Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Sustainability & Circularity NOW 2024; 01: a23302567
DOI: 10.1055/a-2330-2567
Original Article

Dynamics of Business Models in Circular Economy: Shifting Challenges in Pilot Projects

J. Lauten-Weiss
1   Schumpeter School of Business and Economics, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany
,
H. Friege 
2   Faculty for Sustainability, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
,
I. Westphal
3   BIBA, Universität Bremen, Bremen, Germany
,
J. Brinker
4   Smart Enterprise Engineering, Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz GmbH, Kaiserslautern, Germany
› Author AffiliationsSupported by: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung FONA ReziProK
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints


Abstract

This study investigates the dynamics of circular business models (CBMs) through a multiple case study of 12 pilot projects funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research between 2019 and 2022. The aim of this study was to draw practical conclusions for CBM pilot projects and public funding tenders, as well as to reveal theoretical insights into the motivation, perceptions of challenges, and potentials regarding CBMs and their shifts over time. Focused on remanufacturing and product-service systems (PSS), the study reveals significant shifts in motivation and perceived challenges before and after the pilot projects. Post-pilot, financial considerations emerged as a primary motivator for CBM adoption, alongside market pull factors and resource availability. However, challenges such as cost-related issues, supply chain complexities, and internal realignment hurdles persisted. Conversely, the perception of market-related challenges had decreased after the pilots, suggesting a growing readiness and adaptability of the market to CBMs. Similarly, experience-related challenges saw a decline, indicating an improvement in knowledge and capabilities within consortia over time. Moreover, the study examines shifts in perceived potential, revealing heterogeneous outcomes across different types of CBMs. While some projects identified new possibilities for value chain cooperation and transparency, others expressed skepticism about further potential, particularly in PSS-focused pilots. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on CBMs by providing empirical insights into the dynamics of circular economy (CE) pilot projects and their impact on organizational learning.

Keywords

Circular business models - Product-as-a-Service - Remanufacturing

Supporting Information

    Supporting information for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2330-2567.
  • Supporting Information


Publication History

Received: 29 February 2024

Accepted after revision: 08 May 2024

Article published online:
01 July 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Bibliographical Record
J. Lauten-Weiss, H. Friege, I. Westphal, J. Brinker. Dynamics of Business Models in Circular Economy: Shifting Challenges in Pilot Projects. Sustainability & Circularity NOW 2024; 01: a23302567.
DOI: 10.1055/a-2330-2567
 

  • Bibliography

  • 1 Argyris Ch, Schön DA. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reis: Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas. Centro de Investigaciones Sociologicas; 1997: 345-348
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Assmann IR, Rosati F, Morioka SN. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2023; 32: 6008-6028
  • 3 Blomsma F, Bauwens T, Weissbrod I, Kirchherr J. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2023; 32: 1010-1031
  • 4 Bocken NM.P, de Pauw I, Bakker C, van der Grinten B. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2016; 33: 308-320
  • 5 Bocken NM.P, Schuit CS.C, Kraaijenhagen C. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2018; 28: 79-95
  • 6 Boehm M, Thomas O. J. Clean. Prod. 2013; 51: 245-260
  • 7 Bressanelli G, Pigosso DC. A, Saccani N, Perona M. J. Clean. Prod. 2021; 298: 126819
  • 8 Brinker J, Beinke JH, Thomas O, Westphal I, Thoben KD, Gleede B. Gestaltung kreislauffähiger Geschäftsmodelle. Einblicke aus Wissenschaft und Praxis. I40M 2022 2022: 9-13
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Cramer J. Milieu: Elementaire Deeltjes: 16. Amsterdam University Press; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 10 D’Adamo I, Rosa P. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016; 86: 2575-2584
  • 11 Desing H, Braun G, Hischier R. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021; 164: 105179
  • 12 European Parliament. Circular economy: definition, importance and benefits [WWW Document]. 2021 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/20151201STO05603/circular-economy-definition-importance-and-benefits accessed 14.03.2022
    Google Scholar
  • 13 European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment. OJ L; 2020
    Google Scholar
  • 14 European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Text with EEA relevance) 2018
  • 15 Friege H. Müll und Abfall 2022; 609-617
  • 16 Geissdoerfer M, Santa-Maria T, Kirchherr J, Pelzeter C. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2022; 32: 3814-3832
  • 17 Hina M, Chauhan C, Kaur P, Kraus S, Dhir A. J. Clean. Prod. 2022; 333: 130049
  • 18 Jensen JP, Prendeville SM, Bocken NM. P, Peck D. J. Clean. Prod. 2019; 218: 304-314
  • 19 Kjaer LL, Pigosso DC. A, Niero M, Bech NM, McAloone TC. J. Ind. Ecol. 2019; 23: 22-35
  • 20 Konietzko J, Bocken N, Hultink EJ. J. Clean. Prod. 2020; 253: 119942
  • 21 Linder M, Williander M. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 2015; 26: 182-196
  • 22 Mhatre P, Panchal R, Singh A, Bibyan S. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 2021; 26: 187-202
  • 23 Mo JP. T. Adv. Decis. Sci. 2012; 2012: 1-19
  • 24 Morseletto P. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020; 153: 104553
  • 25 Neely A. Oper. Manag. Res. 2008; 1: 103-118
  • 26 Nilsen HR. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2020; 47: 27-40
  • 27 Paz FA. G, Heibeck M, Parvez AM, Torrubia J, Van Den Boogaart KG, Raatz S. Sustainability 2024; 16: 1082
  • 28 Potting J, Hanemaaijer A, Delahaye R, Ganzevles J, Hoekstra R, Lijzen J. Circular economy: what we want to know and can measure. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; The Hague: 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Potting J, Hekkert M, Worrell E, Hanemaaijer A. Circular Economy: Measuring Innovation in the Product Chain. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; The Hague: 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Richter A, Steven M. On the Relation Between Industrial Product-Service Systems and Business Models. in Operations Research Proceedings 2008. Fleischmann B, Borgwardt KH, Klein R, Tuma A. Eds Springer; Berlin Heidelberg: 2009: 97-102
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Rockström J, Gupta J, Lenton TM, Quin D, Lade SJ, Abrams JF. Earth’s Future 2021; 9: e2020EF001866
  • 32 Stahel WR. Nature 2016; 531: 435-438
  • 33 Stumpf L, Schöggl JP, Baumgartner RJ. J. Clean. Prod. 2021; 316: 128158
  • 34 Tukker A. J. Clean. Prod. 2015; 97: 76-91
  • 35 Tunn VS. C, Fokker R, Luijkx KA, De Jong SA. M, Schoormans JP. L. Sustainability (Switzerland) 2019; 11: 274
  • 36 Tura N, Hanski J, Ahola T, Ståhle M, Piiparinen S, Valkokari P. J. Clean. Prod. 2019; 212: 90-98
  • 37 Ul-Durar S, Awan U, Varma A, Memon S, Mention AL. J. Knowl. Manag. 2023; 27: 2217-2248
  • 38 Veleva V, Bodkin G. J. Clean. Prod. 2018; 188: 20-37
  • 39 Vermunt DA, Negro SO, Verweij PA, Kuppens DV, Hekkert MP. J. Clean. Prod. 2019; 222: 891-902
  • 40 Weissbrod I, Bocken NM. P. J. Clean. Prod. 2017; 142: 2663-2676
  • 41 Yin RK. Case study research and applications: design and methods. Sixth edition. ed SAGE; Los Angeles London New Delhi Singapore Washington DC Melbourne: 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Zink T, Geyer R. J. Ind. Ecol. 2017; 21: 593-602