IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i20p9279-d1774847.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of PLM System Scenarios: Sensitivity Insights from an Academic Use Case

Author

Listed:
  • Mathis Cuzin

    (Laboratoire de Conception de Produit et d’Innovation, LCPI, EA 3927, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, F-75013 Paris, France
    Capgemini Engineering R&D, F-92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux, France)

  • Antoine Mallet

    (Capgemini Engineering R&D, F-31100 Toulouse, France)

  • Kevin Nocentini

    (Capgemini Engineering R&D, F-06616 Antibes, France)

  • Benjamin Deguilhem

    (Capgemini Engineering R&D, F-31100 Toulouse, France)

  • Victor Fau

    (Capgemini Engineering R&D, F-31100 Toulouse, France)

  • Tom Bauer

    (Bordeaux INP, I2M, UMR 5295, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université de Bordeaux, F-33400 Talence, France
    Bordeaux INP, I2M, UMR 5295, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, F-73375 Chambéry, France)

  • Philippe Véron

    (Laboratoire d’Ingénierie des Systèmes Physiques Et Numériques, LISPEN, EA 7515, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, F-13617 Aix-en-Provence, France)

  • Frédéric Segonds

    (Laboratoire de Conception de Produit et d’Innovation, LCPI, EA 3927, Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, F-75013 Paris, France)

