liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Lean and green product development: two sides of the same coin?
Jonköping University, Sweden; Malardalen University, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Manufacturing Engineering. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2552-3636
2014 (English)In: Journal of Cleaner Production, ISSN 0959-6526, E-ISSN 1879-1786, Vol. 85, 104-121 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper compares and contrasts the lean product development (LPD) and green product development (GPD) concepts through a systematic literature review including 102 journal publications. The review resulted in 14 findings that were organised according to four dimensions: general, process, people and tools/techniques. A number of similarities between the concepts were found. For example, implementation of both concepts calls for a systems perspective where the dimensions of process-people-tools/techniques are linked holistically. Differences between the LPD and GPD concepts lie in: their goal and focus, value construct, process structure, performance metrics, and tools/techniques used. The findings do not unambiguously support that "green thinking is thinking lean" and consequently it cannot be argued that LPD and GPD are two sides of the same coin, meaning that LPD automatically leads to greener products or that GPD ensures improvements and efficiency in the product development process. However, it is reasonable to conclude that LPD and GPD belong to the same "currency". That is, the concepts share a number of similarities that indicate a synergistic relationship. This synergistic relationship has been accentuated by a nine propositions where the potential for cross-field learning is shown.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier , 2014. Vol. 85, 104-121 p.
Keyword [en]
Lean; Green; Sustainable; Product development; Product design; Literature review
National Category
Mechanical Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-113494DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.005ISI: 000346551500010OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-113494DiVA: diva2:781952
Available from: 2015-01-19 Created: 2015-01-19 Last updated: 2017-12-05

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(998 kB)559 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 998 kBChecksum SHA-512
60da8b4d865cfacbb3b740be7bf36f0adf1ed945915bb2b7291118809496f1a2a40bf6982d4357316bc0d9e53bdf904d63bad11c371997e3aafe4d3f051e5b30
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Sundin, Erik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sundin, Erik
By organisation
Manufacturing EngineeringThe Institute of Technology
In the same journal
Journal of Cleaner Production
Mechanical Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 559 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 317 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf