stakeholders regarding CE strategies (Osei-Tutu et al., 2022). Research findings highlight that insufficient knowledge about CE strategies impedes the widespread implementation of circular practices (Charef and Emmitt, 2021).

To tackle the challenges of waste management, an innovative strategy is required for waste collection and treatment. Urban waste management will require a conceptual framework incorporating the product’s whole life cycle into the waste management system. The objective is to reduce waste from one system and repurpose it as a resource for other systems in an ideal waste-free city. Transitioning to a zero-waste smart city necessitates three critical steps: waste prevention, proper garbage disposal, and practical value recovery from collected waste. The ‘resource waste’ concept prioritizes waste reduction upstream, emphasizing resource management by separating trash at its source to improve value recovery rather than relying exclusively on treatment. This strategy aims to improve efficiency by merging principles from CE and sharing economy (Esmaeilian et al., 2018). Manufacturers may play a critical role by implementing measures to reduce waste and emissions and get knowledge throughout the product’s lifetime. Understanding customer behavior and product usage time might help remanufacturers anticipate the future potential of abandoned items (Mostafa and Dumrak, 2015). For example, prompt buy-back rates can be provided for returning old items, such as consumer electronics, allowing upgrading and recovery through specified remanufacturing channels (Sabbaghi et al., 2016). Municipalities can more effectively handle the timely collection and recovery of waste by keeping apprised of the rate of waste development. This information may also be used to modify the layout and size of waste containers for different geographical locations. Overall, utilizing product lifecycle data provides opportunities for information interchange, the investigation of new data formats, the introduction of creative business models, and the possibility to boost resource utilization, minimize capability waste, and shorten product lifecycles.

In today’s world, embracing the principles of CE and sustainable environmental practices has become more than an option; it is now necessary in our quest for a cleaner and more sustainable future. Our planet urgently needs to reduce carbon emissions, preserve dwindling resources, and responsibly manage waste. By utilizing biomass as a renewable energy source and implementing innovative waste management strategies, we have the potential to bring about a revolutionary change. Transitioning to CE and sustainable environmental practices is a challenging task that requires the collective effort of governments, companies, and the public. It involves implementing significant legislative changes, technological advancements, and a shift in public perception. However, the benefits are numerous and far-reaching. By switching to biomass energy, we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and decrease reliance on fossil fuels. Similarly, effective waste management can significantly reduce pollution, protect ecosystems, and help us realize the economic value of wasted materials. Climate change and environmental degradation caused by waste mismanagement present significant challenges, but they also offer opportunities for economic growth and innovation. By transitioning to more sustainable practices, we can create a cleaner, more prosperous environment for ourselves and future generations. As responsible members of society, we must adopt these practices and live in harmony with the world. Together, we can build a brighter and more sustainable future for all.

Nazim Forid ISLAM: supervision, conceptualization, writing - original draft, and writing - review & editing; Bhoirob GOGOI: data curation, software, methodology, validation, formal analysis, and writing - original draft; Rimon SAIKIA: data curation, formal analysis, methodology, and writing - original draft; Balal YOUSAF: writing - review & editing; Mahesh NARAYAN: writing - review & editing; and Hemen SARMA: supervision and writing - review & editing. All authors approved the manuscript.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

The authors thank Bodoland University, Assam of India, and Nanda Nath Saikia College, Assam of India, for logistics and assistance. Additionally, the Department of Biotechnology, Government of India, is acknowledged for granting research funds (BT/NER/143/SP44344/2021) to Nanda Nath Saikia College under the North Eastern Region (NER) Biotech Hub Program.