Next Article in Journal
Role of Bioavailability in Compost Maturity During Aerobic Composting of Chicken Manure
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Digital Inclusive Finance on Residents’ Cultural Consumption in China: An Urban-Rural Difference Perspective
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mapping Circular Economy in Portuguese SMEs
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Industrial Sufficiency: A Conceptual Methodological Framework

Fraunhofer IPA, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(24), 11121; https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411121
Submission received: 8 November 2024 / Revised: 11 December 2024 / Accepted: 16 December 2024 / Published: 18 December 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Strategic Enterprise Management and Sustainable Economic Development)

Abstract

:
Implementing sustainability strategies is essential for the future viability of companies. While companies have been focusing intensively on the operationalization of efficiency and consistency for quite some time, sufficiency approaches are rare. As a result, there is a lack of fundamental understanding of the concept, its inherent potential, as well as a lack of basic implementation concepts for strategies, management systems, and product and process development. Based on a literature review using Scopus and Web of Science according to the PRISMA approach, this paper develops a definition for the concept of industrial sufficiency and presents three general industrial sufficiency strategies (frugality, longevity, and specificity) regarding three distinct business determinants (product, production, and business model). The investigation shows that not only can there be overlaps between the three general sustainability strategies (efficiency, consistency, and sufficiency) but that individual measures are also mutually dependent at different levels. In addition, significant conflicts of objectives for implementation in industrial practice are revealed.

1. Introduction

With prospects of a rising world population, accelerated technological development, and the associated increase in resource use, the current economic model is facing harsh headwind [1,2]. Furthermore, increasing CO2 emissions are putting a strain on the ecosystem and planetary boundaries. Earth is today beyond six out of nine of these planetary boundaries, e.g., climate change, the nitrogen and phosphorus cycle, and the loss of biodiversity [3]. Despite the 1.5-degree target adopted in 2015, global CO2 emissions increased by 1687 million metric tons between 2015 and 2022 [4]. Since industry is responsible for around a quarter of global GHG emissions, companies are becoming increasingly obliged to participate in climate protection [5,6,7]. To address these issues, political actions such as the so-called European Green Deal try to achieve net zero CO2 emissions, affecting industry strategies as well [8]. This paper focuses on these environmental aspects of sustainability, while the social and economic aspects are not examined in detail.
Generally, three strategies are named in the scientific literature for ecological sustainability: efficiency, consistency, and sufficiency [9]. Although these strategies are distinct, there are overlaps between them. For example, consistency encompasses efficiency concepts such as reduction as an efficiency strategy, as well as sufficiency concepts such as avoidance. The currently conceptualized efficiency strategies aim to “do more with less” and reduce the use of materials, energy, and labor in production while optimizing output at the same time [10,11]. In the context of sustainability, the efficiency concept exists in combination with a wide range of dimensions, including energy, material, resource, and eco-, socio-, and ultra-efficiency [12,13,14,15,16]. Various authors, however, show that increasing the efficiency of any technical system usually induces a more feudal consumption of the same or other goods, also known as the rebound effect [17,18,19]. A further effect that goes hand-in-hand with efficiency in the context of sustainability is the failure to consider the entire lifecycle or the interactions with other systems. Decisions based on the assumption of a too-narrow system boundary or temporal frame of reference mostly lead to a shift of the problem into precisely those areas that are not considered (phases of the lifecycle, regions, etc.). In the literature, this phenomenon is referred to as the leakage or spillover effect [20]. Last, but not least, efficiency is a relative figure. An increase does not necessarily lead to an improvement in the absolute use of the environment [21]. In the case of non-renewable resources, the strategy can only achieve an extension of availability but not permanent access. In the literature, this phenomenon is referred to as the quantity effect [20]. A solution to the environmental problem through a microeconomic increase in efficiency is, therefore, not possible.
In contrast, the concept of consistency refers to an adaptation of human actions to nature. In the context of production, the consistency strategy seeks an adaptation of the industrial to the natural material cycle, which is predominantly discussed in the field of industrial ecology [22]. Here, substances and energy are intended to be kept in closed, local loops to return back to economic processes, remaining in a state of low entropy [23]. The general vision of consistency is the circular economy. Yet, like the efficiency concept, this strategy cannot be recognized without its contradiction as a path to a sustainable economic form. There are doubts about the general feasibility of the concept, which are supported, among other things, by the economic theory of entropy [24]. The concept of the circular economy of recycling products without loss is not fully applicable to most products [25]. Thus, efficiency and consistency are not sufficient to overcome the environmental challenges [26,27,28]. This poses a particular issue for industrial companies, which are increasingly attempting to operate more sustainably. Furthermore, the concept of consistency is closely related to sufficiency, as the first R-Strategy, “refuse”, inherently includes avoidance as a clear sufficiency strategy [28].
Hence, the focus shifts to the third sustainability strategy, sufficiency, which has been virtually overlooked by industry to date [29]. While the concepts of efficiency and consistency are to be seen as adaptations of traditional economic approaches, the sufficiency strategy is a pure expression of the concept of sustainability. Its basic concept identifies the rationalization of resources or needs as the central lever for sustainable development [30,31]. The general vision of sufficiency is the demand economy. Applied to society, sufficiency strategies focus on basic needs, meaningfulness, and simplicity and aim to act on the principles of “less” and “enough” to ensure human well-being and, simultaneously, ecological stability [32]. Although from a purely ecological perspective, the sufficiency concept has the most logical arguments for sustainable development, the approach massively contradicts conventional patterns of thinking. While up to date, its implementation in real-world settings, especially in industries, has been confronted with insurmountable hurdles. This is reflected in the diffusion of the concepts in enterprises: while efficiency and consistency strategies are often common practice, companies tend to avoid sufficiency-oriented strategies because at first glance they do not correlate with the growth-oriented business model [28,33]. This can also be an advantage, as sufficiency-driven approaches primarily target strategy and business models, thereby requiring no technological investments in most cases [28]. However, one reason for this is the rather simplistic perspective that has been adopted to date, as a comprehensive consideration of sufficiency approaches for companies in the manufacturing industry does not yet exist. To ensure success, all three ecological sustainability strategies must be combined, as no single approach is sufficient on its own. A systematic approach and structural change are essential for the effective implementation of sufficiency, as it represents an inherently distinct perspective on resources [34]. Therefore, this paper addresses three basic research questions: (1) What is “industrial sufficiency” (ISZ)? (2) What are the basic strategies for ISZ? (3) What are the challenges for the implementation of ISZ?

2. Materials and Methods

The research process of this work follows the standard approach of science according to Ulrich [35]. The aim of this work is, thus, to provide subjectively perceived sections of reality by describing and defining concepts to develop alternative courses of action for the realization of future realities. By identifying the essential issues of implementing sufficiency in industrial practice, a search string for a literature review according to the flow diagram of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was developed [36]. PRISMA was chosen as it provides transparency and accuracy to the process and it is widely used in the field of economic and business research (e.g., [37]). The results of the literature review were reviewed in relation to previous studies. Thereupon, a coherent theoretical model of ISZ was derived. Similar approaches are well-documented in the literature [38,39].

