Pre-paradigmatic status of industrial sustainability: a systematic review

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.*Related content and download information correct at time of download. Design/methodology/approach -Using an evidenced-based approach, a systematic review (SR) of 574 articles from 62 peer-reviewed scientific journals associated with industrial sustainability is conducted.Findings -This paper distinguishes three prevailing dialogues in the field of industrial sustainability, and uses Kuhn's theory of paradigms to propose its pre-paradigmatic scientific status. The three dialogues: "productivity and innovation", "corporate citizenship" and "economic resilience" are conjectured to privilege efficiency strategies as a mode of incremental reductionism. Industrial sustainability espouses the grand vision of a generative, restorative and net positive economy, and calls for a future research trajectory to address institutional and systemic issues regarding scaling-up and transition, through transformative strategies.Research limitations/implications -The review is limited by the nature of the inquiries addressed in the literatures by specific researcher communities between 1992 and 2014. Originality/value -This study performs the first SR in the field of industrial sustainability, synthesises prevailing scholarly dialogues and provides an evaluation of the scientific status of the field.

Assessing relations between Circular Economy and Industry 4.0: a systematic literature review

“…x (Hughes 2017) x (Isaksson, Hallstedt, and Öhrwall Rönnbäck 2018) x (Jensen and Remmen 2017) x (Jin et al 2014) x (Kölsch et al 2017) x (Kowalkowski et al 2017) x (Kuo and Smith 2018) x (A. Q. Li and Found 2017) x (Liao et al 2017) x (Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al 2018a) x (Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al 2018b) x (Mařík et al 2016) x (Moreno and Charnley 2016) x (Neligan 2018) x (Okorie et al 2018) x (Pagoropoulos, Pigosso, and McAloone 2017) x (Planing 2017) x (Prendeville et al 2016) x (Rajala et al 2018) x (Ruggeri et al 2017) x (Sarkis and Zhu 2018) x (Shanshan Yang et al 2018) x (Sinclair et al 2018) x (Smart et al 2017) x (Srai et al 2016) x (Stark et al 2014) x (Stock and Seliger 2016) x (Thomas 2018) x (Tolio et al 2017) x (Townsend and Coroama 2018) x (Ünal, Urbinati, and Chiaroni 2018) x (X. Wang, Ong, and Nee 2018) x (Wilts and Berg 2017) x (B. Xu 2016)…”

“…Wang, Ong, and Nee 2018) x Total 5 4 3 13 (Barbosa et al 2016) x (Bassi 2017) x (Deschamps et al 2018) x (Gürdür and Gradin 2017) x (Hehenberger et al 2016) x (Holligan, Hargaden, and Papakostas 2017) x (Isaksson, Hallstedt, and Öhrwall Rönnbäck 2018) x (Jensen and Remmen 2017) x (Kusiak 2018) x (J. Li et al 2015) x (Ma et al 2018) x (Mashhadi and Behdad 2018) x (Menon, Kärkkäinen, and Gupta 2016) x (Menon et al 2018) x (Minetola and Eyers 2018) x (Miranda et al 2017) x (Müller et al 2018) x (Pacis, Subido Jr., and Bugtai 2017) x (Rødseth, Schjølberg, and Marhaug 2017) x (Sauerwein, Bakker, and Balkenende 2017) x (Schmidt et al 2017) x (Schroeder et al 2016a) x (Schroeder et al 2016b) x (Sinclair et al 2018) x (Sharpe et al 2018) x (Sheng Yang et al 2017) x (Syed-Khaja, Perez, and Franke 2016)…”

“…Given the importance these two paradigms have acquired over time, much literature discusses CE and I4.0 from several perspectives (Liao et al 2017;Smart et al 2017;Govindan and Hasanagic 2018). However, there is still a great distance between theory and practice (Gorissen, Vrancken, and Manshoven 2016).…”

Product-service systems business models for circular supply chains

“…Sustainable development agendas are increasingly calling for supply chains to shift from linear to a closed-loop models, in which circularity ideals such as reuse, reconditioning, remanufacturing and recycling become the 'new normal' practices (Nasir et al 2017). Embedding circularities within supply chains thus has been considered by many researchers, practitioners and policymakers as an approach for businesses to improve its sustainability outcomes (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2014;Lewandowski 2016;Murray, Skene, and Haynes 2015;Nasir et al 2017;Smart et al 2017). A number of companies (e.g.…”

Supply chain operations for a circular economy

“…Supply chain management provides significant opportunities to enable business approaches to meeting sustainability imperatives of the so-called 'circular economy'. Strong cases have been made for the circular use of resources by businesses as a response to the rising costs of raw materials acquisition and the environmental impact of by-products and waste handling and disposal (Preston 2012;Svensson and Wagner 2012;Su et al 2013;Bourlakis et al 2014;Smart et al 2017).…”