Ecologically Embedded Design in Manufacturing: Legitimation within Circular Economy
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. What Are the Benefits of CE Strategies?
2.2. How Have Researchers Viewed CE in a Business Context?
2.3. What Is Ecological Embeddedness?
- Ecological practices are presented as being environmentally-friendly.
- Ecological practices are presented through their impact on product quality (not environmental protection).
- Ecological “dis-embeddedness” results due to technical and/or market constraints.
2.4. Comparison of CE and Ecological Embeddedness Strategies
2.5. Conceptual Framework
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
5.1. Analysis and Template Development
- Adapting output, goals, and methods of operation to conform to prevailing definitions of legitimacy;
- Using communication to attempt to alter the definition of legitimacy for conformity with present organizational practices, output, and values; and/or
- Using communication to become identified with symbols, values, or institutions which have a strong base of legitimacy.
5.2. Template Implementation
5.3. Summary
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ghisellini, P.; Cialani, C.; Ulgiati, S. A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 114, 11–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bocken, N.; De Pauw, I.; Bakker, C.; van der Grinten, B. Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2016, 33, 308–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lieder, M.; Rashid, A. Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 115, 36–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lüdeke-Freund, F.; Gold, S.; Bocken, N. A review and typology of circular economy business model patterns. J. Ind. Ecol. 2018, 23, 36–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Murray, A.; Skene, K.; Haynes, K. The circular economy: An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 140, 369–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Borland, H.; Lindgreen, A.; Ambrosini, V.; Vanhamme, J. Creating theory for business strategies for sustainability and climate change. In Business Strategies for Sustainability; Borland, H., Lindgreen, A., Maon, F., Vanhamme, J., Ambrosini, V., Florencio, B., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019; pp. 65–80. [Google Scholar]
- Rashid, A.; Asif, F.; Krajnik, P.; Nicolescu, C. Resource conservative manufacturing: An essential change in business and technology paradigm for sustainable manufacturing. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 57, 166–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkis, J. Manufacturing’s role in corporate environmental sustainability: Concerns for the new millennium. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2001, 21, 666–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Florida, R. Lean and green: The move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1996, 39, 80–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garza-Reyes, J.; Kumar, V.; Batista, L.; Cherrafi, A.; Rocha-Lona, L. From linear to circular manufacturing business models. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2019, 30, 554–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Takata, S.; Suemasu, K.; Asai, K. Life cycle simulation system as an evaluation platform for circular manufacturing systems. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 68, 21–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franco, M. Circular economy at the micro level: A dynamic view of incumbents’ struggles and challenges in the textile industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 833–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landrum, N.; Ohsowski, B. Identifying worldviews on corporate sustainability: A content analysis of corporate sustainability reports. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2018, 27, 128–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geissdoerfer, M.; Savaget, P.; Bocken, N.; Hultink, E. The circular economy—A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Elkington, J. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business; Capstone: Oxford, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Ayres, R.U. Sustainability economics: Where do we stand? Ecological Economics. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 67, 281–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gardner, L.; Colwill, J. A framework and decision support tool for improving value chain resilience to critical materials in manufacturing. Prod. Manuf. Res. 2018, 6, 126–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šerešová, M.; Kočí, V. Proposal of package-to-product indicator for carbon footprint assessment with focus on the Czech Republic. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Merli, R.; Preziosi, M.; Acampora, A. How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 178, 703–722. [Google Scholar]