2.1. Data Collection

The studies to be included in the review were identified by searching Scopus and Web of Science because some articles cannot be found in both databases [40]. The search string aimed to identify industrial sufficiency strategies in the field of ecological sustainability. To cover the sufficiency aspect of sustainability, the terms “sustainability” and “sufficiency” as well as “sustainable consumption” were selected. To address the industrial aspect, the terms “production” for application in product manufacturing, “product” for the design of industrial products, and “business model” for economic implementation were chosen. In this study, we focused on the manufacturing industry. For this reason, additional areas were excluded through the search string. The construction industry often considers aspects such as heating, cooling, and space usage in the context of sufficiency, which are not relevant to the ISZ [41]. Self-sufficiency was excluded as it primarily pertains to agricultural aspects. Energy sufficiency was excluded due to its predominant focus on political, sociological, and personal dimensions [42]. These requirements resulted in the following search string:
(sufficiency OR “sustainable consumption”) AND strategy AND (production OR product OR “business model”) AND sustainability AND NOT (“self sufficiency” OR energy OR buildings).

2.2. Study Selection

Using the search string, the papers were retrieved from the two databases and imported into reference management software (Citavi 6). Through this software, the papers were manually reviewed for relevance by two independent reviewers. The selection of the suitable literature was carried out as shown in Figure 1. In the first step, the titles and abstracts of the identified articles were examined, which resulted in 108 potentially relevant articles. In cases of differing assessments, these were discussed in order to reach a consensus. During the selection process, articles were chosen that were specifically related to the manufacturing industry. In contrast, full texts that referred to other sectors or took the perspective of individuals and were not yet excluded in the search string (e.g., tourism industry) were excluded. Furthermore, papers relating only to consistency and efficiency strategies were not included. Taking the criteria into account, 51 articles were found to be relevant, excluding duplicates and including further literature through forward–backward search. The literature classified as relevant covers a publication period from 2007 to 2023, which means that the validity of the reviewed literature is considered current. The results were from various journals, with the “Journal of Cleaner Production” being the most represented, featuring 11 titles, followed by “Sustainability” with 6 titles. The most relevant author in this field is Nancy Bocken from Maastricht University, with 8 publications, followed by Maike Gossen from TU Berlin with 4 titles. All studies from the search string with the corresponding specific industrial sufficiency strategy are presented with the corresponding strategy in Section 3.2.

3. Results

3.1. Defining Industrial Sufficiency

In the traditional form of the economic circuit, as established by Quesnay and Fisher [43], labor is compensated with wages, while the produced goods are purchased using these wages. However, a business model oriented toward sufficiency, which advocates for “enough”, necessitates the inclusion of emission-free values as a new value proposition attached to the purchased products or services. This shift consequently fosters moral permission and appreciation from the household perspective, altering the foundational dynamics of the economic circuit. Consequently, the concept of ISZ advocates for companies to assume responsibility while recognizing sufficiency not as an isolated endeavor but as a comprehensive necessity for a livable world [44]. In this paper, we understand ISZ as the consolidation of the economic activities of a manufacturing company or a production network to a socio-ecologically acceptable level. Figure 2 illustrates an adaptation of the classic economic circuit in the context of ISZ.
The term “sufficiency” is derived from the Latin word “sufficere”, which means “being enough, satisfy, suffice” [45]. Its fundamental objective is not to reduce but to fulfill the requirements for a ”good” life for humans and societies [44]. Sufficiency, as previously highlighted in the Introduction Section, is one strategy that must be prioritized in conjunction with the other two strategies to ensure that we remain within the planetary boundaries, as shown in Figure 3. Sufficiency can be separated into three hierarchy levels. The holistic societal level addresses moral and philosophical topics that influence the way people define their values and subsequent actions, such as their life goals or perception of nature [46]. This societal sufficiency can be addressed by the concept of social metabolism, which abstracts society into a biological system that produces positive outputs and waste or emissions [47,48,49]. Individual sufficiency addresses consumer decisions and the effect of these on our society. ISZ, however, seeks to provide producing companies with a further solution space for sustainability-oriented innovations.
To approach this topic in the context of industrial performance, the following considerations are necessary:
The socio-ecologically acceptable level companies shall act on is determined by the values of society and the utilization of the environment. In other words, the concept is inherently linked to the concept of planetary boundaries and socially accepted goals;
The concept presupposes a holistic understanding of value. Companies not only contribute to value creation through the creation of financial and/or functional added value but also, for example, in the common goods economy through their contribution to maintaining or improving the socio-ecological status quo;
A limit can only be set as long as a company remains viable. The decisive question here is the point at which the economic viability of a company is given or ensured.
The starting points for achieving these limitation goals must be based on established corporate or value creation structures or offer meaningful added value, i.e., the upstream and downstream network, the company, the product, the production, and the business model.

3.2. Strategic Approaches to Industrial Sufficiency

Although efficiency, consistency, and sufficiency exhibit certain overlaps [11], sufficiency can affect different parts of the company separately. For the structuring of the areas in which ISZ plays a role, the functional organizational structure was chosen as a basis [50]. This is suitable for considerations from the perspective of executives in the company. Sufficiency strategies influencing the produced outcomes such as purchasing, development, and design were summarized under the term product; strategies targeting production, suppliers, and the associated corporate infrastructure under the term production; and everything related to sales and marketing under the term business model (Table 1).
Based on the literature review, three recurring generic industrial sufficiency strategies (GISS) were identified: frugality, longevity, and specificity. These GISS were used to structure the underlying specific industrial sufficiency strategies (SISS). To ensure a uniform understanding, these GISS are explained as follows:
Frugality refers generally to focus on simplicity and is further characterized by functionality, performance level, and cost reduction in the corporate context [90,102]. In an industrial context, this affects the offered range of functionalities, the size, or resource consumption. The sustainability strategy of efficiency is closely related to the concept of frugality. The reduction in non-essential elements is inherently linked to the concept of efficiency, while frugality represents the maximization of this concept;
Longevity refers to the ability of a material to endure its lifecycle [103]. In the context of this paper, longevity is not limited to materials but also refers to the concept of products being useful and functional for an extended period before they are discarded or replaced. This strategy is strongly connected to the sustainability strategy of consistency. The main difference to this strategy in the context of sufficiency lies in the focus on usability and functionality, whereas the consistency strategy aims for closed material flows;
Specificity relates to achieving renunciation and reduction through adaptation to special circumstances or needs. As this can lead to emotional attachment, resource cycles can be extended [100]. Consequently, specificity can ensure that the capacity for longevity is also realized.
Table 1 shows the eighteen SISS found in the literature review, each addressing one or more GISS. The SISS are separated into three levels: business model, production, and product.

3.3. Product-Specific Industrial Sufficiency Strategy

3.3.1. Frugality of Products

Frugal Design
Frugality means reduction. In a frugal design, this is reflected in terms of functions, material consumption, and cost. Frugal designs are characterized in particular by their limitation to the basic functionalities, which ensures a simple and user-friendly product [90,92]. This leads to a product design that is as minimalist as possible, which can reduce material consumption, volume, and weight [79]. Reducing the amount of material used and eliminating additional elements outside of basic functionality can also affect a product’s manufacturing costs; consequently, a frugal design can contribute to the production of functionally fulfilling products at affordable prices [91]. One example is Riversimple, a car manufacturer that is removing faddish elements from new models to focus on personal mobility [28].
Frugal Packaging
Frugality is also a key aspect of packaging and is becoming increasingly important in terms of sufficiency and sustainability. The European Commission has published a first draft for a new packaging regulation at the EU level in 2023 [95]. This frugality of packaging consequently leads to the avoidance of excess use of resources and, thus, contributes to sufficiency in the industry.
One practical approach to reduced packaging is to dispense with single-use packaging and switch to the use of reusable packaging/containers [81]. The used packaging is sorted by the providers after use, cleaned, and returned to the manufacturers for reuse [81]. One example in this context is Terracycle’s “Loop” initiative in the food container sector. This initiative aims to reuse packaging and reduce the need for single-use packaging [81].
Reuse options, lower material consumption, and the use of service providers not only reduce waste but can also reduce the environmental impact of transportation [94].
Frugal packaging can lead to the overlap between the sustainability strategies of consistency and sufficiency.

