The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Environmental Impacts of Reuse: A Review
Abstract
Summary: The fear that human consumption is causing climate change, biodiversity loss, and mineral scarcity has recently prompted interest in reuse because of the intuitive belief that it reduces new production and waste. The environmental impacts of reuse have, however, received little attention—the benefits typically assumed rather than understood—and consequently the overall effects remain unclear. In this article, we structure the current work on the topic, reviewing the potential benefits and pitfalls described in the literature and providing a framework for future research. Many products’ use‐phase energy requirements are decreasing. The relative importance of the embodied impacts from initial production is therefore growing and the prominence of reuse as an abatement strategy is likely to increase in the future. Many examples are found in the literature of beneficial reuse of standardized, unpowered products and components, and repairing an item is always found to be less energy intensive than new production. However, reusing a product does not guarantee an environmental benefit. Attention must be paid to restoring and upgrading old product efficiencies, minimizing overspecification in the new application, and considering whether more efficient, new products exist that would be more suitable. Cheap, reused goods can allow many consumers access to products they would otherwise have been unable to afford. Though socially valuable, these sales, which may help minimize landfill in the short term, can represent additional consumption rather than a net environmental benefit compared to the status quo.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Structural steel has a particular propensity for reuse considering its maintained capacity over time (durability), potential for reversible connections (e.g., bolted connections), maturity as a technology and high level of standardization, and modularity, all of which have been identified as enabling factors for reuse (Lee et al. 2024;Cooper and Gutowski 2017).”
From Reusing Heavy-Section Steel in Buildings: Carbon Reduction Potential and Material Availability (2025) · cites this paper as Cooper and Gutowski 2017
In the citing paper
“lifetime extension is only valid when the avoided impacts from production, e.g., energy use and the subsequent reduction in impact upstream such as raw material extraction and transportation, are lower than the impacts from producing more durable components or treating the returned product to extend its lifetime [20,26].”
From Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Passive durable products, however, hold a larger and more consistent potential for environmental improvement because their environmental impact is dominated by the production phase, usually the production of materials, while their physical lifetime is not fully exploited [20].”
From Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Passive durable products, however, hold a larger and more consistent potential for environmental improvement because their environmental impact is dominated by the production phase, usually the production of materials, while their physical lifetime is not fully exploited [20].”
From Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“the extension of the lifetime of passive durable products, i.e., products that do not consume energy or materials during the use phase, has been found by researchers to have high potential [18][19][20].”
From Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Passive durable products, however, hold a larger and more consistent potential for environmental improvement because their environmental impact is dominated by the production phase, usually the production of materials, while their physical lifetime is not fully exploited [20].”
From Is Prolonging the Lifetime of Passive Durable Products a Low-Hanging Fruit of a Circular Economy? A Multiple Case Study (2019) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“Estimates for remanufacturing savings of EEE range from 50%-80% when the use phase is excluded [19].”
From Material efficiency strategies to reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with buildings, vehicles, and electronics—a review (2019) · cites this paper as [19]
Citations
Cites
Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature review
Srivastava, S. K. (2007) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00202.x · Cited by 3,984
IPCC--Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Fu, Q., Manabe, S., & Johanson, C. M. (2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-5008 · Cited by 3,303
Energy efficiency and consumption—The rebound effect—A survey
A. Greening, L., Greene, D. L., & Difiglio, C. (2000) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/s0301-4215(00)00021-5 · Cited by 2,077
The Circular Economy: A New Development Strategy in China
Yuan, Z., Bi, J., & Moriguichi, Y. (2006) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1162/108819806775545321 · Cited by 1,175 · cited 3×
“Keywords: dematerialization energy environmental impact materials efficiency remanufacturing reuse Introduction Reuse has become one of the well-known 3Rs—“reduce, reuse, recycle”—promoted by environmental agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA 2014) and the UK Waste and Resources Action Pro…”
InfluentialMaterial efficiency: A white paper
Allwood, J. M., Ashby, M. F., Gutowski, T. G., & Worrell, E. (2011) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.11.002 · Cited by 927
Self-citationMicklin, P. (2007) · Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences · doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.35.031306.140120 · Cited by 755
The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate and neoclassical growth
Saunders, H. D. (1992) · The Energy Journal · doi:10.5547/issn0195-6574-ej-vol13-no4-7 · Cited by 665
Consumption and the Rebound Effect: An Industrial Ecology Perspective
Hertwich, E. G. (2005) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1162/1088198054084635 · Cited by 605
Materials and the environment: eco-informed material choice
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-6823 · Cited by 530
Making functional sales environmentally and economically beneficial through product remanufacturing
Sundin, E., & Bras, B. (2004) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.04.006 · Cited by 512
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Adler D., 2007, International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, 1
- J. Allwood J. Cullen M. Carruth D. Cooper M. McBrien R. Milford M. Moynihan A. Patel 2012 UIT Cambridge UK
- M. Ashby 2012 Elsevier Oxford UK
- Asolekar S., 2006, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Dismantling of Obsolete Vessels
- P. Astle 2008 University of Cambridge Cambridge UK
- L. Bollinger R. Frenkel R. Grand R. Kutta R. Lund C. Stanovsky 1981 Center for Policy Alternatives Cambridge MA USA
- D. Cooper 2013 University of Cambridge Cambridge UK
- Gutowski T., 2001, World technology (WTEC) division panel report on environmentally benign manufacturing
- ICCT (International Council on Clean Transportation), 2013, The International Council on Clean Transportation
- 2006 Springer Berlin A. King J. Miemczyk D. Bufton Photocopier remanufacturing at Xerox UK 173 186
- D. Leal‐Ayala 2012 University of Cambridge Cambridge UK
- Lund R., 1984, Remanufacturing, Technology Review, 87, 19
- Milford R., 2010, Re‐use without melting: Emissions savings from case studies (working paper)
- D. Pelletiere K. Reinert 2002 Blackwell Oxford UK
- RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology, 2013, Centre for remanufacturing
- Schischke K., 2003, 11th LCA Case Studies Symposium, 2
- Stahel W., 1982, Product‐life factor. Product Life Institute
- Steinhilper R., 2011, International Conference on Remanufacturing
- Tilwankar A. A.Mahindrakar andS.Asolekar.2008.Steel recycling resulting from ship dismantling in India: Implications for green house gas emissions. InDismantling of obsolete vessels pp.1–10 15–16 September Glasgow UK.
- Well Dressed 2006 Institute for Manufacturing Cambridge UK
- WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme), 2014, Waste and Resources Action Programme
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Targets for a circular economy
Morseletto, P. (2019) · Resources Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104553 · Cited by 1,651
A review and typology of circular economy business model patterns
Lüdeke‐Freund, F., Gold, S., & Bocken, N. M. P. (2019) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12763 · Cited by 1,256
Corona, B., Shen, L., Reike, D., Rosales Carreón, J., & Worrell, E. (2019) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104498 · Cited by 987
Kristensen, H. S., & Mosgaard, M. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118531 · Cited by 797
Foster, G. (2019) · Resources Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104507 · Cited by 567
“For example, spillover effects may result in more buildings being built overall rather than less (Cooper and Gutowski, 2017).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooper, D. R., & Gutowski, T. G.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cooper, Daniel R.
- Venue
- Journal of Industrial Ecology
- Published
- 2015-12-28
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38-56
- ISSN
- 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9290
- OpenAlex
- W2216148103
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 110
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 38.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Design and Development
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Keywords
- reuse, embodied energy, product repair, product upgrading, overspecification, waste reduction, climate change mitigation, biodiversity loss, mineral scarcity, circular economy
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
