Most products require a redesign to be viable in a circular economy. For instance, by implementing design for disassembly, remanufacturing, recyclability, and using long-lived components. Typically, different solutions can be chosen to improve a products' circularity, and different strategies can be aimed at keeping the product, its components, and materials in the loop. When developing products for a circular economy, designers and manufacturers want to assess their solutions and choose between alternatives early in the design process. This paper describes the Circularity Calculator, a tool that has been developed to help designers assess the potential resource circularity and value capture of products in the first design stages. The tool provides quantitative indicators that help determine whether and which circular strategies are potentially viable for the company. This paper discusses the methodology behind the Circularity Calculator, which uses four KPIs that have been developed for assessment; a Circularity indicator, Value Capture indicator, Recycled Content indicator and a Reuse Index. We will explain how the dashboard interface is used to model a linear and circular product system which can be compared on its economic potential. The tool is illustrated with an example concerning the analysis of a household blender.@en

By combining the lessons learned from the four ResCoM industrial cases, a generic methodology was developed for other companies that want to engage in the development of multiple-lifecycle products. This report describes a stepwise approach for developing such products. The approach includes a suite of design tools as well as a practical case study example to illustrate the implementation in practice.@en

The Circular Pathfinder tool, which provides guidance to companies looking for appropriate circular design strategies, was developed based on OEM (original equipment manufacturer) case studies. Ease of use was one of the main requirements during development of the tool, resulting in a software-based guide that asks a maximum of ten product-related questions, after which it gives a recommendation for one or more specific circular design strategies. The advantage of a practice-based tool is that the practical relevance is, in all likelihood, high. The disadvantage, however, is the lack of scientific validation. This paper presents a literature review of the decision variables and heuristics of the Circular Pathfinder, with the aim to uncover any discrepancies between practice and literature. The main finding is that the focus on practical usefulness of the tool has led to excessive reduction of the complexity inherent in strategic circular design decisions. Recommendations for improving the Circular Pathfinder tool are given.@en

The transition within business from a linear to a circular economy brings with it a range of practical challenges for companies. The following question is addressed: What are the product design and business model strategies for
companies that want to move to a circular economy model? This paper develops a framework of strategies to guide designers and business strategists in the move from a linear to a circular economy. Building on Stahel, the terminology
of slowing, closing, and narrowing resource loops is introduced. A list of product design strategies, business model strategies, and examples for key decision-makers in businesses is introduced, to facilitate the move to a circular economy. This framework also opens up a future research agenda for the circular economy.
@en

In the field of sustainable product design, the use of nature-inspired design (NID) strategies such as biomimicry and cradle to cradle has become more widespread, resulting in a variety of nature-inspired products. Research so far has studied NID on the basis of individual, key design cases and student projects. This paper assesses the state of NID at nine companies that have applied either biomimicry or cradle to cradle in product design. NID comes to the forefront as a promising but challenging new design paradigm. Analysis of best practice reveals that companies that applied a top-down approach, invested in training and/or external NID-experts, set positive and ambitious design targets, and included value chain partners early on in their projects were generally successful in removing barriers towards project success.@en