Investigating Business Potential and Users’ Acceptance of Circular Economy: A Survey and an Evaluation Model

Abstract

Circular economy is gaining attention in business and society to advance sustainability. This paradigm is particularly relevant for energy-consuming products such as washing machines, where alternatives to linear economy such as pay-per-use and refurbishment are gaining ground. To succeed, these business models should achieve consensus and acceptance among users. However, little attention has been paid to customers’ interest for circular economy business models so far. This paper aims to compare the economic and environmental impacts of pay-per wash and refurbishment business models, while investigating the degree of users’ acceptance and factors influencing it. A survey has been designed to collect users’ data regarding washing machine consumption patterns and acceptance rates of the circular business models. An evaluation model was developed to assess the economic and environmental impacts of pay-per-wash and refurbishment against a traditional linear model, fed with data from 279 Italian households collected through the survey. Finally, logistic regressions were carried out to investigate the influence of different customer, product, and usage factors on the acceptance rates of the two circular business models. Results show that, on average, pay-per-wash business models and washing machine refurbishment can guarantee environmental savings. However, only refurbishment generates economic savings for users. Moreover, only around half of the users’ sample shows a positive degree of acceptance of such alternatives. Respondent age has been found as a significant factor influencing the interest towards a refurbishment model, while the washing machine failures experienced by users and the relevance of the environmental gains achievable influence the acceptance rate of pay-per-wash models. Thus, when offering pay-per-wash schemes, suppliers should emphasize the information on the environmental benefits of this alternative, and that with such models they take over the responsibility and costs for maintenance and repair. On the other hand, providers of refurbished products should target younger consumers, who are less affected by a bias against second-hand goods.

Sustainability and Circular Economy Business Development

“…The adoption of CE has led to the development of new business models. Unlike the traditional linear economic models that primarily focus on sales transactions, CE encourages businesses to assess their pre-and post-production impacts [26]. This includes the effects of their business practices and products or services on the environment and communities served [27].…”

Factors behind the Consumer Acceptance of Sustainable Business Models in Pandemic Times

“…Based on a study of different schemes for reusable packaging and refilling options [32], it was found that finance-(the price of the first container and the refill), convenience-(difficulty of use, refilling, and technical parameters such as weight, compatibility, and hygiene), and belief-related factors (perceived environmental and financial benefits) influence consumer acceptance most. Similarly, functional benefits (durability, reliability, and ease of use and maintenance) are highlighted as acceptance factors of eco-design practices in the construction industry [33]. Based on a study by [12], the most important barriers to the acceptance of environmentally friendly packaging are the following: lack of knowledge and guidance (consumers consider it difficult to identify or understand what is environmentally beneficial) and lack of interest (negligible perceived financial and convenience benefits).…”

A Framework to Assess Manufacturers’ Circular Economy Readiness Level in Developing Countries: An Application Case in a Serbian Packaging Company

“…Refs. [41,42] proposed a model to assess the readiness of manufacturing companies for the CE paradigm at the micro-level, in this case also not focusing on developed countries and not emphasizing the lack of a regulatory framework and support of public authorities. Ref.…”