CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Sustainable Supply Chain ManagementSustainable Design and DevelopmentEnvironmental Sustainability in Business

A Process Approach to Product Repair from the Perspective of the Individual

Open access
Svensson-Hoglund, Sahra, Russell, Jennifer D., Richter, Jessika Luth·2023·Circular Economy and Sustainability
DOI 10.1007/s43615-022-00226-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Product repair plays an important role in the realisation of a circular economy (CE) and sustainable consumption, yet little is known about what repair entails for individual product owners or users, particularly in a realised CE. This paper proposes a comprehensive approach by conceptualising repair as a multi-stage, cyclical process, shaped by previous experiences and, in turn, impacting future repairs. Moreover, we acknowledge and consider that the repair experience is determined by both internal (to the individual) and external (environmental) factors, which overlap in the individual’s interpretation of the process, primarily as perceived cost vs. benefits. Using a literature review, the role of the individual and key factors influencing the repair experience are discerned and organised according to their relevance within the process. This comprehensive perspective of the repair experience of individuals generated a wide range of insights, including the existence of general vs. specific factors and the prevalence of themes in the repair process. Implications for the upscaling of repair and future research are suggested.

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 · 10.1007/s43615-022-00226-1

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • When repair becomes economically unjustifiable, consumers opt for replacement, regardless of environmental attitudes.

    “When repair becomes economically unjustifiable, consumers opt for replacement, regardless of environmental attitudes [13].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Decision (p. 16) says that repair costs high relative to replacement are a common reason repairable devices are discarded and that this reduces willingness to repair. It does not establish that consumers invariably choose replacement when repair is economically unattractive, or that they do so regardless of their environmental attitudes. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Research on spare parts pricing reveals its critical influence on repair profitability and customer satisfaction.

    “Research on spare parts pricing reveals its critical influence on repair profitability and customer satisfaction [13,24].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Decision (p. 16) says spare parts can cost nearly as much as a replacement product, and Satisfaction (p. 18) identifies cost as one factor in an individual's satisfaction with a repair. The paper does not establish that spare-parts pricing affects repair profitability; its discussion of profit in The Investigation (p. 15) concerns manufacturers' sales of replacement products. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In pursuit of cost reductions, manufacturers often compromise on component durability and modularity, degrading long-term repair potential even though such design choices reduce upfront consumer prices.

    “In pursuit of cost reductions, manufacturers often compromise on component durability and modularity, degrading long-term repair potential even though such design choices reduce upfront consumer prices [13].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Investigation (p. 15) says low-quality products may break again and make replacement comparatively inexpensive; Preliminary Diagnostics (p. 17) says design that enables disassembly can make or break repair efforts. The Decision (p. 16) links cheap replacement products to low manufacturing costs. The paper does not say manufacturers often sacrifice component durability or modularity to cut costs, or establish that those design choices lower upfront consumer prices. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • When repair costs approach the price of a new product, consumers choose replacement regardless of their environmental values.

    “when repair costs approach the price of a new product, consumers choose replacement regardless of their environmental values”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Decision (p. 16) says that repair costs close to replacement costs can make repair unattractive and reduce willingness to repair. But the Predisposition section (p. 12) identifies environmental concerns as a motivation for repair; the paper does not say consumers choose replacement regardless of those values. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Perceived durability and performance trust are decisive mediators of repair engagement.

    “this study supports earlier evidence that perceived durability and performance trust are decisive mediators of repair engagement [13,28].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Event (p. 14) says expectations of restored functionality affect repair intentions, while The Decision (p. 16) describes uncertainty about how long a repair will last and lower trust in repaired products. These passages support a role for perceived durability and trust, but the paper does not establish them as decisive mediators of repair engagement. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. [1]1. Cooper T (2020) Slower cycles: an essential characteristic of the circular economy. In: Eisenriegler S (ed) The Circular Economy in the European Union. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 99-116. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 50239-3\_9 <!-- image -->
  2. [2]2. Velenturf APM, Purnell P (2021) Principles for a sustainable circular economy. Sustain Prod Consum 27:1437-1457. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. spc. 2021. 02. 018
  3. [3]3. Niskanen J, McLaren D, Anshelm J (2021) Repair for a broken economy: lessons for circular economy from an international interview study of repairers. Sustainability 13(4). https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su130 42316
  4. [4]4. Zink T, Geyer R (2017) Circular economy rebound. J Ind Ecol 21(3):593-602. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jiec. 12545
  5. [5]5. Cohen MJ (2017) The future of consumer society: prospects for sustainability in the new economy, First edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, NY
  6. [6]6. Milios L (2021) Towards a circular economy taxation framework: expectations and challenges of implementation. Circ Econ Sustain 1(2):477-498. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s43615- 020- 00002-z
  7. [10]10. Svensson-Hoglund S, Richter JL, Maitre-Ekern E, Russell JD, Pihlajarinne T, Dalhammar C (2021) Barriers, enablers and market governance: a review of the policy landscape for repair of consumer electronics in the EU and the U.S. J Clean Prod 288:125488. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2020. 125488
  8. [11]11. Dissanayake DGK, Weerasinghe D (2022) Towards circular economy in fashion: review of strategies, barriers and enablers. Circ Econ Sustain 2(1):25-45. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s43615- 021- 00090-5
  9. [13]13. Luth Richter J, Svensson-Hoglund S, Russell JD, Dalhammar C, Milios L (2022) Taking stock for repair and refurbishing: a review of harvesting of spare parts from electrical and electronic products. J Ind Ecol. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jiec. 13315
  10. [14]14. Dalhammar C et al (2021) Enabling reuse in extended producer responsibility schemes for white goods: legal and organisational conditions for connecting resource flows and actors. Circ Econ Sustain 1(2):671-695. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s43615- 021- 00053-w
  11. [15]15. Niskanen J, McLaren D (2021) The political economy of circular economies: lessons from future repair scenario deliberations in Sweden. Circ Econ Sustain. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s43615- 021- 00128-8
  12. [17]17. Svensson-Hoglund S, Russell JD, Richter JL, Dalhammar C (2020) A future of fixing: the upscaling of repair activities envisioned using a circular economy repair society. In: 2020+ Electronics Goes Green (EGG) Conference Proceedings, pp 434-441. [Online]. Available https:// online. elect ronic sgoes green. org/ wp- conte nt/ uploa ds/ 2020/ 10/ Proce edings\_ EGG20 20\_ v2. pdf
  13. [18]18. Camacho-Otero J, Boks C, Pettersen IN (2018) Consumption in the circular economy: a literature review. Sustainability 10(8):Art. no. 8. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su100 82758
  14. [20]20. Maitre-Ekern E, Dalhammar C (2019) Towards a hierarchy of consumption behaviour in the circular economy. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 10232 63X19 840943
  15. [21]21. Russell JD (2018) Market transformation for value-retention processes as a strategy for circular economy. Thesis, Rochester Institute of Technology. [Online]. Available https:// schol arwor ks. rit. edu/ theses/ 9858/
  16. [24]24. Cooper T, Salvia G (2018) Fix it: Barriers to repair and opportunities for change. In: Crocker R, Chiveralls K (eds) Subverting consumerism: reuse in an accelerated world, London ; New York, Routledge Taylor and Francis Group
  17. [25]25. Russell JD, Svensson-Hoglund S, Richter JL, Dalhammar C, Milios L (2022) A matter of timing: system requirements for repair and their temporal dimensions. J Ind Ecol:jiec.13280. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jiec. 13280
  18. [26]26. Jaeger-Erben M, Frick V, Hipp T (2021) Why do users (not) repair their devices? A study of the predictors of repair practices. J Clean Prod 286:125382. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2020. 125382
  19. [27]27. Lefebvre M (2019) To repair or not to repair: an investigation of the factors influencing prosumer repair propensity, thesis. Loughborough University. https:// doi. org/ 10. 26174/ thesis. lboro. 11365 325. v1
  20. [28]28. Laitala K, Klepp IG, Haugrønning V, Throne-Holst H, Strandbakken P (2021) Increasing repair of household appliances, mobile phones and clothing: Experiences from consumers and the repair industry. J Clean Prod 282:125349. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2020. 125349
  21. [29]29. Bakker C, Wang F, Huisman J, den Hollander M (2014) Products that go round: exploring product life extension through design. J Clean Prod 69:10-16. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2014. 01. 028
  22. [30]30. McCollough J (2009) Factors impacting the demand for repair services of household products: the disappearing repair trades and the throwaway society. Int J Consum Stud 33(6):619-626. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1470- 6431. 2009. 00793.x