3.3.2. Longevity of Products

Product Quality
According to common standards, the concept of quality encompasses the ability of objects to fulfill the required function and performance and includes the value and benefit to the customer [104]. Based on this understanding, product quality is one of the key elements in making products more durable [28]. Consequently, improved product quality incentivizes slower product replacement and ensures that products need to be replaced less frequently [73,81]. Higher quality can be achieved through high-quality raw materials, better product design, or taking greater care during production [86,97]. The increase in care during production can result from highly qualified personnel or a modern IT infrastructure [97].
In addition to extending the potential life of products through the measures described above, it is essential to avoid planned obsolescence, i.e., the deliberate implementation of service life restrictions to increase the frequency of purchases, in order to extend the product lifecycle [28]. One example in this context is the furniture manufacturer Vitsœ, whose aim is to produce durable, expandable, and repairable products without planned obsolescence [28].
Repairability
Besides the improvement of product quality and the associated avoidance of planned obsolescence, the repairability of products can promote their longevity [98]. This provides consumers with the ability to have components that negatively impact the functionality of the product repaired without having to replace the entire product [28]. By developing repairable products (e.g., through modular design) which is strongly connected to consistency strategies, manufacturers can thus reduce the demand for new products and their consumption, thereby contributing to sufficiency, especially for the manufacturing company [10]. To implement the reparability of products, the use of instructions on the provider’s website or special smartphone apps can be considered to enable customers to make guided use of this reparability [99]. In addition to Vitsœ, which focuses on repairability in the furniture sector, Patagonia offers repair services in the outdoor clothing sector [28]. Further details on services are described in Section 3.5.2.

3.3.3. Specificity of Products

Personalized Products
One way to strengthen the bond between consumer and product is to customize the product to the customer’s wants and needs. It is assumed that the personalized appearance of a product can extend and multiply lifecycles through emotional attachment [100]. In general terms, this approach means that through the exchange between producer and user, products can be manufactured whose look are tailored to the wants of the consumer. Through this customization, consumers are more inclined to lengthen the longevity of a product, which can contribute to the avoidance of new consumption. Overemphasis on trends, for example in terms of color design, should be avoided [73]. The use of specific designs, therefore, forces a reduction in the purchase frequency of new products by allowing the user to identify with the product and fulfill the intended use for as long as possible. VAUDE, a manufacturer of outdoor clothing, is one of the companies consciously taking this into account [73].
Specific Design
Besides the individual appearance of personalized products, the specific adaptation of a product’s functionalities to customer needs can increase the product’s lifetime. This is due to the fact that the personalized function can contribute to a higher utility value and an increased emotional loyalty [57]. The focus lies on the specificity and durability of products. Specific designs contribute to all aspects of sufficiency: longevity, specificity, and frugality.
Luxury Goods
Another aspect that implicitly results from increased product quality and an increased emotional bond between the consumer and the product is the use of luxury goods. At first glance, this aspect appears to contradict sustainable, sufficient measures as the term “luxury” is associated with prestige, which goes beyond the satisfaction of necessary needs; however, such products can represent a sustainable solution through longer use due to the higher emotional value if new consumption is foregone [28]. Luxury goods are often specific to customer needs. In the clothing sector, for example, this approach is used by the company Brunello Cucinelli [28]. High-quality products are not automatically synonymous with a higher environmental impact in production, use, and disposal so the combination of emotional attachment and increased product quality can reduce the frequency of new purchases [28].

3.4. Production-Specific Industrial Sufficiency Strategy

3.4.1. Frugality in Production

Energy Consumption
While the use of renewable energies in the manufacturing process is part of the consistency area, there is also the possibility of establishing sufficiency measures. To understand the characteristics of sufficiency in production, it is helpful to consider a sufficiency economy. In such an economy, the aim is to consume only enough energy to enable a modest but sufficient standard of living [78]. When abstracted to the production of a company, this means that energy consumption is reduced to the minimal consumption necessity for the manufacturing of products. The focus here is on avoidance and reduction in all phases of the product lifecycle and, thus, also in production [79]. In the field of information technology, care can be taken when using software to ensure that the data collected and transmitted are reduced or limited to the transmissions required to ensure functionality [10]. This goes hand-in-hand with the energy required for use, which should also be taken into account when using energy-saving modes, for example as seen in [10]. When it comes to avoiding energy consumption in the company, it is also important to raise employee awareness as their involvement can be an important part of the reduction process [81].
Usage of Small Devices
Using other products in production that provide the same benefits but are smaller or have fewer features is also a form of sufficiency [26]. Smaller devices (e.g., laptops instead of desktop computers) often have a lower environmental impact as they require fewer material resources and less energy to manufacture and operate [10]. The use of smaller devices in production can, therefore, also be a starting point for sufficiency. A limitation to this is that the smaller device must always fulfill all functions of the originally used device. Rebound effects caused by the usage of more devices or shorter lifespans can reduce the positive impact.

3.4.2. Longevity of Production

Usage of High-Quality Production Equipment
Sufficiency in production is primarily aimed at reducing or avoiding the consumption of resources [2]. Resource losses in production are avoidable resource inputs that need to be reduced. A distinction can be made between yield losses, energy losses, and tooling losses, with the energy aspect already discussed in the previous section [84]. Sub-optimal utilization of materials in production leads to an increased proportion of waste and, thus, loss of yield [84]. The wear and tear of the tools used in production also represent a loss of resources as the tools have to be changed and replaced more frequently in order to produce the products to the specified quality [84]. These types of losses can be reduced or eliminated by using high-quality production equipment. Consequently, the production equipment should be selected and designed in such a way that the resources employed to manufacture the respective products are used with as little waste as possible. A higher quality of the production equipment can enable a longer service life while at the same time fulfilling its function; this means that it has to be replaced less frequently, which can lead to an avoidance and reduction in procurement of new production equipment [84]. The use of high-quality production equipment in the production context described above involves an overlap between the sustainability strategies of efficiency and sufficiency.

3.4.3. Specificity of Production

Local Production
Local production refers to the process of establishing shorter and less geographically dispersed value chains [85]. This can have two effects.
On the one hand, local production can reduce the consumption of energy and resources in the value chain caused by transportation and the associated production (e.g., packaging) [78]. At the same time, it reduces the number of suppliers as long-term relationships can be maintained with them, creating a bond between the players along the value chain through local business relationships, which can also bring non-monetary benefits [86]. The use of local resources can, therefore, be a component in the avoidance and reduction in resource consumption [87].
Furthermore, local production and the associated local embedding can contribute to a long-term and emotional relationship with consumers by supporting the regional economy [62]. By purchasing locally produced products, we can avoid the increased use of resources that would occur if we purchased products from other production conditions. Although the local market reduces the range of offers, it has aspects of frugality as well.

