CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Sustainable Supply Chain ManagementEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityEnvironmental Sustainability in Business

Towards sustainable business models with a novel life cycle assessment method

Open access
Goffetti, Giulia, Böckin, Daniel, Baumann, Henrikke, Tillman, Anne‐Marie, Zobel, Thomas·2022·Business Strategy and the Environment
DOI 10.1002/bse.3005
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Business model (BM) innovation for sustainability is hampered by a lack of tools for environmental assessment and guidance at the BM level. Conventional life cycle assessment (LCA) neglects the economic and socio‐technical mechanisms within a BM, and tools based on the BM canvas (BMC) cannot provide recommendations substantiated by environmental data. Here, a new method, BM‐LCA, is applied to a case comparing the selling and renting of jackets, using profit as basis of comparison. Results identify how business parameters influence environmental performance, permitting analysis for decoupling within a business practice. This is made possible by the unique way the method links physical life cycle and the monetary flows of a BM. Usefulness of BM‐LCA is discussed relative to BM innovation, business strategy and similar tools. BM‐LCA provides insights into a broad range of BM elements and emerges as useful for business strategy. By measuring BM environmental performance, it helps determine what BM to compete with and support critical analysis of business against greenwashing. BM‐LCA also enables identification of BM elements in greatest need of environmental innovation. BM‐LCA appears as a promising tool for guiding business companies towards sustainability, filling a space between LCA and BMC. The method offers a practical way for business and LCA experts to merge their respective knowledge.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bse.3005

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A circular economy requires LCA to analyse environmental trade-offs across the entire product life cycle, linking to value creation and capture dynamics to enable strategic decision-making.

    “Although these methods suit a productfocused linear economy, a circular economy (CE) requires LCA to analyse environmental trade-offs across the entire product life cycle, linking to value creation and capture dynamics to enable strategic decision-making (Goffetti et al. 2022).”

    From Integrating Life Cycle Assessment, Monetised Externalities and Value Alignment for Strategic Reconfiguration of Circular Business Models: The Case of Smartphones (2026) · cites this paper as Goffetti et al. 2022

    Sections 5.1 and 5.2 distinguish product-centred conventional LCA from BM-LCA, which connects physical life-cycle flows with business costs, revenues and profitability. Section 6 says that this connection helps companies evaluate environmental performance and strategic options. The paper supports that approach for circular business models, but does not say conventional LCA is suited only to a linear economy or that a circular economy requires LCA generally to link value-creation and value-capture dynamics. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Single-dimensional assessments obscure trade-offs, whereas multilayered frameworks reveal both tensions and synergies.

    “Singledimensional assessments obscure trade-offs, whereas multilayered frameworks reveal both tensions and synergies (de Giacomo and Bleischwitz 2020; Goffetti et al. 2022).”

    From Integrating Life Cycle Assessment, Monetised Externalities and Value Alignment for Strategic Reconfiguration of Circular Business Models: The Case of Smartphones (2026) · cites this paper as Goffetti et al. 2022

    Section 5.3 says business-model canvas tools can miss interconnections, while BM-LCA measures them; Section 6 says conventional LCA covers fewer business-model elements than BM-LCA. The paper also examines environmental performance alongside profitability, supporting the idea that a broader assessment can expose tensions and potential win-win outcomes. It does not establish the claim for single-dimensional assessments and multilayered frameworks in general. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • LCA is effective in systematically accounting for impacts across entire life cycle stages and highlighting environmental hotspots in resource extraction, component manufacturing, assembly, transport, use phase and end-of-life.

    “in systematically accounting for impacts across the entire life cycle stages and highlighting environmental hotspots in resource extraction, component manufacturing, assembly, transport, use phase and EoL (Goffetti et al. 2022).”

    From Integrating Life Cycle Assessment, Monetised Externalities and Value Alignment for Strategic Reconfiguration of Circular Business Models: The Case of Smartphones (2026) · cites this paper as Goffetti et al. 2022

  • Conventional LCA is not well suited to assess business models, as it neglects economic and socio-technical factors such as monetary flows and value-chain dynamics.

    “Most critically, for business strategy, conventional LCA is not well suited to assess business models, as it neglects economic and socio-technical factors, such as monetary flows and value-chain dynamics, essential to corporate strategy (Goffetti et al. 2022).”

