Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

From green product definitions and classifications to the Green Option Matrix
Rosa Maria Dangelico a, *, Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo b
a
Department of Mechanical and Management Engineering, Politecnico di Bari, Viale Japigia, 182-70126 Bari, Italy
b
Department of Environmental Engineering and Sustainable Development, Politecnico di Bari, Via Alcide De Gasperi, 74100 Taranto, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Hybrid cars, recycled products, photovoltaic cells, bioplastics: why so different products can be called
Received 20 November 2009 ‘green’? Which practices companies willing to develop green products should implement? How
Received in revised form companies can easily and effectively communicate to stakeholders the environmental features of their
28 May 2010
green products? This paper tries to answer these questions, by developing a Green Option Matrix (GOM),
Accepted 8 July 2010
Available online 16 July 2010
which characterizes green products and practices along different dimensions. This matrix is then used to
analyze the different features of green products as well as related green practices developed by a sample
of companies belonging to the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (DJSWI). Relevant data are collected
Keywords:
Green products
by means of content analysis of companies’ websites and sustainability reports. Green products and
Green practices practices developed by each company in the sample are positioned in the matrix and results are pre-
Green Option Matrix sented and discussed for each industrial sector. Then, different sectors’ behaviors are compared. The
Dow Jones Sustainability World Index proposed matrix can be used by companies as a market tool to analyze competitors’ green products and
practices and as a communication tool to effectively communicate to stakeholders the specific green
features of their products and practices.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to exploit climate-induced demand (such as hybrid cars). Therefore,

Nowadays, to become ‘green’ is both a need and an opportunity for
companies. The reasons that push firms to go ‘green’ can be very
different, such as legitimacy, competitiveness, and ecological
responsibility (e.g. Shrivastava and Hart, 1995; Bansal and Roth, 2000;
González-Benito and González-Benito, 2006; Murillo-Luna et al.,
2008). As a result, a growing number of companies are embracing
environmental sustainability into their strategies (Unruh and
Ettenson, 2010). In this context, the development of green products
is becoming more and more relevant. In fact, the Green Paper on
Integrated Product Policy (Commission of the European Communities,
2001) states that one way to achieve the target of sustainable devel-
opment is “a new growth paradigm and a higher quality of life through
wealth creation and competitiveness on the basis of greener prod-
ucts”. The development of green products can also be a means for
companies to achieve competitive advantage. For example, Porter and
Reinhardt (2007) highlight the need for companies to adopt a strategic
approach to climate and to take action now, underlining the oppor-
tunity to gain competitive advantage by creating green products, able
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ39 080 5962725; fax: þ39 080 5962788.
E-mail addresses: r.dangelico@poliba.it (R.M. Dangelico), pontrandolfo@poliba.it
(P. Pontrandolfo).
the number of companies facing the green product challenge is
supposed to rapidly grow in the next years. This is coherent with the
growing trend of companies that obtain yearly the European Eco-label
for their products. In fact, while at the end of 2000 about 50 companies
obtained European Eco-label for their products, at the beginning of
2010, this number has grown to more than1000.
In the literature, research on green product innovation is
growing in interest (e.g. Baumann et al., 2002; Pujari et al., 2003;
Rehfeld et al., 2007; Albino et al., 2009; Dangelico and Pujari,
forthcoming). In particular, green products are receiving
increasing attention as means to improve companies’ performance
(Pujari, 2006; Chen et al., 2006; Chung and Tsai, 2007). However,
the debate regarding what constitutes a green product (e.g. Chen,
2001; Baumann et al., 2002; Berchicci and Bodewes, 2005) is still
ongoing. Similarly, there is much uncertainty among firms on the
product dimensions to be considered to develop green products.
This paper aims at providing a description and a characteriza-
tion scheme of the main different options to develop green prod-
ucts. The goal is then providing a matrix useful for companies to
compare industrial sectors’ green products and practices and to
communicate to stakeholders the environmental features of their
green products and practices.
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 reports a literature
review of the main definitions and classifications of green products,

0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.07.007
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
whereas Section 3 proposes a new dimension of characterization
and the Green Option Matrix (GOM), which represents a guide for
companies to position their own green products and communicate
them to stakeholders and to analyze competitors’ green products,
so highlighting new spaces to be explored for green product design.
In Section 4, the proposed matrix is used to analyze green products
and practices developed by a sample of companies considered best
performers in sustainability, while in Section 5 directions for
companies on how to use the GOM are provided. Finally, in Section
6 discussion and conclusion are reported.
2. Definitions and classifications of green products
The many meanings of the word ‘green’ have been discussed in
the literature (e.g. Kleiner, 1991; McDonagh and Prothero, 1996;
Miller and Szekely, 1995; Silverstein, 1993). In particular, McDo-
nagh and Prothero identify several dimensions of green, such as
ecological, political, corporate social responsiveness, fair trade,
conservation, non-profit, new-consumerism, sustainability, and
equality. These concepts are very broad and embrace very different
aspects, so generating confusion on the meaning of ‘green’ and not
giving clear directions to companies willing to become green.
Similarly, at the product level, several attempts have been made to
define what a green product is (e.g. Peattie, 1995; Roy et al., 1996;
Ottman, 1997). Nevertheless, there is still confusion on what
constitutes an environmentally friendly product (Baumann et al.,
2002; Berchicci and Bodewes, 2005).
Some authors have tried to define ‘green products’. Peattie
(1995, p. 181), defines a product as ‘green’ “when its environ-
mental and societal performance, in production, use and disposal, is
significantly improved and improving in comparison to conventional
or competitive products offerings”. This definition highlights the
different life cycle phases during which a product can show its
environmentally friendly features.
Reinhardt (1998, p. 46) states that environmental product
differentiation takes place when: “a business creates products that
provide greater environmental benefits, or that impose smaller envi-
ronmental costs, than similar products”. This definition points out
that green products are not only those products with a lower
environmental impact, but also those providing higher environ-
mental benefits compared to conventional products.
Ottman et al. (2006, p. 24) state that “although no consumer
product has a zero impact on the environment, in business, the terms
‘green products’ or ‘environmental product’ are used commonly to
describe those that strive to protect or enhance the natural environ-
ment by conserving energy and/or resources and reducing or elimi-
nating use of toxic agents, pollution, and waste”. This definition
stresses the main types of environmental focus of green product
development, namely energy, resources, pollution and waste.
The Commission of the European Communities (2001) defines
green products as products that “use less resources, have lower impacts
and risks to the environment and prevent waste generation already at the
conception stage”. This definition emphasizes the importance of
designing products as ‘green’ since the conceptualization phase.
Several other authors have highlighted the distinctive features
of green products (Table 1).
The many definitions and characteristics of green products
prompt the need to develop a coherent framework in which inte-
grating them. Although in some definitions and characteristics of
green products the social performance is mentioned, in this paper,
we chose to refer to a product as ‘green’ only on the basis of its
environmental performance.
In the literature, different perspectives to classify products have
been identified, namely marketing, organization, engineering design,
and operations management (Krishnan and Ulrich, 2001). Green
1609
product design can be thought of as a fifth perspective (Sousa and
Wallace, 2006). In fact, the natural environment represents a driver
to redesign existing products or to create new ones, making them
more energy efficient or less material intensive (Shrivastava, 1995).
Several green product classifications have been developed driven
by distinct classification purposes. Taxonomy dimensions can be
product characteristics (e.g. Rombouts, 1998), level of environ-
mental impacts (e.g. Hanssen, 1999), or types of environmental
improvement strategies (e.g. Park et al., 1999; Rose et al., 1999).
Kaebernick and Soriano (2000) use a simplified approach to assess
the conceptual design phase, by classifying products into groups
according to their environmental features. They consider four
product life cycle phases (materials, process, usage, and disposal)
and divide products into two groups, distinguishing two kinds of
impact drivers, namely energy based and material based. Sousa and
Wallace (2006) develop an automated classification system guiding
the identification of product groups based upon environmental
categories. Dewberry and Goggin (1996) develop an Ecodesign
Matrix, subsequently used by Roy et al. (1996), to classify the envi-
ronmental impact of products on the basis of two dimensions: main
life cycle stage (production, use, and disposal) and environmental
focus (energy, materials/resources, pollution/toxic waste). Peattie
(1995) classifies products on the basis of their eco-performance,
distinguishing different shades of ‘green’ (from deep green to black)
and types of products (absolute green or relative green). In partic-
ular, absolute green products contribute to the improvement of
society or the environment, whereas relative green products reduce
the harm they cause to society or environment. This distinction
recalls the one made in Reinhardt’s (1998) definition. The concept of
absolute green product is quite close to those of ‘ameliorative
product’, defined as a product necessary to survive environmental
deterioration (Ryan et al., 1992, p. 13), and of ‘sustainable-function
product’, defined as “a product (or service) that reduces a negative
impact in its surroundings to such an extent that the reduction
exceeds the impact caused by the product’s lifecycle itself” (Wever
and Boks, 2007, p. 201). As highlighted by Wever and Boks (2007)
and Wever et al. (2008), despite its high potential, this type of
innovation lacks of academic attention.
Based on these considerations, this paper expands the Ecodesign
Matrix proposed by Dewberry and Goggin (1996), adding a third
dimension for green products’ characterization, i.e. the type of
environmental impact. In the next Section, the three dimensions
will be explained and integrated in a tridimensional matrix.
3. The Green Option Matrix (GOM)
In order to synthesize and integrate in a coherent framework
the different dimensions of green products and to give relevance to
the different types of contributions of green products towards the
environment, a tridimensional matrix is developed.
Starting from the consideration that every product (even green
ones) impacts on the environment (Peattie, 1995), it is important to
clarify when, why, and how much a product is green. It is then
necessary to point out:
1. When, i.e. the phase of the product life cycle during which the
green features are expressed;
2. Why, namely the reason why the product can be considered
green, which involves recognizing the main environmental
focus of the product;
3. How much, that is the type of impact on the natural
environment.
With regard to the phase of the product life cycle, we will
consider three main phases: (i) before usage (including materials’
1610 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Table 1
Review of the characteristics of green products.