3.5. Business-Model-Specific Industrial Sufficiency Strategy

3.5.1. Frugal Business Models

Frugal Range of Offers
Frugal business models are mainly used in resource-constrained or low-income markets [1]. The core aspect here is the consideration of customer needs, which are to be satisfied by the products and services offered at the lowest possible cost in order to enable consumption in these markets [1,26]. The range of products and services is, therefore, designed in such a way that the focus is on the production of frugal products that address the basic functions and needs of problem solving, which are reduced to the essentials without losing value for the customer. In addition to the resource-limited necessity of frugal business models, the approaches of the model can also contribute to a reduction in material and energy consumption in other markets outside of emerging countries [1]. What is relevant here is the focus on the necessary needs of a market, which can lead to sustainable business model innovation [1,26].
Integration of Services
The integration of service represents a business model innovation that supplements or transforms the existing value proposition by offering services [28]. Existing equipment is used to satisfy customers’ needs, promoting additional functionalities through services. Implementations of this approach are already widespread in the areas of mobility, sport and leisure, gardening, and offices [26].
This “as-a-service” approach can be extended to other industries. The prerequisite is that access is given to a product that does not necessarily have to be owned in order to satisfy a need [52]. Providers can extend their existing business model into the area of paid services (servitization), while at the same time reducing the need for customers to consume their own material resources. As a result, the demand for new products is reduced, which can contribute to the avoidance and reduction in using resources [51]. One example of this is the manufacturer of office copiers Kyocera. Kyocera’s business model does not focus on the physical product but on providing a service package that helps customers to save energy and paper [52]. This business model contributes to the specificity as it can integrate individual customer needs.
Sharing
Sharing promotes the joint use of products by several customers without acquisition or ownership, and it is often mentioned in consistency contexts as well [28,52]. The business model aims to reduce consumer demand for new products, while at the same time, enabling access to the use of required needs and strengthening customer loyalty [57]. As it reduces the number of potential buyers, it contributes to the sufficient longevity of products as it makes higher quality products more affordable and repairs economic. Car-sharing services such as “Share Now” are a popular example in this context.

3.5.2. Longevity Business Models

Repair Services
The repair service business model aims to extend product lifespans through repair and maintenance services to promote sufficiency in consumption and minimize environmental impact through reduced resource consumption and waste. This reduction in waste makes it a part of the consistency strategy as well. This approach comprises two main strategies: the direct provision of repair and maintenance services by the company; and the facilitation of self-repairs by the customer through the provision of instructions and resources [26,62]. The direct involvement of the customer in the repair process promotes a deeper understanding and appreciation of the products and strengthens the customer relationship. This business model requires close cooperation between design, production, and customer service to ensure that the products and services meet the requirements of reparability and sustainability. This business model contradicts the principle of psychological or economic obsolescence as it makes buying new products less attractive and, therefore, is a sufficiency strategy. As a practical example, Patagonia supports this approach through a repair website in cooperation with iFixit. Customers have access to information on how to repair selected products themselves, prolonging their use [28].
Remanufacturing/Upgrades
The approach of remanufacturing describes the systematic reprocessing of products that have already been used. This can address the integration of a new technology into an existing product or the integration of the core into another product so that a new product is created [65]. The flexibility of the remanufacturing approach makes it possible to apply it even to complex technical systems such as, e.g., engines that are remanufactured and offered with modern technology at a lower price than comparable new products [65,66]. This offers ecological as well as economic advantages. Existing products and product families can also be improved in function and performance through upgrades and adapted to the current needs of customers [67,68]. The approach promotes a circular economy, contributing to the consistency strategy, by maximizing the reuse of products and materials, which helps reduce waste and make more efficient use of resources. For companies, this opens up the opportunity to expand the established business model and open up additional revenue streams by upgrading these products in the form of a service or by providing the required parts, while reducing the possibilities to sell new products [69]. The establishment of such a business model requires the use of long-lasting products, which requires a shift in product development toward a modular design that allows for easy disassembly, maintenance, and replacement of components [65]. The commercial vehicle manufacturer MAN, for example, offers an eco-line series of overhauled engines, which can have an extended lifecycle with new and repaired components [70].
Promotion/Support of Used Goods
The creation of markets for used goods as part of the business model also serves to reduce and avoid waste and unused assets [28]. Consumers are motivated to buy used, functional products that are sold at a lower cost than comparable new goods [73]. This concept is already widely used in the clothing sector, where, e.g., “Jyoti Fair Works” resold returned clothing as second-hand goods [2]. The ability of products to be offered as reusable goods is related to the design of products, as explained in Section 3.3.2. Thus, appropriate design of product quality and avoidance of planned obsolescence are the basis for such a business model [28]. This creates an incentive for product owners to take better care of their products to ensure a higher resale value. The durability of products can, thus, be increased. The same as repair and remanufacturing, the promotion of used goods is also part of the consistency strategy, while reducing the market for new products and, therefore, being part of ISZ.
To create such markets, public platforms as well as proprietary platforms for buying and selling used products can be used [28,72]. Sustainable entrepreneurship start-ups are increasingly contributing to the establishment and popularization of these multiple-use and reuse markets [72]. Overall, the business model around used goods promotes an economy that prioritizes both economic and environmental sustainability.

3.5.3. Specific Business Models

Premium Business Models
For sufficiency-oriented companies, the introduction of a premium business model can be another starting point for sustainable business practices [1]. The use of such models is already widespread in various branches of industry and has been described several times in the literature [28,57,77]. Premium business models focus on the production of high-quality products and the development of services that are sold at a higher price than mass-produced goods. The production of premium products is, therefore, part of a premium business model (see also Section 3.3.3). In addition to the cost of production, premium pricing models also allow the manufacturer to take into account the externalities of slower consumption through longer shelf-life, life extension, and repair support [57,77]. Thus, a higher price per unit can compensate for the lower sales volume [26]. These premium pricing models represent a sustainable option as long as the products are valued by consumers and, thus, the increased longevity is also exploited [28]. In order not to artificially shorten consumption cycles, it is advisable to refrain from discount promotions [28]. This can be achieved through the lack of volume discounts or the refusal to participate in consumer campaigns such as Black Friday (VAUDE, Patagonia) [73]. Therefore, premium business models can contribute to the reduction and prevention of new consumption by combining the cost-effective production of high-quality products with the simultaneous retention of consumers for these products.

3.6. Challenges for Sufficiency

Sufficiency strategies are considered niche strategies, especially in relation to efficiency strategies, when it comes to sustainable corporate management [64]. The question, therefore, arises as to what barriers and challenges the SISS in industrial companies face that make practical implementation difficult. In the following section, three literature-based challenges and barriers to practical implementation are discussed from the company’s perspective, some are interlinked. The list of challenges is not in order of priority as they may vary in severity from industry to industry.

3.6.1. Interactions Between Individual Measures and Strategies

Even if the SISS in Section 3 are presented in different categories and levels, they must be viewed as in holistic interaction with each other. This applies within sufficiency as well as with regard to the interactions between the sustainability strategies of efficiency, consistency, and sufficiency [64]. To achieve optimum effectiveness in terms of a company’s sustainable management, the right balance of selected measures from various SISS at different company levels must be integrated into a coherent business model. The challenge for the management of companies is to combine the appropriate building blocks of sufficiency, considering target harmony, target neutrality, and target conflict, and to incorporate them into the appropriate, economically viable business model in the respective industry. At this point, the necessary management impetus to actively drive sustainable change in the organization is often lacking so practical implementation cannot take place to a sufficient extent [53]. Possible reasons for this lack of impetus could be a lack of knowledge or the contradictions to capitalist growth ideologies discussed in point two [53].