    From Integrating Life Cycle Assessment, Monetised Externalities and Value Alignment for Strategic Reconfiguration of Circular Business Models: The Case of Smartphones (2026) · cites this paper as Goffetti et al. 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 49

  1. Adam, M., Straehle, J., & Freise, M. (2017). The interaction of product- service systems (PSS) and corporate environmental management (CEM): Can PSS drive Today's fashion industry toward more environ- mental sustainability? Service Science, 9(3), 235-249. https://doi.org/ 10.1287/serv.2017.0182 · DOI
  2. Baumann, H., Böckin, D., Goffetti, G., Tillman, A.-M., & Zobel, T. (2022). Switching the focus from product function to business profit: Intro- ducing business model LCA (BM-LCA). In E3S conference series, vol, pp. doi. Forthcoming.
  3. Bech, N. M., Birkved, M., Charnley, F., Kjaer, L. L., Pigosso, D. C. A., Hauschild, M. Z., McAloone, T. C., & Moreno, M. (2019). Evaluating the environmental performance of a product/service-system business model for merino wool next-to-skin garments: The case of Armadillo Merinox I. Sustainability, 11(20), 5854. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su11205854 · DOI
  4. Blüher, T., Riedelsheimer, T., Gogineni, S., Klemichen, A., & Stark, R. (2020). Systematic literature review-Effects of PSS on sustainability based on use case assessments. Sustainability, 12(17), 6989. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su12176989 · DOI
  5. Bocken, N., Strupeit, L., Whalen, K., & Nussholz, J. (2019). A review and evaluation of circular business model innovation tools. Sustainability, 11(8), 2210. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082210 · DOI
  6. Bocken, N. M., Weissbrod, I., & Antikainen, M. (2021). Business model experimentation for the circular economy: Definition and approaches. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1, 49-81. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s43615-021-00026-z · DOI
  7. Braun, M., Latham, S., & Cannatelli, B. (2019). Strategy and business models: Why winning companies need both. Journal of Business Strat- egy, 40(5), 39-45. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-01-2019-0005 · DOI
  8. Buxel, H., Esenduran, G., & Griffin, S. (2015). Strategic sustainability: Creating business value with life cycle analysis. Business Horizons, 58(1), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.09.004 · DOI
  9. Camacho-Otero, J., Boks, C., & Pettersen, I. N. (2019). User acceptance and adoption of circular offerings in the fashion sector: Insights from user-generated online reviews. Journal of Cleaner Production, 231, 928-939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.162 · DOI
  10. Costa, D., Quinteiro, P., & Dias, A. C. (2019). A systematic review of life cycle sustainability assessment: Current state, methodological chal- lenges, and implementation issues. Science of the Total Environment, 686, 774-787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.435 · DOI
  11. Day, S., Godsell, J., Masi, D., & Zhang, W. (2020). Predicting consumer adoption of branded subscription services: A prospect theory perspec- tive. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1310-1330. https:// doi.org/10.1002/bse.2435 · DOI
  12. de Giacomo, M. R., & Bleischwitz, R. (2020). Business models for environ- mental sustainability: Contemporary shortcomings and some perspec- tives. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(8), 3352-3369. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2576 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Evans, S., Vladimirova, D., Holgado, M., van Fossen, K., Yang, M., Silva, E. A., & Barlow, C. Y. (2017). Business model innovation for sus- tainability: Towards a unified perspective for creation of sustainable business models. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(5), 597-608. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1939 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Hauschild, M. Z., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2015). Life cycle impact assessment. In series LCA compendium-The complete world of life cycle assessment. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9744-3 · DOI
  15. Hauschild, M. Z., Rosenbaum, R. K., & Olsen, S. I. (2018). Life cycle assess- ment (Vol. 2018). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-319-56475-3 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Holmquist, H., Fantke, P., Cousins, I. T., Owsianiak, M., Liagkouridis, I., & Peters, G. M. (2020). An (eco)toxicity life cycle impact assessment framework for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(10), 6224-6234. https://doi.org/10.1021/ acs.est.9b07774 · DOI
  17. Johnson, M. W., Christensen, C. M., & Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review, 86(12), 57-68.
  18. Johnson, M. W., & Lafley, A. G. (2010). Seizing the white space: Business model innovation for growth and renewal. Harvard Business Press.
  19. Jourdaine, M., Loubet, P., Sonnemann, G., & Trébucq, S. (2021). The ABC- LCA method for the integration of activity-based costing and life cycle assessment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(4), 1735-1750. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2712 · DOI
  20. Joyce, A., & Paquin, R. L. (2016). The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1474-1486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016. 06.067 · DOI
  21. Kerdlap, P., Gheewala, S. H., & Ramakrishna, S. (2021). To rent or not to rent: A question of circular prams from a life cycle perspective. Sus- tainable Production and Consumption, 26, 331-342. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.spc.2020.10.008 · DOI
  22. Lang, C., & Armstrong, C. M. J. (2018). Fashion leadership and intention toward clothing product-service retail models. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22(4), 571-587. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JFMM-12-2017-0142 · DOI
  23. Linder, M., & Williander, M. (2017). Circular business model innovation: Inherent uncertainties. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(2), 182-196. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1906 · DOI
  24. In Gadgil, A. and Tomich, T.P. (Ed.), Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 42, 599-626. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ- 102014-021340 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5), 86-92.
  26. Martin, M., Heiska, M., & Björklund, A. (2021). Environmental assessment of a product-service system for renting electric-powered tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, 125245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro. 2020.125245 · DOI
  27. Martínez-Blanco, J., Forin, S., & Finkbeiner, M. (2020). Challenges of orga- nizational LCA: Lessons learned from road testing the guidance on organizational life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 25(2), 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367- 019-01699-3 · DOI
  28. Moro Piekarski, C., Mendes da Luz, L., Zocche, L., & De Francisco, A. C. (2013). Life cycle assessment as entrepreneurial tool for business man- agement and green innovations. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 8(1), 44-53. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-2724201300 0100005 · DOI
  29. Nilsson-Lindén, H., Rosén, M., & Baumann, H. (2019). Product chain collaboration for sustainability: A business case for life cycle manage- ment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(8), 1619-1631. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2388 · DOI
  30. Nosratabadi, S., Mosavi, A., Shamshirband, S., Kazimieras Zavadskas, E., Rakotonirainy, A., & Chau, K. W. (2019). Sustainable business models: A review. Sustainability, 11(6), 1663. https://doi.org/10.3390/su110 61663 · DOI
  31. Nussholz, J. L. K. (2018). A circular business model mapping tool for creat- ing value from prolonged product lifetime and closed material loops. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197(1), 185-194. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.112 · DOI
  32. Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A hand- book for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons.
  33. Pieroni, M. P. P., McAloone, T. C., & Pigosso, D. C. A. (2019). Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: A review of approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 198-216. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.036 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Piontek, F. M., Amasawa, E., & Kimita, K. (2020). Environmental implication of casual wear rental services: Case of Japan and Germany. Procedia CIRP, 90, 724-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.01.076 · DOI
  35. Pizzol, M., Laurent, A., Sala, S., Weidema, B., Verones, F., & Koffler, C. (2017). Normalisation and weighting in life cycle assessment: Quo vadis? The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22(6), 853-866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1199-1 · DOI
  36. Reim, W., Sjödin, D., & Parida, V. (2021). Circular business model imple- mentation: A capability development case study from the manufactur- ing industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(6), 2745-2757. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2891 · DOI
  37. Rossi, M., Germani, M., & Zamagni, A. (2016). Review of ecodesign methods and tools. Barriers and strategies for an effective implemen- tation in industrial companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129, 361-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.051 · DOI
  38. Santa-Maria, T., Vermeulen, W. J., & Baumgartner, R. J. (2021). How do incumbent firms innovate their business models for the circular economy? Identifying micro-foundations of dynamic capabilities. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse. 2956 · DOI
  39. Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E. G., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2016). Business models for sustainability: Origins, present research, and future avenues. Organization & Environment, 29(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1086026615599806 · DOI
  40. Shafer, S. M., Smith, H. J., & Linder, J. C. (2005). The power of business models. Business Horizons, 48(3), 199-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. bushor.2004.10.014 · DOI
  41. Sommer, A. (2012). Managing green business model transformations. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 642-28848-7 Business Sweden. (2020). Business costs and prices of key services. Avail- able at https://www.business-sweden.com/ (11 May 2020) · DOI
  42. Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 172-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp. 2009.07.003 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Tillman, A.-M., Svingby, M., & Lundström, H. (1998). Life cycle assessment of municipal waste water systems. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 3(3), 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf029 78823 · DOI
  44. Timmers, P. (1998). Business models for electronic markets. Electronic Markets, 8(2), 3-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10196789800000016 · DOI
  45. Tukker, A. (2015). Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy-A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97(SI), 76-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Tukker, A., & Tischner, U. (2006). Product-services as a research field: Past, present and future. Reflections from a decade of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(17), 1552-1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2006.01.022 · DOI · Paper page
  47. van Loon, P., Diener, D., & Harris, S. (2021). Circular products and business models and environmental impact reductions: Current knowledge and knowledge gaps. Journal of Cleaner Production, 288, 125627. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125627 · DOI
  48. Welford, R. (2003). Beyond systems: A vision for corporate environmental management for the future. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 162-173. https://doi.org/10.1504/ IJESD.2003.003328 · DOI
  49. Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M. (2017). Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: Can collaborative consumption reduce the environ- mental impact of fast fashion? Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1368-1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.128 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goffetti, G., Böckin, D., Baumann, H., Tillman, A., & Zobel, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Siena (IT)
  • Chalmers University of Technology (SE)
  • Luleå University of Technology (SE)
Corresponding author
Baumann, Henrikke
ORCID
Venue
Business Strategy and the Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-02-17
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
2019-2035
ISSN
  • 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0836
DOI
10.1002/bse.3005
OpenAlex
W4213206316
Cited by
58
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8
FWCI
9.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Business Strategy and the Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Familjen Kamprads Stiftelse
  • VINNOVA
  • Stiftelsen för Miljöstrategisk Forskning
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
Keywords
business model innovation, business model canvas, sustainable business models, jackets, decoupling, greenwashing, business strategy, financial flows

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review