.Authors Characteristics associated with the ‘green’ nature of a product

Elkington and Hailes (1988)  Not endangering the health of the consumer or of others
 Causing no significant damage to the environment during
manufacture use or disposal
 Not consuming a disproportionate amount of energy during manufacture, use and disposal
 Not causing unnecessary waste, either because of overpackaging or because of an unduly short useful life
 No use of materials derived from threatened species or from threatened environments
 Not involving unnecessary use or cruelty to animals
 Not adversely affecting other countries, particularly the third world
Simon (1992)  Reduced raw material, high recycled content
 Non-polluting manufacture/non-toxic materials
 No unnecessary animal testing
 No impact on protected species
 Low energy consumption during production/use/disposal
 Minimal or no packaging
 Reuse/refillability where possible
 Long useful life, updating capacity
 Post-consumer collection/disassembly system
 Remanufacturing capability
Schmidheiny (1992)  Eliminate or replace product
 Eliminate or reduce harmful ingredients
 Substitute environmentally preferred materials or processes
 Decrease weight or reduce volume
 Produce concentrated product
 Produce in bulk
 Combine the functions of more than one product
 Produce fewer models or styles
 Redesign for more efficient use
 Increase product life span
 Reduce wasteful packaging
 Improve reparability
 Redesign for consumer reuse
 Remanufacture the product
Peattie (1995)  Recyclability
 Resource efficiency
 Emissions
 Impact on ecosystems
 Social impact
 Sustainability of resource use
 Waste and disposal
 Eco-efficiency of production and organization
Robert (1995)  Minimize the use of nonrenewable materials
 Avoid the use of toxic materials
 Use renewable resources in accordance with their rate of replenishment
Shrivastava and Hart (1995)  Low environmental impact during usage
 Easily composted, reused, or recycled at the end of their useful life
Roy et al. (1996)  Capable of lessening global environmental problems
 Energy efficient
 Easily repairable
 Designed to last, or to be reused, reconditioned or recycled
 Generates minimum pollution and waste
 Can be disposed of safely
 Minimal use of materials, including packaging
 Manufactured from renewable or abundant resources, or recycled materials
 Manufactured, if possible, locally and from locally obtainable materials to reduce transport
requirements
 Environmental information on product available to purchaser
 Not harmful to human health
 Satisfies a genuine human need
Luttropp and Lagerstedt (2006)  Do not use toxic substances and utilize closed loops for necessary but toxic ones
 Minimize energy and resource consumption in the production
phase and transport
 Use structural features and high-quality materials to minimize weight
 Minimize energy and resource consumption in the usage phase
 Promote repair and upgrading
 Promote long life
 Invest in better materials, surface treatments or structural arrangements
 Prearrange upgrading, repair and recycling
 Promote upgrading, repair and recycling
 Use as few joining elements as possible
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1611

Table 1 (continued ).

Authors Characteristics associated with the ‘green’ nature of a product

Ljungberg (2007)  Reduce the materials and the use of energy for a product
 Reduce emissions, dispersion and creation of toxics
 Increase the amount of recyclable materials
 Maximize the sustainable use of renewable resources
 Minimize the service intensity for products and services
 Extend the useful life for a product
 Assess and minimize the environmental impact
 Having a “functional economy”
 Use “reverse logistics”
 Increase the efficiency in the usage phase

extraction, production processes, transportation processes), (ii)
usage, and (iii) after usage (end-of-life).
By environmental focus we refer to the main category of envi-
ronmental impact of a green product, as the latter can improve its
impact on the environment with emphasis on materials (including
water), energy, or pollution (emissions and toxic waste). We can
then distinguish green products, on the basis of their main envi-
ronmental focus, respectively as green products focused on mate-
rials, energy, and pollution.
Once recognized the three main types of environmental focus of
green products, it is possible to specify the type of impact, which we
name as less negative, null, or positive. A product can be considered
green, in terms of one of the three types of environmental focus, if it
has an environmental impact lower than conventional products, or if
it has a null impact, or if it positively contributes to environment,
reducing environmental impact of other products. Below we detail
the definition with respect to each environmental focus.
A green product with a focus on materials is, for example,
a product that:
 is produced using less amount of materials than conventional
products (less negative environmental impact);
 uses only recycled materials or natural/biodegradable mate-
rials at a sustainable rate (null environmental impact);
 is designed to be reused, disassembled and remanufactured, or
it is made of materials that can be recycled, reducing then the
environmental impact of other products that will not require
the consumption of virgin materials (positive environmental
impact).1
In Fig. 1 some examples of green products with a focus on
materials and the respective levels of environmental impact during
a specific phase are shown.
Similarly, a green product with a focus on energy is, for example,
a product that:
 is more energy efficient than conventional products, or if part
of the energy used comes from renewable energy sources (less
negative environmental impact);
 uses only energy from renewable sources (null environmental
impact);
 produces energy from renewable sources, and in so doing
reduces the environmental impact that will be caused by other
products (positive environmental impact).
In Fig. 2 some examples of green products focused on energy
and the respective levels of environmental impact during a specific
phase are shown.
1
Products with a positive impact with regard to the focus ‘materials’ recall the
concept of “cradle to cradle”, since they allow a new life for materials.
A green product with a focus on pollution is, for example,
a product that:
 is less pollutant than conventional products (less negative
environmental impact);
 does not pollute (null environmental impact);
 reduces pollution caused by other products (positive environ-
mental impact).
In Fig. 3 some examples of green products with a focus on
pollution and the respective levels of environmental impact during
a specific phase are shown.
In particular, a greater attention should be addressed to the
third point of each kind of products, i.e. products with positive
environmental impact. In fact, while other products can be
considered ‘green’ as they create less environmental problems
than conventional products, these products contribute to solve
environmental problems, which in turn implies a negative envi-
ronmental footprint and then a reduction on the environmental
footprint due to other products. In this sense, a green product with
positive impact can be considered as an “environmental helper”.
Note that, as the evaluation of the product impact is done with
specific regard to a given focus and phase rather than over the
whole life cycle, a product with a positive impact might not be
such over the entire life cycle.
Based on the above we propose the Green Option Matrix (GOM)
(Table 2) that allows green products to be characterized according
to the discussed dimensions.
4. The GOM applied to different sectors
The developed matrix is then used to analyze the different
features of green products developed by a sample of 142 compa-
nies belonging to the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index
(DJSWI) and operating in different sectors, in particular Tech-
nology, Consumer Goods, Industrial, and Basic Materials.2 We
choose these companies since the Dow Jones Sustainability
Indexes track the financial performance of the leading sustain-
ability-driven companies worldwide.3 Being environmental
sustainability a key dimension of sustainability, these companies
are assumed to be leaders in environmental sustainability, and
their behavior can be considered as a benchmark. Table 3 reports
the sample composition.
The significant information for this research has been taken from
companies’ public websites, and, when on line available, from their
2
The classification of sectors is the one used in the DJSWI and the sample is
represented by companies listed in the DJSWI referred to September 2008.
3
The identification of sustainability leaders for the Dow Jones Sustainability
Indexes is based on the Corporate Sustainability Assessment of SAM Research,
encompassing three dimensions: economic, environment, and social.
1612 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
FOCUS: MATERIALS
Less negative
Material Consumption
Conventional Wooden pallets
wooden pallets designed to have the
minimum weight
and volume
Fig. 1. Green products with a focus on materials and levels of environmental impact (evaluation referred to a specific focus and life cycle phase).
environmental/sustainability reports4 (data collection has been
carried out between October 2008 and December 2008; reports on
line available during this time period were referred to 2007).
Relevant data have been collected by means of content analysis
of companies’ websites and sustainability reports (e.g. Wolfe,
1991; Krippendorf, 2004). In particular, sections containing the
following keywords have been content analyzed: green products,
eco products, environmental products, eco-friendly products,
environment-conscious products, sustainable products, environ-
mental technologies, green technologies, green processes.
In this way, green products and related practices developed by
each company in the sample have been identified and positioned in
the GOM. In particular, to this purpose we developed and used
a structured procedure involving three main steps: step 1, identi-
fying the focus area(s) to which the improved environmental
performance of the product/practice or the environmental benefits
determined by the product/practice refer; step 2, identifying to
which phase(s) of the product life cycle the improved environ-
mental performance of the product/practice or the environmental
benefits determined by the product/practice refer; step 3, identi-
fying the type of environmental impact of the considered product/
practice. These steps are depicted in Appendix A.
Results are then aggregated by industrial sector, so as to develop
a matrix for each sector, which represents the different undertaken
actions.5 Comparing the matrices of the different sectors, industry
specific behaviors are highlighted.
For the sake of clarity, the tridimensional matrix is presented by
means of three separate matrices, each of which referred to
a specific environmental focus.
4.1. Technology sector
The technology sector includes companies producing techno-
logically based goods, i.e. electronics, software, computers, other
products related to information technology.
4.1.1. Environmental focus ‘materials’
In Table 4 in Appendix B the GOM filled with green products and
practices developed in the technology sector is shown, with a focus
on materials.
4
Being environmental reporting one of the corporate sustainability assessment
criteria through which companies are selected to belong to the DJSWI, environ-
mental information related to products and processes was always present in the
sample companies’ websites or reports.
5
Note that if a company in DJSWI covers more than one sector, it is classified into one
of them, according to a best in class approach. As a result products and practices
analyzed for a certain company under the related sector might belong to other sectors as
well.
Null Positive
Material Supply
Wooden pallets made Wooden pallets designed to
of certified wood be disassembled and
coming from remanufactured
sustainably managed
forests
In the ‘before usage’ phase, companies have reduced their
products’ environmental impact (‘less negative’), through efficient
production processes, in terms of reduction of water and raw
materials use, and waste production. Important efforts have also
been made to reduce size and weight of products, components and
packaging, therefore at the same time both saving materials and
reducing energy consumption and pollution due to transportation.
To have a ‘null’ impact some companies have used recycled mate-
rials, fibers or paper coming from certified sustainably managed
forests, and bio-based plastics. Practices adopted by companies that
can be conceived as having a ‘positive’ impact are the reuse or
recycle of production wastes or by-products that can then be used
to manufacture new products.
In the ‘usage’ phase, firms have tried to reduce the environ-
mental impact of products by extending their lifecycle or making
products more efficient, in terms of resource consumption.
Referring to the ‘after usage’ phase, in order to have a ‘null’
impact, actions have been devoted to use biodegradable materials.
In order to have a ‘positive’ impact, many firms have designed
products, components, and packaging to be easily disassembled
(avoiding glues, adhesives and welds), reused and recycled.
The ‘usage’ phase is the one in which fewer actions are
identified, especially with regard to null and positive impacts,
leaving then opened for firms opportunities to explore innova-
tive options.
4.1.2. Environmental focus ‘energy’
Table 5 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green products
and practices developed in the technology sector, with a focus on
energy.
With regard to the ‘before usage’ phase, several green practices
have been adopted to make production processes more energy
efficient (‘less negative’ impact), use renewable energy sources
(‘null’ impact) and cogenerate energy or reuse waste energy
(‘positive’ impact).
The ‘usage’ phase is the one wherein the greatest variety of
products and practices has been proposed in this sector. In
particular, a number of high-energy efficient products and
components have been developed (‘less negative’ impact). In
some of these cases, intelligent devices have been embedded into
products to make them more efficient, such as devices signaling to
unplug cell phone charger when the battery is full or automatic
luminance control function for LCDs. At a higher level of envi-
ronmental impact, there are much fewer products such as eco-
mechanisms for watches (‘null’ impact), and photovoltaic cells
(‘positive’ impact).
With regard to the ‘after usage’ phase, no products and
practices have been identified, leaving then opened innovation
spaces for companies.
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1613

FOCUS: ENERGY

Less negative Null Positive

Energy Consumption Energy Production

Conventional Energy Lightings with integrated Photovoltaic

lightings efficient photovoltaic cells panels/Wind
lightings turbines

Fig. 2. Green products with a focus on energy and levels of environmental impact (evaluation referred to a specific focus and life cycle phase).

4.1.3. Environmental focus ‘pollution’
Table 6 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with for green
products and practices developed in the Technology sector, with
a focus on pollution.
In the ‘before usage’ phase, most practices are developed to
reduce emissions due to production and transportation (‘less
negative’ impact), with attention to avoid the use of toxic
substances and to use renewable energy sources (‘null’ impact).
In the ‘usage’ phase, all actions undertaken to make products,
components, and attachments energy efficient can be considered as
they have also an indirect influence on the reduction of emissions
(‘less negative’ impact).
With regard to the ‘after usage’ phase, firms give emphasis to
the elimination of harmful substances, the safe disposal of prod-
ucts, and the recyclability of products and components which
prevent electronic wastes from going to landfill (‘null’ impact).
4.2. Consumer goods
The consumer goods sector includes companies selling their
products to the final customer, so spanning a wide range of prod-
ucts (clothing, footwear, household, personal products, etc.).
4.2.1. Environmental focus ‘materials’
Table 7 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green products
and practices developed in the Consumer Goods sector, with a focus
on materials.
With regard to the ‘before usage’ phase, in order to reduce their
products environmental impact (‘less negative’) companies give
emphasis to efficient production processes (in terms of reduction of
water and raw materials use, and waste production). Important
efforts are also made to reduce size and weight of products,
components and packaging, therefore at the same time both saving
materials and reducing energy consumption and then pollution
production due to transportation processes. Furthermore, several
products are developed using a certain amount of recycled mate-
rial. In order to have a ‘null’ impact’ some companies develop
several products (such as clothes, footwear, building materials)
using only recycled or natural (such as bioplastics or organic cotton)
materials. Practices that can be conceived as having a ‘positive
impact’ are the reuse or recycle of production processes wastes or
by-products, which can then be reused as inputs for production or
maintenance processes. Moreover, there are some technologies
able to treat resources and make them again available for other
production processes (e.g. systems treating process water). Finally,
the promotion of reforestation, by firms dealing with forestry, can
be mentioned as having a ‘positive’ impact on the environment.
In the ‘usage’ phase, several environmentally friendly deter-
gents for personal care and for household are developed that save
water (‘less negative’ impact) or that are made by natural/organic
ingredients, which are harmless for people’s skin and then have
a ‘null’ impact. In terms of ‘positive’ impact, we could mention glues
allowing for fast and reliable repair of durable goods, then
extending their life and preserving resources.
Referring to the ‘after usage’ phase, products and packaging
partially (‘less negative’ impact) or completely (‘null’ impact) biode-
gradable/compostable are developed. Other practices that can be
positioned in the ‘positive’ impact cell are the development of recy-
clable, reusable, repairable, easily disassembly products, components,
or packaging. Furthermore, management systems to collect, recover

FOCUS: POLLUTION

Less negative Null Positive

Pollution Production Pollution Reduction

Conventional Hybrid Electric vehicles/ Photocatalytic

vehicles vehicles Hydrogen vehicles cements

Fig. 3. Green products with a focus on pollution and levels of environmental impact (evaluation referred to a specific focus and life cycle phase).
1614 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
Table 2
The Green Option Matrix.
. Environmental focus
Materials
Life cycle phase / BU U AU
Environmental impact Less negative
Null
Positive
and recycle products, components, or packaging (such as toner
cartridge, batteries, and consumer electronics) are also developed.
4.2.2. Environmental focus ‘energy’
Table 8 in Appendix B reports the GOM referred to green
products and practices developed in the Consumer Goods sector,
with a focus on energy.
In the ‘before usage’ phase, companies have developed several
practices to make production processes more energy efficient (‘less
negative’ impact), use renewable energy sources (‘null’ impact) and
reuse waste energy in terms of heat or gas (‘positive’ impact).
The greatest variety of green products and practices of this
sector is proposed in the ‘usage’ phase. In particular, a number of
high-energy efficient products and components are developed
(‘less negative’ impact). In some of these cases, intelligent devices
are embedded into products to make them more efficient, such as
intelligent systems with sensor for energy efficiency. Several
actions are implemented for vehicles, from efficient tires with low
rolling resistance, to alternative feeding systems and engines (such
as common rail, hybrid engine, biodiesel compatible systems), to
car solar roofs. Several insulating products are developed for
buildings, such as interlayer film for laminated glass and adhesives
tile for houses. At a higher level of environmental impact, we can
mention biofuels and several solutions for buildings, such as
natural ventilation, solar thermal panels for hot water heating,
wind turbines to generate electricity for use in lighting (‘null’
impact), and roofing materials for solar cells (‘positive’ impact).
Finally, with regard to the ‘after usage’ phase neither products
nor practices with a ‘less negative’ or ‘null’ impact can be identified,
whereas some practices are developed with a ‘positive’ impact. In
particular, products are developed that can be disassembled or
directly used to generate energy (such as vehicles or tires) at the
end of their lifecycle.
4.2.3. Environmental focus ‘pollution’
Table 9 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green products
and practices developed in the Consumer Goods sector, with a focus
on pollution.
In the ‘before usage’ phase, many practices are developed to
reduce emissions due to production and transportation and to
filtrate and purify water (‘less negative’ impact). In terms of ‘null’
environmental impact, several practices are aimed at eliminating
chemicals and substances that could be harmful during production
Table 3
Sample composition.
.Industrial sector Number of companies
Technology 23
Consumer goods 36
Industrials 55
Basic materials 28
Total 142
Energy Pollution
BU U AU BU U AU
processes (such as chlorine, fluorine, etc.). In terms of ‘positive’
impact the cleaning up of contaminated sites and the use of waste
as fuels contribute to reduce waste in the environment.
Referring to the ‘usage’ phase, the most important actions to
reduce pollution are developed with regard to vehicles. In terms of
‘less negative’ impact, these include all actions developed for the
focus ‘energy’ plus other systems to reduce vehicles’ emissions,
such as particulate filters, and exhaust gas treatment system.
Several other innovations for vehicles, such as fuel cells, and elec-
tric cars, or tires without aromatic oils, can be mentioned as having
a ‘null’ impact. In terms of ‘positive’ impact, the following products
can be mentioned: silicone sealants with biological active
substances and fungicide as well as water purification equipment.6
With regard to the ‘after usage’ phase, products are developed
with reduced (‘less negative’ impact) or null (‘null’ impact) content
of toxic substances, harmful after product disposal, such as lead,
chrome, fluorocarbon, and PVC.
4.3. Industrials
The industrial sector includes companies whose businesses are
mainly related to the manufacture and distribution of capital goods,
such as construction, engineering and building products, aero-
space, electrical equipment, and industrial machinery.
4.3.1. Environmental focus ‘materials’
Table 10 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green
products and practices developed in the Industrials sector, with
a focus on materials.
With regard to the ‘before usage’ phase, companies reduce their
products’ environmental impact (‘less negative’) giving emphasis to
efficient production processes (in terms of reduction of water and
raw materials use, and waste production). Important efforts are
also made to reduce size and weight of products, components and
packaging, therefore at the same time both saving materials and
reducing energy consumption and then pollution production due to
transportation. Furthermore, several products are developed using
a certain amount of recycled material. In order to have a ‘null’
impact several products are completely made of recycled materials,
or renewable raw materials coming from certified sources (such as
wood, cellulose, and fibers). Finally, the recyclability of by-products
and the recovery and reuse of water, which can then be used as
inputs for other processes, can be mentioned as practices with
a ‘positive’ impact.
In the ‘usage’ phase, two main types of products with ‘less
negative’ impact are developed: products with higher durability
6
With regard to products, in this paper the type of environmental impact is
evaluated considering as unit of analysis products that represent autonomous
systems for the final customer. For example, a water filter can be an autonomous
system as the consumer may buy it as such, whereas a particulate filter for cars is
not an autonomous system as consumers generally buy it as part of a car; thus its
environmental impact will be considered as part of the car. However, this
assumption may be altered according to the GOM user and its objectives.
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
and resource-saving products (which consume less water, deter-
gent or paper during their use). Products using renewable resources
(such as biomass power plants) could be mentioned as having
a ‘null’ impact, whereas neither products nor practices are identi-
fied as having a ‘positive’ impact.
Referring to the ‘after usage’ phase, products and packaging
partially biodegradable or recyclable (‘less negative’ impact),
completely biodegradable (‘null’ impact), and completely reusable
or recyclable (‘positive’ impact) are developed.
4.3.2. Environmental focus ‘energy’
Table 11 in Appendix B reports the GOM related to green
products and practices developed in the Industrials sector, with
a focus on energy.
In the ‘before usage’ phase, companies reduce their products’
environmental impact (‘less negative’) through energy efficient
production processes, designing products requiring less energy to
be produced and installed, using computerized control systems to
reduce energy consumption during production processes, or opti-
mizing transportation processes. The use of renewable energy
sources can be mentioned as practice aimed at having a ‘null’
impact, whereas waste heat and gas recovery for power generation
as practice with a ‘positive’ impact.
Several products and practices can be identified in the ‘usage’
phase. A number of high-energy efficient products and compo-
nents are developed (‘less negative’ impact). In particular, several
actions are undertaken for vehicles, such as the development of
fuel-efficient engines, hybrid vehicles, the use of materials
reducing aerodynamic drag or weight of vehicles, and energy
conserving systems applied to engines (e.g. converter for hybrid
cars). In the field of building and construction, thermal insulating
products can be mentioned. At a higher level of environmental
impact, we can mention green buildings, with integrated photo-
voltaic solar system on the roof (‘null’ impact), several products
linked to renewable energy production (wind turbines, hydro
turbines, solar cells, biomass power plants), materials increasing
power generation efficiency, and systems to generate electrical
energy and process heat from waste (‘positive’ impact).
In the ‘after usage’ phase, neither products nor practices are
identified with a ‘less negative’ or ‘null’ impact, whereas, in terms of
‘positive’ impact, products are developed that can be recycled into
biofuels at the end of their lifecycle.
4.3.3. Environmental focus ‘pollution’
Table 12 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green
products and practices developed in the Industrials sector, with
a focus on pollution.
In the ‘before usage’ phase, companies have implemented
several practices to reduce emissions from production processes
(such as more efficient heat generation systems) and transportation
processes (such as use of more efficient transportation means or
reduction of size and weight of products). Many products are
developed reducing the content of chemicals and hazardous
materials. Furthermore, a modification of product formulation can
lead to the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions during
production (such as in the case of composite cements, with reduced
clinker content). All these actions can be positioned in the ‘less
negative’ impact cell. In terms of ‘null’ environmental impact,
practices are mainly devoted to the prevention of soil pollution. The
reuse of waste, contributing to reduce waste from the environment,
could be mentioned as having a ‘positive’ impact.
Referring to the ‘usage’ phase, several technologies and systems
to reduce pollution (‘less negative’ impact) are developed with
regard to vehicles: clean engines, hybrid vehicles, and lightweight
vehicles. Other interesting innovations are excavators able to adapt
1615
power levels to each operation, and detergents with low volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) emissions. Fuel cells and detergents
without chemical cleaners can be mentioned as having a ‘null’
impact. In terms of ‘positive’ impact some interesting products are
developed to reduce pollution produced by other products or
processes. Among them a special note goes to products to reduce
CO2 (CO2 absorbent ceramics), NOx (photocatalytic cements) from
air and oil (oil-skimmers) from water and to accelerate the
decomposition of waste.
In the ‘after usage’ phase, most actions are addressed to develop
products and packaging with ‘null’ impact: products without
materials, chemicals, and gases (such as lead, bismuth, bromine,
fluorocarbons) that are hazardous when products are disposed, and
packaging that does not produce dioxin when burned.
4.4. Basic materials
The basic materials sector includes companies involved with the
discovery, development and processing of raw materials. In
particular, it includes mining and refining of metals, chemical
products and forestry products.
4.4.1. Environmental focus ‘materials’
Table 13 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green
products and practices developed in the Basic Materials sector, with
a focus on materials.
With regard to the ‘before usage’ phase, companies reduce their
products environmental impact (‘less negative’) through efficient
production processes (in terms of reduction of water and raw
materials use, and waste production). In order to have a ‘null’
impact several products are developed using only recycled mate-
rials, or renewable and natural materials. In particular, interesting
products could be mentioned in the field of polymers (such as
biomass derived plastics). Achievement of zero waste and zero
water to discharge through operational efficiency also deserves
special note. Among practices with a ‘positive’ impact we can
mention the recycle of waste materials, hazardous wastes, water,
and used oil generated from operations; all of these can then be
used as inputs for other processes.
In the ‘usage’ phase, we mention as products with ‘less negative’
impact, paints for car refinishes reducing the amount of material
required for adequate coverage compared to traditional systems,
and special materials enabling a longer useful life of products. No
products or practices with a ‘null’ or ‘positive’ impact are identified,
leaving then innovation opportunities opened for firms.
Referring to the ‘after usage’ phase, products and materials
partially biodegradable (‘less negative’ impact), completely biode-
gradable (‘null’ impact), and completely recyclable (‘positive’ impact)
are developed.
4.4.2. Environmental focus ‘energy’
Table 14 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green
products and practices developed in the Basic Materials sector, with
a focus on energy.
With regard to the ‘before usage’ phase, companies reduce their
products environmental impact (‘less negative’’) through energy
efficient production processes. The use of renewable energy sour-
ces and the replacement of oil as heating fuel by peat, biomass and
recycled fuel are practices aimed at having a ‘null’ impact. Co-
generation plants, waste heat and gas recovery for power genera-
tion, and reuse of waste to produce energy can be mentioned as
having a ‘positive’ impact.
With regard to the ‘usage’ phase, in terms of ‘less negative’
impact, we can mention solar reflecting pigments (preventing heat
absorption on roof coatings), heat transfer fluids (reducing energy
1616 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
consumption in refrigeration systems), paints for car refinishes
(requiring less energy than traditional systems), and aluminum for
the vehicular industry (reducing weight and then saving energy).
No products are identified as having a ‘null’ impact, whereas we can
mention organic photovoltaic cells and aluminum photovoltaic
panels as having a ‘positive’ impact.
With regard to the ‘after usage’ phase, materials that can be
recycled with high-energy efficient processes (such as aluminum)
can be mentioned as having a ‘less negative’ impact, whereas
neither products nor practices with a ‘null’ or ‘positive’ impact are
identified, leaving then opportunities to innovate for companies.
4.4.3. Environmental focus ‘pollution’
Table 15 in Appendix B shows the GOM filled with green
products and practices developed in the Basic Materials sector, with
a focus on pollution.
Referring to the ‘before usage’ phase, several practices are
adopted to reduce emissions from production processes (such as flue
gas cleaning systems, more efficient heat generation systems, and
technologies to capture the CO2 coming from coal combustion) and
to reduce waste production (‘less negative’ impact). In terms of ‘null’
impact, the main actions are the development of new processes that
generate no by-products, systems that biologically clean waste-
water, carbon neutral polymers (such as plant-based polylactic acid),
fiber recycled from biomass and not requiring organic solvents in
manufacturing, and the avoidance of chemicals substances. In terms
of ‘positive’ impact, the reuse of wastewater, which contributes to
reduce waste from the environment, can be mentioned.
In the ‘usage’ phase, many products and practices to reduce
pollution (‘less negative’ impact) are developed. These refer to
reduction of VOCs in products, lighter materials for vehicular industry,
elimination of sulfur from gasoline and diesel fuels. As products
having a ‘null’ impact, we can identify chlorine-free bleaching crop
protection products and ‘green’ lights that avoid problems for birds’
migration. In terms of ‘positive’ impact, some interesting products are
developed to support environmental preservation (tools and systems
for water purification, air purification, soil cleanup).
With regard to the ‘after usage’ phase, we identify only one
product as having a ‘null’ impact (halogen-free flame retardant
alloy resin), whereas neither products nor practices are identified
as having ‘less negative’ or ‘positive’ impact.
4.5. A comparison of green products and practices in different
sectors
The comparison among sectors is made by measuring four sector
variables: (i) the most diversified environmental focus, that is iden-
tified counting the total number of filled matrix cells7 per environ-
mental focus type, regardless the life cycle phase as well as the impact;
(ii) diversification of products and practices within each environ-
mental focus, i.e. the number of filled matrix cells for the considered
environmental focus; (iii) diversification of products and practices
with ‘positive’ impact, which is measured as the total number of filled
matrix cells corresponding to ‘positive’ impact regardless the envi-
ronmental focus; (iv) overall diversification of products and practices,
which is measured by the total number of filled matrix cells.
Diversification has been chosen as the main criterion to
compare the behaviour of companies operating in different sectors,
since it allows us to highlight for each sector both how the meaning
of ‘green’ is multidimensional and how many options for ‘greening’
products and practices are available.
7
It is not relevant how many practices or products are positioned in each cell, but
that at least one product or one practice has been positioned in that matrix cell.
Referring to level (i), in the Technology sector, the most diver-
sified types of environmental focus are materials and energy. This
result is coherent with the kind of products developed in this sector
(e.g. printers, cellular phones, computers) wherein the most rele-
vant impacts are represented by materials, especially before and
after usage (most of products and practices are indeed identified in
such phases), and energy consumption, especially during product
use (most of products and practices are indeed identified in such
a phase). By addressing the environmental focus energy, not only
products’ environmental impact is reduced but also energy and cost
savings benefit customers. In the Consumer Goods sector and in the
Industrial sector, materials prove to be the most diversified envi-
ronmental focus. This result depends on several innovation
opportunities available in terms of materials used in products of
these sectors. Finally, materials and pollution are the predominant
types of environmental focus in the Basic Materials sector. This was
expected since several innovation options are available to reduce
materials’ environmental impact in terms of materials’ features
(such as recyclability, biodegradability, etc.) and reduction of
pollution due to materials’ toxicity, whereas fewer innovation
opportunities are available with regard to energy.
Considering level (ii), with regard to the environmental focus
materials, the most diversified sector is Consumer Goods, wherein
all matrix cells (life cycle phase/environmental impact) are filled
out, followed by Industrial, Basic Materials, and Technology.
Referring to the environmental focus energy, the most diversified
sectors are Consumer Goods and Industrials, wherein seven out of
nine cells are filled out, followed by Technology and Basic Mate-
rials. For the environmental focus pollution, the most diversified
sector is Consumer Goods (all cells are filled out in this case),
followed by Industrial, Basic Materials, and Technology. To sum up,
the most diversified sector is Consumer Goods regardless the
environmental focus. This result is coherent with expectations,
since Consumer Goods is the sector with the widest range of
products, which in turn reflects on the variety of developed green
products and practices.
With regard to level (iii) the most diversified sector with respect
to products and practices with a ‘positive’ impact is Consumer
Goods, wherein eight out of nine cells are covered, followed by
Industrial, Basic Materials, and Technology. We believe that the
result of the Consumer Goods is the effect of what noted above
(wide range of products) joint with the great efforts by companies
in this sector to develop innovative products and practices that
reduce the environmental impact of other products.
Considering level (iv), the sector with the highest overall
diversification of products and practices is Consumer Goods fol-
lowed by Industrial, Basic Materials, and Technology. In our
opinion, especially in this case, the wide range of products devel-
oped by Consumer Goods sector plays a key role to explain the
observed rank.
Based on the observed green products and practices, some
general considerations can also be developed. First of all, it should
be specified that the positioning of products and practices in the
GOM is not mutually exclusive, meaning that a product (practice)
can be positioned in more than one GOM cell. Such a feature is very
useful to both identify and communicate those green products and
practices that present a manifold impact (which can be cross-focus
as well as cross-phase). For example, almost all sectors have
adopted practices such as size and weight reduction of products,
packaging, and materials. These efforts are very valuable in terms of
environmental impact, since they are related to all the three types
of environmental focus. In fact, they allow for material conserva-
tion, reduce the energy used and the pollution produced for
transportation (before usage), as well as reduce the energy used
and the pollution produced during product use (usage) when
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
referred to vehicles. Furthermore, practices aimed at improving
energy efficiency of processes or products are quite common as
well as very valuable, since they also have an indirect effect on
pollution reduction.
5. How companies can put the GOM into practice
The GOM can be used by companies as a market analysis tool to
study competitors’ green product offering and as a communication
tool for public relations activities. If the purpose of the matrix is
conducting a market analysis of competitors’ green products
offering, first, a market analyst should identify the company’s
main competitors as well as their green products, then, an envi-
ronmental expert, able to recognize these products’ environmental
focus, phase of life cycle, and type of impact, should position them
in the matrix. The positioning of green products and practices of
the DJSWI companies (as discussed in Section 4) indeed represents
an example of the use of the matrix as a market analysis tool. The
matrix filled out with competitors’ green product offering could
then be taken into account by the top management, for decisions
making about the green product portfolio management. For
example, a company can decide the share of new products with
environmental features similar to the ones of competitors’ prod-
ucts, as well as the share of more innovative green products. In the
former case new products would be positioned in already filled
cells of the matrix deriving from the market analysis, in the latter
case these products would be positioned in empty cells.
If the purpose of the matrix is to communicate to stakeholders
the company’s environmental efforts, first, managers knowledge-
able about environmental performance of products and processes
(e.g. head of environmental management/affairs or head of HSE
management) should position in it the company’s green products
and practices. Then, people in charge of public relations should
further elaborate the matrix to make it more easily readable and
understandable by stakeholders. We suggest such a matrix to be
included in the company’s environmental/sustainability report.
Despite the above discussed benefits, it is not straightforward to
identify to which cell of the GOM a given real product/practice
should be assigned. To support companies in this task we further
detailed the procedure reported in Appendix A as a checklist
(Appendix C). The development of such a checklist, with respect to
the dimension environmental impact, benefited from the analysis
we conducted on the 142 DJWSI companies: after the detailed
screening of the implemented products and practices, we charac-
terized them according to the environmental impact (less negative,
null, positive), then developed a short general description of any
group of products (practices) recognized as similar, finally used
such a description as an item of the checklist, which a company can
easily use as a reference to position actual products (practices).
6. Discussion and conclusion
This paper has stressed that despite several definitions and
classifications of green products, an integrated characterization
seems to be still lacking in the literature. In fact, most of the
contributions available in the literature generally put emphasis on
single aspects that can be associated with the greenness of
a product. In particular, this paper has explicitly recognized
a specific type of green products, which previous tools (such as the
Ecodesign matrix) do not highlight: products contributing to the
improvement of the environment. We define such products as
having a positive impact in that they reduce the environmental
impact of other products.
A new dimension to better characterize green products has then
been introduced, “type of environmental impact”. It can assume
1617
three different levels, i.e. less negative, null, and positive, whose
meaning is slightly different according to each of the three envi-
ronmental focus (materials, energy, and pollution). A Green Option
Matrix (GOM) has been developed to integrate this new dimension
with environmental focus (materials, energy, and pollution) and
life cycle phase (before usage, usage, and after usage).
The GOM has then been used to analyze and characterize green
products and practices developed by a sample of companies
considered best performers in sustainability. In particular we have
analyzed all companies listed into the DJSWI in the sectors Tech-
nology, Consumer Goods, Industrials, and Basic Materials. The
comparison of green products and practices in different sectors has
highlighted which types of environmental focus are most impor-
tant for each sector, and to which extent the developed green
products and practices are diversified. As expected, Consumer
Goods has proven to be the sector with the highest levels of
diversification of green products and practices.
Several questions were posed at the beginning of this paper.
First, we raised the point about why very different products,
becoming more and more widespread in the market (such as hybrid
cars, recycled products, photovoltaic cells, and bioplastics to name
a few), can be claimed as ‘green’. Our study, by helping to structure
the knowledge about products’ environmental features, highlights
the multi-facets features of ‘greenness’ and provides us with
a roadmap to understand commonalities and differences among
several types of green products.
Another question we raised was related to practices that should be
implemented by companies willing to develop green products. By
conducting an analysis of green products and practices developed by
142 companies, leaders in sustainability and operating in different
industrial sectors, and positioning them in the GOM, we suggest
a wide range of options that could be implemented by companies that
are starting to shift towards more sustainable business models. The
other question we raised was about how companies can easily and
effectively communicate to stakeholders the environmental features
of their green products. Due to a rapid increase of the public interest
towards environmental issues, companies are feeling more and more
in duty bound to communicate to stakeholders their environmental
efforts. While several guidelines exist for reporting overall firms’
environmental performance (see for instance the Global Reporting
Initiative), similar tools have not been developed for products. Of
course, the environmental excellence of products can be communi-
cated through eco-labels or in terms of LCA results. However, not for
all product categories eco-labels exist (think of products related to the
production of renewable energy), and, when available, they generally
give a synthetic indication of high environmental performance,
without providing a detailed picture of the different types of envi-
ronmental focus, impact, or life cycle phase that the product
addresses. On the other hand, communicating LCA results could be
misleading for customers if producers of competitive products do not
do the same. The GOM may thus represent a suitable way for firms to
communicate environmental features of their green products.
This study has several implications for companies. The GOM, in
that helps to structure the knowledge about green products and
practices (referable to a single company as well as to a whole sector)
may represent a useful tool for companies that want to develop
green products. In particular, the value of this matrix can be
twofold: (i) as a market analysis tool, helping companies to analyze
competitors’ green products and practices, so providing tangible
directions to green their products, as well as suggesting directions
to be explored, by identifying areas wherein green products or
practices have yet to be developed (empty cells of the GOM); in this
sense the GOM can support green product portfolio management;
(ii) as a communication tool, helping companies in their commu-
nication strategies to stakeholders about the environmental
1618 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

impacts of their products or practices (in particular we suggest the entire life cycle. Such an approach has been adopted since it is
filled out GOM to be included in a company’s environmental/ coherent with the main purpose of our study, which is to offer an
sustainability report). It should be noticed that, since the use of the easy tool to managers for green product market analysis and
GOM as a communication tool helps companies to be specific in communication. Methodologies and tools for a quantitative
their green claims (the GOM forces a company to explicit the when, assessment of the environmental impact (such as LCA software) are
why, and how much), it prevents them from making general claims already available and out of the scope of this study.
of ‘ecological’, ‘green’, sustainable’ products, so reducing the risk of Furthermore, even though we developed the checklist to the
green washing. best of our knowledge and analyzing companies recognized as
Among the possible limitations of our study, we would stress sustainability leaders, we cannot exclude that additional items
that the GOM is not proposed as a tool to assess the environmental should be added to it, as a result of the technological progress as
impact of products. In fact, a careful evaluation of a product envi- well as the existence of green products and practices that could
ronmental impact would require the use of life cycle assessment result difficult to refer to one of the checklist items.
tools and should take into account the conditions of use of the While the developed matrix as well as the procedure to position
product itself as well as external factors, such as the state of the products and practices in it were tested through the analysis of the
ecosystem, which may affect its impact. The proposed approach is sustainability reports of 142 sustainability leaders companies, an
indeed qualitative in terms of the estimated environmental impact interesting avenue for future research could be testing the devel-
as well as referred to specific phases and specific types of envi- oped checklist in some case study companies through direct
ronmental focus, rather than quantitative and measured over the interviews with managers.

Appendix A

Steps to characterize green products and practices.

STEP 1 Identify focus area

materials energy pol lu ti on/

toxic waste

STEP 2 Identify life cycle Identify life cycle Identify life cycle
phase phase phase

B.U.
D.U. A.U. B.U. D.U. A.U. B.U. D.U. A.U.

Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type Id. type
STEP 3 of impact of impact of impact of impact of impact of impact of impact of impact of impact

Less Null Pos. L e s s Nu l l P o s . Less Nu l l Pos . Less N u ll P o s. Less Null Pos. Less Null P o s. Less Null Pos . Less Null Pos. Less Null Pos.
neg. neg. neg. neg . neg. neg. ne g . n e g. neg.

Appendix B

Table 4
Green option matrix for the environmental focus materials in the Technology sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Efficient production processes - Products with extended lifecycles -
(reducing water use, (e.g. making microprocessors compatible
raw material use, with different types of applications;
waste production) making products with more resistant
- Reduction of products, and flexible materials)
components and - Reduction of paper usage,
packaging size and weight thanks to user-friendly
(e.g. new generation function in copiers
semiconductors, PCs, etc)
- Manuals on CD-ROM to
minimize paper use
- Reduction of packaging impact
(e.g. packaging printed with monochrome
ink; universal packaging component, etc)
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1619

Table 4 (continued ).

Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Null - Use of recycled materials for - - Elimination of waste CDs by
products and packaging (ex. plastics) delivering software through
- Elimination of harmful substances download instead of CDs
- Use of fibers or paper - Biodegradable foam for packaging
coming from certified
sustainably managed forests (FSC, PEFC)
- Bio-based materials from
renewable materials
(such as polylactate-based plastic)
for notebook PCs or
cell phones covers
- Recycling water from
rainfall and sewage
- Software delivery through
download instead of CDs
Positive - Water reuse and recycle - - Easily disassemblable products
- Material recycle (avoidance of glues,
- Hazardous wastes recycle adhesives and welds)
- Waste recycle or reuse (printers, PCs, notebooks PCs, etc)
- Scrap/by-products recycling - Reusable products, components,
and packaging
- Recyclable products, components
(phone and batteries, printers)
and packaging

Table 5
Green option matrix for the environmental focus energy in the Technology sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Practices reducing energy consumption - High-energy efficient products -
(e.g. use of energy saving lightings, use of recycled (scanners, printers, projectors, copiers,
rather than raw materials, integrating the PCs, faxes, monitors, multifunctional devices,
control of lighting and air conditioning, speaking amplifiers, transistors, processors,
tuning air conditioning and lighting based on microprocessors, etc)
sunlight and heat transmission) (e.g. warm-up time shortened, use of LEDs,
optimization of power consumption
systems for desktop PCs)
- High-energy efficient attachments
(e.g. chargers for electronic products)
- High-energy efficient components
(e.g. chips, new generation semiconductors
using less power per transistor)
- Devices signalling to unplug cell
phone charger when the battery is full
- Low-power electronic devices
(such as PDAs, web tablets, portable and
wired Internet access devices, gateways)
- Automatic luminance control function for
LCDs, so reducing LED consumption
- Dimming LEDs and small LEDs
- System integrating multiple functions
on a single chip
- Energy profile to monitor energy use by
different active applications and turn off
the not needed ones (e.g. in cell phone)
Null - Use of renewable energy sources - Eco-mechanism for watches powered by the -
unwinding of a mainspring with no
batteries or motors
Positive - Co-generation plants (e.g. use of reverse osmosis reject water - Photovoltaic solar cells -
from water treatment facility) to provide electricity,
heating, and cooling
- Reusing energy from
exhaust hot gas
1620 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Table 6
Green option matrix for the environmental focus pollution in the Technology sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Reduction of emissions in - energy efficient products -
production processes and applications micropro-
- Reduction of emissions due to transportation cessors meeting the most
(e.g. use of local materials, transportation stringent international inter-
optimization, products' size and weight ference and health standards
reduction, software delivery for radio frequency
through downloading instead of CD)
Null - Processors produced with - - Elimination of CFCs and radioactive materials
a lead-free process - Elimination of harmful substances
- Preventing the use of - Halogen-free products
hazardous materials and chemicals - Lead-free products
- Use of renewable energy - Elimination of PVC in packaging
sources - Safe disposal of used products
- Use of supercritical - Recyclable products (no electronic wastes in landfill)
fluid technology as
alternative to classic solvents
- No ozone-depleting
substances (e.g. CFCs) used
in the production process
Positive - - -

Table 7
Green option matrix for the environmental focus materials in the Consumer Goods sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Reduction of products, components and - High performing detergents - Partially biodegradable products
packaging size and weight (saving water)
- Reduction of water use for hands or clothes
- Reduction of raw materials (e.g. no water is needed
- Reduction of waste generation to generate the foam)
- Products partially made of
post-consumer material
(e.g. bottles with recycled glass,
cans with recycled
aluminium and steel;
packaging with recycled plastic)
- Products partially made by
renewable raw materials
(e.g. detergents, glue sticks,
wallpaper sticks, packaging adhesives)
- Replacement of empty package
water rinsers with air rinsers
- Systems reducing liquid losses
during production line changes,
start-ups and shutdowns
Null - Use of recycled water in - Shampoos with plant extracts - Biodegradable/compostable
production processes form certified organic crops products and packaging
- Use of natural and - Toothpaste with materials (e.g. soap and shower gel,
renewable raw materials natural based or from certified footwear, packaging for food)
(e.g. gum rubber and rice organic cultivations
husks and organic cotton in footwear, - Soap, shampoo, and shower
soy oil-based polyurethane gel formulations made of
foam for passenger seats in vehicles, natural ingredients
organic cotton in clothes,
bioplastics in packaging)
- Wood and timber coming from
sustainably managed (local) forests
- No artificial colours and flavours in food
- Use of recycled materials
(e.g. recycled polyester, recycled
PET plastic, recycled fabrics)
in products and packaging
(e.g. clothes, footwear, food carrier bags,
tissue papers and towels of
paper, building materials)
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1621

Table 7 (continued ).

Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Positive - Sustainable forest management, - Glue allowing for fast and reliable - Recyclable products,
promotion of tree planting repair of durable goods components, and packaging
- Recycle 100% of waste (zero emission system) (extending their life and (e.g. batteries, toners, tyres,
- Systems treating all process water, conserving resources) vehicles, televisions, radiator,
enabling it to be recycled and reused bottles and containers
(e.g. membrane bio reactor) - Recyclable house
- Production waste recycling (reuse system house)
- Reuse and/or recycle of - Reusable packaging
raw materials and wastes - Repairable and
- Use of by-products as raw materials reusable alternators
- Use recycled water for cooling - Easily disassembly
water and plant maintenance products (e.g. oil filters)
- Management systems
that collect, recover and
recycle post-consumer packaging,
products, or components
(fax toner cartridge, batteries,
consumer electronics)

Table 8
Green option matrix for the environmental focus energy in the Consumer Goods sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Low energy consuming production - Energy efficient products (e.g. coolers, washing machines, -
processes batteries, lightbulbs, LEDs, TVs, DVD home theatre, air
- Combined heat and power plant conditioners, buildings, eco-fluorescent lamps)
- Food requiring less amount of heat - High performing detergents
to be cooked (working at low temperatures)
- Intelligent systems with sensor for energy efficiency (in TVs)
- Intelligent chargers automatically shutting off when
objects charged
- Ejector cycle in refrigeration
- Heat insulating interlayer film for laminated glass
- Insulating sealants, tile adhesives for houses

Vehicles:
- Hybrid vehicles
- High-concentration ethanol vehicles
- Cars with solar roof
- Biodiesel compatible vehicles
- High precision injection
(four-cylinder petrol engine)
- Auto start stop function
(switch off the engine when
the car is at a standstill and in neutral)
- Electric power steering
(ensure that energy is only
used during actual steering manoeuvres)
- Brake energy regeneration
(power from brake pedal)
- Electrically controlled vents
(air resistance reduced,
as is fuel consumption)
- Gear shift indicator
(the system gives recommendations
on how to go up and
down the gears reducing
fuel consumption)
- Use of lighter materials
- Hybrid engine
- Lithium-ion batteries for hybrid engine
- Natural gas vehicles
- LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas) vehicles
- Biodiesel vehicles
- Starter generator facilitating idle-stops
- More fuel-efficient engines
(such as high precision injection,
(continued on next page)
1622 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Table 8 (continued ).

Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

direct injection, transmission efficiency, common rail
system; improvement of injectors
for finer spray automatization;
variable cam timing; battery engine
control unit for hybrid cars)
- Common rail system

Tires:
- Weight of the tire reduced
- Rolling resistance decreased
- Tire-pressure inflation-monitoring systems

Null - Use of renewable energy sources - Green building (natural ventilation, -

(such as solar, wind, hydroelectric, thermal mass via the concrete
geothermal power generation, frame, solar thermal panels for
biofuels, etc) hot water heating and a wind turbine
to generate electricity for use in lighting)
- Second generation biofuels
Positive - Use of landfill gas to generate energy - Roofing material for solar cells - Recovering tyres as
- Reuse of heat from production processes fuel with a high
- Waste wood as biomass energy source heating value
- Vehicle 95%
recoverable; 10%
can provide energy
(for cement
production, heating, etc.)

Table 9
Green option matrix for the environmental focus pollution in the Consumer Goods sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative Reduction of production emissions: Vehicles: - Reduction of halogenated
- Process that eliminates - (All items mentioned in the plastic for electrical wires
the need for steam in environmental focus energy)
soap manufacturing - NOx reducing systems
- Use of climate-friendly ice - Integrated powertrain and filter
cream cabinets systems to reduce NOx, CO and volatile
(hydrocarbon refrigerant cabinets) hydrocarbons emissions
- Sustainable agriculture: - Exhaust gas treatment system
reduction of pesticide use - Particulate filter
- Reduction of chemicals Tires:
and hazardous materials - Weight of the tire reduced
- Reduction in consumption of - Rolling resistance decreased
solvents - Tire-pressure
(main source of VOC emissions) inflation-monitoring systems
- Reduction of use of paint Fuels:
containing toluene, xylene or styrene - Second generation biofuels
- Reduction of release of
chemical substances into
the environment
- Minimization of waste generated
Reduction emissions due to transportation:
- Use of cleaner, more fuel-efficient vehicles
- Reduction in the number of vehicles
- Reduction of packaging material
- Concentrated detergents
- Optimization of logistics processes
Water:
- Water filtration systems to
maximize the purity of water
- Treatment of water after usage

Null - Use of elemental chlorine-free - Fuel cell vehicles - Lead-free solder in manufacturing
(ECF) and total chlorine-free - Electric cars products (such as wide screen TVs,
(TCF) bleached pulp - Tyres’ tread compounds DVD players, digital still
- Use of fluorine-free glue without aromatic oils cameras and cellular telephones)
- PVC-free products
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1623

Table 9 (continued ).

Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

- Control and elimination
of chemical substances
- Elimination of hazardous wastes
- Responsible disposal of unsold
product and of packaging
Positive - Redevelopment of brownfield land;
cleaning up of contaminated sites; returning
of the land to productive
- High-quality refuse derived fuel
- Use of hydroflurocarbon (HFC) - Chrome-free leather
free insulation in refrigerated - Evaporator without
point-of-sale equipment hexavalent chromium (in vehicles)
- Toluene-free adhesive products - Mercury-free bulb (in vehicles)
- Lead-free starter (in vehicles)
- Use of hydroflurocarbon
(HFC) free insulation in refrigerated
point-of-sale equipment
- Avoidance of the use of
softeners in PVC
- Non-fluorocarbon car
air conditioner
- Mold blocker silicone sealant through -
biological active substances and fungicide
- Drainage water purification equipment

Table 10
Green option matrix for the environmental focus materials in the Industrial sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Products with a percentage of recycled materials
- Water efficiency
- Raw materials efficiency
- Size and weight reduction of products and
packaging reduction of cushioning material
Null - Products completely made from
recycled or discarded material
- Products completely made of renewable
raw material coming from certified sources
(such as wood, cellulose, and fibers)
- Elimination of waste in all its forms
Positive - Water recover and reuse
- Recyclable by-products
- Products with high durability - Products partially made of
(more robust, with longer service life) biodegradable or recyclable materials
- Resource-saving products (which consume
less water, detergent and paper
during their use)
- Products using renewable - Biodegradable products
resources (such as biomass power plants) (such as bioplastics)
- - Reusable packaging and products
- Recyclable packaging and products

Table 11
Green option matrix for the environmental focus energy in the Industrial sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Products requiring less energy to be produced - Energy-efficient products -
- Products requiring less energy to be installed (LEDs, lamps, engines, air
- Use of computerized control systems to reduce conditioners, buildings, etc)
energy consumption during production processes - Thermal insulating
- Transport optimization products/materials (e.g. ecoglass)
- Use of more fuel-efficient vehicles - Fuel-efficient engines
- Size and weight reduction, concentration - Hybrid vehicles
of products (reduction of transportation) - Lightweight vehicles
- Use of more efficient heat generation systems - Energy-efficient heat pump systems
- Energy conserving products
(e.g. converter for hybrid cars and
other systems applied to engines)
- Use of materials reducing
aerodynamic drag of vehicles
- Reduction of vehicles’ weight
Null - Use of renewable energy sources - Green buildings with photovoltaic -
(such as solar, wind, hydroelectric, solar system on the roof
geothermal power generation, etc)
Positive - Waste heat recovery for power generation - Wind turbines - Waste products
- Waste gases recovery for power generation - Hydro turbines recyclable into biofuels
- Solar cells
- Biomass power plants
- Materials increasing power generation efficiency
- System for generating electrical energy and process
heat from residues of paper production
1624 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Table 12
Green option matrix for the environmental focus pollution in the Industrial sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Reduction of GHG emissions - Clean engines -
during production processes - Hybrid vehicles
- Miniaturization, weight reduction, - Efficient crankcase
concentration of products ventilation filtration systems
(reduction of transportation) - Vehicles with exhaust gas
- Transport optimization recirculation and selected
- Use of cleaner-burning alternative catalytic reduction
fuel vehicles for transportation - Lightweight vehicles
- Use of hybrid vehicles for transportation - Excavator able to adapt
- Use of more efficient heat generation systems power levels to each operation
- Use of control systems - Detergent with low VOC emissions
helping to reduce GHG emissions - Tube for furnaces
- Composite cements ensuring low nitrogen emissions
(with reduced clinker content)
- Reduction of hazardous materials
- Reduction of chemicals
Null - Prevention of soil pollution - Fuel cells - Packaging that does not produce
- Detergents without chemical cleaners dioxin when burned
- Products (such as air conditioners)
without fluorocarbons
- Elimination of hazardous materials and
chemicals (such as lead, bismuth, bromine, etc)
from products
- Tools that do not require the
use of any cutting fluids
Positive - Waste reuse - Photocatalytic cements -
- Oil-skimmers based on steel
belts facilitating recovery of
oil from contaminated water
- CO2 absorbent with barium
orthotitanate ceramics
- Technology to accelerate the
decomposition of waste
- Ceramic filtering systems
particulate trapping for diesel engines

Table 13
Green option matrix for the environmental focus materials in the Basic Materials sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Reduction of water wastes - Paint for car refinishes reducing the - Organic photovoltaic cells
- Minimization of waste generation amount of material required for adequate
- Minimization of raw material use new coverage compared to traditional systems
processes for propylene oxide, to reduce water use - Special steels enabling a longer useful life of products
- New processes for propylene oxide,
to reduce water use
Null - Use of recycled metal to produce - - Biodegradable materials
top quality aluminium foil (polymers, chelates, biomass
- Wood coming from derived plastics, solvents)
sustainably managed forests
- Chelating agents made of renewable materials
- Production of polyethylene
from renewable resource (sugar cane)
- Sustainable management of water
- Renewable polymers
(such as plant-based polylactic acid)
for fibres, textiles and plastic resin products
- Biomass derived plastic
(plant fiber-reinforced plastic made by
plant-based polylactic acid and cellulose)
- Biodiesel (e.g. from canola)
- Organic compound made of recycled vegetal
wastes and sludge from the steelworks
- Zero waste through operational efficiency
- Zero water to discharge
Positive - Recycle waste materials - - Recyclable materials
- Recycle hazardous wastes (e.g. aluminium)
- Reuse and recycle water - Design-for-recycling
- Recycle of used oil generated from operations
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1625

Table 14
Green option matrix for the environmental focus energy in the Basic Materials sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Energy efficient production processes - Solar reflecting pigments - Materials that can be
- New processes for propylene (preventing heat absorption on roof coatings) recycled with high-energy
oxide, to reduce energy use - Heat transfer fluids reduce efficient processes
- Recirculation system to recycle energy consumption in refrigeration systems (e.g. aluminium)
hot air and save energy - Aluminium or transparent polycarbonate
- Clean coal: technologies to for the vehicular industry (lightness saves energy)
significantly improve - Paint for car refinishes requiring
efficiency from the use of coal less energy to be used compared to traditional systems
- Energy efficient lighting solutions
Null - Use of green electricity - -
(from renewable energy sources)
- Replacement of oil as heating fuel
by peat, biomass and recycled fuel
Positive - Used oil generated from - Organic photovoltaic cells -
operations burned for energy recovery - Aluminium photovoltaic panels
- Use of by-product gas for
n-house generation systems
- Capture and conversion of coal
mine methane into saleable energy
- Piping methane gas from
landfill to generate steam
- Waste incineration and energy recovery
- Energy co-generation plant
(use of surplus gas from iron and
steelmaking to produce electricity and steam)
- Reuse of wastes from wood
preparation to generate steam

Table 15
Green option matrix for the environmental focus pollution in the Basic Materials sector.

.Impact Life cycle phase

Before usage Usage After usage

Less negative - Production processes with low emissions - Reduction of volatile organic compounds -
- Reduction of hazardous substances (VOCs) in products
- Flue gas cleaning system (e.g. car refinishes and solvents)
(reduction of nox and SOx) - Use of aluminium in the vehicular industry
- Recirculation system to (lightness reduces emissions)
recycle hot air (reduction of co2) - Use of transparent polycarbonate in the
- Clean coal: technologies to vehicular industry
capture the co2 created from coal combustion (lightness reduces emissions)
- Reduction of waste to landfill - Use of special lighter materials
(such as steels) in transportation (containers)
- Stainless steel (lighter)
in the vehicular industry
- Brilliance scanner with radiation
doses reduced by up to 80%
- Removing of sulphur from
gasoline and diesel fuels
- Natural gas cylinders and
conversion kits for vehicles
(allowing switch between
natural gas and other fuels)
Null - New processes for propylene oxide, - Chlorine-free bleaching crop - Halogen-free flame retardant
to generate no by-products protection products ensuring alloy resin (for DVD recorder)
- Wastewater cleaned biologically conservation of soil structure by l
before flowing into the sea eaving roots intact, helping to
- Avoidance of chemicals substances prevent soil erosion
- Carbon neutral polymers - ‘Green’ lights not creating
(such as plant-based polylactic acid) problems for birds migration
for fibres, textiles and plastic resin products
- Fiber recycled from biomass and not requiring
organic solvents in manufacturing
- Emission-free alternative energy sources
Positive - Industrial re-use of municipal waste water - Products used to support environmental -
preservation (water purification,
air purification, soil cleanup)
(e.g. chips detecting microorganisms for
soil and groundwater cleanup)
1626 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628

Appendix C. Checklist to guide the characterization of green

.Product or practice description Corresponding
products and practices. type of impact
, Product with extended lifecycle/high durability Less negative
 STEP 1 , Eco-efficient products, requiring/allowing the Less negative
use of less materials
In which one(s)8 of the following focus areas does the , Products using renewable raw materials (where Null
competitive products use non renewable ones)
product/practice display improved environmental performance
, Products that during use are in contact with Null
compared to industry standards or determines environmental peoples’ skin and are made of natural/certified
benefits? materials
, Products allowing to extend lifecycle of other products Positive
, Materials (including water) / go to the section ‘materials’
, Energy / go to the section ‘energy’ After product usage
, Pollution/toxic waste / go to the section ‘pollution/toxic
waste’  STEP 3

Select the description that better reflects the product or prac-

Section ‘materials’
tice:

 STEP 2
.Product or practice description Corresponding
In which phase(s) of the product life cycle does the product/ type of impact
practice display improved environmental performance compared , Product or packaging partly made of biodegradable Less negative
to industry standards or determines environmental benefits? materials
, Product or packaging partly made of recyclable Less negative
materials
, Before product usage/ go to the section ‘before product usage’
, Product or packaging completely made of Null
, During product usage / go to the section ‘during product usage’ biodegradable materials
, After product usage/ go to the section ‘after product usage’ , Product or packaging completely reusable, Positive
remanufacturable, or recyclable
Before product usage
Section ‘Energy’
 STEP 3
 STEP 2
Select the description that better reflects the product or practice
and derive the corresponding type of impact. To which phase(s) of the product life cycle the improved envi-
ronmental performance of the product or the environmental
benefits determined by the product refer?
.Product or practice description Corresponding type of impact
, Eco-efficient production Less negative , Before product usage/ go to the section ‘before product usage’
processes , During product usage / go to the section ‘during product usage’
, Reduction of product or Less negative , After product usage/ go to the section ‘after product usage’
packaging’s size and weight
, Use of recycled materials for Null
product or packaging
Before product usage
, Use of materials not containing Null
harmful or toxic substances for  STEP 3
product or packaging
, Use of renewable materials for Null
Select the description that better reflects the product or
product or packaging
, Use of environmentally Null practice:
certified raw materials for
product or packaging
, Production waste recycling/reuse Positive
.Product or practice description Corresponding
, Production water recycling/reuse Positive
type of impact
, Products requiring less energy to be Less negative
produced or installed
During product usage , Reduction of product or packaging’s Less negative
size and weight
, Use of practices reducing energy Less negative
 STEP 3
consumption in production plants
, Transport optimization Less negative
Select the description that better reflects the product or , Use of more efficient energy generation Less negative
practice: systems in production processes
, Use of renewable energy sources Null
in production processes
, Use of co-generation plants to provide Positive
electricity, heating, and cooling in
production processes
8 , Generating energy from exhaust hot Positive
Note that more than one choice is possible for steps 1 and 2. In such cases, all
gas/waste in production processes
the related sections need to be considered.
 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628 1627

During product usage During product usage

 STEP 3  STEP 3

Select the description that better reflects the product or prac- Select the description that better reflects the product or prac-
tice: tice:

.Product or practice description Corresponding .Product or practice description Corresponding

type of impact type of impact

, Energy efficient products, attachments, components Less negative , Energy efficient products, attachments, Less negative
, Size and weight reduction of products used for transport Less negative components
, Thermal insulating products/materials Less negative , Size and weight reduction of products Less negative
, Energy conserving products Less negative used for transport
, Products working through energy coming from Null , Products with reduced electromagnetic Less negative
renewable sources by themselves generated waves emissions
, Products increasing energy generation efficiency Positive , Products reducing pollution/release Less negative
, Products generating energy from renewable Positive of toxic substances during their use
energy sources , Products avoiding pollution/release Null
of toxic substances during their use
, Products avoiding/reducing pollution/release Positive
of toxic substances of other products
After product usage

 STEP 3 After product usage

Select the description that better reflects the product or prac-  STEP 3
tice:
Select the description that better reflects the product or
.Product or practice description Corresponding practice:
type of impact
, Products or packaging that can be recycled Less negative
with high-energy efficient processes .Product or practice description Corresponding
, Reusing products or packaging without Null type of impact
any processing , Products with reduced amount of toxic Less negative
, Waste products recyclable into fuel Positive substances e e.g. CFCs, radioactive materials,
PVC e (thus generating a reduced
Section ‘polluation/toxic waste’ amount of toxic waste)
, Products avoiding the use of toxic substances Null
(thus not generating toxic waste)
 STEP 2 , Products that reduce the pollution in the Positive
environment wherein disposed
To which phase(s) of the product life cycle the improved envi-
ronmental performance of the product or the environmental
benefits determined by the product refer?
References

, Before product usage/ go to the section ‘before product usage’ Albino, V., Balice, A., Dangelico, R.M., 2009. Environmental strategies and green
, During product usage / go to the section ‘during product product development: an overview on sustainability-driven companies.
Business Strategy and the Environment 18 (2), 83e96.
usage’
Bansal, P., Roth, K., 2000. Why companies go green: a model of ecological respon-
, After product usage/ go to the section ‘after product usage’ siveness. Academy of Management Journal 43 (4), 717e748.
Baumann, H., Boons, F., Bragd, A., 2002. Mapping the green product development
Before product usage field: engineering, policy and business perspectives. Journal of Cleaner
Production 10 (5), 409e425.
Berchicci, L., Bodewes, W., 2005. Bridging environmental issues with new product
 STEP 3 development. Business Strategy and the Environment 14 (5), 272e285.
Chen, Y.S., Lai, S.B., Wen, C.T., 2006. The influence of green innovation performance
on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics 67 (4), 331e339.
Select the description that better reflects the product or Chen, C., 2001. Design for the environment: a quality-based model for green
practice: product development. Management Science 47 (2), 250e263.
Chung, Y., Tsai, C., 2007. The effect of green design activities on new product
.Product or practice description Corresponding type of impact strategies and performance: an empirical study among high-tech companies.
, Reduction of emissions Less negative International Journal of Management 24 (2), 276e288.
Commission of the European Communities, 2001. Green Paper on Integrated
in production processes
Product Policy. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2001/com2001_
, Reduction of emissions due Less negative
0068en01.pdf.
to transportation
Dangelico, R.M., Pujari, D., forthcoming. Mainstreaming green product innovation:
, Use of renewable energy sources Null why and how companies integrate environmental sustainability. Journal of
in production processes Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0434-0
, Avoidance of the use of hazardous Null Dewberry, E., Goggin, P., JaneMar 1996. Spaceship Ecodesign. Co-design 5/6, 12e17.
materials and chemicals in Elkington, J., Hailes, J., 1988. The Green Consumer Guide. Victor Gollancz, London,
production processes UK.
, Redevelopment of brownfield land/ Positive González-Benito, J., González-Benito, O., 2006. A review of determinant factors of
cleaning up of contaminated sites environmental proactivity. Business Strategy and the Environment 15 (2), 87e102.
, Transforming production Positive Hanssen, O.J., 1999. Sustainable product systems e experiences based on case
waste in fuel projects in sustainable product development. Journal of Cleaner Production 7
(1), 27e41.
1628 R.M. Dangelico, P. Pontrandolfo / Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1608e1628
Kaebernick, H, Soriano, V. An approach to simplified environmental assessment
by classification of products. In: Proceedings of Seventh CIRP International
Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 27e29 November
2000.
Kleiner, A., 1991. What does it mean to be green? Harvard Business Review 69 (4),
38e47.
Krippendorf, K., 2004. Content Analysis: an Introduction to Its Methodology, second
ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Krishnan, V., Ulrich, K., 2001. Product development decisions: a review of the
literature. Management Science 47 (1), 1e21.
Ljungberg, L.Y., 2007. Materials selection and design for development of sustainable
products. Materials and Design 28, 466e479.
Luttropp, C., Lagerstedt, J., 2006. EcoDesign and the ten golden rules: generic advice
for merging environmental aspects into product development. Journal of
Cleaner Production 14 (15/16), 1396e1408.
McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., 1996. Green Management: a Reader. The Dryden Press,
Harcourt Brace & Company Limited, London, UK.
Miller, J., Szekely, F., 1995. What is green? European Management Journal 13 (3),
322e333.
Murillo-Luna, J.L., Garcés-Ayerbe, C., Rivera-Torres, P., 2008. Why do patterns of
environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach. Strategic
Management Journal 29 (11), 1225e1240.
Ottman, J.A., Stafford, E.R., Hartman, C.L., 2006. Green marketing myopia. Envi-
ronment 48 (5), 22e36.
Ottman, J.A., 1997. Green Marketing: Opportunity for Innovation. TC/Contemporary
Books, Lincolnwood, IL.
Park, J.H., Seo, K.K., Jang, D.S., 1999. Recycling cell formation using group technology
for disposal products. In: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on
Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing. IEEE, pp.
830e835.
Peattie, K., 1995. Environmental Marketing Management: Meeting the Green
Challenge. Pitman Publishing, London, UK.
Porter, M.E., Reinhardt, F.L., 2007. A strategic approach to climate. Harvard Business
Review 85 (10), 22e26.
Pujari, D., Wright, G., Peattie, K., 2003. Green and competitive. Influences on
environmental new product development performance. Journal of Business
Research 56 (8), 657e671.
Pujari, D., 2006. Eco-innovation and new product development: understanding the
influences on market performance. Technovation 26 (1), 76e85.
Rehfeld, K.M., Rennings, K., Ziegler, A., 2007. Integrated product policy and envi-
ronmental product innovations: an empirical analysis. Ecological Economics 61
(1), 91e100.
Reinhardt, F.L., 1998. Environmental product differentiation: implications for
corporate strategy. California Management Review 40 (4), 43e73.
Robert, K.-H., March/April 1995. The natural step. Timeline, 1e24.
Rombouts, J.P., 1998. A knowledge-based system for ranking DfE-options. In:
Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the
Environment. IEEE, pp. 287e291.
Rose, C., Beiter, K., Ishii, K., 1999. Determining end-of-life strategies as a part of
product definition. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE International Symposium
on Electronics and the Environment. IEEE, pp. 219e224.
Roy, R., Wield, D., Gardiner, J.P., Potter, S., 1996. Innovative Product Development.
The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Ryan, C.J., Hosken, M., Greene, D., 1992. EcoDesign: design and the response to the
greening of the international market. Design Studies 13 (1), 3e22.
Schmidheiny, S., 1992. Changing course: a global business perspective on devel-
opment and the environment. In: Business Council for Sustainable Develop-
ment. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Shrivastava, P., Hart, S., 1995. Creating sustainable corporations. Business Strategy
and the Environment 4 (3), 154e165.
Shrivastava, P., 1995. Environmental technologies and competitive advantage.
Strategic Management Journal 16, 183e200.
Silverstein, M., 1993. What does it mean to be green? Business and Society Review
86, 16e23.
Simon, F.L., 1992. Marketing green products in the triad. Columbia Journal of World
Business 27 (3-4), 268e285.
Sousa, I., Wallace, D., 2006. Product classification to support approximate life-cycle
assessment of design concepts. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 73,
228e249.
Unruh, G., Ettenson, R., 2010. Growing green. Harvard Business Review 88 (6), 94e100.
Wever, R, Boks, C. Design for sustainability in the fuzzy front end. In: Proceedings of
Sustainable Innovation 07, Farnham, Surrey, UK, 29e30 October 2007, pp.199e205.
Wever, R, Boks, C, Bakker, C. Sustainability within product portfolio management.
In: Proceedings of Sustainable Innovation 08, Malmo, Sweden, 27e28 October
2008, pp. 219e227.
Wolfe, R., 1991. The use of content analysis to assess corporate social responsibility.
In: Post, J. (Ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, vol. 13. JAI
Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 281e307.