3.6.2. Contradiction to the Ideology of Growth

While efficiency strategies in an industrial environment can be combined with the characteristics of a capitalist-oriented economy in terms of increasing profitability, sufficiency strategies are characterized by contrasting characteristics such as avoidance and frugality [64]. Especially in large corporations, the focus is on short-term maximization of shareholder value; therefore, long-term, sustainable approaches have a lower priority and are less important from the management’s point of view in the corporate context. Thus, it might be difficult to justify a change in orientation toward the integration of sufficiency measures to shareholders [28]. The focus on sufficiency is, therefore, often at odds with current business models and goes hand-in-hand with concerns about risking competitive disadvantages and a loss of sales in competitive markets [28]. At the same time, some SISS in the area of ISZ can be directly related to increasing profitability, such as the reduction and avoidance of packaging and the associated reduction in costs [86]. The influence of a possible improvement in reputation through the implementation of sufficiency strategies paired with appropriate communication to consumers can also have a positive impact on demand and sales [1]. Sufficiency is, therefore, not necessarily at odds with profit-oriented growth strategies but can broaden the perspective and reshape and complement existing business models. Further research quantifying the macroeconomic effects of sufficiency-oriented business practices is still pending.

3.6.3. Customer Behavior Patterns

To operate in a sufficiency-oriented manner from a company’s perspective, there must be a corresponding demand from consumers for the services offered by the company. Consumers are willing to change their behavior patterns if the benefit for them increases at an individual level, whereby the term benefit includes monetary factors as well as time, habit, freedom, and comfort aspects [64]. However, since sufficiency measures promote sustainability at regional and global levels, changing consumer behavior patterns primarily increases the benefit of the general public and not directly the benefit of the individual [64]. The various benefit factors must be determined at an individual level and considered when designing the company’s performance. A corresponding design of the value proposition and communication with customers through marketing, which clarifies the respective individual benefits, is essential [28].

3.7. Framework for ISZ Implementation: Sufficiency Circle

Figure 4 shows the categorization of the found SISS. On the left side are the superordinate aspects of corporate strategy and the ecosystem. These aspects must be considered for all measures. The ring sections show the placement of the SISS described in Section 3.4, Section 3.5 and Section 3.6. to the GISS. The longest segment of the ring sections of each SISS shows that they primarily belong to the corresponding GISS. The length of the overlap does not provide any indication of the actual proportions within the GISS. The inner ring shows SISS concerning products, the middle ring concerning production, and the outer ring concerning business models. Each SISS is shown in a ring section covering one or multiple sufficiency strategies.

