The Circular Economy (CE) concept has been recognized as the core strategy that can support sustainable business through technological innovation that enables CE transition by focusing on resource savings. This case study conducts research on business strategy in achieving CE transition in an agroindustry company, by performing SWOT analysis to assess internal and external factors. The SWOT model provides valuable results that an effective strategy could maximize strengths and opportunities, minimize weaknesses and threats in business by boosting circularity on business-critical factors. The CE adoption by agroindustry company mostly focuses on efficient organic waste management, energy-efficient production, and production process. This study case reveals that while technology plays a significant role in advancing CE, there is still a significant need to pay attention to the social aspect in supporting the creation of worker-owned cooperatives by creating space for employee involvement in finding innovations and adopting technology in business transition into CE process. Social innovation through the involvement of employees by sharing CE vision, synergizing and optimizing internal potential, and building up the green innovation culture has created an internal conducive climate to put CE principle into practice. Further result shows that a labor-intensive company’s business strategy prioritizes employment and job security over maximizing profits, which directly leads to the economic welfare and social protection of the business operation that makes an inclusive business.

Our previous research on social innovation examined the process, levels, and stakeholders of social innovation, as well as its relationship with technical and technological innovation. The present study analyzes the spatial image created by the social innovation potential and investigates its relationship with the economic power of the neighborhoods. The most important conclusion of the study is that the basic territorial inequality dimensions are the same in the case of both the social innovation potential and the district’s economic strength. The difference is primarily to be found in concentration, as economic power is much more concentrated in the capital and the most important economic and tourism centers than the social innovation potential. We can therefore state that developments based on social innovation can solve a lot of the highly concentrated spatial structure in Hungary.