This article argues that a popular circular economy already exists in many world cities, and that this economy can be enhanced through spatial planning. We use Mexico City as a case study, and analyse its popular circular economy, defined as the family micro-businesses which contribute to enhancing the circularity of everyday objects by enabling their reuse, repair, refurbishment or recycling. We first present a panorama of this economy using the Mexican economic census. We complement this analysis by presenting two ethnographic vignettes of practices that also form part of the popular circular economy, beyond what can be observed in the census: the first one illustrates practices of public market workers to avoid food waste, and the second pictures an e-waste informal street market. Taken together, these scales of analysis provide a rich account of the multiple activities that compose Mexico City’s popular circular economy. We then compare this phenomenon with the orientation and main strategies of the city’s circular economy programme, noting a discrepancy between the two with regards to the scope of action. We conclude that spatial planning tools can foster the already existing popular circular economy, by allocating space for family businesses in all neighbourhoods, and by enhancing social cohesion through the design of quality public spaces and infrastructures.
Aguayo-AyalaA (2016) El caso de la Cerrada de Andrómaco en el contexto del megaproyecto de Nuevo Polanco, Ciudad de México [The case of Cerrada de Andrómaco in the context of the Nuevo Polanco megaproject, Mexico City]. CON-TEMPORÁNEA3(6): 1–16.
3.
Aquino-IllescasVHAguilar-MartínezAG (2022) Corporate verticalization of urban space in Mexico City (1940–2018). Revista de Geografia Norte Grande2022(81): 161–182.
4.
BahersJBRutherfordJ (2024) Urban infrastructures, metabolic resource flows and the contradictions of circular economy ‘solutions’ in Nantes and Gothenburg. Urban Studies62(9): 1897–1918.
5.
BhanG (2019) Notes on a Southern urban practice. Environment and Urbanization31(2): 639–654.
6.
BladesDFerreiraFLugoMA (2011) The informal economy in developing countries: An introduction. Review of Income and Wealth57(s1): S1–S7.
7.
BolgerKDoyonA (2019) Circular cities: Exploring local government strategies to facilitate a circular economy. European Planning Studies27(11): 2184–2205.
8.
BonoFWuytsWWillemsE (2024) Towards a care-full circular economy. In: DąbrowskiMVan denBKWilliamsJ, et al. (eds) Going Circular – Unlocking the Potential of Regions and Cities to Drive the Circular Economy Transition. Routledge, Taylor and Francis, pp.43–59.
9.
BortolottiAKampelmannSDe MuynckS (2018) Decentralised organic resource treatments – Classification and comparison through extended material flow analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production183: 515–526.
10.
Bracamontes NájeraLAGuibrunetL (n.d.) Diversidad del comercio minorista en la Ciudad de México e implicaciones para un sistema alimentario sostenible [Diversity of retail in Mexico City and its implications for a sustainable food system]. In: Eudamidas BezerraJ (ed.) Supermercadización En América Latina: Transformaciones En La Geografía Del Comercio de Alimentos En Las Ciudades [Supermarketisation in Latin America: Geographical Transformations of Food Retail in Cities]. Editora Universidade de Brasilia.
11.
BrownDMcGranahanG (2016) The urban informal economy, local inclusion and achieving a global green transformation. Habitat International53: 97–105.
12.
Bunge GonzálezEB (2024) Circuitos de renovación: La segunda vida de los residuos eléctricos y electrónicos en una colonia de pepenadores en la Ciudad de México. El caso de Colonia Renovación, Iztapalapa [Renovation Circuits: The second life of electric and electronic waste in a recyclers’ neighbourhood in Mexico City. The case of the Renovación neighbourhood, Iztapalapa]. Bachelor’s thesis in Anthropology. Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico.
13.
CapronGEsquivel-HernándezMT (2016) El enclave urbano, lógica socioespacial de la periferia urbanizada y sus efectos sobre la segregación residencial y la fragmentación urbana [The urban enclave, socio-spatial logic of the urbanised periphery and their effects on residential segregation and urban fragmentation]. Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía25(2): 127.
DavisJMGarbY (2019) Extended responsibility or continued dis/articulation? Critical perspectives on electronic waste policies from the Israeli-Palestinian case. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space2(2): 368–389.
16.
DelgadilloV (2016) Selective modernization of Mexico City and its historic center. Gentrification without displacement?Urban Geography37(8): 1154–1174.
17.
De MeloTACDe OliveiraMADe SousaSRG, et al. (2022) Circular economy public policies: A systematic literature review. Procedia Computer Science204: 652–662.
18.
DiasSM (2016) Waste pickers and cities. Environment and Urbanization28(2): 375–390.
19.
DoménechTDaviesM (2011) The role of embeddedness in industrial symbiosis networks: Phases in the evolution of industrial symbiosis networks. Business Strategy and the Environment10(5): 281–296.
20.
DunlapAArceMC (2022) ‘Murderous energy’ in Oaxaca, Mexico: Wind factories, territorial struggle and social warfare. Journal of Peasant Studies49(2): 455–480.
GaigerLI (2019) Da informalidade à economia popular: Distinguindo realidades e conectando abordagens [From informality to popular economy: Distinguishing realities and connecting approaches]. Ciências Sociais Unisinos55(1): 97–110.
24.
Gallegos-CarrascoBVJuvera-VargasJT (2015) Basura cero como alternativa a la incineración de residuos en cementeras. Movimiento Pro Salud, Apaxco, México [Zero waste as an alternative to waste incineration in cement factories. Pro Salud movement in Apaxco, Mexico]. Ecología Política49: 102–105.
25.
GigliaA (2018) Comercio, Consumo y Cultura En Los Mercados Públicos de La Ciudad de México [Retail, Consumption and Culture in Mexico City’s Public Markets]. Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa.
26.
GuibrunetL (2019a) The interplay of tacit and explicit knowledge in the informal economy: The atypical case of a recycling family business in Mexico City. International Development Planning Review43(1): 13–31.
27.
GuibrunetL (2019b) What is “informal” in informal waste management? Insights from the case of waste collection in the Tepito neighbourhood, Mexico City. Waste Management86: 13–22.
28.
HagbertPWangelJBromsL (2020) Exploring the potential for just urban transformations in light of eco-modernist imaginaries of sustainability. Urban Planning5(4): 204–216.
29.
HaswellFEdelenboschOYPiscicelliL, et al. (2024) The geography of circularity missions: A cross-country comparison of circular economy policy approaches in the Global North and Global South. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions52: 100883.
30.
HaydenTB (2021) Street food as infrastructure: Consumer mobility, vendor removability and food security in Mexico City. Food, Culture and Society24(1): 98–111.
INEGI (2024a) Directorio Estadístico Nacional de Unidades Económicas [National Statistical Directory of Economic Units]. Mexico City. Available at: https://www.inegi.org.mx/app/mapa/denue/default.aspx (accessed 23 September 2025).
JanoschkaM (2005) Discursos de inseguridad y la ciudad cerrada: Mitos, realidades, barreras y fronteras de un producto inmobiliario ‘perfecto’ [Safety discrouses and the closed city: Myths, realities, barriers and borders of a ‘perfect’ real estate product]. Revista de Investigación Social2: 11–35.
35.
JehličkaPMaHKosteleckýT, et al. (2023) Chinese food self-provisioning: key sustainability policy lessons hidden in plain sight. Agriculture and Human Values41: 647–659.
36.
Kakeu-tardyRCMHowarthHSahakianM, et al. (2023) On the (in)visibility of practices: Opportunities for the promotion of household waste-segregation in Western Switzerland. Worldwide Waste6(1): 1–16.
37.
KorsunovaAHalmeMKourulaA, et al. (2022) Necessity-driven circular economy in low-income contexts: How informal sector practices retain value for circularity. Global Environmental Change76: 102573.
38.
LallRLalaRHGajjarH (2025) How Zoning Regulations Can Recognize, Enable and Anticipate Home-based Work. WIEGO technical brief no. 17.
39.
Martinez-AlierJ (2002) Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation. Edward Elgar.
40.
MartínezAL (2016) “You cannot be here”: The urban poor and the specter of the Indian in neoliberal Mexico City. Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology21(3): 539–559.
Mexico City Government (2024) Programa de Economía Circular de la Ciudad de México 2024-2030 [Circular Economy Programme of Mexico City, 2024–2030]. Mexico City.
44.
MiesAGoldS (2021) Mapping the social dimension of the circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production321: 128960.
45.
MorrowODaviesA (2022) Creating careful circularities: Community composting in New York City. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers47(2): 529–546.
46.
MorrowOParkerB (2020) Care, commoning and collectivity: From grand domestic revolution to urban transformation. Urban Geography41(4): 607–624.
OstromEAhnTK (2003) Una perspectiva del capital social desde las ciencias sociales: Capital social y acción colectiva [A perspective on social capital from the social sciences: social capital and collective action]. Revista Mexicana de Sociología65(1): 155–233.
49.
PowerERWilliamsMJ (2020) Cities of care: A platform for urban geographical care research. Geography Compass14(1): 1–11.
50.
ReddyRN (2015) Producing abjection: E-waste improvement schemes and informal recyclers of Bangalore. Geoforum62: 166–174.
51.
ReikeDVermeulenWJVWitjesS (2018) The circular economy: New or refurbished as CE 3.0? — Exploring controversies in the conceptualization of the circular economy through a focus on history and resource value retention options. Resources, Conservation and Recycling135: 246–264.
52.
Sarria-IcazaAMTiribiaL (2004) Economía popular [Popular economy]. In: CattaniAD (ed.) La Otra Economía [The Other Economy]. Editorial Altamira, Fundación OSDE, pp.23–30.
Shapiro-GarzaE (2013) Contesting the market-based nature of Mexico’s national payments for ecosystem services programs: Four sites of articulation and hybridization. Geoforum46: 5–15.
55.
SmithJJehličkaP (2013) Quiet sustainability: Fertile lessons from Europe’s productive gardeners. Journal of Rural Studies32: 148–157.
TölgRFuentesC (2024) Care and circularity: How the enactment of care enables and shapes the circular consumption of clothing. Consumption and Society4(2): 1–19.
58.
TongXLiJTaoD, et al. (2015) Re-making spaces of conversion: Deconstructing discourses of e-waste recycling in China. Area47(1): 31–39.
59.
UNEP (2013) City-level decoupling – Urban resource flows and the governance of infrastructure transitions. In: SwillingMRobinsonBMarvinS, et al. (eds) A Report of the Working Group on Cities of the International Resource Panel. Available at: https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/8488 (accessed 23 September 2025).
60.
van der VeldenM (2021) ‘Fixing the world one thing at a time’: Community repair and a sustainable circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production304: 127151.
61.
WiedmannTLenzenMKeyßerLT, et al. (2020) Scientists’ warning on affluence. Nature Communications11(1): 1–10.
WilliamsJ (2020) The role of spatial planning in transitioning to circular urban development. Urban Geography41(6): 915–919.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