4. Conclusions

Due to the ecological challenges and the transgression of planetary boundaries, an improvement in sustainability within the industrial context is necessary. The aim of this paper was to structure and summarize the application of the sufficiency strategy in the industrial context. Three research questions were posed. First, industrial sufficiency was initially defined as a strategy that, based on socio-ecological values, defines what is “enough” for industrial processes to keep up to a socio-ecologically acceptable level, emphasizing the importance of rationalizing resource use and fulfilling basic human needs. This is distinct from societal and individual sufficiency. Second, a literature review showed currently relevant strategies that were summarized and structured into three generic industrial sufficiency strategies derived from the literature. The developed results identified a total of 18 specific industrial sufficiency strategies across three levels: business model, production, and product. Seven specific industrial sufficiency strategies were found for the product and business model, four were found for production. The target of the specific industrial sufficiency strategies vary in a broad range, many have overlapping aspects with other sustainability strategies, such as the efficiency of consistency. Finally, the challenges for industrial sufficiency were discussed. The contradiction to the growth ideologies, the interconnections between the measures, and the importance of sociological changes were mentioned.
Some limitations must be taken into account when considering this publication and the used methods, e.g., the PRISMA method. One limitation is the restricted sources used for the literature review. The search focused on the scientific literature and only in specific industries; consequently, some relevant articles might be excluded. Another limitation is the reduced search string. To limit the effort to a manageable amount, some articles may not have been found considering this search string. Additionally, the challenging differentiation of the different sustainability strategies could be criticized as some specific industrial sufficiency strategies could be easily connected to the sustainability strategies of efficiency or consistency. The mentality underlying industrial sufficiency is repeatedly found in other sustainability strategies; however, the socio-ecological aspect and the stronger behavior-related aspects make it particularly relevant for sustainability. Nevertheless, this inherent fuzziness necessitates a holistic approach to sustainability strategies. It would be advisable to integrate industrial sufficiency into existing sustainability models for the industry and to develop it as an equivalent and heavily interconnected option.
The presented collection of specific industrial sufficiency strategies is not exhaustive, further strategies should be included. A sectoral specification of industrial sufficiency strategies will improve its applicability. Industrial sufficiency, as considered in this paper, is the area of sustainability that is most challenging to reconcile with a company’s current product, production, and business model strategies. Nevertheless, industrial companies should engage with industrial sufficiency as part of their sustainability strategy. This means investing in education and knowledge-building to integrate savings in this area into the corporate strategy.
Further research is required on the economically satisfying implementation of sufficiency measures and the impact of industrial sufficiency on the strategy of growth, leading to possible alternative forms of implementation. Since the concept of industrial sufficiency in this paper is largely based on theoretical frameworks, a validation of the impact of sufficiency on sustainability metrics should be conducted using real-world data. Simultaneously, the application and the challenges arising from a case study should be described. Policymakers should promote these real-world applications of industrial sufficiency to form strategies integrating it into national strategies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.S.; methodology, P.S. and A.B.; Investigation, A.B.; writing—original draft preparation, M.I., P.S. and A.B.; writing—review and editing, P.S., M.I., F.M. and R.M.; visualization, P.S.; project administration, P.S.; Supervision: R.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of this study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Bocken, N.; Short, S.W.; Rana, P.; Evans, S. A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 65, 42–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Heinrich, A.; Müller-Christ, G. Unternehmen kommunizieren Suffizienz—Beispiele aus der Praxis für die Förderung eines genügsamen Konsums. In Nachhaltiger Konsum: Best Practices aus Wissenschaft, Unternehmenspraxis, Gesellschaft, Verwaltung und Politik; Wellbrock, W., Ludin, D., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany; Imprint Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2021; pp. 185–207. ISBN 9783658333539. [Google Scholar]
  3. Richardson, K.; Steffen, W.; Lucht, W.; Bendtsen, J.; Cornell, S.E.; Donges, J.F.; Drüke, M.; Fetzer, I.; Bala, G.; von Bloh, W.; et al. Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9, eadh2458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Global Carbon Project. Entwicklung des Weltweiten CO2-Ausstoßes in den Jahren 1995 bis 2021 (in Millionen Tonnen): (Graph); Statista: Hamburg, Germany, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  5. Crippa, M.; Guizzardi, D.; Schaaf, E.; Monforti-Ferrario, F.; Quadrelli, R.; Risquez Martin, A.; Rossi, S.; Vignati, E.; Muntean, M.; Brandao De Melo, J.; et al. GHG Emissions of All World Countries 2023; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Panjaitan, T.W.S.; Dargusch, P.; Wadley, D.; Aziz, A.A. A study of management decisions to adopt emission reduction measures in heavy industry in an emerging economy. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Daly, H. Economics for a Full World. Available online: https://greattransition.org/publication/economics-for-a-full-world (accessed on 2 May 2024).
  8. European Comission. The European Green Deal. Available online: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en (accessed on 27 June 2024).
  9. Huber, J. Nachhaltige Entwicklung durch Suffizienz, Effizienz und Konsistenz. In Nachhaltigkeit in Naturwissenschaftlicher und Sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive; Fritz, P., Huber, J., Levi, H.W., Eds.; Hirzel/Wissenschaftliche Vertragsgesellschaft: Stuttgart, Germany, 1995; pp. 31–46. ISBN 3804713939. [Google Scholar]
  10. Santarius, T.; Bieser, J.C.T.; Frick, V.; Höjer, M.; Gossen, M.; Hilty, L.M.; Kern, E.; Pohl, J.; Rohde, F.; Lange, S. Digital sufficiency: Conceptual considerations for ICTs on a finite planet. Ann. Telecommun. 2022, 78, 277–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Speck, O.; Möller, M.; Grießhammer, R.; Speck, T. Biological Concepts as a Source of Inspiration for Efficiency, Consistency, and Sufficiency. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Schaltegger, S.; Bennett, M.; Burritt, R.L.; Jasch, C. Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) as a Support for Cleaner Production. In Environmental Management Accounting for Cleaner Production; Schaltegger, S., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 3–26. ISBN 978-1-4020-8912-1. [Google Scholar]
  13. Waltersmann, L.; Kiemel, S.; Bogdanov, I.; Lettgen, J.; Miehe, R.; Sauer, A.; Mandel, J. Benchmarking Holistic Optimization Potentials in the manufacturing Industry—A Concept to Derive Specific Sustainability Recommendations for Companies. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 39, 685–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. McDonough, W.; Braungart, M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, 1st ed.; North Point Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002; ISBN 9781429973847. [Google Scholar]
  15. Miehe, R.; Stender, S.; Hessberger, N.; Mandel, J.; Sauer, A. Improving manufacturing systems with regard to the concept of ultra-efficiency. In Advances in Manufacturing Technology XXXI; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 321–326. [Google Scholar]
  16. von Hauff, M. Sustainable Development in Economics. In Sustainability Science: An Introduction; Heinrichs, H., Martens, W.J.M., Michelsen, G., Wiek, A., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands; Heidelberg, Germany; New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2016; pp. 99–107. ISBN 978-94-017-7241-9. [Google Scholar]
  17. Berkhout, P.H.G.; Muskens, J.C.; Velthuijsen, J.W. Defining the rebound effect. Energy Policy 2000, 28, 425–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Greening, L.A.; Greene, D.L.; Difiglio, C. Energy efficiency and consumption—The rebound effect—A survey. Energy Policy 2000, 28, 389–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sorrell, S.; Dimitropoulos, J. The rebound effect: Microeconomic definitions, limitations and extensions. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 636–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Nertinger, S. Carbon and Material Flow Cost Accounting: Ein Integrierter Ansatz im Kontext Nachhaltigen Erfolgs und Wirtschaftens, 1st ed.; Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014; ISBN 978-3-658-08129-4. [Google Scholar]
  21. Howarth, R. Towards an operational sustainability criterion. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 656–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ayres, R.U.; Ayres, L.W. A Handbook of Industrial Ecology; Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 2002; ISBN 1840645067. [Google Scholar]
  23. Brinken, J.; Trojahn, S.; Behrendt, F. Sufficiency, Consistency, and Efficiency as a Base for Systemizing Sustainability Measures in Food Supply Chains. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Georgescu-Roegen, N. The Entropy Law and the Economic Process in Retrospekt; IÖW: Berlin, Germany, 1987; ISBN 3926930012. [Google Scholar]
  25. Allwood, J.M. Squaring the Circular Economy. In Handbook of Recycling, 1st ed.; Worrell, E., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Safari: Boston, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 445–477. ISBN 9780123964595. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kirsch, T.; Steinmeier, F. Suffizienz unterstützen als Geschäftsmodell. In Nachhaltiger Konsum: Best Practices aus Wissenschaft, Unternehmenspraxis, Gesellschaft, Verwaltung und Politik; Wellbrock, W., Ludin, D., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany; Imprint Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2021; pp. 209–234. ISBN 9783658333539. [Google Scholar]
