2.1 Circular Economy

The first study mentioning the Circular Economy (CE) on the Scopus platform dates back to 2001, but the first article to substantively address the topic was published in 2004. In this work, Dajian (2004) highlights the emergence of CE as a groundbreaking methodology in developed markets such as Germany and Japan. The author argues that CE could enable the construction of a sustainable society, contrasting with the prevailing consumerist model of the time.

According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a global reference institution in the promotion of CE among decision-makers, governments, and academia, the three principles that guide CE are: (a) regeneration of natural capital, balancing the consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources; (b) increasing the useful life of products and materials through biological and technical cycles; and (c) eliminating negative impacts of production systems, such as waste and pollution (MacArthur et al. 2015).

In this context, CE can be defined as:

A regenerative economic system which necessitates a paradigm shift to replace the end-of-life concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling, and recovering materials throughout the supply chain, with the aim to promote value maintenance and sustainable development, creating environmental quality, economic prosperity, and social equity, to the benefit of current and future generations. It is enabled by an alliance of stakeholders (industry, consumers, policymakers, academia) and their technological innovations and capabilities (Kirchherr et al. 2023, p. 4).

In recent years, a significant volume of research has been published, 36,146 documents (keyword: “Circular Economy,” database: Scopus, filter: Title/Keywords/Abstract, period: 2020–2025, date: March 28, 2025). Many studies seek to identify CE's benefits and interfaces with other themes. Winkler (2011) emphasizes its relationship with sustainable supply chain networks, which can enhance organizations' environmental and economic performance. Mathews (2011) suggests that CE could refine capitalism to benefit society. Su et al. (2013) note that CE practices are applicable at micro and macro levels, requiring support from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and governments. Ghisellini et al. (2016) assert that decoupling environmental pressure from economic growth is a core objective of CE.

Schroeder et al. (2019) identify CE as a driver for implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), while Bag et al. (2021) highlight how artificial intelligence, powered by big data analytics, positively impacts sustainable manufacturing and CE.

Vanapalli et al. (2021) underscore challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic to effective plastic waste management. The authors emphasize that transitioning to green materials and developing sustainable technologies are critical to mitigating future crises. During the pandemic, single-use plastic consumption surged; though temporary, this trend may alter consumer perceptions and hinder CE transition goals.

The literature analysis reveals CE's thematic evolution. However, studies remain concentrated in Europe, China, and the United States, indicating the need for research in other contexts. Moreover, CE's interdisciplinary nature underscores its analytical complexity. Few studies explore its application to production and operations management (Lim et al. 2022a), where CE emerges as a viable alternative to linear production models, fostering a more sustainable society.

2.2 Lean Manufacturing

Although it is a well-established topic, Lean Manufacturing (LM) continues to attract the attention of the international scientific community. Between 2020 and 2025, 2315 documents related to the theme were published, according to a survey conducted in the Scopus database (keyword: “Lean Manufacturing”; filters applied: title, keywords, and abstract; search date: February 4, 2025). Among this total, approximately 338 publications exhibit some interface with the theme of sustainability, indicating potential contributions of lean practices to sustainability.

Moreover, many of these studies converge in defining Lean Manufacturing as a set of managerial principles and practices aimed at waste elimination, customer value enhancement, and continuous process improvement (Alshammari et al. 2025; Carrijo et al. 2024; Ferrazzi et al. 2025; Gama and Bonamigo 2025; Halim-Lim et al. 2025; Reza et al. 2025; Songkhwan et al. 2025; Yang et al. 2025). Therefore, LM focuses on eliminating waste throughout the production chain while simultaneously increasing the value perceived by customers through the optimized use of resources (Razali and Chi 2021; Singh et al. 2021), aligning production with organizations' strategic objectives through the application of tools such as Kaizen, TQM, Kanban, among others (Reza et al. 2025).

Ferrazzi et al. (2025) emphasize that LM has evolved into a philosophy with strong synergy with environmental sustainability by minimizing resource use and reducing environmental impacts. Gama and Bonamigo (2025) reinforce this perspective, highlighting that LM contributes to sustainability by reducing waste, optimizing resources, and promoting operational excellence. Salman et al. (2024) associate LM drivers with improved circular performance in sectors such as pharmaceuticals. Carrijo et al. (2024) examine LM in agribusiness, relating it to productivity and rural sustainability. Halim-Lim et al. (2025) underscore the prominent role of LM in the transition toward a circular economy.