Abstract

The 2020s represent both the digital decade and the pivotal period in the fulfillment of long-standing commitments made by public, private, and institutional actors in favor of sustainable development. In the manufacturing context, Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems are used during the design phase to reduce product environmental footprint. However, only a few studies have thoroughly identified the environmental impacts associated with these technological solutions. This study proposes a sensitivity analysis of five environmental impact categories associated with two PLM system architectures and three mitigation scenarios. To this end, we use an engineering school as a representative PLM system case study, relying on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology and leveraging specialized tools that enable the execution and comparative analysis of multiple LCA scenarios. Our results consistently identify the manufacturing and usage phases of PLM system users’ equipment as the main contributors of the PLM system to climate change, acidification, and the depletion of abiotic mineral and metal resources. End-of-life contributes significantly to particulate matter impact, and usage phase, in a nuclear mix country, to ionizing radiation. The policy of purchasing and reselling reconditioned users’ equipment is clearly identified as a key lever for reducing the magnitude of these five environmental impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathis Cuzin & Antoine Mallet & Kevin Nocentini & Benjamin Deguilhem & Victor Fau & Tom Bauer & Philippe Véron & Frédéric Segonds, 2025. "Life Cycle Assessment of PLM System Scenarios: Sensitivity Insights from an Academic Use Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-37, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:20:p:9279-:d:1774847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/20/9279/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/20/9279/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan C. T. Bieser & Lorenz M. Hilty, 2018. "Assessing Indirect Environmental Effects of Information and Communication Technology (ICT): A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Mariane Bigarelli Ferreira & Giulihano Luis Feltz Zeni & Guilherme Francisco do Prado & Jovani Taveira Souza & Cassiano Moro Piekarski & Fabio Neves Puglieri, 2025. "Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainability in the Digital Product Lifecycle: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Mariusz Cholewa & Luan Huynh Ba Minh, 2021. "PLM Solutions in the Process of Supporting the Implementation and Maintenance of the Circular Economy Concept in Manufacturing Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-28, September.
    4. Canavati, Anne & Toweh, Jayson & Simon, Adam C. & Arbic, Brian K., 2022. "The world’s electronic graveyard: What is the solution to Ghana’s e-waste dilemma?," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    5. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Sala, Serenella & Ciuffo, Biagio & Nijkamp, Peter, 2015. "A systemic framework for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 314-325.
    7. Joanna Helman & Maria Rosienkiewicz & Mariusz Cholewa & Mateusz Molasy & Sylwester Oleszek, 2023. "Towards GreenPLM—Key Sustainable Indicators Selection and Assessment Method Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & El Benni, Nadja & Douziech, Mélanie, 2025. "Implementing responsible research and innovation and sustainability assessment in research projects: A framework and application," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(2).
    2. Parolin, Giácomo & McAloone, Tim C. & Pigosso, Daniela C.A., 2024. "How can technology assessment tools support sustainable innovation? A systematic literature review and synthesis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    3. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    4. Ana Salomé García-Muñiz & María Rosalía Vicente, 2021. "The Effects of Informational Feedback on the Energy Consumption of Online Services: Some Evidence for the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Abdallah Alaoui & Moritz Hallama & Roger Bär & Ioanna Panagea & Felicitas Bachmann & Carola Pekrun & Luuk Fleskens & Ellen Kandeler & Rudi Hessel, 2022. "A New Framework to Assess Sustainability of Soil Improving Cropping Systems in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. David Tremblay & François Fortier & Jean‐François Boucher & Olivier Riffon & Claude Villeneuve, 2020. "Sustainable development goal interactions: An analysis based on the five pillars of the 2030 agenda," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1584-1596, November.
    8. Victoria Vicario-Modroño & Rosa Gallardo-Cobos & Pedro Sánchez-Zamora, 2023. "Sustainability evaluation of olive oil mills in Andalusia (Spain): a study based on composite indicators," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6363-6392, July.
    9. Sun, Xianming & Xiao, Shiyi & Ren, Xiaohang & Xu, Bing, 2023. "Time-varying impact of information and communication technology on carbon emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Rui Meng & Lirong Zhang & Hongkuan Zang & Shichao Jin, 2021. "Evaluation of Environmental and Economic Integrated Benefits of Photovoltaic Poverty Alleviation Technology in the Sanjiangyuan Region of Qinghai Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-19, November.
    11. Anna Furberg & Rickard Arvidsson & Sverker Molander, 2022. "A practice‐based framework for defining functional units in comparative life cycle assessments of materials," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 718-730, June.
    12. Ferretti, Paola & Zolin, Maria Bruna & Ferraro, Giacomo, 2020. "Relationships among sustainability dimensions: evidence from an Alpine area case study using Dominance-based Rough Set Approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. Walzberg, Julien & Dandres, Thomas & Merveille, Nicolas & Cheriet, Mohamed & Samson, Réjean, 2020. "Should we fear the rebound effect in smart homes?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    14. Firas M. Sharaf, 2023. "Assessment of Urban Sustainability—The Case of Amman City in Jordan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-16, March.
    15. Lhermie, Guillaume & Wernli, Didier & Jørgensen, Peter Søgaard & Kenkel, Donald & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia & Tauer, Loren William & Gröhn, Yrjo Tapio, 2019. "Tradeoffs between resistance to antimicrobials in public health and their use in agriculture: Moving towards sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Natália M. P. de Alencar & Martin Le Tissier & Shona K. Paterson & Alice Newton, 2020. "Circles of Coastal Sustainability: A Framework for Coastal Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-27, June.
    17. Rafael Horn & Hanaa Dahy & Johannes Gantner & Olga Speck & Philip Leistner, 2018. "Bio-Inspired Sustainability Assessment for Building Product Development—Concept and Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    18. Dinesh Seth & Minhaj Ahemad A. Rehman, 2022. "Critical success factors‐based strategy to facilitate green manufacturing for responsible business: An application experience in Indian context," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 2786-2806, November.
    19. Moreno-Miranda, Carlos & Dries, Liesbeth, 2022. "Integrating coordination mechanisms in the sustainability assessment of agri-food chains: From a structured literature review to a comprehensive framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    20. K. Koppiahraj & S. Bathrinath & V. G. Venkatesh & Venkatesh Mani & Yangyan Shi, 2023. "Optimal sustainability assessment method selection: a practitioner perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 324(1), pages 629-662, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:20:p:9279-:d:1774847. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.