Sustainable production

Abstract

Sustainable production can be defined as a means of producing goods and services that, at every stage of the production cycle and the life cycle of a product (sourcing, product design, method of production, confectioning, distribution and disposal) take into account ecological and social aspects to a higher extent than the existing or conventionally used methods of producing a given type of good or service. It is a holistic approach to the process of creating products throughout their life cycle, with a main focus on reducing the negative impact on the environment, society and economy.

Sustainable production is related to an ecological point of view with the efficient use of energy sources and other resources (renewable energy, net positive water consumption), promoting a climate-neutral economy (reduction of carbon dioxide and other gas emissions), reduction of waste, a social point of view of promoting sustainable infrastructure, access to basic services, decent jobs, better quality of life, social reporting and eco-labelling, the economic point of view with the introduction of sustainable business practices, intelligent solutions and the use of artificial intelligence, certification.

Sustainable production also implies respect for the ethical aspects of the production process, included in the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR).

The use of production balancing patterns is helpful in the implementation of development plans, reduces environmental, social and economic costs, strengthens economic competitiveness and reduces poverty.

This chapter aims to present the essence of sustainable production and its actions and solutions to balance production against the background of the Sustainable Development Goals and the policy of the European Green Deal. In addition, the benefits and costs for enterprises from the implementation of this concept will be presented.

Full text

DOI: 10.4324/9781003379409-12
9 Sustainable production
Patrycja Zwiech
Introduction
The industry has been maximising production for the last two centuries to meet
the demand of the rising global population, improved standards of living and
growing urbanisation. The increasing maximisation of industrial production has
brought problems with a negative impact on human health and on the planet’s
well-being caused by air, soil and water pollution, the use of the planet’s re-
sources and the exacerbating climate change. Industrial production processes
involve major material and energy ows, thus there is an intense interaction
between businesses and their surrounding natural and social environment. The
economic system was (and sometimes still is) based on the linear model, which
meant a focus on creating, using and then disposing of all that was produced
because it was no longer useful.
A linear economy-based approach demonstrated as an extract-process-
consume-dispose economy, hit the natural and social environment hard. We had
to nd systems that would minimise the burning environmental issue. Environ-
mental protection thus began to focus in particular on the production process
with regard to the protection of water, air or soil. As more and more raw materi-
als and energy were used, the focus shifted more towards the aspect of human
input, to consider the resources used in the production process, towards how
they are fed in and used effectively. At this point, environmental protection got
integrated with production. However, despite achievements in limiting pollu-
tion, the actions taken did not lead to the elimination of environmental problems,
it merely “treated the symptoms”. Individual environmental areas were largely
discussed as detached from one another while environmental protection meas-
ures led to a change in environmental problems. The very focus on production
turned out to be too narrow a proposal to solve problems (Viles, et al., 2022).
It was then that more and more discussions started to be held on introduc-
ing sustainable production. The aim of this chapter is to present the essence of
sustainable production and the actions and measures exercised within it, which
lead to sustainable production.

Sustainable production 121
Sustainable production in the context of circular economy,
Industry 4.0 and lean production
The subject matter of sustainable production (and also sustainable consump-
tion) emerged in the international policy arena during the 1992 United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Today’s po-
litical framework of actions on sustainable production is based on the Johan-
nesburg Declaration adopted at the World Summit on Sustainable Development
in Johannesburg in 2002. The EU sustainable development strategy, revised in
2006, 2015, 2019 and 2020, recognised sustainable production (and also sustain-
able consumption) as one of the major challenges to tackle.
As early as in the 1970s, we started to search for solutions that would intro-
duce more sustainable products and processes. Initially, the focus was mainly
to limit the use of natural resources and to reuse and recycle used materials or
resources. Therefore, in the 1970s, policy-makers relied on the 3Rs Sustainable
Production strategies (reducing, reusing, recycling) (Viles, et al., 2022).
Another three Rs were added with time (recover, redesign, remanufacture),
which extended the scope of operation from 3Rs to 6Rs to achieve a more sustain-
able production (Joshi, et al., 2006). Different authors or groups assign different at-
tributes and meanings which implies divergent conceptualisations of this concept.
Today we hear more and more about having to apply a 9R-strategy or even a
10R-hierarchy (refuse, rethink, reduce, resell/reuse, repair, refurbish, remanu-
facture, repurpose, recycle (material), recover (energy)) (Khaw-ngern, et al.,
2021) as a way to achieve even more sustainable production. This concept is
presented in the context of a circular economy (Potting, et al., 2017). Therefore,
when discussing environmental and social aspects, commentators took into con-
sideration the entire product life cycle, from product development, to its produc-
tion and consumption, or possible repair, to recycling or disposal, and then to
waste management and reuse of secondary raw materials.
Circular economy was rst introduced in the 1970s as an alternative economic
model for replacing the traditional linear industrial economy (Khaw-ngern,
et al., 2021). The objective of the Circular Economy is “to maintain the val-
ues and manage stocks of assets from natural, cultural, human, manufactured
to nancial stocks” (Stahel & MacArthur, 2019). Circular economy has been
proposed as a very promising concept to guide the achievement of sustainabil-
ity (Betancourt Morales & Zartha Sossa, 2020; Viles, et al., 2022), especially
for manufacturers (Acerbi & Taisch, 2020; Viles, et al., 2022). In December
2015, the European Commission launched the Circular Economy Action Plan,
focusing in particular, on circular economy as its new mainstream sustainable
development framework. Fifty-four actions under this plan have been delivered
or are being implemented (European Commission, 2019). In addition, in Decem-
ber 2019, the European Commission adopted the “Green New Deal” challenge,
through an investment plan, which aims at an ecological transition model, where

122 Patrycja Zwiech
this transition is to be ecologically and socially fair. In March 2020, the sustaina-
ble development concept and the circular economy concept became the basis for
further documents adopted by the European Union: Environmental Technolo-
gies Action Plan [Eco-innovation Action Plan] (European Commission, 2020a),
and A New Circular Economy Action Plan for a Cleaner and More Competitive
Europe (European Commission, 2020b).
A signicant paradigm change of the 1990s made us address and analyse
the entire product life cycle. Circular economy’s fundamental contribution to
sustainable production is its innovative approach to a product life cycle which
brings about an increase in material circulation, that is, the relationship between
secondary raw materials derived from waste and used materials.
The 1990s marked a departure away from the linear model, towards a circular
economy in developed countries. This is why environmental protection attained
a global dimension and became an important economic factor. The environmen-
tal protection perspective extended greatly. Besides, environmental protection
began to be perceived not only as an expense that strikes at companies’ competi-
tiveness, but more as an investment. Sustainable production and competitiveness
stopped being perceived as contrary, opposing goals.
Industry 4.0 too introduced a new look at sustainable production. The central
idea of Industry 4.0 is to use emerging technologies so that all industrial pro-
cesses are integrated, thus making production exible, efcient and intelligent
with high quality and low cost (Machado, et al., 2019). De Sousa et al. (2018)
suggest that Industry 4.0 technologies will help the decision-making process
concerning sustainable operations management and the development of new
business models. Madhado et al. (2019) in turn, claim that the decision-making
for sustainable development is aided by methods used for modelling and simu-
lating the activities that occur throughout the product value chain. To sum up,
some technologies of Industry 4.0 may help achieve more sustainable produc-
tion through improvement of the circularity of a product or processes or through
trying to reduce resource consumption. Industry 4.0 could be considered as a
synergic environment essential to achieve holistic, integrated sustainability in
production systems (Ciliberto, et al., 2021).
Lean production, however, is an effective method of managing processes and
operations, which can also be used in the pursuit of sustainable production.
For example, lean tools may be used in the production environment (i.e., 5S,
value stream mapping, just-in-time) to make production more sustainable. This
is why 5S focuses primarily on labelling and organising material storage and
inventory management; it is able to quickly identify spills and dangerous leaks
and reduce air pollution (Bae & Kim, 2008; Francis & Thomas, 2020), VSM
lean tool is used to understand waste and value in production. Internal effects
of lean production that also contribute to the circular economy include brand
and reputation enhancement that maintain loyalty to new areas of the market
(Geldermann, et al., 2007).

Sustainable production 123
Circular economy, Industry 4.0, lean production and sustainable production
show a certain degree of complementariness towards one another.
The industry, at the moment, is facing a new paradigm which opts out of a
one-sided ecological perspective for the benet of a much stronger focus on the
social dimension, which in consequence leads to more sustainable production.
The turn of the 20th and 21st centuries was fundamentally modelled by the con-
cept of sustainable development.
One of the rst denitions of sustainable production, which pointed to aspects
that need a particular emphasis, was offered by the Lowell Center (1998). It was
dened as “the fabrication of goods and services by applying processes and
systems that are non-polluting, save energy and natural resources, are economi-
cally viable, safe and healthy for employees and consumers, and socially and
creatively benecial for all working people”. Sustainable production is simi-
larly dened by O’Brien (1999), Veleva & Ellenbecker (2001), Krajnc & Glavic
(2003), Hauschild, et al. (2005), Lebel & Lorek (2008) or Wiles & Watts (2014).
For example, Veleva and Ellenbecker (2001) claim that
sustainable production is dened as the development of products and ser-
vices by processes and procedures that are pollution free, energy and natural
resource efcient, economically viable, secure and safe for workers, com-
munities and consumers, and socially and creatively benecial to all the
stakeholders.
The principles of sustainable production encompass the ties between the envi-
ronmental, social, and economic frameworks within which the development and
consumption take place (Machado, et al., 2019). When we look at this denition
we see that it accommodates three equal areas: ecology, economy and society.
Elkington had already presented such an approach (1994, 1998a, 1998b), where
he encouraged companies to reconsider their value creation activities in a multi-
dimensional perspective, that integrates economic aspects with the environmen-
tal and social dimensions in an integrated framework called “triple bottom line”.
The concept of sustainable production is still evolving, changing the context
as new paradigms appear. However, despite universal recognition of having to
transition to more sustainable production and to take various relevant initiatives,
the global extraction of resources and increasing degradation of social and en-
vironmental resources are still growing. Besides, we should bear in mind the
choices we make today on building or upgrading production facilities will af-
fect the state of the environment for the next 20–40 years, triggering solutions
relating to more or less sustainable production. The investment cycles of objec-
tives last usually between 20 and 40 years, which means that the companies
are just one or at least two investment cycles away from half a century (Wyns,
et al., 2018). Investment taken up today may either subject humanity or future
generations to an unsustainable lifestyle with constantly growing use of natural

124 Patrycja Zwiech
resources or encourage the course towards sustainable production from the envi-
ronmental, economic and social angles.
Economic, environmental and social pillars of sustainable
production
Sustainable production covers three pillars of sustainability: economy, society
and environment. Politicians and economists seek a balance between costs and
economic, social and environmental benets using tools such as innovation, reg-
ulations and legal incentives (Porter & van der Linde, 1995a, 1995b), partner-
ship under civil law, dissemination of knowledge or creating infrastructure that
encourages sustainable production.
The economic and environmental pillars were described in the 2003 Kiev
Declaration as the need to “delink economic growth from environmental degra-
dation so as to promote both economic growth and environmental protection”.
From the environmental point of view, sustainable production refers to a sus-
tainable use of resources (raw materials, land, water, air, soil, landscape and
biodiversity) and sources of energy, promotion of climate-neutral economy (re-
duction of greenhouse gas emissions) and waste reduction.
The main aspect of sustainable production is the sustainable use of resources
and energy sources. Satisfaction of today’s material needs should not lead to
excessive extraction and degradation of these resources. A sustainable use of
resources in the long run requires that we take into account their availability,
ensuring supply chain security and protection of ecosystems. At the same time,
it is important to maintain the environment’s ability to absorb emissions and
pollution.
Waste reduction is equally important. Waste has a negative impact on the
environment by, for example, polluting air, soil or surface and ground waters.
Landlls take up large areas, thus changing the landscape, while wrong waste
management poses a threat to societies, especially public health. Moreover, the
waste generated also means a loss of stocks of raw materials. Waste reduction
at the company level forces situations where they will be using more recycled
materials and will develop and implement new production processes. Such an
activity focuses on a more sustainable acquisition of raw materials, on process-
ing one’s own waste and on correct product design and manufacturing. Com-
panies must also reduce the quantity of waste, reduce the content of dangerous
substances in waste and of their permeating the environment and also improve
the efciency of using waste as secondary raw materials.
Climate change is another major challenge that pushes us towards sustainable
development. Upon adoption and execution of the Kyoto Protocol, extensive
efforts were made to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases that are harmful
to the environment. Apart from having to introduce a circular process and re-
source efciency, we need to decarbonise production. Decarbonisation of heavy

Sustainable production 125
industry is a great challenge because decarbonisation of some material and
chemical processes, until this day, is an inseparable challenge. Decarbonisation
may be implemented in a number of ways, for example, by improving energy
efciency, increasing the use of low-emission electricity, using more recycled
materials, modifying existing processes to use, capture, utilise and store carbon
dioxide, identifying alternative heat sources for existing processes or through a
complete change of fuels (e.g. by direct or indirect electrication, biological raw
materials or hydrogen) (Bataille, et al., 2018; Davis, et al., 2018).
Therefore, from the environmental point of view a transition to a circular
economy, net-zero resource-efcient economy and achievement of net-zero-
greenhouse gas emissions are fundamental. To do so, it is vital to retain products,
components and materials in the economy for as long as possible and at the same
time eliminate waste on the one hand and, on the other hand, the need to use
primary resources (McCarthy, et al., 2018).
We must be aware that these priorities cause the emergence of other, new
priorities – on the one hand, there is a growing use of the planet’s resources, that
is, soil, water and raw materials and energy due to growing demand, and, on the
other hand, a valid need to reduce them. This results in a growing competition
for these resources between the industry (heavy industry in particular), agricul-
ture and the energy sector (OECD, 2017).
From an economic point of view, sustainable production refers to the intro-
duction and use of sustainable business practices, smart solutions and articial
intelligence.
A greater emphasis on resource efciency often leads to great savings and
thus to better nancial results. Actions intended to promote ecological product
life cycle through effective resource use, resource-efcient production technolo-
gies, innovations and increased consumer awareness as well as the demand for
environmentally friendly products turn out to improve competitiveness on the
one hand and to improve companies’ nancial situation on the other hand. An
ecological product life cycle requires sustainable initiatives at all stages of the
product life cycle, such as eco-design, eco-labelling, ecomanagement and audit
scheme (EMAS) or eco-innovations, which require that producers get involved.
Furthermore, an emphasis on sustainable production allows for new business
models to be created. For example, today we can see a greater number of com-
panies that offer energy services, which help other companies and public institu-
tions to become more energy efcient. Focussing on sustainable production may
turn out not to be a burden, but rather a new business opportunity.
Moreover, despite the fact that the literature on the economic returns of sus-
tainable production is already very rich, it still does not lead to any conclusive
evidence pertaining to its economic consequences (Antonioli, et al., 2022). It is
difcult to deny that circular economy transition for companies will always re-
quire costly changes, not only in physical capital (investments) but also in intan-
gibles (R&D activities) and in organisational changes (Antonioli, et al., 2022).

126 Patrycja Zwiech
Environmental economics has made great progress in integrating the eco-
nomic and environmental spheres. At the moment environmental issues are not
discussed in the context of costs that limit competitiveness. Economic and en-
vironmental goals are not seen as contrary or mutually-exclusive. On the other
hand, with regard to sustainable production, advancing sustainability directs
fuller attention to the social dimension. When it comes to manufacturing com-
panies, reports on the sustainability of their operations rarely include the social
dimension. Many companies produce corporate reports which identify environ-
mental practices and emphasise governance aspects but tend to overlook the role
of the employees or workforce (Schneider, 2008). Such an approach is reected
in the literature because studies show that investment in human and social capi-
tal may deliver important benets such as increased productivity, reduced costs,
more innovation, higher growth and competitiveness (Schneider, 2008).
This lack of proportionality between the pillars (economic and environmental
on the one hand and social on the other hand) results not only from a lower inter-
est on the part of the companies themselves but also from difculties in quanti-
cation. In the sustainable production dimension, social aspects include elements
that are difcult to measure, such as safeguarding generational and intergenera-
tional justice, supporting the protection of human rights within the company’s
sphere of inuence and promoting honesty, integrity and fairness in all aspects of
doing business, safeguarding gender equality, ensuring decent workplaces, pro-
moting positive employee treatment and contributing to employee health, safety,
dignity and satisfaction, a better quality of life, respect for collective bargaining
and interaction with local communities.
What is more, the social dimension is the most difcult to integrate. A com-
bination of the economic and environmental pillars from the point of view of
companies was much easier than incorporating social goals to the sustainability
process. However, only an extension of the economy and the environment as
components of the analysis of eco-innovation to include social aspects will allow
for a full understanding and the introduction of sustainable production.
We must realise that sustainable production brings both improvement and
problems in social questions. For example, the introduction of an energy transfor-
mation will mainly affect less economically-developed areas, which is addressed
in the 2015 International Labour Organization (ILO) guidelines on just transition
(ILO, 2015). Low-income areas and scarcely populated rural areas will be most
vulnerable to job losses as a result of automation and transition to low-emission
economy (Oxford Economics, 2019). Therefore, we will need to provide support
to those made redundant in the poorest countries to prevent poverty, aggravated
social inequality or problems associated with economic migration.
Despite the problems that accompany attempts to make production sustain-
able, the angle adopted is indispensable, necessary and right. Lauritzen (2008)
identies a few reasons why humanity must head in this direction, as we have no
other solutions at hand. The rst of them is the global population growth, which

Sustainable production 127
will entail growth of consumption. The next is the growth of income per capita
around the world. Growing incomes (which is naturally a good thing) will entail
further growth of consumption, use of energy or other resources and greater use
of the natural environment. A growing demand will also lead to higher prices
and will thus boost attractiveness of the development of energy-efcient and
resource-efcient ways to produce goods and services. Thirdly, growing con-
sumer awareness presents new challenges for companies regarding not only the
quality and price but also, increasingly, sustainable products.
Principles of sustainable production
In the light of the aspects and problems described above, we may nd the princi-
ples of sustainable production useful, which pave the way for companies or help
establish how they must adjust their production systems to be in line with princi-
ples of sustainable production and how to identify strategies helpful in a transition
to sustainable production. Veleva and Ellenbecker presented such Principles of
Sustainable Production at the beginning of the 21st century. They point out that:
• Products and packaging are designed to be safe and ecologically sound
throughout their life cycles; services are designed to be safe and ecologi-
cally sound.
• Wastes and ecologically incompatible by-products are continuously re-
duced, eliminated or recycled.
• Energy and materials are conserved, and the forms of energy and materials
used are most appropriate for the desired ends.
• Chemical substances, physical agents, technologies, and work practices
that present hazards to human health or the environment are continuously
reduced or eliminated.
• Workplaces are designed to minimise or eliminate physical, chemical, bio-
logical, and ergonomic hazards.
• Management is committed to an open, participatory process of continuous
evaluation and improvement, focused on the long-term economic perfor-
mance of the rm.
• Work is organised to conserve and enhance the efciency and creativity
of employees.
• The security and well-being of all employees are a priority, as is the con-
tinuous development of their talents and capacities.
• The communities around workplaces are respected and enhanced econom-
ically, socially, culturally and physically; equity and fairness are promoted.
(Veleva & Ellenbecker, 2001)
Nevertheless, these principles concerned a linear economy and did not take into
consideration principles of circular economy or solutions proposed in Industry

128 Patrycja Zwiech
4.0 or lean production schemes. In 2021, Viles et al. proposed rules that also
refer to the concept of circular economy and Industry 4.0. They identify the
following:
• Design for circularity. Design processes, products, and packing to con-
sume minimum natural resources and energy to sustain the ecosystem’s
regenerative capacities. Follow design for disassembly to allow –
if possible – for recycling, repairing, reconditioning, refurbishing or
remanufacturing.
• Conserve resources and preserve their value. Use natural resources and
energy that are appropriate for the desired sustainable goals. Preserve the
value of resources for as long as possible within production facilities (in-
ternal recirculation) and consider the concept of industrial symbiosis to
circulate resources (external recirculation).
• Manage waste sustainably. Emphasise waste-prevention activities by rein-
troducing resources within the intended ow. For resources that reach the
waste management stage, use the waste management hierarchy following
these strategies: reduce waste, then reuse and recycle, minimising all dis-
posal routes, including landlling and waste to energy.
• Pursue a risk-free environment. Reduce or eliminate chemical substances,
physical agents, and technologies that present a risk to the environment.
Reduce greenhouse gases emissions to reach net-zero emissions.
• Prioritise employees’ well-being. Embed employee safety and well-being
in the day-to-day work. Choose practices and workplaces that preserve the
physical, functional, and psychological comfort of employees.
• Enhance management’s commitment to sustainability. Establish an organi-
sational culture enabling high sustainability performance. Empower em-
ployees and develop their talents. Promote diversity, equity and inclusion
in the workplace.
• Make a positive contribution to the community. Contribute to better eco-
nomic, environmental, social, cultural, and physical outcomes of the com-
munities in which the company operates and in those where its decisions
can have an impact.
• Promote value chain stakeholder collaboration. Establish uid commu-
nication and collaboration with all the stakeholders of the value chain to
make processes and products more sustainable.
• Measure and optimise sustainable processes. Dene a set of “Key Perfor-
mance Indicators” to optimise production processes. Monitor short-term
and long-term sustainability performance of the production system by en-
couraging digitalisation.
• Boost the use of sustainable technologies. Improve existing technologies
with more sustainable alternatives, and provide information on both the
potential benets and risks of sustainable production. Consider the best

Sustainable production 129
available techniques; these techniques involve both the technology used
and the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of the installation.
(Viles, et al., 2022)
Summary
Sustainable development, as Goal 12 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable De-
velopment, was formulated as follows: ensuring sustainable consumption and
production patterns – it requires a systematic approach and cooperation of enti-
ties that participate in the entire supply chain. Achievement of the sustainable
production goal is constantly guided through global, regional and national poli-
cies, which encourage a transition to a circular economy with a more effective
use of resources and lesser pollution.
The rst part of this chapter describes how the concept of sustainable develop-
ment came about and what the links between sustainable production and circular
economy are, Industry 4.0 and lean production. The second part identies three
dimensions of sustainable production: the environmental, economic and social
realms. In the last part principles of sustainable production are presented.
Sustainable production may be considered a complex strategy that achieves
success only through the involvement of the entire supply chain. In this sense,
in order to promote sustainability, there is a need for a strong ability to identify
and pursue common and mutual benets for producers, suppliers, and customers
in an integrated and holistic way (Ciliberto, et al., 2021). This chapter refers to
sustainable production and is related to producers’ actions, but we must be aware
that the consumer is an equally important element in this process. This process
envisages educational or other projects for consumers which are intended to
raise their awareness about sustainable production and the related lifestyle by,
for example, carrying out information actions on product standards and labelling
or consumer involvement in public procurement.
References
Acerbi, F., & Taisch, M. (2020). A literature review on circular economy adoption in the
manufacturing sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.123086
Antonioli, D., Ghisetti, C., Mazzanti, M., & Nicolli, F. (2022). Sustainable production:
The economic returns of circular economy practices. Business Strategy and The Envi-
ronment, 31, 2603–2617. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3046.
Bae, J. W., & Kim, Y. W. (2008). Sustainable value on construction projects and lean con-
struction. Journal of Green Building, 3(1), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.3.1.156.
Bataille, C., Åhman, M., Neuhoff, K., Nilsson, L. J., Fischedick, M., Lechtenböhmer, S.,
Solano-Rodriquez, B., Denis-Ryan, A., Stiebert, S., Waisman, H., Sartor, O., & Rah-
bar, S. A. (2018). A review of technology and policy deep decarbonization pathway

130 Patrycja Zwiech
options for making energy-intensive industry production consistent with the Paris
Agreement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 960–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JCLEPRO.2018.03.107.
Betancourt Morales, C. M., & Zartha Sossa, J. W. (2020). Circular economy in Latin
America: A systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment,
29(6), 2479–2497. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2515.
Ciliberto, C., Szopik-Depczyńska, K., Tarczyńnska-Łuniewska, M., Ruggieri, A., & Iop-
polo, G. (2021). Enabling the circular economy transition: A sustainable lean man-
ufacturing recipe for Industry 4.0. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(7),
3255–3272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2801.
Davis, S. et al. (2018). Net-zero emissions energy systems. Science, 360(6396). http://doi.
org/10.1126/science.aas9793.
de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., Jabbour, C. J. C., Godinho Filho, M., & Roubaud, D. (2018).
Industry 4.0 and the circular economy: A proposed research agenda and original road-
map for sustainable operations. Annals of Operations Research, 270(1), 273–286.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2772-8.
Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strate-
gies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36, 90–100. https://
doi.org/10.2307/41165746.
Elkington, J. (1998a). Accounting for the triple bottom line. Measuring Business Excel-
lence, 2(3), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025539.
Elkington, J. (1998b). Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of
21st-century business. Environmental Quality Management, 8(1), 37–51. https://doi.
org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106.
European Commission. (2019). Report From The Commission To The European Parlia-
ment, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Commit-
tee Of The Regions On The Implementation Of The Circular Economy Action Plan.
European Commission.
European Commission. (2020a). Environmental Technologies Action Plan [Eco-
innovation Action Plan]. European Commission.
European Commission. (2020b). A New Circular Economy Action Plan for a Cleaner and
More Competitive Europe. European Commission.
Francis, A., & Thomas, A. (2020). Exploring the relationship between lean construction
and environmental sustainability: A review of existing literature to decipher broader
dimensions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.119913.
Geldermann, J., Treitz, M., & Rentz, O. (2007). Towards sustainable production net-
works. International Journal of Production Research, 45, 4207–4224. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00207540701440014.
Hauschild, M., Jeswiet, J., & Alting, L. (2005). From life cycle assessment to sustain-
able production: Status and perspectives. CIRP Annals, 54 (2), 1–21. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60017-1.
ILO. (2015). Guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally sustainable econo-
mies and societies for all. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---
emp_ent/documents/publication/wcms_432859.pdf.

Sustainable production 131
Joshi, K., Venkatachalam, A., & Jawahir, I. S. (2006). A new methodology for transform-
ing 3R concept into 6R concept for improved product sustainability. In Proceedings of
the IV Global Conference on Sustainable Product Development and Life Cycle Engi-
neering, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 3–6.
Khaw-ngern, K., Peuchthonglang, P., Klomkul, L., & Khaw-ngern, Ch. (2021). The
9Rs strategies for the circular economy 3.0. Psychology and Education, 58(1), 1440–
1446. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8e5c/34b5865c21a0544158cf5235a9bbb313
19c6.pdf
Krajnc, D., & Glavicˇ, P. (2003). Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Technologies
and Environmental Policy, 5, 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-003-0221-z.
Lauritzen, F. (2008). Sustainable production as industrial policy. In OECD Sustainable
Development Studies Measuring Sustainable Production. OECD Publishing, 19–22.
ISBN 978-92-64-04412-8.
Lebel, L., & Lorek, S. (2008). Enabling sustainable production-consumption systems.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33, 241–275. https://doi.org/10.1146/
ANNUREV.ENVIRON.33.022007.145734.
Lowell Center. (1998). Lowell Center for Sustainable Production. Sustainable Produc-
tion: A Working Denition. Informal Meeting of the Committee Members.
McCarthy, A., Dellink, R., & Bibas, R. (2018). The macroeconomics of the circular econ-
omy transition: A critical review of modelling approaches. OECD Environment Work-
ing Papers, No. 130, OCD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/af983f9a-en.
Machado, C. G., Winroth, M. P., & Ribeiro da Silva, E. H. D. (2019). Sustainable manu-
facturing in Industry 4.0: An emerging research agenda. International Journal of Pro-
duction Research, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1652777
O’Brien, Ch. (1999). Sustainable production – a new paradigm for a new millennium.
International Journal of Production Economics, 60(1), 1–7.
OECD. (2017). The Land-Water-Energy Nexus: Biophysical and Economic Conse-
quences. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264279360-en.
Oxford Economics. (2019). How Robots Change the World: What Automation Really
Means for Jobs and Productivity. Oxford Economics. http://resources.oxfordeconom-
ics.com/how-robotschange-the-world.
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995a). Green and competitive: Ending the Stalemate.
Harvard Business Review Reprint, 73, 120–134. http://kentlundgren.se/artiklar/veten-
skapliga/Porter_Linde_1995.pdf
Porter, M., & van der Linde, C. (1995b). Toward a new conception of the environment –
competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118. https://
doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.97.
Potting, J., Hekkert, M., Worrell, E., & Hanemaaijer, A. (2017). Circular Economy:
Measuring Innovation in the Product Chain. Policy Report. PBL Netherlands Environ-
mental Assessment Agency.
Schneider, R. (2008). Measuring social dimensions of sustainable production. In OECD
Sustainable Development Studies Measuring Sustainable Production. OECD Publish-
ing, 39–47. ISBN 978-92-64-04412-8.
Stahel, W. R., & MacArthur, E. (2019). The Circular Economy. A User’s Guide. Rout-
ledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429259203

132 Patrycja Zwiech
Veleva, V., & Ellenbecker, M. J. (2001). Indicators of sustainable production: Framework
and methodology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 9, 519–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0959-6526(01)00010-5.
Viles, E., Kalemkerian, F., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Antony, J., & Santos, J. (2022). Theoriz-
ing the principles of sustainable production in the context of circular economy and
industry 4.0. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 33, 1043–1058. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.08.024
Wiles, Ch., & Watts, P. (2014). Continuous process technology: A tool for sustainable
production. Green Chemistry, 16, 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3GC41797B.
Wyns, T., Robson, I., & Khnadekar, G. (2018). A Bridge Towards a Carbon Neutral
Europe. Institute for European Studies. https://www.ies.be/les/Industrial_Value_
Chain_25sept.pdf.