  23. [31]31. Salvia G, Cooper T, Fisher T, Harmer L, Barr C (2015) What is broken? Expected lifetime, perception of brokenness and attitude towards maintenance and repair. In: Cooper T, Moreno M, Salvia G, Braithwaite N (eds) Product lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE) conference proceedings. Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, pp 342-348
  24. [32]32. van den Berge R, Magnier L, Mugge R (2021) Too good to go? Consumers' replacement behaviour and potential strategies for stimulating product retention. Curr Opin Psychol 39:66-71. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. copsyc. 2020. 07. 014
  25. [33]33. Dewberry EL et al (2016) A landscape of repair. In: Proceedings of the Sustainable Innovation 2016. Circular economy innovation and design. Towards sustainable product design. The centre for sustainable design. University of the Creative Arts, Epsom, Surrey
  26. [34]34. Cooper T (2010) The significance of product longevity. In: Cooper T (ed) Longer lasting products: alternatives to the throwaway society. Routledge, London
  27. [37]37. Diddi S, Yan R-N (2019) Consumer perceptions related to clothing repair and community mending events: a circular economy perspective. Sustainability 11(19):5306-5306. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su111 95306
  28. [38]38. Boldoczki S, Thorenz A, Tuma A (2020) The environmental impacts of preparation for reuse: a case study of WEEE reuse in Germany. J Clean Prod 252. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2019. 119736
  29. [41]41. Gutowski TG, Sahni S, Boustani A, Graves SC (2011) Remanufacturing and energy savings. Environ Sci Technol 45(10):4540-4547. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1021/ es102 598b
  30. [42]42. Parajuly K et al (2021) Product lifetime, right to repair, and repair cafes. University of Limerick. https:// doi. org/ 10. 31880/ 10344/ 10246
  31. [43]43. Jackson T (2005) Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. Sustainable Development Research Network
  32. [44]44. Russell JD, Moore EA, Novich L, Donaghey F, Svensson-Hoglund S, Schewtschenko H (2021) Achieving a circular economy through a fixing city mindset. In: presented at the Architecture Media Politics Society (AMPS) Conference, New York City
  33. [45]45. van der Velden M (2021) 'Fixing the world one thing at a time': community repair and a sustainable circular economy. J Clean Prod 304:127151. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2021. 127151 <!-- image --> 1 3
  34. [47]47. Borg K, Boulet M, Smith L, Bragge P (2019) Digital inclusion &amp; health communication: a rapid review of literature. Health Commun 34(11):1320-1328. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 10410 236. 2018. 14850 77
  35. [48]48. Temple University Libraries (2020) Systematic reviews &amp; other review types. Temple University Libraries, [Online]. Available https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ eb026 408. Accessed 5 Oct 2021
  36. [49]49. Rasmussen CDN, Højberg H, Bengtsen E, Jørgensen MB (2018) Identifying knowledge gaps between practice and research for implementation components of sustainable interventions to improve the working environment - a rapid review. Appl Ergon 67:178-192. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. apergo. 2017. 09. 014
  37. [50]50. Okorie O, Salonitis K, Charnley F, Moreno M, Turner C, Tiwari A (2018) Digitisation and the circular economy: a review of current research and future trends. Energies 11(11):3009. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ en111 13009
  38. [52]52. Moher D (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151(4):264. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7326/ 0003- 4819- 151-4- 20090 8180- 00135
  39. [57]57. Jaeger-Erben M, Proske M (2017) What's hot, what's not: the social construction of product obsolescence and its relevance for strategies to increase functionality. In: Presented at the PLATE - Product Lifetimes and the Environment. Delft, Netherlands. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3233/ 978-1- 61499- 820-4- 181
  40. [59]59. Cox J, Griffith S, Giorgi S, King G (2013) Consumer understanding of product lifetimes. Resour Conserv Recycl 79:21-29. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. resco nrec. 2013. 05. 003
  41. [60]60. Nazlı T (2021) Repair motivation and barriers model: investigating user perspectives related to product repair towards a circular economy. J Clean Prod 289:125644. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2020. 125644
  42. [61]61. Rogers HA, Deutz P, Ramos TB (2021) Repairing the circular economy: public perception and participant profile of the repair economy in Hull, UK. Resour Conserv Recycl 168:105447. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. resco nrec. 2021. 105447
  43. [62]62. McLaren A, McLauchlan S (2015) Crafting sustainable repairs: practice-based approaches to extending the life of clothes. In: Cooper T, Braithwaite N, Moreno M, Salvia G (eds) Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE) Conference proceedings. Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, pp 221-228
  44. [63]63. Brusselaers J, Bracquene E, Peeters J, Dams Y (2019) Economic consequences of consumer repair strategies for electrical household devices. J Enterp Inf Manag 33(4):747-767. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ JEIM- 12- 2018- 0283
  45. [64]64. Lee T, Wakefield-Rann R (2021) Conspicuous and inconspicuous repair: a framework for situating repair in relation to consumer practices and design research. J Clean Prod 294:126310. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2021. 126310
  46. [65]65. McLaren A, McLauchlan S (2015) Crafting sustainable repairs: practice-based approaches to extending the life of clothes. In: Braithwaite N, Moreno M, Salvia G (eds) Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE) conference proceedings, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, 17-19 June 2015, C. International Conference on Product Lifetimes and the Environment Tim. Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, pp 221-228
  47. [67]67. Madon J (2022) Free repair against the consumer society: how repair cafés socialize people to a new relationship to objects. J Consum Cult 22(2):534-550. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 14695 40521 990871
  48. [68]68. Raihanian Mashhadi A, Esmaeilian B, Cade W, Wiens K, Behdad S (2016) Mining consumer experiences of repairing electronics: product design insights and business lessons learned. J Clean Prod 137:716-727. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2016. 07. 144
  49. [69]69. Ackermann L, Mugge R, Schoormans J (2018) Consumers' perspective on product care: An exploratory study of motivators, ability factors, and triggers. J Clean Prod 183:380-391. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2018. 02. 099
  50. [70]70. Sheth JN, Newman BI, Gross BL (1991) Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. J Bus Res 22(2):159-170. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ 0148- 2963(91) 90050-8
  51. [72]72. Gregson N, Metcalfe A, Crewe L (2009) Practices of object maintenance and repair: how consumers attend to consumer objects within the home. J Consum Cult. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 14695 40509 104376
  52. [73]73. Bolton LE, Alba JW (2012) When less is more: consumer aversion to unused utility. J Consum Psychol 22(3):369-383. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jcps. 2011. 09. 002
  53. [74]74. Dermody J, Nagase Y, Berger W (2020) Theorizing self-repairers' worldview-personhood to advance new thinking on extended product lifetimes. Int J Consum Stud 44(5):435-444. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ ijcs. 12582
  54. [76]76. McCollough J (2010) Consumer discount rates and the decision to repair or replace a durable product: a sustainable consumption issue. J Econ Issues. No. 1:183. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2753/ JEI00 21- 36244 40109
  55. [78]78. McCollough J (2007) The effect of income growth on the mix of purchases between disposable goods and reusable goods. Int J Consum Stud 31(3):213-219. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1470- 6431. 2006. 00504.x
  56. [79]79. Hernandez RJ, Miranda C, Goñi J (2020) Empowering sustainable consumption by giving back to consumers the 'right to repair. Sustainability 12(3):850. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su120 30850
  57. [80]80. McCollough J (2020) The impact of consumers' time constraint and conspicuous consumption behaviour on the throwaway society. Int J Consum Stud 44(1):33-43. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ ijcs. 12545
  58. [81]81. Riisgaard H, Mosgaard M, Zacho KO (2016) Local circles in a circular economy - the case of smartphone repair in Denmark. Eur J Sustain Dev 5(1):109-124. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14207/ ejsd. 2016. v5n1p 109
  59. [82]82. Sabbaghi M, Cade W, Behdad S, Bisantz AM (2017) The current status of the consumer electronics repair industry in the U.S.: a survey-based study. Resour Conserv Recycl 116:137-151. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. resco nrec. 2016. 09. 013
  60. [87]87. Blankenberg A-K, Alhusen H (2019) On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: a literature review and guide for the empirical economist. University of Goettingen, Department of Economics 350 [Online]. Available https:// ideas. repec. org/p/ zbw/ cegedp/ 350. html. Accessed 10 Mar 2020
  61. [88]88. Testa F, Pretner G, Iovino R, Bianchi G, Tessitore S, Iraldo F (2021) Drivers to green consumption: a systematic review. Environ Dev Sustain 23(4):4826-4880. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10668- 020- 00844-5
  62. [89]89. Jaeger-Erben M, Hielscher S (2018) Resisting Obsolescence whilst enabling inclusive developments? Experimenting with novel and old relationships and narratives in repair cafes. In: Presented at the Third International Conference of the Sustainable Consumption Research and Action Initiative. Denmark, Copenhagen
  63. [90]90. Hielscher S, Jaeger-Erben M (2021) From quick fixes to repair projects: insights from a citizen science project. J Clean Prod 278:123875. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2020. 123875
  64. [91]91. Russell JD, Moore EA, Svensson-Hoglund S, Novich L, Donaghey F (in press) Achieving circular economy through a fixing city mindset. In: Montgomery J (ed) Place-based sustainability. Cambridge Scholars Publishing <!-- image -->
  65. [94]94. Haug A (2017) Defining 'resilient design' in the context of consumer products. Des J 1-22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 14606 925. 2018. 13952 65
  66. [95]95. Mitchell S (2018) Narratives of resistance and repair in consumer society. Third Text 32(1):55-67. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09528 822. 2018. 14591 10
  67. [96]96. Akenji L (2014) Consumer scapegoatism and limits to green consumerism. J Clean Prod 63:13-23. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2013. 05. 022 <!-- image --> 1 3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Svensson-Hoglund, S., Russell, J. D., & Richter, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Richter, Jessika Luth
ORCID
Venue
Circular Economy and Sustainability
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-11-28
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
1327-1359
ISSN
  • 2730-597X (ISSN-L)
  • 2730-5988
DOI
10.1007/s43615-022-00226-1
OpenAlex
W4310212270
Cited by
39
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Circular Economy and Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas (2017‐01037)
  • Institute for Critical Technology and Applied Science
  • Lund University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Design and Development
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
Keywords
product repair, repair process, circular economy, sustainable consumption

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