Thus, LM demonstrates strong interdisciplinarity, interfacing with various other fields of study such as environmental management, sustainability, quality, CE, and Industry 4.0. Given this context, the relevance of the topic stands out for both academic literature and organizations, highlighting its potential to significantly contribute to reconciling economic gains with sustainability.

2.3 Interface Between Lean Manufacturing and the Circular Economy

The global economy faces a dilemma between the need for production and the scarcity of natural resources (Jabbour et al. 2020). In this context, resource conservation becomes essential for sustainable development (Farrukh et al. 2023). In response, many organizations are incorporating environmental considerations throughout the product life cycle, seeking not only to reduce impacts but also to gain competitive advantages, cost savings, and risk mitigation (Dahmani et al. 2022).

The need for a business strategy that integrates waste reduction, efficient resource use, and environmental protection is evident (Kazancoglu et al. 2018; Lim et al. 2022a). In this regard, the integration of Lean Manufacturing (LM) and the Circular Economy (CE) emerges as a promising approach to achieving these objectives, promoting greater sustainability and efficiency in production processes (Lim et al. 2022a).

LM is the most dominant production strategy in global organizations (Hu et al. 2015), as its practices enhance efficiency by eliminating waste and focusing on delivering customer value (Goshime et al. 2019). Conversely, CE seeks to redefine economic growth by decoupling it from the consumption of finite resources and promoting a more sustainable model of production and consumption (MacArthur 2013).

E Silva et al. (2024) developed the Lean-Circular Maturity Model (LCMM). Their study found that integrating LM and CE enables companies to continuously improve their processes, optimize resource utilization, and enhance both economic and environmental performance.

Ghaithan et al. (2023) highlight that the LM practices with the greatest impact on CE aim to eliminate waste, reduce emissions, and polluting materials, thereby strengthening environmental sustainability. The implementation of LM in production not only improves operational efficiency by reducing costs and increasing profit margins but also streamlines production flow, enhances the work environment, and promotes occupational health and safety.

Dos Santos and Ramos (2020) argue that, given the current globalized scenario in which organizations must keep pace with constant changes and technological innovations, solid strategies are necessary to adapt to such trends. According to the authors, LM is one of these strategies. Reyes et al. (2021) support this view by pointing out that LM and Industry 4.0 can enable organizations and researchers to improve the planning and management of lean production and supply processes.

Lim et al. (2022a) emphasize the importance of integrating LM with CE principles to drive operational sustainability in production. Furthermore, several studies show that the synergy between LM and CE can contribute to improvements in economic and environmental performance (e Silva et al. 2024; Skalli et al. 2022), operational performance (Nadeem et al. 2023), and social performance (Kalemkerian et al. 2022). Therefore, the specialized literature indicates that the joint adoption of LM and CE is essential for organizational prosperity and for achieving sustainable performance.

Despite the identified advances and benefits, studies exploring the intersection between LM and CE remain limited (Nadeem 2019; Kurdve and Bellgran 2021; Hedlund et al. 2020; e Silva et al. 2024), justifying the need for further research (Ghaithan et al. 2023; Maldonado-Guzmán and Garza-Reyes 2023) and concrete proposals that achieve a true fusion of LM and CE. Such integration would facilitate the adoption of business models and product strategies that promote reuse, recycling, and remanufacturing, as well as LM practices that contribute to resource efficiency and waste reduction.

4.1 Integrative Systematic Review

To ensure a comprehensive literature review on LM and CE, both a systematic review (Sasso et al. 2025; Awan et al. 2021) and an integrative review (Alcayaga et al. 2019) were conducted. The systematic review aims to summarize the existing literature based on selected criteria and answer a scientific question (Koutsos et al. 2019), while the integrative review captures the diversity and development of more than one body of literature, culminating in a conceptual model or framework (Miles and Huberman 1994).

To ensure transparency, coherence, and replicability while minimizing bias (Cook et al. 1997), the PRISMA method was adopted, which is widely used to identify relevant studies (Moher et al. 2009; Lim et al. 2022b). Additionally, the classification and coding methodology proposed by Junior and Godinho Filho (2010), and later applied by Jabbour (2013) and Teixeira et al. (2020), was employed. For data collection, Scopus and Web of Science were selected due to their widespread use in literature reviews and recognized reliability (Mongeon and Paul-Hus 2016; Chadegani et al. 2013), and for including peer-reviewed scientific publications (Awan et al. 2021).

Given the recent integration of LM and CE (Marquina et al. 2021), and in order to avoid overlooking relevant works, no publication type restrictions were applied. Titles, abstracts, and keywords were analyzed without limiting the search periods, thus allowing for a comprehensive integrative systematic review.

The search terms used (keywords) were: “Lean Manufacturing”, “Lean Production”, and “Circular Economy”, which were combined in various ways, as detailed in Table 1.

The initial search was conducted in July 2023 and retrieved 49 articles from Scopus and 36 from Web of Science, considering titles, abstracts, and keywords, and limited to articles and reviews. After the removal of duplicates and studies unrelated to LM and CE, 30 articles remained. A second search was conducted in July 2024, using the same criteria, identifying 73 articles in Scopus and 53 in Web of Science. After excluding duplicates and articles that did not relate to LM and CE, 45 publications remained.

Finally, a new (final) search was conducted in January 2025, following the same methodology. A total of 88 articles were retrieved from Scopus and 56 from Web of Science. After filtering duplicates and articles unrelated to LM and CE, 50 studies remained. A comparative analysis of all search rounds (July 2023, July 2024, and January 2025) revealed one article that had not appeared in the last January 2025 search, which was included in the final analysis, totaling 51 articles.

Figure 1 illustrates the stages of identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion in the review process.

In summary, it is worth emphasizing that, for the exclusion of the aforementioned studies, the following criteria were adopted: (1) duplicate studies, (2) not being articles or review articles, and (3) not being related to CE and LM—that is, studies that mention LM and CE without performing a joint analysis of both themes. Therefore, to ensure the reliability and feasibility of the integrative systematic review process, these inclusion and exclusion criteria were rigorously and carefully defined and consistently applied throughout the review. This process involved the participation of all co-authors, who assessed compliance with the established criteria. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion. The articles that met the strict criteria were then selected for detailed analysis. The criteria are summarized in Table 2. It is noteworthy that this integrative systematic review differs from traditional approaches by updating the research in three distinct time periods, thereby offering a broader perspective on the themes.

After data collection, information related to authors, countries, year of publication, source, and keywords was recorded in a database and analyzed using descriptive statistics in MS Excel, in accordance with methodologies adopted in related literature reviews (Sequeira and Santos 2018).

Table 4 presents the classification of the 51 selected articles based on the dimensions established in Table 3 (Classification and Coding). The next section details the classified and coded aspects (Stage 4), as well as the main gaps identified and potential directions for future research.

5.1 Initial Research Results

Figure 2 illustrates the temporal distribution of publications on the topic.

Research integrating Lean Management (LM) and Circular Economy (CE) are relatively recent, with a significant increase in publications over the past 5 years. However, only one study has directly compared the two concepts, underscoring the relevance of this investigation. The first study on this interface, conducted by Minunno et al. (2018), identified barriers to the adoption of CE in construction. While LM contributes to waste minimization, traditional buildings, characterized by non-standardized on-site assembled components, hinder its effective implementation.

Annual research contributions were analyzed using Biblioshiny. From 2018 to 2019, scientific output remained low. However, from 2020 onward, interest grew, peaking in 2021 with 14 publications. In 2023, 7 studies were identified, followed by 11 in 2024. In 2025, 4 publications were recorded, indicating that the integration of LM and CE remains a promising and academically relevant field.

To illustrate the geographical distribution of publications on LM and CE based on the affiliation of the first author, a choropleth map was created (Figure 3). Darker shades of blue indicate countries with a higher number of contributions.

Brazil leads with 8 publications, followed by India and Morocco (7 each). The research is geographically diverse, with Spain (5), Italy, China, and Greece (4 each), and Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Australia (2 each). In addition, France, Germany, Taiwan, Poland, Thailand, and Pakistan contributed one study each, reflecting the advancement of the topic across other global regions.

To identify the most cited documents, an analysis was conducted using Biblioshiny (Figure 4). The results show that the most cited article is Nascimento et al. (2019), with 654 citations. This study proposes a circular model for the reuse of electronic scrap devices, integrating web technologies and reverse logistics to support CE practices.

Hong et al. (2018), with 356 citations, highlight the role of LM and CE in enhancing economic performance and reducing environmental impact. The authors emphasize that extending the lifespan of resources through these practices supports both economic and social sustainability.

Caldera et al. (2019), with 268 citations, conclude that integrating LM with sustainable practices extends the lifecycle of resources and enables small and medium-sized enterprises to adopt sustainable business models, reinforcing the CE framework.

