4.7 Review

Circular business models: A review

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 277, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123741

关键词

Circular business model; Business model innovation; Sustainable business model; Circular economy; Review

资金

  1. EPSRC Centre for Innovative Manufacturing in Industrial Sustainability [EP/I033351/1]
  2. EPSRC project Business Models for Sustainable Industrial Systems [EP/L019914/1]
  3. EPSRC
  4. Foundation of German Business
  5. research project CIRCit (Circular Economy Integration in the Nordic Industry for Enhanced Sustainability and Competitiveness), Nordic GreenGrowth Research and Innovation Programme [83144]
  6. NordForsk
  7. Nordic Energy Research
  8. Nordic Innovation
  9. EPSRC [EP/L019914/1, EP/I033351/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Circular Economy is gaining traction in academia, industry, and policy making as an alternative model that minimises resource depletion, waste, and emissions. To implement the concept on the organisational level, business models are an important leverage. A body of literature has emerged investigating the notion of circular business model and circular business model innovation, however, there is considerable lack of clarity about their theoretical conceptualisation. To address this and systematise the state-of-the-art of the nascent field of circular business models and circular business model innovation, we have reviewed this literature, employing systematic database searches and crossreference snowballing. Our contributions to conceptual clarity are: (1) an overview of the history of the concepts of circular business model and circular business model innovation, (2) an overview and synthesis of definitions of circular business model and circular business model innovation, and (3) an overview and synthesis of conceptual frameworks for circular business model and circular business model innovation. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据