- Manninen, K.; Koskela, S.; Antikainen, R.; Dahlbo, H. Do business models capture the circular economy value propositions? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 171, 413–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stewart, R.; Niero, M. Circular economy in corporate sustainability strategies: A review of corporate sustainability reports in the fast-moving consumer goods sector. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2018, 27, 1005–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Angioletti, C.; Despeisse, M.; Rocca, R. Product circularity assessment methodology. In Advances in Production Management Systems. The Path to Intelligent, Collaborative and Sustainable Manufacturing; Lödding, H., Riedel, R., Thoben, K.D., von Cieminski, G., Kiritsis, D., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland; Berlin, Germany, 2017; pp. 411–418. [Google Scholar]
- Moreno, M.; De los Rios, C.; Rowe, Z.; Charnley, F. A conceptual framework for circular design. Sustainability 2016, 8, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Masi, D.; Kumar, V.; Garza-Reyes, J.; Godsell, J. Towards a more circular economy: Exploring the awareness, practices, and barriers from a focal firm perspective. Prod. Plan. Control 2018, 29, 539–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whiteman, G.; Cooper, W. Ecological Embeddedness. Acad. Manag. J. 2000, 43, 1265–1282. [Google Scholar]
- Hassan, M.; Nordin, N.; Ashari, H. Environmental stewardship issue among Malaysian manufacturing firms. Int. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2016, 5, 36–42. [Google Scholar]
- Bennett, N.; Whitty, T.; Finkbeiner, E.; Pittman, J.; Bassett, H.; Gelcich, S.; Allison, E. Environmental stewardship: A conceptual review and analytical framework. Environ. Manag. 2018, 61, 597–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mathevet, R.; Bousquet, F.; Larrère, C.; Larrère, R. Environmental stewardship and ecological solidarity: Rethinking social-ecological interdependency and responsibility. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2018, 31, 605–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, C.; Kirwan, J. Ecological embeddedness: An interrogation and refinement of the concept within the context of alternative food networks in the UK. J. Rural Stud. 2011, 27, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baritaux, V.; Houdart, M.; Boutonnet, J.P.; Chazoule, C.; Corniaux, C.; Fleury, P.; Lacombe, N.; Napoléone, M.; Tourrand, J.F. Ecological embeddedness in animal food systems (re-)localisation: A comparative analysis of initiatives in France, Morocco and Senegal. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 43, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahimifard, S.; Woolley, E.; Webb, P.; Garcia-Garcia, G.; Stone, J.; Jellil, A.; Gimenez-Escalante, P.; Jagtap, S.; Trollman, H. Forging new frontiers in sustainable food manufacturing. In Sustainable Design and Manufacturing; Springer: Cham, Switzerland; Berlin, Germany, 2017; pp. 13–24. [Google Scholar]
- Trollman, H.; Trollman, F. A sustainability assessment of smart innovations for mass production, mass customisation and direct digital manufacturing. In Mass Production Processes; Akdogan, A., Vanli, A.S., Eds.; InTechOpen: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Trollman, H. A novel approach to assessing manufacturer progress toward sustainability. Procedia CIRP 2018, 78, 370–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lumsakul, P.; Sheldrick, L.; Rahimifard, S. The sustainable co-design of products and production systems. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 21, 854–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bastianutti, J.; Dumez, H. Environmental sustainability for industry legitimacy and competitiveness. The case of CSR collective strategies in the cement industry. In Business Strategies for Sustainability; Borland, H., Lindgreen, A., Maon, F., Vanhamme, J., Ambrosini, V., Florencio, B., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019; pp. 65–80. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, B.; Zhang, T.; Yan, S. How corporate social responsibility influences business model innovation: The mediating role of organizational legitimacy. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Suchman, M.C. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 571–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research, Design and Methods; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA; New Delhi, India, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Zucchella, A.; Urban, S. Futures of the sustainable firm: An evolutionary perspective. Futures 2014, 63, 86–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Halkier, B. Methodological practicalities in analytical generalization. Qual. Inq. 2011, 17, 787–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kosmützky, A.; Nokkala, T.; Diogo, S. Between context and comparability: Exploring new solutions for a familiar methodological challenge in qualitative comparative research. High. Educ. Q. 2020, 74, 176–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- British Standards: BS 8001: 2017 Circular Economy. 2017. Available online: https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/standards/benefits-of-using-standards/becoming-more-sustainable-with-standards/BS8001-Circular-Economy/ (accessed on 18 December 2019).