To analyze keyword co-occurrence, the VOSviewer software was used. The software identifies clusters as groups of interconnected nodes, where proximity within a cluster indicates thematic similarity (Van Eck and Waltman 2017). Figure 5 presents the five main keyword clusters. The most frequently used keywords were circular economy, lean production, sustainable development, environmental impact, lean manufacturing, agile manufacturing systems, Industry 4.0, sustainability, and manufacturing.

Figure 5 visually maps these thematic relationships, demonstrating the interconnection of LM, CE, and sustainability concepts.

5.2 Content Analysis Results and Research Recommendations

5.2.1 Country Context

The analysis revealed that most articles addressing LM and CE were not conducted within a specific national context, consisting predominantly of conceptual and review studies (50%), as illustrated in Figure 6. Articles focused on developing markets (33.3%) and developed markets (16.6%) were less common. A total of 53 articles were analyzed, as two studies compared the topic across different national contexts. These findings led to the first recommendation of this study:

R1.There is a need for more studies in both developed and developing countries, comparing different contexts and analyzing variations in the integration of LM and CE.

5.2.2 Types and Methods of Research

Regarding research types, the results indicate that most articles addressing the concepts of LM and CE adopt a qualitative approach (66.7%), followed by a quantitative approach (21.6%). Only 9.8% of the studies employ a mixed-methods approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative techniques (Figure 7).

As for the research methods employed (Figure 8), the majority of articles concerning LM and CE are literature reviews (41.3%), followed by case studies (30.2%). Only two articles (3.2%) used a combination of methods (case study and survey). Mixed-methods research (quantitative/survey and qualitative/case study) enables methodological complementarity and reduces biases associated with single-method approaches (Teixeira et al. 2020), thus making studies more robust. The total frequency was 63, as some articles employed more than one research method.

In light of this scenario, the second recommendation is proposed:

R2.Future research on LM and CE should adopt mixed research methods, particularly the combination of case studies and surveys, as well as data analysis techniques such as structural equation modeling and fuzzy logic, to deepen the understanding of the LM–CE relationship and strengthen the evidence base for this integration.

5.2.3 Analyzed Sector

Figure 9 shows that 54.7% of the 53 economic activities identified in the 51 articles analyzed focused on the manufacturing sector (C). The number of activities recorded exceeds the number of articles because some studies addressed multiple sectors. The second most represented category was “V” (not assigned to a specific category), with 22.6%, followed by “F” (Construction) with 5.7%, and “S” (Other activities and services) and Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing, each with 3.8%.

Other categories had only one occurrence (1.9%) each: M (Professional, Scientific and Technical Activities), P (Education), E (Water Supply, Sewerage, Waste Management and Remediation Activities), J (Information and Communication), and G (Wholesale and Retail Trade; Repair of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles). Although manufacturing was predominant, studies on SMEs in this sector were scarce (Ferlito 2024; Nadeem et al. 2023; Lim et al. 2022a; Agyabeng-Mensah et al. 2021; Caldera et al. 2019), highlighting a research gap (Ghaithan et al. 2023) and supporting the third recommendation:

R3.Explore the integration of LM and CE in SMEs, given the scarcity of studies addressing the combined application of these approaches in this context.

Only two studies examined the remanufacturing sector (Kurilova-Palisaitiene et al. 2018; Pawlik et al. 2021), a key CE practice (Yadav et al. 2020). As LM mitigates remanufacturing challenges (Kurilova-Palisaitiene et al. 2018), further investigation is required, supporting the fourth recommendation:

R4.Analyze the application of LM and CE in the remanufacturing sector, considering its relevance to the Circular Economy and the specific challenges of this segment.

Few studies analyzed manufacturing and services together (Agyabeng-Mensah et al. 2021; Hong et al. 2018), and only one focused exclusively on the services sector (Marrucci et al. 2020). Although LM is predominantly applied in industry (Prashar and Chaudhuri 2025), evidence suggests its growing relevance in services (Marrucci et al. 2020). Expanding research in both sectors could significantly contribute to the literature, justifying the fifth and sixth recommendations:

R5.Jointly investigate the manufacturing and service sectors to identify gaps, synergies, and shared practices across these two economic segments.

R6.Examine the service sector independently, given the scarcity of studies exclusively focused on this area and its increasing involvement in CE practices.

The construction sector was examined in three studies (Benachio et al. 2021; Tseng et al. 2021; Minunno et al. 2018), agriculture in two (Kalemkerian et al. 2024; Nayal et al. 2025), and the textile sector in one (Ferlito 2024). Given their substantial role in waste generation and resource extraction (Benachio et al. 2021; Nayal et al. 2025; Ferlito 2024), more research on their dynamics is essential, supporting the seventh recommendation:

R7.Expand research in underexplored sectors such as construction, agriculture, and textiles, considering their importance to CE and their significant environmental impact.

When analyzing the recycling and waste management sector, we identified that they appeared in only three studies (Wang et al. 2019; Hedlund et al. 2020; Akkalatham and Taghipour 2021), despite their critical role in CE implementation (Ghaithan et al. 2023). LM-driven strategies, such as Total Quality Management, enhance efficiency, supplier relationships, and waste reduction (Akkalatham and Taghipour 2021). There is a need to broaden research in this area, justifying the eighth recommendation: Expand research on lm and ec implementation.

R8.Expand research on the implementation of LM and CE in the recycling and waste management sector, given its relevance to the efficiency of circular processes and the need for optimization in waste management.

5.3 Proposal of an Integrative Framework

Based on the robust analysis conducted in this study, an integrative framework is proposed that connects Lean Manufacturing (LM) and the Circular Economy (CE) (Figure 10).

This framework highlights how lean practices (Just-in-Time, automation, and waste elimination) interact with circular strategies (remanufacturing, resource regeneration, and life cycle extension) creating synergies that enhance environmental, economic, operational, and social performance. This proposal serves as a theoretical guide for future research and corporate initiatives oriented toward sustainability and value creation through the integration of LM and CE, with potential to direct public policies, corporate strategies, and academic agendas focused on sustainable development.

Graphically, Figure 10 presents the synergy between Lean Manufacturing (LM) and the Circular Economy (CE), illustrating how this integration, grounded in the Resource-Based View (RBV), can generate substantial improvements across multiple domains of organizational performance (environmental, social, economic, operational, and sustainable) ultimately leading to the development of sustainable competitive advantage.

More specifically, the RBV functions as the theoretical foundation explaining how resources and capabilities that are valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable become central enablers for the effective implementation of lean and circular practices. These resources include, for example, organizational capabilities, tacit knowledge, technologies, recycling infrastructure, and a culture of continuous improvement.

On the Lean Manufacturing side, practices, such as Just-in-Time, Kaizen, Value Stream Mapping, 5S, SMED, Six Sigma, digitalization, and standardized operations stand out, as they reduce waste, increase efficiency, and enhance process flexibility. These practices establish the ideal conditions for incorporating circular principles.

In turn, the Circular Economy amplifies the benefits by promoting the regeneration of natural capital, closing technical and biological cycles, and eliminating the negative externalities of production systems, such as waste and pollution. This leads to greater product durability, improved material utilization, and reduced dependence on non-renewable resources.

The LM–CE integration, therefore, enables a cyclical and virtuous logic of value creation: while Lean fosters efficiency and waste reduction, CE extends product life cycles, closes material loops, and contributes to environmental goals. This complementarity leads to value generation and drives performance improvements across multiple organizational dimensions, ultimately creating competitive advantage.

7.1 Theoretical Implications

This article fills a relevant gap in the literature by demonstrating the importance of integrating LM and CE as a strategic approach to addressing sustainability challenges. It suggests that LM practices align with CE principles, promoting waste and emission reduction, minimizing the use of polluting materials, and optimizing raw materials, natural resources (such as energy and water), production processes (operational efficiency), and supply chains, thereby facilitating the transition from linear to circular production systems.

Thus, this study expands the theoretical understanding of LM and CE by showing that integrating these two research areas can help extend CE practices beyond recycling and enhance organizational performance in social, environmental, and operational domains.

Additionally, from the perspective of the Resource-Based View (RBV) and Dynamic Capabilities, this study demonstrates that LM–CE integration constitutes a valuable, rare, and inimitable resource (Barney 1991) if structurally and strategically embedded at the core of organizations. In other words, organizations that develop expertise in this integration establish barriers to imitation, with rare and valuable resources strengthening their competitive advantage and improving sustainable performance.

Therefore, this work expands theoretical knowledge in both LM and CE by developing a framework that integrates LM–CE. This framework not only fills gaps identified in the literature but also establishes a systemic model capable of guiding the transition toward CE, offering a grounded theoretical foundation to be explored and refined in future empirical research.

7.2 Practical Implications

The main practical contribution of this study lies in demonstrating that the implementation of LM practices can accelerate organizations' transition toward CE, for instance, by identifying and eliminating waste along the production chain, promoting efficiency, and reducing the consumption of raw materials (Ghaithan et al. 2023).

Furthermore, it contributes to organizing and rationalizing factory layouts, creating an environment conducive to implementing reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling strategies (Deng et al. 2022). These practices not only reduce costs but also increase employee and stakeholder acceptance of CE, thus amplifying economic and environmental gains.

Thus, the LM–CE integration presents significant practical implications. For organizations, it offers an operational model that combines production efficiency with sustainability, for example, reducing costs by minimizing waste (LM) and valorizing waste as inputs (CE), thereby creating new revenue streams through the reuse of materials.

For managers and professionals, integrating LM–CE demands changes in mindset, organizational culture, and the development of new capabilities, such as design for disassembly and life cycle analysis, as well as the adoption of new performance metrics, such as resource efficiency and material recovery rates. Therefore, managers must also foster a culture of innovation and collaboration within and between organizations to drive progress toward circularity.

For governments, the proposed LM–CE framework can guide public policy that encourages the transition to a CE, for example, through tax incentives for companies that adopt sustainable LM practices, the promotion of applied research, or regulations that guide infrastructure development for waste collection and processing.

Finally, for society, this integration offers significant environmental and economic benefits: reduced environmental impact, such as decreased natural resource extraction and lower waste generation, results in a reduced ecological footprint and long-term cost savings for consumers. Additionally, the production of durable and repairable goods may generate employment opportunities in emerging business models such as specialized maintenance and repair services.

7.3 Impacts on Economic, Environmental, Social, and Operational Performance

The study's findings indicate that integrating LM and CE positively impacts economic, environmental, operational, social, organizational, and sustainable performance. Economically, LM optimizes production processes, reduces operating costs, and increases profitability. By minimizing waste and improving efficiency, the LM–CE synergy enhances market competitiveness, lowers raw material expenses, and increases financial sustainability (Maldonado-Guzmán and Garza-Reyes 2023).

Environmentally, strategies, such as waste reduction, energy efficiency, and minimized resource consumption enable organizations to meet ambitious sustainability targets. These initiatives not only mitigate environmental impacts but also respond to growing consumer and stakeholder demands (Lim et al. 2022a).

Operationally, the LM–CE integration improves production flexibility and resilience, shortens lead times, and enhances process predictability. Organizations adopting this approach demonstrate greater adaptability to sustainability and innovation challenges, aligning with Industry 4.0 trends (Kalemkerian et al. 2024). However, organizational and social performance still require further exploration (Sasso et al. 2025; Kalemkerian et al. 2022).

Despite these benefits, challenges remain, including cultural and structural barriers to jointly implementing LM and CE. Organizational resistance, limited knowledge of circular methodologies, and the absence of clear incentives hinder adoption, requiring strategic interventions to facilitate the transition to circular production models (Arora et al. 2024).

7.4 Limitations and Directions for Future Research

First, several areas for future research emerge from the gaps identified in our integrative systematic literature review, which revealed a predominance of studies on LM–CE integration in developed markets, with limited empirical research typically confined to emerging economies. Moreover, there are few qualitative and quantitative studies assessing the operational, economic, and environmental impacts of LM–CE integration. The review also revealed a lack of studies on LM and CE applications in specific sectors, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and remanufacturing industries.

Like all research, this study has limitations. One relates to the choice of databases and keywords used in the search. Although the search was conducted in the two main global databases and followed a rigorous selection process, it is possible that some relevant studies may have been missed.

Another limitation concerns the use of a single theoretical lens—namely, the Resource-Based View, highlighting the need for alternative theoretical approaches. Additionally, the analysis focused exclusively on operational, environmental, social, sustainable, and economic performance.

Therefore, future studies are encouraged to use qualitative, quantitative, and especially mixed methods (i.e., combining both qualitative and quantitative research) to apply the proposed framework in organizations across different contexts (developed and developing countries/emerging markets) and of different sizes and sectors (micro, small, medium, and large enterprises), with the goal of testing its applicability and refining the model by incorporating new insights, such as best practices, applied strategies, lessons learned, and the barriers and benefits of LM–CE integration.

Lastly, longitudinal studies are recommended to explore the outcomes of the LM–CE synergy, such as waste reduction and the reuse of materials, inputs, and equipment within organizations. These studies would enable clearer and more precise quantification of the benefits and demonstrate the practical impacts of this integration.