The circular economy (CE) and bioeconomy (BE) are recognized as potential solutions for achieving sustainable development, yet little research has examined their potential contribution to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of 649 articles published between 2007 and 2022, as well as a systematic literature review of 81 articles, to assess the extent to which the CE and BE communities have addressed the SDGs. Our analysis identified 10 research gaps including the limited number of empirical quantitative papers, particularly in the context of BE, and the underrepresentation of developing regions such as Latin America and Africa in the literature. Our main finding reveals that the CE community primarily focuses on SDG 12, Responsible Consumption and Production, followed by SDG 9, Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure; SDG 7, Affordable and Clean Energy; and SDG 6, Clean Water and Sanitation. The BE community, on the other hand, focuses primarily on SDG 7, followed by SDG 9 and SDG 12. However, both communities lack attention to social SDGs such as quality education, poverty, and gender equality. We propose that a combination of CE and BE, known as circular bioeconomy, could help countries achieve all SDGs. Further research is needed to develop and implement circular bioeconomy policies that address these gaps and promote sustainable development. In this sense, our study identified an important research gap that needs more attention in the future.

Research on economic diversification and complexity has made significant advances in understanding economic development processes, but has only recently explored environmental and social sustainability considerations. In this article we evaluate the current state of this emerging literature and reveal 13 research gaps. A total of 35 different keywords and methods from structured literature reviews and network science helped to identify 374 scientific articles between 1988 and 2020 and revealed a fragmented research landscape around three larger network communities: (1) industrial policies, climate change, and green growth; (2) economic complexity and its association with inequality and environmental sustainability; and (3) economic diversification, including studies on livelihood diversification in poor areas. Economic complexity research applies new empirical methods and considers both social and environmental sustainability, but seldom scrutinizes theory and policy. Industrial policy research focuses on green growth policies but tends to omit social sustainability issues and advanced empirical methods. Research on economic diversification in poor regions provides insights on the livelihood diversification of farmers, but is disconnected from the economic complexity and industrial policy research. This review helps to summarize the main contributions and shows pathways for potential mutual learning between these communities for the sake of sustainable development.

Economic growth is not the only factor to explain human development. Therefore, many authors have prioritized studies to measure the Human Development Index. However, these indexes do not analyze how Economic Complexity can increase Human Development. This paper aimed to determine how efficiently nations from Latin America and Asia measure a country’s performance in converting Economic Complexity into Human Development, between 2010 and 2014. We used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), through the Variable Returns of Scale (VRS) Model and Window Analysis. Results showed that in 2014, all Asian countries, except China and the Philippines, were efficient; on the other hand Cuba was the benchmark for inefficient countries. Window Analysis showed Japan, South Korea and Singapore were efficient over time. This result confirms the initial hypothesis of this article: the more complex countries are the more efficiently they create Human Development.