- Lindblom, C. Politics and Markets: The World’s Political-Economic Systems; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Press, M.; Robert, I.; Maillefert, M. The role of linked legitimacy in sustainable business model development. Ind. Mark. Manag 2019, in press, corrected proof. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tallberg, J.; Zürn, M. The legitimacy and legitimation of international organizations: Introduction and framework. Rev. Int. Organ. 2019, 14, 581–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bowman, M.; Marriott, R.; Woroniecka, K.; Taylor, J. Too Much of a Bad Thing: The Use and Misuse of UK Soil and Land to Grow Sugar; Feedback: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Dowling, J.; Pfeffer, J. Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pac. Sociol. Rev. 1975, 18, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Beneficiary | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manufacturer | Consumer | Environment | |||
Strategy | Circular Economy (CE) | closing loop | - | - | √ |
narrowing loop | √ | - | - | ||
slowing loop | - | √ | - | ||
Ecological Embeddedness | eco-design of production | √ | - | √ | |
eco-design of product quality | - | √ | √ |
Product/Manufacturer | Circular Economy Loops | Form of Ecological Embeddedness | Benefits Derived from CE (Manufacturer/Consumer) |
---|---|---|---|
Sugar (Silverspoon, 2 kg), AB Sugar | process—narrowing, closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (cost savings and legitimacy) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
batteries (8 pack, AA), Duracell | process—X | product quality | consumer (money savings: cascading POWERCHECK, long-lasting) |
product—slowing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
toilet cleaner (pine & mint 750 mL), Ecover | process—narrowing, closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (cost savings, legitimacy, and customer loyalty: refills) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—slowing, closing | |||
washing up liquid (400 mL), Greenscents | process—X | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (legitimacy and customer loyalty: refills) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—slowing, closing | |||
organic body wash (200 mL), Kinn Living | process—X | product quality | consumer (health: natural and organic) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
mop (Deep Clean Mop), e-cloth | process—X | product quality | consumer (money savings on chemicals, durability, health) |
product—slowing, closing | |||
packaging—X | |||
Hardtack (beer in can), Jaw Brew | process—narrowing, closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (cost savings and legitimacy) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
hot-rolled steel for automotive industry, TaTa Steel | process—narrowing, closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (cost savings and legitimacy) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
jeans, MUD Jeans | process—narrowing, closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (cost savings, legitimacy, customer loyalty: rent a jeans) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—slowing | |||
shoes, Veja Shoes | process—closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (legitimacy) |
product—closing (some shoes) | |||
packaging—X | |||
mobile phone, Fairphone | process—narrowing, closing | product quality | consumer (money savings: longevity, easy repair, modular upgrades) |
product—slowing, closing | |||
packaging—X | |||
washing machine (Eco 7 kg), Miele | process—X | product quality | consumer (money savings: built to last, energy and water consumption) |
product—slowing, closing | |||
packaging— X | |||
American fridge freezer (LSR100), LG | process—X | product quality | consumer (money savings: Instaview door for less energy use) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—X | |||
Insulation (6 pack, 1200 mm × 400 mm × 10 mm), Rockwool | process—closing | product quality | consumer (money savings: energy performance; health: fire safety) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—X | |||
kitchen furniture (Kungsbacka), IKEA | process—closing | environmentally-friendly | manufacturer (legitimacy, product closing loop for loyalty is still theoretical) |
product—closing | |||
packaging—closing | |||
hybrid car (Camry), Toyota | process—X | product quality | consumer (money savings: fuel economy, hybrid brake pads last longer, lower emissions for road tax savings) |
product—slowing, closing | |||
packaging—X | |||
landfill compactor (Cat 81 6K—one of Cat’s most rebuilt products), Finning Caterpillar | process—narrowing, closing | product quality | consumer (money savings: designed to last and rebuild/remanufacture) |
product—slowing, closing | |||
packaging—X |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Trollman, H.; Colwill, J.; Brejnholt, A. Ecologically Embedded Design in Manufacturing: Legitimation within Circular Economy. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4261. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104261
Trollman H, Colwill J, Brejnholt A. Ecologically Embedded Design in Manufacturing: Legitimation within Circular Economy. Sustainability. 2020; 12(10):4261. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104261
Chicago/Turabian StyleTrollman, Hana, James Colwill, and Alan Brejnholt. 2020. "Ecologically Embedded Design in Manufacturing: Legitimation within Circular Economy" Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4261. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104261