  27. Wiedmann, T.; Lenzen, M.; Keyßer, L.T.; Steinberger, J.K. Scientists’ warning on affluence. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 3107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Bocken, N.; Short, S.W. Towards a sufficiency-driven business model: Experiences and opportunities. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2016, 18, 41–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lorek, S.; Fuchs, D. Why only strong sustainable consumption governance will make a difference. In A Research Agenda for Sustainable Consumption Governance; Mont, O., Ed.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2019; pp. 19–34. ISBN 9781788117814. [Google Scholar]
  30. Sachs, W. Die vier E’s: Merkposten für einen maß-vollen Wirtschaftsstil. Politische Ökologie 1993, 11, 69–72. [Google Scholar]
  31. Baumgartner, R.J.; Rauter, R. Strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop a sustainable organization. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Niessen, L.; Bocken, N.M. How can businesses drive sufficiency? The business for sufficiency framework. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 28, 1090–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Griese, K.-M.; Halstrup, D. Umsetzung einer suffizienzorientierten Unternehmenskommunikation und die Bedeutung der Stakeholder: Ansätze und Empfehlungen. uwf 2013, 21, 59–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Heyen, D.A.; Fischer, C.; Barth, R.; Brunn, C.; Grießhammer, R.; Keimeyer, F.; Wolff, F. Mehr als nur Weniger: Suffizienz: Notwendigkeit und Optionen Politischer Gestaltung; Öko-Institut: Freiburg, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ulrich, P.; Hill, W. Wissenschaftstheoretische Grundlagen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre (Teil l). Z. Für Ausbild. Und Hochschulkontakt 1976, 5, 204–309. [Google Scholar]
  36. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Tilly, N.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Degirmenci, K.; Paz, A. How sustainable is electric vehicle adoption? Insights from a PRISMA review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024, 117, 105950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Waltersmann, L.; Kiemel, S.; Stuhlsatz, J.; Sauer, A.; Miehe, R. Artificial Intelligence Applications for Increasing Resource Efficiency in Manufacturing Companies—A Comprehensive Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Miehe, R.; Buckreus, L.; Kiemel, S.; Sauer, A.; Bauernhansl, T. A Conceptual Framework for Biointelligent Production—Calling for Systemic Life Cycle Thinking in Cellular Units. Clean Technol. 2021, 3, 844–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2016, 106, 213–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gaspard, A.; Chateau, L.; Laruelle, C.; Lafitte, B.; Léonardon, P.; Minier, Q.; Motamedi, K.; Ougier, L.; Pineau, A.; Thiriot, S. Introducing sufficiency in the building sector in net-zero scenarios for France. Energy Build. 2023, 278, 112590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Toulouse, E.; Le Du, M.; Gorge, H.; Semal, L. Stimulating energy sufficiency: Barriers and opportunities. In Proceedings of the ECEE Summer Study Proceedings, Hyeres, France, 29 May–3 June 2017; pp. 59–68. [Google Scholar]
  43. Mimkes, J. Introduction to macro-econophysics and finance. Contin. Mech. Thermodyn. 2012, 24, 731–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen. Suffizienz als “Strategie des Genug”: Eine Einladung zur Diskussion: Diskussionspapier; Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen (SRU): Berlin, Germany, 2024; ISBN 978-3-947370-27-6. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lars-Arvid Brischke. Sufficiency. Available online: https://www.ifeu.de/en/topics/energy/sufficiency (accessed on 27 June 2024).
  46. Norgaard, R.B. Development Betrayed: The End of Progress and a Coevolutionary Revisioning of the Future; Reprinted, digital printing; Routledge: London, UK, 2009; ISBN 0415068622. [Google Scholar]
  47. Beaucaire, K.; Saey-Volckrick, J.; Tremblay-Pepin, S. Integration of approaches to social metabolism into democratic economic planning models. Stud. Political Econ. 2023, 104, 73–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fischer-Kowalski, M.; Mayer, A.; Schaffartzik, A. Zur sozialmetabolischen Transformation von Gesellschaft und Soziologie. In Handbuch Umweltsoziologie, 1st ed.; Groß, M., Ed.; VS Verlag: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2011; pp. 97–120. ISBN 978-3-531-17429-7. [Google Scholar]
  49. Bauer, J. Industrielle Ökologie: Theoretische Annäherung an ein Konzept Nachhaltiger Produktionsweisen. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  50. Dillerup, R.; Stoi, R. Unternehmensführung; Vahlen: Berlin, Germany, 2013; ISBN 3800645939. [Google Scholar]
  51. Bocken, N.; Morales, L.S.; Lehner, M. Sufficiency Business Strategies in the Food Industry—The Case of Oatly. Sustainability 2020, 12, 824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Spangenberg, J.; Alcott, B.; Kiss, V.; Coote, A.; Reichel, A.; Lorek, S.; Mathai, M.V.; Mastini, R.; Rijnhout, L. Sufficiency: Moving Beyond the Gospel of Eco-Efficiency (Report by Friends of the Earth Europe); Friends of the Earth Europe: Brussels, Belgium, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  53. Luthra, S.; Mangla, S.K.; Xu, L.; Diabat, A. Using AHP to evaluate barriers in adopting sustainable consumption and production initiatives in a supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 181, 342–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mont, O.; Bleischwitz, R. Sustainable consumption and resource management in the light of life cycle thinking. Eur. Environ. 2007, 17, 59–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Reiche, A.; Seeberg, B. The Ecological Allowance of Enterprise: An Absolute Measure of Corporate Environmental Performance, its Implications for Strategy, and a Small Case. J. Environ. Sustain. 2011, 1, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wells, P. Degrowth and techno-business model innovation: The case of Riversimple. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 197, 1704–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bocken, N. Kreislaufwirtschaft: Langsam ist das Neue Schnell: Mit Suffizienz zum Erfolg? Wie das Prinzip des “Genug” als Businessmodell Funktioniert; Zukunftsinstitut GmbH: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2018; Volume 2018. [Google Scholar]
  58. Bocken, N. Business-led sustainable consumption initiatives: Impacts and lessons learned. J. Manag. Dev. 2017, 36, 81–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Campbell-Johnston, K.; Calisto Friant, M.; Thapa, K.; Lakerveld, D.; Vermeulen, W.J. How circular is your tyre: Experiences with extended producer responsibility from a circular economy perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Pu, R.; Li, X.; Chen, P. Sustainable development and sharing economy: A bibliometric analysis. Probl. Perspect. Manag. 2021, 19, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Schmidt, K.; Matthies, E. Where to start fighting the food waste problem? Identifying most promising entry points for intervention programs to reduce household food waste and overconsumption of food. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 139, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Khmara, Y.; Kronenberg, J. Degrowth in business: An oxymoron or a viable business model for sustainability? J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 177, 721–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Bauwens, T.; Hekkert, M.; Kirchherr, J. Circular futures: What Will They Look Like? Ecol. Econ. 2020, 175, 106703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Stengel, O. Suffizienz: Die Konsumgesellschaft in der Ökologischen Krise; Oekom Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2011; ISBN 9783865813855. [Google Scholar]
  65. Jing, X.D.; Xu, B.S.; Zhang, G.Q. Architecture of Remanufacturing Systematic Engineering. Adv. Mater. Res. 2011, 314–316, 2197–2204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Koop, C.; Grosse Erdmann, J.; Koller, J.; Döpper, F. Circular Business Models for Remanufacturing in the Electric Bicycle Industry. Front. Sustain. 2021, 2, 785036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Brissaud, D.; Zwolinski, P. The Scientific Challenges for a Sustainable Consumption and Production Scenario: The Circular Reuse of Materials for the Upgrading and Repurposing of Components. Procedia CIRP 2017, 61, 663–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ali, M.I.M.; Choe, P. Independent User Circular Behaviors and Their Motivators and Barriers: A Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Garcia-Ortega, B.; Galan-Cubillo, J.; Llorens-Montes, F.J.; de-Miguel-Molina, B. Sufficient consumption as a missing link toward sustainability: The case of fast fashion. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 399, 136678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Christian Buck. Good for the Environment—And a Booming Busienss. Available online: https://www.man.eu/corporate/en/experience/good-for-the-environment-and-a-booming-business-122752.html (accessed on 24 April 2024).
  71. Singhry, H.B. An Extended Model of Sustainable Development from Sustainable Sourcing to Sustainable Reverse Logistics: A Supply Chain Perspective. Int. J. Supply Chain. Manag. 2015, 4, 115–125. [Google Scholar]
  72. Bocken, N.M. Sustainable consumption through new business models—The role of sustainable entrepreneurship. In Sustainable Entrepreneurship; Routledge: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  73. Gossen, M.; Kropfeld, M.I. “Choose nature. Buy less.” Exploring sufficiency-oriented marketing and consumption practices in the outdoor industry. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 30, 720–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Lou, X.; Chi, T.; Janke, J.; Desch, G. How Do Perceived Value and Risk Affect Purchase Intention toward Second-Hand Luxury Goods? An Empirical Study of U.S. Consumers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Shao, J.; Taisch, M.; Mier, M.O. A Proposal of Consumer Driven Framework for Enabling Sustainable Production and Consumption. In Proceedings of the IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems, Ajaccio, France, 20–24 September 2014; Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014; pp. 406–414. [Google Scholar]
