90
M. Aurisicchio et al.
volatile and creating uncertainties in resource markets (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Importantly it is increasingly acknowledged that if we do not intervene
now to preserve our material resources, we risk compromising the ability of future
generations to source and use materials to address their manufacturing needs.
At present, consumption is predominantly based on one-off payments made by
consumers to own products and dispose of them at the end of use. Despite the present
recycling infrastructure aiming to close resource loops, acquisition and recovery of
products and materials is poor. Disposed products largely end up in landfills because
either the infrastructure for recovery does not exist or is not suitable for many types of
products; and because not all consumers are willing or able to access the infrastructure
(Steg and Vlek 2008). The products and materials that are intercepted for recovery
are generally cascaded to lower level applications as the collected streams remain
contaminated. This is due both to the way products are designed (Mestre and Cooper
2017; Bocken et al. 2016) and the ability to revalorise material resources, which
is limited by sorting and separating technologies, material properties and material
recovery technologies.
To transition to an economy that is circular, products can be designed in conjunction with use and result oriented services to offer value to consumers, while efficiently
using fewer resources. These product-service systems (PSSs) offer consumers access
to products, while ownership of the products remains with or returns to producers
(Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Rather than paying to obtain ownership of
products, consumers are charged for the time spent with products as they ‘pay per
use’. A notable application is the ‘Pay-per-lux’ intelligent lighting service introduced by Philips (Rau and Oberhuber 2016). In this product-service system, Philips
retain control over the products that they produce enabling better maintenance,
reconditioning and recovery. The producer, therefore, is incentivised to increase
its control over resources that are consumed to deliver the performance of resources
and dematerialise the performance where possible. Increased control over the flow
of resources offers two main opportunities for the circular management of materials. First, producers would be expected to design products according to circular
design principles (Mestre and Cooper 2017), e.g. easier to disassemble, sort, identify
and separate. This improves the ability to produce pure or purifiable resource flows.
Second, centralised ownership of products encourages to develop product-specific
recycling infrastructure and activities. This permits companies to reduce the risk of
contamination of the collected resources and optimise the recovery and reuse of products, components, and possibly materials. Despite the opportunities to flow materials
continuously using this model, the resources in these models will eventually become
obsolete and producers still have to dispose of them (Zink and Geyer 2018). The
issue of whether resources are revalorised and returned to materials suppliers to
function as a continuous feedstock remains dependent on the response of producers
to obsolescence; and the roles to be fulfilled by collectors, recovers and recyclers.
This paper introduces preliminary research to investigate the concept of offering
materials, not products, as a service. Material-service systems (MSSs) are positioned as new business models for the circular economy where material suppliers
shift from the selling of material resources to the provision of material services.
M. Aurisicchio et al.
volatile and creating uncertainties in resource markets (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Importantly it is increasingly acknowledged that if we do not intervene
now to preserve our material resources, we risk compromising the ability of future
generations to source and use materials to address their manufacturing needs.
At present, consumption is predominantly based on one-off payments made by
consumers to own products and dispose of them at the end of use. Despite the present
recycling infrastructure aiming to close resource loops, acquisition and recovery of
products and materials is poor. Disposed products largely end up in landfills because
either the infrastructure for recovery does not exist or is not suitable for many types of
products; and because not all consumers are willing or able to access the infrastructure
(Steg and Vlek 2008). The products and materials that are intercepted for recovery
are generally cascaded to lower level applications as the collected streams remain
contaminated. This is due both to the way products are designed (Mestre and Cooper
2017; Bocken et al. 2016) and the ability to revalorise material resources, which
is limited by sorting and separating technologies, material properties and material
recovery technologies.
To transition to an economy that is circular, products can be designed in conjunction with use and result oriented services to offer value to consumers, while efficiently
using fewer resources. These product-service systems (PSSs) offer consumers access
to products, while ownership of the products remains with or returns to producers
(Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Rather than paying to obtain ownership of
products, consumers are charged for the time spent with products as they ‘pay per
use’. A notable application is the ‘Pay-per-lux’ intelligent lighting service introduced by Philips (Rau and Oberhuber 2016). In this product-service system, Philips
retain control over the products that they produce enabling better maintenance,
reconditioning and recovery. The producer, therefore, is incentivised to increase
its control over resources that are consumed to deliver the performance of resources
and dematerialise the performance where possible. Increased control over the flow
of resources offers two main opportunities for the circular management of materials. First, producers would be expected to design products according to circular
design principles (Mestre and Cooper 2017), e.g. easier to disassemble, sort, identify
and separate. This improves the ability to produce pure or purifiable resource flows.
Second, centralised ownership of products encourages to develop product-specific
recycling infrastructure and activities. This permits companies to reduce the risk of
contamination of the collected resources and optimise the recovery and reuse of products, components, and possibly materials. Despite the opportunities to flow materials
continuously using this model, the resources in these models will eventually become
obsolete and producers still have to dispose of them (Zink and Geyer 2018). The
issue of whether resources are revalorised and returned to materials suppliers to
function as a continuous feedstock remains dependent on the response of producers
to obsolescence; and the roles to be fulfilled by collectors, recovers and recyclers.
This paper introduces preliminary research to investigate the concept of offering
materials, not products, as a service. Material-service systems (MSSs) are positioned as new business models for the circular economy where material suppliers
shift from the selling of material resources to the provision of material services.