Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T19:34:59.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

M. Kravchenko*
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
D. C. A. Pigosso
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
T. C. McAloone
DTU-Technical University of Denmark, Denmark


Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Early integration of sustainability considerations into decision making is seen as a key enabler for companies to understand the potential implications of their decisions on the triple bottom line aspects. Lack of the tools to support decisions when trade-off between sustainability aspects occur, however, may lead to uninformed decision-making and undesired outcomes. By consolidating the learnings from empirical work together with literature recommendations, we propose key criteria to be considered when developing decision support tools to manage sustainability-related trade-off situations.

Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (, which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press


Amaral, J.V. and Guerreiro, R. (2014), “Knowledge and Assessment of Logistics Cost Trade-offs : a Study with Brazilian Professionals”, Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, Vol. 25 No. 65, pp. 111123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, D.N. and Larsen, P.B. (2013), “Survey of Parabens”, Danish Ministry of the Environment, pp. 158.Google Scholar
Arena, M., Azzone, G. and Conte, A. (2013), “A streamlined LCA framework to support early decision making in vehicle development”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 41, pp. 105113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, C. et al. (2012), “Rethinking eco-design priorities; The case of the Econova television”, Electronics Goes Green 2012+, ECG 2012 - Joint International Conference and Exhibition, Proceedings.Google Scholar
Bengtsson, M. (2001), “Weighting in practice: Implications for the use of life-cycle assessment in decision making”, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 4760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björklund, M. and Forslund, H. (2019), “Challenges addressed by swedish third-party logistics providers conducting sustainable logistics business cases”, Sustainability (Switzerland), Vol. 11 No. 9, available at: Scholar
Blessing, L. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009), “DRM: A Design Research Methodology”, Springer London, No. September, pp. 1342.Google Scholar
Bovea, M.D. and Pérez-Belis, V. (2012), “A taxonomy of ecodesign tools for integrating environmental requirements into the product design process”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 6171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, G. and Tennant, M. (2018), “Sustainable value and trade-offs: Exploring situational logics and power relations in a UK brewery's malt supply network business model”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 621630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byggeth, S. and Hochschorner, E. (2006), “Handling trade-offs in Ecodesign tools for sustainable product development and procurement”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14 No. 15-16, pp. 14201430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driessen, P.H. and Hillebrand, B. (2013), “Integrating multiple stakeholder issues in new product development: An exploration”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 364379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eakin, H. et al. (2009), “Hidden costs and disparate uncertainties: trade-offs in approaches to climate policy”, In: Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I. and O'Brien, K.L. (Eds.), Adapting to Climate Change. Thresholds, Values, Governance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 501.Google Scholar
EC (2019), “Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs”, European Commission, available at: (accessed 11 November 2019).Google Scholar
Fontes, J. et al. (2016), “Product social impact assessment”, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, pp. 547555.Google Scholar
Gagnon, B., Leduc, R. and Savard, L. (2012), “From a conventional to a sustainable engineering design process: Different shades of sustainability”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 4974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, R.B. et al. (2005), Sustainability Assessment: Criteria, Processes and Applications, Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
Haffar, M. and Searcy, C. (2017), “Classification of Trade-offs Encountered in the Practice of Corporate Sustainability”, Journal of Business Ethics, Springer Netherlands, Vol. 140 No. 3, pp. 495522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, T. et al. (2010), “Editorial Trade-Offs in Corporate Sustainability: You Can't Have Your Cake and Eat It”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 217229.Google Scholar
Hallstedt, S.I. (2017), “Sustainability criteria and sustainability compliance index for decision support in product development”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 140, pp. 251266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J.S. and Keeney, R.L. (1999), “Making smart choices in engineering”, IEEE Spectrum, IEEE, Vol. 36 No. 11, pp. 7176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, D. and Watson, A. (2008), “Exploring the dilemma of local sourcing versus international development - The case of the flower industry”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 318329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogmartens, R. et al. (2014), “Bridging the gap between LCA, LCC and CBA as sustainability assessment tools”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, available at: Scholar
ISO 14044 (n.d.), Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines.Google Scholar
de Koeijer, B., de Lange, J. and Wever, R. (2017), “Desired, perceived, and achieved sustainability: Trade-offs in strategic and operational packaging development”, Sustainability (Switzerland), Vol. 9 No. 10, p. 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A. and Seppälä, J. (2018), “Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations”, Ecological Economics, available at: Scholar
KPMG International. (2014), “Future State 2030: The global megatrends shaping governments”, pp. 180.Google Scholar
Kravchenko, M., Pigosso, D.C.A. and McAloone, T.C. (2019), “Towards the ex-ante sustainability screening of Circular Economy initiatives in manufacturing companies : consolidation of leading”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, p. 118318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Magalhães, R.F., de Danilevicz, Â.M.F. and Palazzo, J. (2019), “Managing trade-offs in complex scenarios: A decision-making tool for sustainability projects”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 212, pp. 447460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAloone, T.C. (1998), Industry Experiences of Environmentally Conscious Design Integration: An Exploratory Study, Industry Experiences of Environmentally Conscious Design Integration: An Exploratory Study, Cranfield University.Google Scholar
McAloone, T.C. and Pigosso, D.C.A. (2018), “Ecodesign Implementation and LCA”, In: Hauschild, M.Z., Rosenbaum, R.K. and Olsen, S.I. (Eds.), Life Cycle Assessment: Theory and Practice, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 545576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison-Saunders, A. and Pope, J. (2013), “Conceptualising and managing trade-offs in sustainability assessment”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Elsevier Inc., Vol. 38, pp. 5463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prendeville, S.M. et al. (2017), “Uncovering ecodesign dilemmas: A path to business model innovation”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 143, pp. 13271339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Retief, F. et al. (2013), “Exploring the psychology of trade-off decision-making in environmental impact assessment”, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siew, T.F. (2008), “Connecting science and decision-making: A conceptual framework through organisation knowledge management”, Proc. IEMSs 4th Biennial Meeting - Int. Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software: Integrating Sciences and Information Technology for Environmental Assessment and Decision Making, IEMSs 2008, Vol. 2, pp. 913924.Google Scholar
Simonovic, S.P., Burn, D.H. and Lence, B.J. (1997), “Practical sustainability criteria for decision-making”, International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 231244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stindt, D. (2017), “A generic planning approach for sustainable supply chain management - How to integrate concepts and methods to address the issues of sustainability?”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 153, pp. 146163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taticchi, P. et al. (2015), “A review of decision-support tools and performance measurement and sustainable supply chain management”, International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis, Vol. 53 No. 21, pp. 64736494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waas, T. et al. (2014), “Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development”, Sustainability (Switzerland), Vol. 6 No. 9, pp. 55125534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watz, M. and Hallstedt, S.I. (2018), “Sustainability in Product Requirements”, Submitted to the 15th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 18-24 May 2018, No. 2017, pp. 14051416.Google Scholar
Wu, Z. and Pagell, M. (2011), “Balancing priorities: Decision-making in sustainable supply chain management”, Journal of Operations Management, Elsevier B.V., Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 577590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zetterlund, H., Hallstedt, S. and Broman, G. (2016), “Implementation Potential of Sustainability-oriented Decision Support in Product Development”, Procedia CIRP, The Author(s), Vol. 50, pp. 287292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar