































 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

1 

Economic evaluation framework for Industrial Symbiosis 

through network lenses: a systematic literature review 

Maurizio Cisi1*, Roberta Napoli2 

 

1 University of Turin, Department of Management, Corso Unione Sovietica 2018bis, 10134, Turin, Italy 

maurizio.cisi@unito.it 

*contact author 
ORCID  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5281-0978 

2 University of Turin, Department of Management, Corso Unione Sovietica 2018bis, 10134, Turin, Italy  

roberta.napoli@unito.it 
ORCID  https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5066-6508 

 

Received: 01/08/2024  

Accepted for publication: 26/11/2024 

Published: 20/12/2024  
 

 

Abstract

Current economic and productive systems, characterized by huge resource consumption, cause significant environmental and 

social impacts, underlining their intrinsic unsustainability. This research explored circular economy models, in particular 

Industrial Symbiosis (IS) process, involving materials, energy, water and by-products exchange among different entities. 

Although the economic aspect is often considered of paramount importance, IS costs and benefits proved to be scarcely 

identified and properly quantified in the existing literature, since methodologies lack an organized structure to link economic 

outcomes to specific activities that generate value, which, in turn, remains assumed at a merely descriptive level if there’s no 

quantification approach alternative to market value estimation. Therefore, through a systematic literature review literature 

(2019-2023), 61 articles were analyzed, with the objective of filling the knowledge gap by means of systematization of recent 

scientific evidence on IS economic aspect, pinpointing areas of potential economic advantage or disadvantage, for the final 

construction of an innovative and detailed IS economic evaluation framework, including revenues and costs items, calculation 

methodologies and specific performance KPIs. This research contributes to the broad comprehension of economic benefits, 

bolstering sustainable practices and network business model adoption. 
 

Keywords: industrial symbiosis, economic evaluation, networking, industrial ecology, circular economy 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

2 

1. Introduction 

The current economic and productive systems, based on a large and growing resource consumption, entail significant footprints, 

in terms of environmental and social impacts, proving their intrinsic unsustainability; therefore, the need to find innovative 

sustainable business models (Bocken et al., 2014), that can minimize negative effects and positively influence the way value is 

generated and distributed. Among them, the circular economy business model, aiming at creating value from waste 

management, transformation and recovery (Sadraei et al., 2023) represents a source of competitive advantage, combining the 

generation of profit from differentiated products with a conscious perspective on environmental impacts (Costanza, 2020). This 

business model often translates into Industrial Symbiosis (IS) processes, engaging “traditionally separate entities in a collective 

approach to competitive advantage involving physical exchange of materials, energy, water, and by-products” (Chertow, 2000), 

and distinguishing itself from other types of mutual interaction because, according to some authors, it associates at least three 

distinct entities in the exchange of two, or more, different resources (Albino et al., 2016; Chertow, 2007). Case-study analysis 

(Neves et al., 2020) underlines the development and wide adoption of symbiosis practices, involving a variety of industries 

(Lombardi & Laybourn, 2012), mainly from the manufacturing sector. Scientific literature emphasizes, as peculiar features and 

keys of success, cooperation and synergistic possibilities provided by geographical proximity (Boons et al., 2017; Chertow, 

2000, 2007): for those reasons, the symbiotic process generally takes place inside the so-called eco-industrial parks, defined as 

communities of businesses that cooperate to gain economic, environmental and social advantages from the efficient share of 

resources (Chertow, 2000). In fact, IS models fully took shape within the eco-industrial park of Kalundborg, Denmark, although 

many scholars do not consider spatial proximity as a necessary or sufficient pre-condition (Neves et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 

2015), exploring other possibilities for non-localized exchanges, as knowledge networks, intended to eco-innovation and 

efficient resource use (Lombardi & Laybourn, 2012). Indeed, by investigating temporal evolution (Mallawaarachchi et al., 

2020), it can be noticed that IS definition has been enlarged, to embrace intangible exchanges, besides sharing of services and 

infrastructure. Moreover, three specific dimensions have been progressively integrated and deepened: willingness for network 

cooperation, structural and sociocultural context, and externalities linked to exchanges’ sustainability and consequential 

economic and environmental gains. Scientific research regarding IS framed it into the field of Industrial Ecology (IE) 

(Baldassarre et al., 2019; Lybæk et al., 2021), that discipline considering industrial systems similar to ecosystems, with the aim 

of reducing environmental impacts and closing energy and resource loops. Recently, the analysis has been broadened to the 

domain of Circular Economy (CE), an umbrella concept that promotes the transition towards circular models for recycling, 

reusing, and waste valorization, combining environmental and economic goals (MacArthur, 2013). Businesses are at the 

forefront of transition, and peculiar partnerships that develop within an IS are a driving force for enterprises’ shift towards 

production systems oriented to circularity (Costanza, 2020). The CE-focused definition certainly receives more validation at 

the political level, in particular from European policy landscape, which acknowledges IS as a strategic key for circularity of 

industrial and economic systems, within the scope of policies and programs such as the Circular Economy Action Plan (Lybæk 

et al., 2021; Neves et al., 2020; Wadström et al., 2021). Even if both disciplines are built on close-loops theories, CE addresses 

IS both as a critical dimension to evaluate circularity (Piontek et al., 2021). and as a business model in which its principles take 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

3 

shape (Ranjbari et al., 2021), clarifying the economic rationale and operative functioning, and integrating IE perspective, which 

provides a good understanding of IS as a sociotechnical process and its development over time (Baldassarre et al., 2019). 

Focus on economic aspects can be found since the starting point of IS processes: scientific literature identifies costs reductions 

(Colpo et al., 2022b; Lybæk et al., 2021) and search for private advantages (Chertow, 2000, 2007) as the main raison d’être 

for symbiotic exchanges, while the acknowledgment of environmental benefits as a positive consequence of resource flows 

happens at a later time (Boons et al., 2017; Wadström et al., 2021). In fact, even if circularity offers a concrete manner to reduce 

emissions and environmental impacts linked to the use of materials along the whole value chain, it should also represent a more 

attractive production system for companies from an economic point of view (Piontek et al., 2021). The strategic opportunity 

for financial gains, often resulting from scarce raw material availability (Chertow, 2007; Faria et al., 2021), makes a 

spontaneous triggering of IS (Boons et al., 2017; Neves et al., 2020): researchers highlight the need to “uncover” (Chertow, 

2007) symbiosis dynamics and their social structures, in order to incentivize exchanges and spread knowledge with the support 

of specific policies (Boons et al., 2017; Chertow, 2007; Lybæk et al., 2021), aiming at overcoming major operative, 

technological, economic-financial, knowledge and sociocultural barriers (Colpo et al., 2022b; Kosmol & Otto, 2020; Re et al., 

2023; Taqi et al., 2022), and their associated risks (Henriques et al., 2020). However, even if the economic aspect is one of the 

most investigated, because of its primary relevance, scholars pinpoint the need to identify and properly measure economic 

implications, enlarging the scope of research by including quantified IS economic costs and benefits, more than merely 

descriptive outcomes. (Wadström et al., 2021). In fact, current analytical schemes are able to estimate economic advantages 

and disadvantages only through means of existing associated market value, pointing out the lack of specific frameworks for the 

identification and integration of all kinds of value, essential for a comprehensive evaluation of IS feasibility, beyond the market 

one, outlining furthermore a structured model to link outcomes to specific activities generating value. Consequently, this study 

was motivated to fill this knowledge gap by a systematic review of recent literature (2019-2023) in the field of IS economic 

analysis, from business’ point of view, in order to ascertain research trends through a bibliometric analysis, in addition to 

outlining most cited areas of potential advantage/disadvantages. Consequently, the research conducted was oriented to answer 

the following questions: 

RQ1: What is the research trend in the field of IS economic analysis? 

RQ2: What are the most relevant areas of potential economic costs/benefits? 

From the examination of 61 scientific articles, assessed on the basis of a dedicated review protocol, papers’ metadata and 

content data were extracted about industrial sectors involved, economic evaluation and the methodology implemented. Final 

objective consisted in the construction of a detailed framework, innovative and different from all others because of clear 

specification of all cost and revenue items and their quantification methodologies, useful to consider in an IS project economic 

feasibility study because of their recurrence in scientific literature. In a context of growing interest in IS as a powerful tool to 

achieve triple sustainability goals (Neves et al., 2020), this research contributes to the systematization of recent evidence in the 

field of analysis, which constitutes the theoretical basis of the framework, which proves practically useful for weighing benefits 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

4 

and disadvantages that may affect firms in overall evaluation of IS projects. Further relevance of this study is confirmed by its 

helpfulness in overcoming economic barriers and incentivizing the adoption of IS practices and network business models. 

The structure of this paper is as follows: Section 2 delineates methodological steps in conducting systematic literature review, 

Section 3 presents the main bibliometric results and findings useful to construct economic framework of analysis, developed 

in Section 4, also devoted to general discussion. Section 5 draws conclusions, limitations of the study and recommendations 

for future research development. 

 

2. Methodology of Research 

Systematic literature review could be defined as “a systematic, explicit, [comprehensive,] and reproducible method for 

identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, 

and practitioners” (Fink, 2019). This means that the analysis, to be called scientific, must be “systematic in following a 

methodological approach, explicit in explaining the procedures by which it was conducted, comprehensive in its scope of 

including all relevant material, and, hence, reproducible by others who would follow the same approach in reviewing the topic” 

(Okoli, 2015) 

This approach was deemed the most appropriate to provide an in-depth summary of existent evidence on the state of the art 

for Industrial Symbiosis, particularly focused on benefits and disadvantages involved in economic feasibility assessment. To 

pursue this aim, the presented analysis adapted systematic literature review (SLR) methodology outlined by Okoli (2015), 

following a replicable, scientific and transparent approach based on an eight-step guide: 

1. Identify the purpose: to be clear and explicit with the audience, the purpose of this study was to fill a knowledge gap by 

providing a deep understanding of the most up-to-date state-of-the-art on economic feasibility of Industrial Symbiosis. 

Generally speaking, this analysis was conducted to systematize progress in field of inquiry, develop a framework based on 

latest scientific evidence and make recommendations for future research; 

2. Draft protocol and train the team: a written protocol document, as a road map to conduct the review, provided details 

and training for both reviewers, in order to guarantee consistency and uniformity of analysis; 

3. Apply practical screen: in order to critically select sources for scientific evidence, screening for inclusion involved three 

filter criteria:  

-  Publication language: English, the one both reviewers could read; 

- Range of publication: last five years (2019-2023), to focus on the most up-to-date progress in the field of inquiry and to 

uncover potential research avenues; 

- Document type: article, to ensure peer-reviewed quality paper excluding reviews of literature. 

No filter for Journal or Subject area was considered, in order to make the review as more comprehensive as possible, taking 

into account interdisciplinarity in analysis; 

4. Search for literature: literature search was performed on Scopus and Web of Science platforms (Pranckutė, 2021).  



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

5 

Frequently used by researchers across social sciences and disciplines, these databases were selected because they ensure a 

holistic and multidisciplinary vision of the research theme, including high-impact articles on aspects ranging from 

environmental engineering to sustainable development and circular economy, essential for an integrated analysis. Search string 

was built on concepts directly related to the research questions. In order to reach the largest number of relevant articles in the 

most scientific manner, a preliminary keyword pattern analysis was carried out using VOSviewer. A small representative 

sample of articles analyzing economical aspects of Industrial Symbiosis was used to extrapolate keywords most appropriate 

and cited by scholars in the field of research. Performing a brief first analysis of databases’ results, researchers opted to maintain 

keywords combining the two criteria of breadth and specificity. On the one hand, selected keywords provided the highest 

number of results; on the other hand, coherence with the research theme was evaluated in order to guarantee as focused analysis 

as possible, excluding circular practices beyond the definition of Industrial Symbiosis (Chertow, 2000a).  Moreover, the use of 

Boolean operators among selected terms let the researchers take advantage of database search power. This strategy led to a 

search string where the term “Industrial Symbiosis” was combined with synonyms identifying economic implications. In 

particular, the search string (“industrial symbiosis” AND (“effect” OR “economic* aspect*” OR “benefit” OR “economic* 

analysis” OR “cost”)) was performed on databases, searching within “Article title, Abstract and Keywords”. Asterisks were 

used because they represent any number of characters. The procedure was deemed effective to answer the research questions 

because it let researchers be as specific as possible, excluding circular practices beyond the boundaries of Industrial Symbiosis, 

aligning with the objective of constructing an economic evaluation framework as detailed as possible on specific peculiarities 

of symbiotic exchanges. Records identified through searching on Web of Science and Scopus were filtered according to criteria 

for practical screening; then, the removal of duplicates (n= 127) and not accessible (n= 8) articles led to a preliminary total of 

n= 323 papers for eligibility; 

5. Extract data: this step involved the gathering of information that serves as raw material for answering research questions, 

analyzing and discussing results. In particular, the following data were extracted:  

- Keywords, Journal and year of publication: to perform bibliometric analysis and assess evolution patterns in scientific 

literature; 

- Economical cost/benefit: to give a direct answer to research question, upon which building economic assessment framework 

for Industrial Symbiosis; 

- Industries involved in symbiotic exchanges: to understand what economic sectors could be interested as potential users of 

the framework; 

- Methodology for quantifying costs/benefits: to comprehend what applicable calculation methodologies are for the practical 

implementation of the framework.  

6.     Appraise quality: screening in full-text for exclusion led to articles scored on the basis of qualitative quality appraisal 

that did not involve methodology evaluation but appropriateness in answering the research question. To ensure articles met this 

criterion, a preliminary review was implemented on a total of n= 323 papers, accurately reading titles and abstracts; from this 

step, n= 184 articles were excluded. Then, a refined assessment based on full-text was manually performed. This last step led 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

6 

to a final total number of n= 61 articles included in systematic literature review. In each evaluation step, researchers have 

always confronted each other on doubts of interpretation; 

7.     Synthesize studies: charts and tables, presented in Result section, were drafted to map at best the extracted data and to 

structure the systematic literature review; 

 

Figure 11. Systematic literature review – methodological process 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration from Okoli, C. (2015). A guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review. 

 
1 Criteria of selection are specified as follows: 

- Criteria n. 1: first preliminary title and abstract evaluation about relevance and usefulness in answering research questions; 

- Criteria n. 2: integral paper analysis to evaluate relevance and usefulness in answering research questions. 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

7 

8.   Write the review: final step involving paper writing; in particular, a framework for economic assessment of Industrial 

Symbiosis was built upon analyzed literature and presented in Discussion section. This represented the practical implication of 

the study carried out, proving its usefulness especially for companies that want to test economic sustainability of industrial 

symbiosis projects. 

Figure 1 illustrates the above-mentioned process of search, selection and screening, with the detailed number of articles 

involved in each phase. 

 

3. Results 

3.1 Review of Research Trends 

This section is devoted to description and discussion of results emerging from bibliometric analysis of selected articles, 

especially useful to give an answer to the first research question, identifying evolution trends and evaluating research progress 

in the field of Industrial Symbiosis economic analysis. In particular, after the application of selection criteria exposed in 

Methodological section, the main articles’ data were extracted, concerning journal and year of publication, in order to draw 

conclusions about the trend of research. Finally, a keywords co-occurrence analysis was conducted to deeply understand 

semantic relations and emerging issues, to better direct future investigations. 

The following analysis comprises 61 articles included in the systematic literature review, related to economic analysis of 

Industrial Symbiosis and published from 2019 up to 2023. The records analyzed were written by 243 different authors, for a 

total of 1.069 citations. 

Figure 2 illustrates publication evolution over time, starting from 2019 up to 2023. 

 

Figure 2. Publication evolution over time, 2019-2023 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration 

9
10

14
16

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

NUMBER OF PUBLICATION PER YEAR
(2019-2023)



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

8 

As can be seen, 2022 was the year with the highest number of articles published (16), while 2019 records the minimum of 

publications (9). Generally speaking, it can be noticed that the number of articles has grown steadily, reflecting an increasing 

interest of the scientific community that may be related to the ever-rising attention to sustainability issues and transition towards 

more circular production models, backed by Industrial Symbiosis within the scope of Circular Economy (Yazan & Fraccascia, 

2020), for which it is relevant to assess economic feasibility, besides environmental and social implications. The growing 

centrality of economic issues regarding Industrial Symbiosis provides a rationale for the comprehensive recent literature 

systematization, conducted in this study. 

Figure 3 illustrates the number of publications by journal. The 61 selected articles were collected from 31 different journals, 

but most appear in a few key journals. 

 

Figure 3. Number of publications by journal 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration 

 

As can be seen, the distribution is not uniform: in particular, Journal of Cleaner Production is the most influential research 

journal, with 13 articles on the investigated topic, while the top 5 gather a considerable percentage of publications (nearly 51%), 

proving they are of special importance in Industrial Symbiosis research related to economic aspects. In conclusion, the presence 

13

6
5

4
3 3

2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Journal o
f C

leaner P
roducti

on

Reso
urce

s, C
onserva

tio
n and Recyc

lin
g

Su
sta

inabilit
y

Energies

Journal o
f In

dustr
ial E

co
logy

Su
sta

inable Producti
on and Consu

mptio
n

Computers 
and Chemica

l E
ngineerin

g

Enviro
nmental a

nd Clim
ate Tech

nologies

Applie
d Energy

Biofuels, 
Bioproducts

 and Biorefin
ing

Chemica
l E

ngineerin
g Transacti

ons

Circ
ular E

co
nomy a

nd Su
sta

inabilit
y

Computers 
and In

dustr
ial E

ngin
eerin

g

Curre
nt R

ese
arch

 in
 Envir

onmental
 Su

sta
inabilit

y

Energy

Energy Research
 and Socia

l S
cie

nce

Enviro
nmental S

cie
nce

 and Pollu
tio

n Research

Enviro
nmental S

cie
nce

 and Tech
nologies

Fo
od and Bioproducts

 Proce
ssi

ng

Internatio
nal Jo

urnal o
f L

ife
 Cycl

e Asse
ssm

ent

Internatio
nal Jo

urnal o
f P

roducti
on Eco

nomics

Internatio
nal Jo

urnal o
f P

roducti
on Rese

arch

Journal o
f A

gric
ultu

re and Food Research

Journal o
f O

pen In
nova

tio
n: T

ech
nology, 

Market, a
nd Complexit

y

Proce
dia Envir

onmental Sc
ience

, E
ngineerin

g a
nd M

anagement

Proce
ss 

Integratio
n and Optim

iza
tio

n fo
r S

usta
inabilit

y

Renewable and Susta
inable Energy R

evie
ws

Reso
urce

s, C
onserva

tio
n and Recyc

lin
g Advance

s

Sm
art 

Energy

Tech
nologic

al Fo
recasti

ng and So
cia

l C
hange

Waste
 and Biomass 

Valoriz
atio

n

NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS PER JOURNAL



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

9 

of influential journals in the field of waste management, energy engineering, innovation and technology proves the 

interdisciplinary point of view adopted by scholars in examining Industrial Symbiosis. 

VOSviewer software was then used to perform a keywords co-occurrence analysis, with the aim of enlightening hotspots and 

revealing most popular themes in the topic of interest. Keywords’ cluster evaluation could help in the reconnaissance of 

semantics used for the topic, in order to understand past trends and advances in the field, and to give direction to future research. 

Correlations among clusters can reveal border-crossing themes and future possible links to different disciplines and research 

fields.  

The network visualization provided by VOSviewer was created applying the “full counting” method and keeping the keywords 

which appeared, at least, 3 times (for a total of 59 keywords). 

 

Figure 4. Keywords co-occurrence analysis - network visualization from VOSviewer 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration from VosViewer 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

10 

The three most relevant keywords, linked with Industrial Symbiosis (number of occurrences: 45), are Sustainable Development 

(number of occurrences: 21), Circular Economy (number of occurrences: 19), Industrial Ecology (number of occurrences: 8), 

resulting in 2 clusters.  

Figure 4 displays the keywords network split into 4 clusters. The first and largest cluster, the red one, is related to Industrial 

Symbiosis outcome assessment and it includes words like “economic and social effect”, “environmental management”, “cost-

benefit analysis”. The existence of this cluster may be motivated by the fact that evaluating the whole impact is relevant to 

understanding the reasons behind the spontaneous triggering of Industrial Symbiosis and also to incentivizing its 

implementation. The second, the green one, encompasses Circular Economy themes, and it is composed of words like “costs”, 

“recycling”, “waste management”. The presence of keywords linked to Industrial Ecology justifies a particular attention 

devoted to interconnections between these two research domains2, in which Industrial Symbiosis can be placed. The third, the 

blue cluster, is focused on Sustainable Development and it involves terms like “climate change”, “sustainability”, “supply 

chains”; understanding the contribution of Industrial Symbiosis to sustainable development may be the concern that led scholars 

focus on this topic. Lastly, the yellow cluster, though the smaller, contains words related to Industrial Symbiosis, which is the 

central research theme of this paper: “industrial park”, “reuse”, “design”. The often concretization of Industrial Symbiosis into 

eco-industrial parks can validate the presence of this specifically focused topic. It is relevant to underline the connection with 

domains of Circular Economy, Industrial Ecology, and methodologies of impact assessment, such as “life-cycle assessment,” 

“cost-benefit analysis,” and “environmental assessment.” Still, little space is devoted to consideration of social impacts, 

unveiling possibilities for future deepening of the subject. 

 

3.2 Synthesis of main results 

This section is devoted to description and discussion of results coming from main articles’ contents and information that were 

deemed useful for answering research questions and building economic evaluation framework. In particular, data were extracted 

about research methodologies, to comprehend what calculation methods are predominant in literature for estimation of costs 

and benefits, industries involved in symbiotic exchanges, to understand what economic sectors could be interested, and areas 

of economic costs and benefits, to give direct answer to research question. 

First of all, papers examined were classified into three different categories: “Evaluation of real case studies”, focused on 

comparison between pre-IS – post IS scenarios, for those analysis of already implemented IS practices; “Evaluation of symbiosis 

project”, oriented to the appraisal of feasibility of designed IS and/or shared facilities in a network of enterprises; “Application 

on a real case-study”, for evaluation of designed IS practices applied in a real industrial context. The majority of studies 

involved the second category (nearly 50% of examined papers); 27% were applications on real case studies, while the remaining 

were evaluations of pre-IS – post-IS scenarios. This implies that there could be some difficulties in finding studies assessing 

implemented IS economic contribution, the generality being analysis of costs and benefits specifically attributed to a project. 

 
2 Differences and commonalities between Circular Economy and Industrial Ecology were extensively explained in the 
Introduction section. 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

11 

3.2.1 Methodologies 

The first content data analyzed involved quantification methodologies used for IS project evaluation carried out in the 

selected studies for SLR. Understanding the estimation process allowed to create a basis upon which to build an integrated and 

comprehensive methodology within the framework of economic analysis. For this reason, Table I illustrates principal 

methodologies followed by examined literature in conducting the research and quantifying IS economic costs and benefits, 

with a brief description and the list of references which made use of each of them.  

 

Table I. Research methodologies analysis 

METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION REFERENCES 

Cash flows analysis 

Estimation of monetary flows of revenues and costs incurred in 

a period of time, on the basis of financial market prices. Values 

could be discounted, if they involve future potential monetary 

flows. 

Wijeyekoon et al., 2021 

Cost-benefit analysis 

Estimation of revenues obtained and costs incurred in a period 

of time, on the basis of financial market prices. It could 

consider external costs, primarily environmental and social, 

translated into monetary terms. Values could be discounted, if 

they involve future potential monetary flows. 

Cervo et al., 2019 

Pakere et al., 2021 

Sun et al., 2020 

Zabaniotou & Vaskalis, 

2023 

Cost savings and cost 

analysis 

Estimation of items of cost associated with a project through 

monetary terms; if a project involves cost reduction, then it 

could be an estimation of cost savings, as the difference 

between pre and post financial costs. Values could be 

discounted, if they involve future potential monetary flows. 

Ali et al., 2019 

Hu et al., 2020 

Li et al., 2021 

Profit and Net Present 

Value (NPV) analysis 

Calculation of profit margin as the difference between revenues 

obtained and costs incurred in a specific period of time. Values 

could be discounted, if they involve future potential economic 

or financial flows, to calculate a Net Present Value. 

Colpo et al., 2022a 

De Souza & Pacca, 2023 

Dong et al., 2022 

Hedlund et al., 2022 

Kerdlap et al., 2022 

Liao et al., 2024 

Sheppard et al., 2019 

Life-Cycle Costing 

Financial evaluation of total costs of a project, from its 

inception through to its disposal; the conventional c-LCC 

involves only economic costs, while environmental e-LCC and 

social s-LCC also consider externalities 

Ali et al., 2020 

Ansanelli et al., 2023 

Diaz et al., 2021 

Haq et al., 2020 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

12 

Ruiz & Diaz, 2022 

Zhang et al., 2022b 

Agent-based model 

Simulation framework for interaction of individual entities 

according to defined rules. Cost saving function is often 

included to model agent behaviors 

Fraccascia et al., 2020 

Yazan & Fraccascia, 2020 

Game Theory approach 

Theoretical framework analyzing strategic interactions among 

decision-makers, in which payoffs for each participant depend 

on the choices of all involved. To estimate economic outcomes, 

profit margin or economic benefit calculations are often used. 

Ahmad Fadzil et al., 2022 

Chin et al., 2021 

Galvan-Cara et al., 2022 

He et al., 2020 

Linear and non-linear 

programming 

optimization model 

Mathematical technique used to optimize a function subject to 

a set of linear or non-linear constraints. In the case of mixed-

integer or multi-integer programming models, some variables 

could assume integer values. Financial cost analysis often 

provides the economic constraint, while the optimization goal 

could be a profit maximization 

Al-Quradaghi et al., 2022 

Asghari et al., 2023 

Boix et al., 2023 

Bütün et al., 2019 

Chatterjee et al., 2021 

Farouk & Chew, 2021 

Goh et al., 2022 

Misrol et al., 2022 

Misrol et al., 2021 

Yu et al., 2023 

Singular or many-

objective optimization 

model 

Optimization framework that deals with a large number of 

objectives, often conflicting. Economic equations involving 

cash flows or cost savings analysis are used as constraints or 

optimization objectives. 

Cao et al., 2020 

Fahmy et al., 2021 

Lyu et al., 2023 

Teh et al., 2021 

Yeşı̇lkaya et al., 2020 

Source: Authors own elaboration 

 

    For clarity of analysis, research methodologies could be clustered into four macro-categories: 

- Financial evaluation models, adopted by the great majority of studies, aim to evaluate financial and economic flows, and 

they are built upon quantification through market values of revenues obtained and costs incurred and/or avoided in a specific 

period of time. This category includes cash flows and cost-benefit analysis, though this last could also incorporate external 

costs, as environmental and social ones, translated into monetary terms; cost savings and costs analysis, particularly 

recommendable to understand reductions and cost profiles of a project; profit analysis and net present value calculation. 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

13 

The temporal dimension could be taken into account by discounting financial flows and building performance indexes, as 

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) (Colpo et al., 2022a; Sheppard et al., 2019), Profit Index (PI) (Fahmy et al., 2021; Ruiz & 

Diaz, 2022) or Payback Period (PP) (Falsafi et al., 2023; Sun et al., 2020), to give a synthetic overview of economic 

profitability; 

- Life-cycle evaluation models: advanced technique for quantification of total economic costs incurred all along the life cycle 

of a project, from its inception to its disposal. As a conventional method (c-LCC), it can be used to compare cost profiles 

of different projects; as a full Life-cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), comprehensive of environmental (e-LCC) and social 

(s-LCC) analysis, it goes beyond economic consideration, including external costs, especially linked to eco-efficiency and 

environmental and social impacts (Zhang et al., 2022b), quantified by way of emission factors and technical coefficients 

(Ali et al., 2020; Ruiz & Diaz, 2022); 

- Decision models: methodologies for agent behaviors simulation inside a broader network, for this reason often used in IS 

analysis and distribution of aggregated costs and benefits. In a game-theory model, outputs depend on cooperative approach 

and behavior of each participant, while agent-based models simulate actors’ conduct according to different sets of rules. To 

model behaviors on economic reasoning, an economic-objective function, very often a cost (Chin et al., 2021; Fraccascia 

et al., 2020) or a net benefit (Ahmad Fadzil et al., 2022; Galvan-Cara et al., 2022) function, is included; 

- Optimization models: frameworks for optimization of IS practices, often used in application research to existent or designed 

IS projects. Optimization aims at constrained maximization (or minimization) of different objectives, as frequently 

conflicting functions for environmental and economic goals (Cao et al., 2020; Yeşı̇lkaya et al., 2020), expressed through 

cash flows analysis or financial costs (Asghari et al., 2023; Fahmy et al., 2021) and cost savings (Lyu et al., 2023) analysis.  

As the final objective consisted of orientating economic evaluation framework to the most appropriate quantification 

methodology, this analysis led to the conclusion that a more financial focus, translating costs and benefits into monetary terms, 

integrated with models quantifying and optimizing external impacts all along the life cycle, beyond the mere financial sphere, 

is useful in obtaining a comprehensive evaluation of an IS project in its temporal range.  

 

3.2.2 Economic sectors involved 

From the analysis of economic sectors engaged in IS and circular processes, it could be stated that not all cases precisely 

defined type and destination of resources exchanged, and specific role (as a receiver or as a donor) of firms in symbiotic 

relationship. These elements turned out to be relevant, within a framework of analysis, to understand entity and subdivision of 

costs and benefits among resources exchange activities and agents in the network. For those articles clearly identifying 

exchange components, it could be observed that the principal destination (nearly 55% of cases) of resources shared, mainly 

biomasses, wastewater and waste heat and steam, involved production of any kind of energy (electricity, steam and heat for 

power production), that could be directed to an internal use or sold externally, either way contributing to economic benefit, 

lowering energy costs (Diaz et al., 2021; Sheppard et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2019) or as new source of revenues (Haq et al., 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

14 

2020; Sun et al., 2020; Tan Yue Dian et al., 2021). Several studies (24%) focused on production of building materials, 

predominantly from slag residues, fly ashes, agro-industrial wastes and other scrap materials in the same industry.  

Considering the whole number of articles examined, 34% of them explicitly outlined direct exchanges between two entities 

characterized as donor and receiver. Framing economic sectors through the use of ISIC3 classification and the consideration of 

type and destination of wastes, analysis of direct exchanges showed that, again, the industries participating mainly as receivers 

were energy production and manufacturing of non-metallic products for building (43% for both), while major donors were 

industrial and agro-industrial sectors, especially for biowastes sharing, including domestic sector (Saeli et al., 2023). Flows of 

materials could engage the same industry (18% of examined articles): as example, chemical (Farouk & Chew, 2021; Lyu et al., 

2023) and agrifood industry (Prieto-Sandoval et al., 2022; Raimondo et al., 2023; Yu et al., 2023), where biomasses could be 

turned into biological fertilizers. 

A great percentage of studies (40%) focused on mutual exchanges inside industrial parks and ecological networks without 

an explicit definition of resource flows. Prominent examples are the agriculture and forestry sectors (Hu et al., 2020; Yeşı̇lkaya 

et al., 2020), steel, iron, and cement industries (Xue et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2022a). Inside a network, exchanges are not 

purely material: it is worth noting a particular study on sharing carbon permits, which led to increasing profits and overall 

network efficiency (Ahmad Fadzil et al., 2022).  

Ultimately, economic sector analysis proved to be essential to understand main ways of interaction for symbiotic exchanges 

across different industrial contexts, each one with its own specificities, in order to improve flexibility of the framework for 

economic IS costs and benefits, highlighted by scientific literature and pointed out in the following section. 

 

3.2.3 Cost-benefit analysis 

Scientific evidence of IS economic costs and benefits was summarized in Figure 5, displaying a circular chart divided into 

four main sections: 

- Cost reduction, as a source of economic advantage, identified by 45 examined articles (out of 61); 

- New revenues, as a source of economic advantage, identified by 31 examined articles (out of 61); 

- New costs, as a source of economic disadvantage, identified by 19 examined articles (out of 61); 

- Revenues reduction, as a source of economic disadvantage, identified by 1 examined articles (out of 61). 

 

It follows that, given the extracted data, cost reduction represents the most recognized IS economic implication, both by 

optimization application models and research on feasibility assessment. 

Then, each main section of the chart is divided into all costs and revenues items highlighted by scientific literature; the size 

of each of them reflects the percentage number of mentions received relative to the total mentions in the domain of the 

corresponding main section.  

 
3 ISIC stands for International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities, a globally standardized system for 
classifying industries by a four-level hierarchy and for reporting of economic activities across countries. 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

15 

Figure 5. Cost-benefit analysis – circular chart 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration 

 

The most observed benefit was cost reduction (blue section of the circular graph), particularly for raw materials (34% of cost 

reduction mentions), waste management and disposal (32%), substantially avoided, and operating and utility costs, as costs for 

water and energy (Cortez et al., 2022; Diaz et al., 2021; Hedlund et al., 2022; Ruiz-Puente & Jato-Espino, 2020). This advantage 

was revealed both by comparative studies between IS – non-IS scenarios (Cervo et al., 2019; Raciti et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 

2022b), and by optimization analysis of designed and/or already implemented IS (Al-Quradaghi et al., 2022; Chatterjee et al., 

2021; Lyu et al., 2023), confirming evidence in literature about the main raison d’être of IS (Chertow, 2000, 2007; Colpo et 

al., 2022a; Lybæk et al., 2021). A small, though significant, presence of reduction in capital costs must be pointed out, 

confirmed by studies reporting a decrease in equipment costs as one of the economic benefits, though limited, cited by 

companies (Wahrlich & Simioni, 2019). This reduction in costs referred to all those cases for shared infrastructure: when it 

comes to highly centralized and coordinated partnerships, as within eco-industrial parks, enterprises could benefit from the 

provision of common services and maintenance (Fraccascia et al., 2019; Wahrlich & Simioni, 2019), while installing advanced 

production systems, otherwise economically not viable, on already existent plants (Goh et al., 2022; Wijeyekoon et al., 2021).  

Then, analysis of new revenues followed (orange section of the circular graph), first of all from sales of products (62% of new 

revenues mentions), mainly generation of electricity and other kinds of energy (Hedlund et al., 2022; Misrol et al., 2021; Ruiz 

& Diaz, 2022; Sun et al., 2020). Economic advantages from sale of waste were less reported (24%): many evaluations were 

based on free exchanges, which can represent an avoided cost, for receivers (Raciti et al., 2019); other studies, instead, 

underlined the reduced value of wastes, which sometimes is overshadowed by transportation (Borbon-Galvez et al., 2021; 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

16 

Domenech et al., 2019) or treatment costs for recycling and reusing (He et al., 2020; Saeli et al., 2023). Few studies mentioned 

enhanced productivity (Chen et al., 2022; Dong et al., 2022; Raimondo et al., 2023; Wahrlich & Simioni, 2019) and reputational 

gains (Fraccascia et al., 2019). 

Cost items (grey section of the circular graph) that could impact to a greater extent, according to examined literature, were, first 

and foremost, capital costs (37% of new costs mentions) for equipment and infrastructure (Chin et al., 2021; Sun et al., 2020), 

technologies (Bütün et al., 2019) and working capital (Colpo et al., 2022a), which reflect on manufacturing and other operating 

costs (repair and maintenance, 20%). If it is true that costs for required equipment and infrastructure are economically unviable 

for single entities (Colpo et al., 2022a), other studies also highlighted the need for institutional financial incentives to face 

capital costs for grand coalition, more capable of obtaining significant reduction of environmental impacts (Chin et al., 2021). 

On the other hand, scholars pinpointed that some technologies could entail lower costs, depending on the system they are 

implemented in and giving rise to the need for specific considerations about the industrial sector involved (Asghari et al., 2023), 

while the degree of nestedness could also results in total gains balancing capital costs (Chatterjee et al., 2021). In this regard, 

some studies (Fraccascia et al., 2019; Sellitto et al., 2021) emphasized the presence of transaction costs, that depend on 

interaction among enterprises involved. 

Geographic localization is an IS aspect that should be investigated carefully: main studies reporting a reduction in transportation 

costs were focused on proximity exchanges of material resources (Goh et al., 2022; Raciti et al., 2019; Wijeyekoon et al., 2021), 

while others underline the need to broaden boundaries of symbiosis to reach variegate sources of waste, despite this could have 

an impact on resources’ quality (Borbon-Galvez et al., 2021). Even if transportation costs depend on weight and chemical 

characteristics of wastes, whose marginal value is close to zero (Domenech et al., 2019), shipping carriers also play an important 

role (Ali et al., 2019), if treated as an endogenous variable whose optimization could eventually lead to economic benefits, 

looking for more sustainable transport strategies (Borbon-Galvez et al., 2021). However, the great majority of studies pointed 

out a rise in transportation costs (27%): besides representing a limiting factor for certain types of exchange, as heat flows (Lyu 

et al., 2023; Pakere et al., 2021; Sun et al., 2020), distance could affect, together with capital costs, decisions about symbiotic 

relationships economic convenience (Chatterjee et al., 2021), hindering opportunities for IS (Sellitto et al., 2021) or its full 

optimization (Lyu et al., 2023; Tan Yue Dian et al., 2021). 

In conclusion, revenue reduction (yellow section of the circular graph) was observed in just one case (Cervo et al., 2019) as an 

economic loss for traditional suppliers and other stakeholders; nonetheless, this dimension should be deepened as an indirect 

consequence of symbiosis practices.  

These findings confirmed the complexity of interactions, supporting the objective of building a flexible and integrated 

framework for IS economic evaluation, which takes into consideration, as mentioned above, the industrial sector and its 

peculiarities. These elements proved to have an impact on the overall cost-benefit profile of IS; in fact, according to different 

contexts, certain items could be recorded alternatively a cost or a benefit, as the circular graph in Figure 3.4 displays for capital, 

transportation, recycling, manufacturing and other operating costs, and certain revenues could not be realized, as for the case 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

17 

of free waste exchanges. In summary, cost-benefit evaluation must not be seen as static but rather as an evolving process 

influenced by externalities, exchange dynamics, and specificities of the industrial sector. 

 

4. Discussion 

Results examined in section 3.2 led to the construction of a framework for IS economic evaluation, depicted in figure 5, which 

implies context analysis (industrial sector and corresponding technological state, flows of resources possibly exchanged, type 

of interaction at the basis of symbiosis relationship), determination of proper quantification methodologies and consideration 

of spatial and temporal aspects, with the definition of a proper time horizon (Kerdlap et al., 2022). Economic evaluation is 

carried out regarding several cost and benefit items, pointed out by scientific literature, together with specific KPIs for a 

summative feasibility assessment and project overall vision. 

 

Figure 5. IS economic evaluation framework 

 
Source: Authors own elaboration 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

18 

 

Exchanges could involve different resources, material or immaterial: Ahmad Fadzil et al. (2002) proved how sharing carbon 

permits allowed for an efficient aggregate allocation, with cooperative solutions providing the greatest benefits (Galvan-Cara 

et al., 2022; Li et al., 2021). Optimal configurations imply an unequal realization of benefits and costs for each economic agent, 

so economic analysis should take into account the different roles, as receiver or donor, played by each IS participant.  

Looking at calculation methodologies, financial approaches, better if implemented through the use of local accurate market 

values (Liao et al., 2024), should be complemented with life-cycle assessment, considering also external costs, such as 

environmental ones, that turned up to be paramount and worth of quantification, talking about IS cost reductions (Ansanelli et 

al., 2023; Haq et al., 2020; Pakere et al., 2021) 

There are other kinds of aspects that need to be considered: among them, resource availability and supply security, relevant to 

IS location (Wijeyekoon et al., 2021), in particular when it comes to small flows of production (Cortez et al., 2022), and 

geographical proximity, which affects IS joining decision through transportation, infrastructure and investment costs (Ali et al., 

2019; Cervo et al., 2019; Chatterjee et al., 2021; Galvan-Cara et al., 2022; Goh et al., 2022; Tan Yue Dian et al., 2021) and the 

possibility to exploit particular flows, as heat and steam (Pakere et al., 2021). Regarding logistic and transportation costs, some 

scholars argued that they could not impact positive IS overall benefit, while Borbon-Galvez et al. (2021) demonstrated that 

costs could even be lowered through sustainable means of transport and optimal shipping management.  

Technological knowledge regarding waste treatment is also to be considered, as a barrier to IS joining (He et al., 2020): even 

if major benefits come from the leading ones (Farouk & Chew, 2021; Zhang et al., 2022b), some environmental-friendly 

techniques still seemed to be economically inaccessible, making the case for conflict between economic and environmental 

objectives (Cao et al., 2020; Chin et al., 2021; Yeşı̇lkaya et al., 2020). Capital costs for advanced infrastructure and systems 

could both affect IS project profit in negative sense (Misrol et al., 2021), and be lowered by peculiar features of IS, such as 

proximity and sharing systems otherwise too expensive for a single participant (Bütün et al., 2019; Colpo et al., 2022a; Goh et 

al., 2022).  

Scientific literature mentioned other IS characteristics preventing disruption risks but having an effect on economic outcomes: 

nestedness and flexibility, which could grow transaction and capital costs (Boix et al., 2023; Chatterjee et al., 2021; Fraccascia 

et al., 2020). Transaction costs resulted to be influenced also by trust and interaction approaches (Prieto-Sandoval et al., 2022; 

Yazan & Fraccascia, 2020). 

This study also considered articles in the form of IS landscape analysis or industrial interviews (Cortez et al., 2022; Domenech 

et al., 2019; Prieto-Sandoval et al., 2022; Sellitto et al., 2021; Wahrlich & Simioni, 2019), enlightening barriers to IS 

implementation: proximity and procurement security, logistic costs, little knowledge and poor technological research 

investments, social reluctance, lack of adequate infrastructure and institutional support, also in the form of financial incentives, 

that proved to be essential, in certain cases, to face high capital costs (Chin et al., 2021; Haq et al., 2020). 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

19 

5. Conclusion 

In a context of growing concern about industrial systems’ unsustainability, it is paramount to assess the economic advantages 

of the transition towards circular models of production, as well as to incentivize more efficient solutions that could match 

sustainability objectives from an economic, environmental, and social point of view (Bocken et al., 2014). This study presented 

results of a systematic literature review for the last five years of research into IS economic feasibility. Bibliometric analysis 

allowed to notice an increasing interest in the topic, besides thematic connections’ structure. Investigations brought out 

quantification methodologies, analysis of economic sectors involved and cost and benefit items, upon which an IS economic 

evaluation framework was built and commented in Discussion section. To sum up, some critical considerations about typologies 

of articles analyzed, in order to shape limitations and possible improvements. Main sources of costs and revenues, outlined in 

the framework, were deemed as the most considered in economic feasibility evaluation studies; by contrast, few studies were 

found on comparison between IS – non-IS scenarios (Ansanelli et al., 2023; Cervo et al., 2019; Galvan-Cara et al., 2022; 

Kerdlap et al., 2022; Li et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2022b), most of all useful for a full comprehension of 

symbiosis contribute to economic benefit. Studies focused on optimization of productive models stressed out the presence of 

economic–environmental objectives trade-off (Cao et al., 2020; Chin et al., 2021; Fraccascia et al., 2020; Yeşı̇lkaya et al., 

2020), that could be mitigated by an integrated costs analysis, including environmental and social externalities, for a more 

comprehensive overview of IS economic impact. It is reiterated the need to adapt the framework to the specific industrial case 

and its peculiarities, from a technological, economical, sociocultural and normative point of view, though it could represent a 

good starting point for firms interested in economic consequences of IS cooperation. 

 

5.1 Main contributions and practical implications 

Given the lack of consideration and proper quantification of economic aspects of IS (Domenech et al., 2019; Dong et al., 2022; 

Wadström et al., 2021), this study contributed to filling the knowledge gap by systematizing recent literature on the topic of 

areas of IS economic outcomes and outlining integrated alternative methodologies for a preliminary approach to the 

quantification of IS impacts that result in costs and benefits beyond the mere market value sphere, providing a different 

perspective to evaluate financial flows of IS projects. Moreover, a dedicated support tool for IS economic viability was built, 

with the innovative ability to conciliate different features, from context analysis to calculation methodologies with spatial and 

temporal considerations, enhancing the implementation of IS activities by identification of cost and benefit items that could 

generate positive outcomes for companies involved. Though based on a solid and scientific protocol for literature analysis, this 

research constitutes a first and general step in the research field, limited by the lack of attention to environmental and social 

externalities’ consequences and other kinds of implementation barriers that could generate an impact on IS joining decision.  

 

5.2 Research limitations and future research agenda 

Despite being accurately based on a well-structured search process, some methodological limits still exist. First, adopting 

Scopus and Web of Science databases for the last five years of research may restrict the potential number of articles in the 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

20 

sample. To prevent excluding relevant scientific contributions, other search databases should be used, as well as expanding the 

temporal range. Second, quality appraisal turns out to be inevitably afflicted by elements of subjectivity in judgment, which 

could be potentially lowered by more rigorous methods. Last, the use of selected keywords might restrict the scope of research 

conducted; a new analysis should be performed with another search string. 

The economic evaluation framework is based on economic costs and benefits affecting firms directly and independently from 

the different roles played by participants. Future research agenda includes a wider focus on supra-enterprise network 

consequences, also quantifying environmental and social impacts in economic terms to find an IS cost-benefit distribution 

model encouraging an equal realization of benefits and costs for each economic agent and a continuous participation in an 

innovative business model for ecological industrial transition. 

 

4. Conflict of Interest 

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared 

to influence the work reported in this paper. 

 

5. References 

Ahmad Fadzil, F., Andiappan, V., Ng, D. K. S., Ng, L. Y., & Hamid, A. (2022). Sharing carbon permits in industrial 

 symbiosis: A game theory-based optimization model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 357, 131820. 

 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131820. 

Albino, V., Fraccascia, L., & Giannoccaro, I. (2016). Exploring the role of contracts to support the emergence of self-

organized industrial symbiosis networks: An agent-based simulation study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 4353–

4366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.070. 

Ali, A. K., Kio, P. N., Alvarado, J., & Wang, Y. (2020). Symbiotic Circularity in Buildings: An Alternative Path for 

Valorizing Sheet Metal Waste Stream as Metal Building Facades. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 11(12), 7127–7145. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-020-01060-y. 

Ali, A. K., Wang, Y., & Alvarado, J. L. (2019). Facilitating industrial symbiosis to achieve circular economy using value-

added by design: A case study in transforming the automobile industry sheet metal waste-flow into Voronoi facade 

systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 234, 1033–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.202. 

Al-Quradaghi, S., Zheng, Q. P., Betancourt-Torcat, A., & Elkamel, A. (2022). Optimization Model for Sustainable End-of-

Life Vehicle Processing and Recycling. Sustainability, 14(6), 3551. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063551. 

Ansanelli, G., Fiorentino, G., Chifari, R., Meisterl, K., Leccisi, E., & Zucaro, A. (2023). Sustainability Assessment of Coffee 

Silverskin Waste Management in the Metropolitan City of Naples (Italy): A Life Cycle Perspective. Sustainability, 

15(23), 16281. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316281. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131820
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.070
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-020-01060-y
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.202
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063551
https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316281


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

21 

Asghari, M., Afshari, H., Jaber, M. Y., & Searcy, C. (2023). Dynamic deployment of energy symbiosis networks integrated 

with organic Rankine cycle systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 183, 113513. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113513. 

Baldassarre, B., Schepers, M., Bocken, N., Cuppen, E., Korevaar, G., & Calabretta, G. (2019). Industrial Symbiosis: 

Towards a design process for eco-industrial clusters by integrating Circular Economy and Industrial Ecology 

perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 216, 446–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.091. 

Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable 

business model archetypes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039. 

Boix, M., Négny, S., Montastruc, L., & Mousqué, F. (2023). Flexible networks to promote the development of industrial 

symbioses: A new optimization procedure. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 169, 108082. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2022.108082. 

Boons, F., Chertow, M., Park, J., Spekkink, W., & Shi, H. (2017). Industrial Symbiosis Dynamics and the Problem of 

Equivalence: Proposal for a Comparative Framework. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(4), 938–952. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12468. 

Borbon-Galvez, Y., Curi, S., Dallari, F., & Ghiringhelli, G. (2021). International industrial symbiosis: Cross-border 

management of aggregates and construction and demolition waste between Italy and Switzerland. Sustainable 

Production and Consumption, 25, 312–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.004. 

Bütün, H., Kantor, I., & Maréchal, F. (2019). Incorporating Location Aspects in Process Integration Methodology. Energies, 

12(17), 3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12173338. 

Cao, X., Wen, Z., Xu, J., De Clercq, D., Wang, Y., & Tao, Y. (2020). Many-objective optimization of technology 

implementation in the industrial symbiosis system based on a modified NSGA-III. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 

118810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118810. 

Cervo, H., Ogé, S., Maqbool, A. S., Mendez Alva, F., Lessard, L., Bredimas, A., Ferrasse, J.-H., & Van Eetvelde, G. (2019). 

A Case Study of Industrial Symbiosis in the Humber Region Using the EPOS Methodology. Sustainability, 11(24), 

6940. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246940. 

Chatterjee, A., Brehm, C., & Layton, A. (2021). Evaluating benefits of ecologically-inspired nested architectures for 

industrial symbiosis. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 167, 105423. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105423. 

Chen, X., Dong, M., Zhang, L., Luan, X., Cui, X., & Cui, Z. (2022). Comprehensive evaluation of environmental and 

economic benefits of industrial symbiosis in industrial parks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 354, 131635. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131635. 

Chertow, M. R. (2000). INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS: Literature and Taxonomy. Annual Review of Energy and the 

Environment, 25(1), 313–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.313-.71 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113513
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.091
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2022.108082
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12468
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.004
https://doi.org/10.3390/en12173338
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118810
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246940
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105423
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131635
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.313-


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

22 

Chertow, M. R. (2007). “Uncovering” Industrial Symbiosis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 11(1), 11–30. 

https://doi.org/10.1162/jiec.2007.1110. 

Chin, H. H., Varbanov, P. S., Klemeš, J. J., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (2021). Subsidised water symbiosis of eco-industrial 

parks: A multi-stage game theory approach. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 155, 107539. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2021.107539. 

Colpo, I., Rabenschlag, D. R., De Lima, M. S., Martins, M. E. S., & Sellitto, M. A. (2022a). Economic and Financial 

Feasibility of a Biorefinery for Conversion of Brewers’ Spent Grain into a Special Flour. Journal of Open Innovation: 

Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(2), 79. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020079. 

Colpo, I., Martins, M. E. S., Buzuku, S., & Sellitto, M. A. (2022b). Industrial symbiosis in Brazil: A systematic literature 

review. Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy, 40(10), 1462–1479. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X221084065. 

Cortez, S. C., Cherri, A. C., Jugend, D., Jesus, G. M. K., & Bezerra, B. S. (2022). How Can Biodigesters Help Drive the 

Circular Economy? An Analysis Based on the SWOT Matrix and Case Studies. Sustainability, 14(13), 7972. 

https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137972. 

Costanza, F. (2020). The potential of circular businesses in the post-COVID era: A system dynamics view. European Journal 

of Social Impact and Circular Economy, 1-27 Pages. https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/5098.  

De Souza, J. F. T., & Pacca, S. A. (2023). A low carbon future for Brazilian steel and cement: A joint assessment under the 

circular economy perspective. Resources, Conservation & Recycling Advances, 17, 200141. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcradv.2023.200141. 

Diaz, F., Vignati, J. A., Marchi, B., Paoli, R., Zanoni, S., & Romagnoli, F. (2021). Effects of Energy Efficiency Measures 

in the Beef Cold Chain: A Life Cycle-based Study. Environmental and Climate Technologies, 25(1), 343–355. 

https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2021-0025. 

Domenech, T., Bleischwitz, R., Doranova, A., Panayotopoulos, D., & Roman, L. (2019). Mapping Industrial Symbiosis 

Development in Europe_ typologies of networks, characteristics, performance and contribution to the Circular Economy. 

Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 76–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.016. 

Dong, L., Taka, G. N., Lee, D., Park, Y., & Park, H. S. (2022). Tracking industrial symbiosis performance with ecological 

network approach integrating economic and environmental benefits analysis. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 

185, 106454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106454. 

Fahmy, M., Hall, P. W., Suckling, I. D., Bennett, P., & Wijeyekoon, S. (2021). Identifying and evaluating symbiotic 

opportunities for wood processing through techno-economic superstructure optimisation – A methodology and case 

study for the Kawerau industrial cluster in New Zealand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 328, 129494. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129494. 

https://doi.org/10.1162/jiec.2007.1110
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2021.107539
https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020079
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X221084065
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14137972
https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/5098
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcradv.2023.200141
https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2021-0025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.016
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106454
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129494


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

23 

Falsafi, M., Terkaj, W., Guzzon, M., Malfa, E., Fornasiero, R., & Tolio, T. (2023). Assessment of valorisation opportunities 

for secondary metallurgy slag through multi-criteria decision making. Journal of Cleaner Production, 402, 136838. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136838.faro 

Faria, E., Caldeira-Pires, A., & Barreto, C. (2021). Social, Economic, and Institutional Configurations of the Industrial 

Symbiosis Process: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature and a Proposed Theoretical and Analytical Framework. 

Sustainability, 13(13), 7123. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137123.  

Farouk, A. A., & Chew, I. M. L. (2021). Development of a simultaneous mass-water carbon-hydrogen-oxygen symbiosis 

network. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28, 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.004. 

Fink, A. (2019). Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. SAGE Publications. 

Fraccascia, L., Giannoccaro, I., & Albino, V. (2019). Business models for industrial symbiosis: A taxonomy focused on the 

form of governance. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, 114–126. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.016. 

Fraccascia, L., Yazan, D. M., Albino, V., & Zijm, H. (2020). The role of redundancy in industrial symbiotic business 

development: A theoretical framework explored by agent-based simulation. International Journal of Production 

Economics, 221, 107471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.08.006. 

Galvan-Cara, A.-L., Graells, M., & Espuña, A. (2022). Application of Industrial Symbiosis principles to the management 

of utility networks. Applied Energy, 305, 117734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117734. 

Goh, Q. H., Farouk, A. A., & Chew, I. L. (2022). Optimizing the bioplastic chemical building block with wastewater sludge 

as the feedstock using carbon-hydrogen-oxygen framework. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 176, 105920. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105920. 

Haq, H., Välisuo, P., Kumpulainen, L., Tuomi, V., & Niemi, S. (2020). A preliminary assessment of industrial symbiosis 

in Sodankylä. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 100018. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2020.100018. 

He, M., Jin, Y., Zeng, H., & Cao, J. (2020). Pricing decisions about waste recycling from the perspective of industrial 

symbiosis in an industrial park: A game model and its application. Journal of Cleaner Production, 251, 119417. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119417. 

Hedlund, A., Björkqvist, O., Nilsson, A., & Engstrand, P. (2022). Energy Optimization in a Paper Mill Enabled by a Three-

Site Energy Cooperation. Energies, 15(8), 2715. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15082715. 

Henriques, J., Azevedo, J., Dias, R., Estrela, M., & Ascenço, C. (2020). Industrial Symbiosis Incentives: Mitigating risks 

for facilitated implementation. Zenodo. 

Hu, W., Tian, J., Li, X., & Chen, L. (2020). Wastewater treatment system optimization with an industrial symbiosis model: 

A case study of a Chinese eco‐industrial park. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 24(6), 1338–1351. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13020. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136838.faro
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137123
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.016
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.08.006
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117734
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105920
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2020.100018
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119417
https://doi.org/10.3390/en15082715
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13020


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

24 

Kerdlap, P., Low, J. S. C., Tan, D. Z. L., Yeo, Z., & Ramakrishna, S. (2022). UM3-LCE3-ISN: A methodology for multi-

level life cycle environmental and economic evaluation of industrial symbiosis networks. The International Journal of 

Life Cycle Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02024-1. 

Kosmol, L., & Otto, L. (2020). Implementation Barriers of Industrial Symbiosis: A Systematic Review. 

Li, L., Ge, Y., & Xiao, M. (2021). Towards biofuel generation III+: A sustainable industrial symbiosis design of co-

producing algal and cellulosic biofuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 306, 127144. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127144. 

Liao, K., Feng, Z., Wu, J., Liang, H., Wang, Y., Zeng, W., Wang, Y., Tian, J., Liu, R., & Chen, L. (2024). Cement kiln 

geared up to dispose industrial hazardous wastes of megacity under industrial symbiosis. Resources, Conservation and 

Recycling, 202, 107358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107358. 

Lombardi, D. R., & Laybourn, P. (2012). Redefining Industrial Symbiosis: Crossing Academic–Practitioner Boundaries. 

Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(1), 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00444.x. 

Lybæk, R., Christensen, T. B., & Thomsen, T. P. (2021). Enhancing policies for deployment of Industrial symbiosis – What 

are the obstacles, drivers and future way forward? Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 124351. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124351. 

Lyu, Y., Feng, Z. A., Ji, T., Tian, J., & Chen, L. (2023). Networking Chemicals Flows: Efficiency–Value–Environment 

Functionalized Symbiosis Algorithms and Application. Environmental Science & Technology, 57(46), 18225–18235. 

https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c04291. 

MacArthur, E. (2013). Towards the circular economy. 

Mallawaarachchi, H., Sandanayake, Y., Karunasena, G., & Liu, C. (2020). Unveiling the conceptual development of 

industrial symbiosis: Bibliometric analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 258, 120618. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120618. 

Misrol, M. A., Wan Alwi, S. R., Lim, J. S., & Manan, Z. A. (2021). An optimal resource recovery of biogas, water 

regeneration, and reuse network integrating domestic and industrial sources. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286, 

125372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125372. 

Misrol, M. A., Wan Alwi, S. R., Lim, J. S., & Manan, Z. A. (2022). Optimising renewable energy at the eco-industrial park: 

A mathematical modelling approach. Energy, 261, 125345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125345. 

Neves, A., Godina, R., Azevedo, S. G., & Matias, J. C. O. (2020). A comprehensive review of industrial symbiosis. Journal 

of Cleaner Production, 247, 119113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119113. 

Okoli, C. (2015). A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review. Communications of the Association 

for Information Systems, 37. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03743. 

Pakere, I., Gravelsins, A., Lauka, D., & Blumberga, D. (2021). Will there be the waste heat and boiler house competition 

in Latvia? Assessment of industrial waste heat. Smart Energy, 3, 100023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2021.100023. 

 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02024-1
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127144
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107358
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00444.x
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124351
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c04291
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120618
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125372
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125345
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119113
https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03743
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2021.100023


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

25 

Piontek, F. M., Herrmann, C., & Saraev, A. (2021). Steps from Zero Carbon Supply Chains and Demand of Circular 

Economy to Circular Business Cases. European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy, 1-9 Paginazione. 

https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/5712.  

Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic 

World. Publications, 9(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012.  

Prieto-Sandoval, V., Mejia-Villa, A., Jaca, C., & Ormazabal, M. (2022). The Case of an Agricultural Crop Business 

Association in Navarra as Circular Economy Intermediary. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 2(2), 713–729. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00116-y. 

Raciti, A., Dugo, G., Piccione, P., Zappalà, S., & Martelli, C. (2019). A new sustainable product in the green building sector: 

The use of sicilian orange peel waste as high performance insulation. Procedia of Environmental Science, Engeneering 

and management, 6(2), 229–235. 

Raimondo, M., Di Rauso Simeone, G., Coppola, G. P., Zaccardelli, M., Caracciolo, F., & Rao, M. A. (2023). Economic 

benefits and soil improvement: Impacts of vermicompost use in spinach production through industrial symbiosis. 

Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 14, 100845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100845. 

Ranjbari, M., Saidani, M., Shams Esfandabadi, Z., Peng, W., Lam, S. S., Aghbashlo, M., Quatraro, F., & Tabatabaei, M. 

(2021). Two decades of research on waste management in the circular economy: Insights from bibliometric, text mining, 

and content analyses. Journal of Cleaner Production, 314, 128009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128009. 

Re, B., Bottini, L., Ricci, C., Bottini, G., & Strauss, D. (2023). The transition from a “city of waste” to a “circular city”: 

Virtuous practices in the city of Pavia. European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy, 1-16 Pages. 

https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/7691.  

Ruiz, M., & Diaz, F. (2022). Life Cycle Sustainability Evaluation of Potential Bioenergy Development for Landfills in 

Colombia. Environmental and Climate Technologies, 26(1), 454–469. https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2022-0035. 

Ruiz-Puente, C., & Jato-Espino, D. (2020). Systemic Analysis of the Contributions of Co-Located Industrial Symbiosis to 

Achieve Sustainable Development in an Industrial Park in Northern Spain. Sustainability, 12(14), 5802. 

https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145802. 

Sadraei, R., Biancone, P., Lanzalonga, F., Jafari‐Sadeghi, V., & Chmet, F. (2023). How to increase sustainable production 

in the food sector? Mapping industrial and business strategies and providing future research agenda. Business Strategy 

and the Environment, 32(4), 2209–2228. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3244. 

Saeli, M., Capela, M. N., Piccirillo, C., Tobaldi, D. M., Seabra, M. P., Scalera, F., Striani, R., Corcione, C. E., & Campisi, 

T. (2023). Development of energy-saving innovative hydraulic mortars reusing spent coffee ground for applications in 

construction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 399, 136664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136664. 

Sellitto, M. A., Murakami, F. K., Butturi, M. A., Marinelli, S., Kadel Jr., N., & Rimini, B. (2021). Barriers, drivers, and 

relationships in industrial symbiosis of a network of Brazilian manufacturing companies. Sustainable Production and 

Consumption, 26, 443–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.016. 

https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/5712
https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00116-y
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100845
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128009
https://doi.org/10.13135/2704-9906/7691
https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2022-0035
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145802
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3244
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136664
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.016


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

26 

Sheppard, P., Garcia-Garcia, G., Angelis-Dimakis, A., Campbell, G. M., & Rahimifard, S. (2019). Synergies in the co-

location of food manufacturing and biorefining. Food and Bioproducts Processing, 117, 340–359. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2019.08.001. 

Sun, L., Fujii, M., Li, Z., Dong, H., Geng, Y., Liu, Z., Fujita, T., Yu, X., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Energy-saving and carbon 

emission reduction effect of urban-industrial symbiosis implementation with feasibility analysis in the city. 

Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119853. 

Tan Yue Dian, Lim Jeng Shiun, & Wan Alwi Sharifah Rafidah. (2021). Cooperative Game-Based Business Model 

Optimisation for a Multi-Owner Integrated Palm Oil-Based Complex. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 88, 409–

414. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET2188068. 

Taqi, H. M. M., Meem, E. J., Bhattacharjee, P., Salman, S., Ali, S. M., & Sankaranarayanan, B. (2022). What are the 

challenges that make the journey towards industrial symbiosis complicated? Journal of Cleaner Production, 370, 

133384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133384. 

Teh, K. C., Lim, S. C., Andiappan, V., & Chew, I. M. L. (2021). Evaluation of Palm Oil Eco-Industrial Park Configurations: 

VIKOR with Stability Analysis. Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 5(2), 303–316. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-021-00168-5. 

Wadström, C., Johansson, M., & Wallén, M. (2021). A framework for studying outcomes in industrial symbiosis. 

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 151, 111526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111526. 

Wahrlich, J., & Simioni, F. J. (2019). Industrial symbiosis in the forestry sector: A case study in southern Brazil. Journal 

of Industrial Ecology, 23(6), 1470–1482. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12927. 

Wang, S., Lu, C., Gao, Y., Wang, K., & Zhang, R. (2019). Life cycle assessment of reduction of environmental impacts via 

industrial symbiosis in an energy-intensive industrial park in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241, 118358. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118358. 

Wijeyekoon, S., Suckling, I., Fahmy, M., Hall, P., & Bennett, P. (2021). Techno‐economic analysis of tannin and briquette 

co‐production from bark waste: A case study quantifying symbiosis benefits in biorefinery. Biofuels, Bioproducts and 

Biorefining, 15(5), 1332–1344. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.2246. 

Xue, X., Wang, S., Chun, T., Xin, H., Xue, R., Tian, X., & Zhang, R. (2023). An integrated framework for industrial 

symbiosis performance evaluation in an energy-intensive industrial park in China. Environmental Science and Pollution 

Research, 30(14), 42056–42074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25232-0. 

Yazan, D. M., & Fraccascia, L. (2020). Sustainable operations of industrial symbiosis: An enterprise input-output model 

integrated by agent-based simulation. International Journal of Production Research, 58(2), 392–414. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1590660. 

Yeşı̇lkaya, M., Daş, G. S., & Türker, A. K. (2020). A multi-objective multi-period mathematical model for an industrial 

symbiosis network based on the forest products industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 150, 106883. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106883. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2019.08.001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119853
https://doi.org/10.3303/CET2188068
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133384
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-021-00168-5
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111526
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12927
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118358
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.2246
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25232-0
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1590660
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106883


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/10926 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

27 

Yu, H., Da, L., Li, Y., Chen, Y., Geng, Q., Jia, Z., Zhang, Y., Li, J., & Gao, C. (2023). Industrial symbiosis promoting 

material exchanges in Ulan Buh Demonstration Eco-industrial Park: A multi-objective MILP model. Journal of Cleaner 

Production, 414, 137578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137578. 

Zabaniotou, A., & Vaskalis, I. (2023). Economic Assessment of Polypropylene Waste (PP) Pyrolysis in Circular Economy 

and Industrial Symbiosis. Energies, 16(2), 593. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020593. 

Zhang, Y., Zheng, H., Chen, B., Su, M., & Liu, G. (2015). A review of industrial symbiosis research: Theory and 

methodology. Frontiers of Earth Science, 9(1), 91–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-014-0445-8. 

Zhang, Q., Xiang, T., Zhang, W., Wang, H., An, J., Li, X., & Xue, B. (2022a). Co‐benefits analysis of industrial symbiosis 

in China’s key industries: Case of steel, cement, and power industries. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26(5), 1714–1727. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13320. 

Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Wei, S., Dong, J., Zhao, J., & Qian, G. (2022b). Assessing the chlorine metabolism and its resource 

efficiency in chlor-alkali industrial symbiosis—A case of Shanghai Chemical Industry Park. Journal of Cleaner 

Production, 380, 134934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134934. 

 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137578
https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020593
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-014-0445-8
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13320
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134934

