De-influencing as a Catalyst for the Circular Economy
The rise of “de-influencing” on social media platforms, notably TikTok, represents a significant behavioral shift that challenges the linear consumption model driven by traditional influencer marketing 1. While the global influencer market expands, projected to reach US$52.05 billion by 2028 2, the de-influencing trend, which actively advises consumers on what not to buy, signals a widespread fatigue with overconsumption and commercial inauthenticity. This movement, driven by the demand for transparency and economic pressure, offers an unexpected leverage point for the transition toward the circular economy and the bioeconomy.
Context and Evidence
De-influencing is, at its core, a form of anti-consumption that manifests as a direct reaction to the environmental and social hazards of hyper-consumption 3. The initial focus on sectors like beauty and fashion is not accidental; the fashion industry, for instance, is one of the most polluting globally, responsible for approximately 10% of annual carbon emissions and a massive consumer of water 4. Recent data indicates that fashion’s carbon emissions rose by 7.5% in 2023, driven by the ultra-fast fashion model 5. The virality of de-influencing, with billions of views on the #deinfluencing hashtag, demonstrates that the message to “reduce”, the first and most crucial principle of the circular economy, deeply resonates with the public, especially Generation Z.
The movement transcends mere criticism of expensive or ineffective products. It aligns with the concept of de-marketing, a strategy aimed at reducing or controlling demand, but here it is applied organically and bottom-up by consumers themselves 3. By discouraging impulsive purchases, de-influencers promote the conscious use of the planet’s resources, a fundamental pillar for sustainability.
Systemic Implications for the Bioeconomy
The relevance of de-influencing for the bioeconomy and the circular economy lies in its ability to reorient demand. By questioning product quality and necessity, the movement creates space for alternatives that prioritize durability, repairability, and sustainable material composition.
The bioeconomy, which is based on the production of renewable biological resources and the conversion of these resources and waste into bioproducts, energy, and services, directly benefits from this shift in mindset. When consumers are dissuaded from buying low-quality synthetic products (often derived from fossil fuels, such as polyester in fast fashion), the demand for bio-based materials, such as natural fibers, compostable bioplastics, or green chemicals, becomes more attractive. De-influencing acts as an authenticity filter, forcing brands to invest in material innovation and supply chain transparency, rather than relying solely on greenwashing or aggressive marketing.
However, the movement faces a challenge: replacing an expensive product with a “dupe” (cheap alternative) can, in some cases, merely perpetuate the cycle of consumption and disposal, keeping the volume of waste high. The true contribution to the circular economy and the bioeconomy requires de-influencing to evolve into the promotion of systemic solutions, such as rental platforms, repair services, and products with extended lifecycles.
Action and Global Perspective
For de-influencing to become a driver of global and systemic change, stakeholders must act. Businesses must adopt radical transparency and integrate circular business models, such as offering repair services or guaranteeing product longevity. Policymakers should view the trend as a clear signal that consumers are ready for stricter regulations against planned obsolescence and greenwashing.
The de-influencing trend is more than a digital fad; it is a market indicator reflecting a growing ecological and economic awareness. By demanding less, but better, consumers are, inadvertently, paving the way for a future where the bioeconomy and circularity are not just market niches, but the operational standard.