  76. Watkins, L.; Aitken, R.; Mather, D. Conscientious consumers: A relationship between moral foundations, political orientation and sustainable consumption. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Gossen, M.; Ziesemer, F.; Schrader, U. Why and How Commercial Marketing Should Promote Sufficient Consumption: A Systematic Literature Review. J. Macromarketing 2019, 39, 252–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Alexander, S. The Sufficiency Economy: Envisioning a Prosperous Way Down; Sustainable Growth (Topic); SRPN: 2012. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Sufficiency-Economy%3A-Envisioning-a-Prosperous-Alexander/4684824e560b7bfe6b71585b7dc7529fdf06acf0 (accessed on 7 November 2024).
  79. Laurenti, R.; Sinha, R.; Singh, J.; Frostell, B. Towards Addressing Unintended Environmental Consequences: A Planning Framework. Sust. Dev. 2016, 24, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Santarius, T. Investigating meso-economic rebound effects: Production-side effects and feedback loops between the micro and macro level. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 406–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Bocken, N.M.; Short, S.W. Transforming business models: Towards a sufficiency-based circular economy. In Handbook of the Circular Economy; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2020; pp. 250–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Heikkurinen, P.; Young, C.W.; Morgan, E. Business for sustainable change: Extending eco-efficiency and eco-sufficiency strategies to consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 218, 656–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Veleva, V. The role of entrepreneurs in advancing sustainable lifestyles: Challenges, impacts, and future opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 283, 124658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Leder, K. Green and Lean: Wie Lean Management nachhaltigen Konsum in Unternehmen fördert—Am Beispiel der Verpackungsindustrie. In Nachhaltiger Konsum: Best Practices aus Wissenschaft, Unternehmenspraxis, Gesellschaft, Verwaltung und Politik; Wellbrock, W., Ludin, D., Eds.; Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany; Imprint Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2021; pp. 375–392. ISBN 9783658333539. [Google Scholar]
  85. Freudenreich, B.; Schaltegger, S. Developing sufficiency-oriented offerings for clothing users: Business approaches to support consumption reduction. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 247, 119589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Casadesus-Masanell, R.; Crooke, M.; Reinhardt, F.; Vasishth, V. Households’ Willingness to Pay for “Green” Goods: Evidence from Patagonia’s Introduction of Organic Cotton Sportswear. J. Econ. Manag. Strategy 2009, 18, 203–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Stoppa, M. Biomimetic and sustainable design: A virtuous relationship. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 175, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Blomsma, F.; Tennant, M. Circular economy: Preserving materials or products? Introducing the Resource States framework. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 156, 104698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Trummer, P.; Ammerer, G.; Scherz, M. Sustainable Consumption and Production in the Extraction and Processing of Raw Materials—Measures Sets for Achieving SDG Target 12.2. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Weyrauch, T.; Herstatt, C. What is frugal innovation? Three defining criteria. J. Frugal Innov. 2017, 2, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Khan, R. How Frugal Innovation Promotes Social Sustainability. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Marchand, A.; Walker, S. Product development and responsible consumption: Designing alternatives for sustainable lifestyles. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1163–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Gossen, M.; Heinrich, A. Encouraging consumption reduction: Findings of a qualitative study with clothing companies on sufficiency-promoting communication. Clean. Responsible Consum. 2021, 3, 100028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Dangelico, R.M.; Vocalelli, D. “Green Marketing”: An analysis of definitions, strategy steps, and tools through a systematic review of the literature. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 165, 1263–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Europäisches Parlament. Vorschlag für Eine Verordnung des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates über Verpackungen und Verpackungsabfälle, zur Änderung der Verordnung (EU) 2019/1020 und der Richtlinie (EU) 2019/904 Sowie zur Aufhebung der Richtlinie 94/62/EG; European Parliament: Strasbourg, France, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  96. Aschemann-Witzel, J.; Randers, L.; Pedersen, S. Retail or consumer responsibility?—Reflections on food waste and food prices among deal-prone consumers and market actors. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2022, 32, 1513–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kropfeld, M.I.; Reichel, A. The Business Model of Enough: Value Creation for Sufficiency-Oriented Businesses. In Business Models for Sustainability Transitions: How Organisations Contribute to Societal Transformation; Aagaard, A., Lüdeke-Freund, F., Wells, P., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 163–189. ISBN 978-3-030-77579-7. [Google Scholar]
  98. Kristoffersen, E.; Blomsma, F.; Mikalef, P.; Li, J. The smart circular economy: A digital-enabled circular strategies framework for manufacturing companies. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 120, 241–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Goworek, H.; Fisher, T.; Cooper, T.; Woodward, S.; Hiller, A. The sustainable clothing market: An evaluation of potential strategies for UK retailers. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2012, 40, 935–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Liedtke, C.; Buhl, J.; Ameli, N. Microfoundations for Sustainable Growth with Eco-Intelligent Product Service-Arrangements. Sustainability 2013, 5, 1141–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sun, J.J.; Bellezza, S.; Paharia, N. Buy Less, Buy Luxury: Understanding and Overcoming Product Durability Neglect for Sustainable Consumption. J. Mark. 2021, 85, 28–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. von Janda, S.; Kuester, S.; Schuhmacher, M.C.; Shainesh, G. What frugal products are and why they matter: A cross-national multi-method study. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 246, 118977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Mesa, J.A. Developing a material selection index based on circularity: A multiple lifecycle approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 199, 107240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. ISO 9000:2015; DIN EN ISO 9000:2015 Qualitätsmanagementsysteme—Grundlagen und Begriffe. DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung: Berlin, Germany, 2015.
Figure 1. Procedure of the literature review based on the PRISMA approach. The number of relevant full texts is highlighted in bold.
Figure 1. Procedure of the literature review based on the PRISMA approach. The number of relevant full texts is highlighted in bold.
Sustainability 16 11121 g001
Figure 2. Adapted economic circuit for ISZ based on Quesnay and Irving Fisher as shown by Mimkes [43].
Figure 2. Adapted economic circuit for ISZ based on Quesnay and Irving Fisher as shown by Mimkes [43].
Sustainability 16 11121 g002
Figure 3. Integrating the concept of industrial sufficiency as part of the holistic strategy for staying within planetary boundaries based on German Advisory Council on the environmental depiction of sustainability strategies [44].
Figure 3. Integrating the concept of industrial sufficiency as part of the holistic strategy for staying within planetary boundaries based on German Advisory Council on the environmental depiction of sustainability strategies [44].
Sustainability 16 11121 g003
Figure 4. Sufficiency circle as a framework for ISZ implementation with SISS.
Figure 4. Sufficiency circle as a framework for ISZ implementation with SISS.
Sustainability 16 11121 g004
Table 1. Categorization of SISS into three GISS, frugality, longevity, and specificity, applied to three levels—product, production, and business model—with the related sources from the PRISMA method.
Table 1. Categorization of SISS into three GISS, frugality, longevity, and specificity, applied to three levels—product, production, and business model—with the related sources from the PRISMA method.
FrugalityLongevitySpecificitySource
Business ModelFrugal Range of OffersX X[1,26]
Integration of ServicesX X[1,28,51,52,53,54,55,56]
SharingXX [11,28,33,52,55,56,57,58,59,60,61]
Repair Services X [26,28,62,63,64]
Remanufacturing/Upgrades X [65,66,67,68,69,70,71]
Promotion/Support of Used GoodsXX [2,28,32,72,73,74,75,76]
Premium Business Models XX[1,28,57,73,77]
ProductionEnergy ConsumptionX [10,78,79,80,81,82,83]
Usage of Small DevicesX [10,26]
Usage of High-Quality Equipment X [84]
Local ProductionX X[33,63,78,85,86,87,88,89]
ProductFrugal DesignX [79,90,91,92,93]
Frugal PackagingX [81,94,95,96]
Product Quality X [32,64,73,81,83,86,97]
RepairabilityXXX[28,55,63,93,98,99]
Personalized Products XX[32,73,100]
Specific DesignXXX[57]
Luxury Goods XX[28,97,101]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Schmidhäuser, P.; Inhofer, M.; Buchholz, A.; Mais, F.; Miehe, R. Industrial Sufficiency: A Conceptual Methodological Framework. Sustainability 2024, 16, 11121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411121

AMA Style

Schmidhäuser P, Inhofer M, Buchholz A, Mais F, Miehe R. Industrial Sufficiency: A Conceptual Methodological Framework. Sustainability. 2024; 16(24):11121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411121

Chicago/Turabian Style

Schmidhäuser, Paul, Max Inhofer, Annika Buchholz, Franziska Mais, and Robert Miehe. 2024. "Industrial Sufficiency: A Conceptual Methodological Framework" Sustainability 16, no. 24: 11121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411121

APA Style

Schmidhäuser, P., Inhofer, M., Buchholz, A., Mais, F., & Miehe, R. (2024). Industrial Sufficiency: A Conceptual Methodological Framework. Sustainability, 16(24), 11121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411121

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop