Circular economy principles are usually dissociated from strategic planning practices, and there seems to be no guidance on how to decide on competitive strategies to establish circular business models. Therefore, this article aimed to propose a strategic planning decision framework oriented to circular business models (SPDF‐CBM) and test it by conducting a case study of a Brazilian company from the cosmetic sector. The SPDF‐CBM framework comprises five stages: (A) circular trends analysis; (B) circular vision and goals definition; (C) current circular business status; (D) competitive strategy for a circular economy definition; and (E) competitive strategies for a circular economy prioritization. Based on a number of tools to assist going through Stages A, B, and C, businesses get to know their current circular status and define their desired future state. In Stages D and E, businesses define their competitive strategy and spot circular business models (and strategies) they can pursue. After testing the proposed framework in a Brazilian startup from the cosmetic sector, results from SPDF‐CBM suggested that the startup pursues a competitive strategy based on differentiation and a CBM aimed at promoting renewable options. It was also pointed out that other CBMs in decreasing degree of fit with the business were maximizing material and energy efficiency, extending resource value and product life, pursuing sufficiency, and delivering functionality rather than ownership. By using the SPDF‐CBM framework, organizations can increase both their competitiveness and circularity at the same time.

Growing awareness of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues drives a significant transformation in the global business environment, making sustainability an urgent necessity and a source of competitive advantage. However, despite advances in research, there are still significant gaps in how these practices can confer competitive advantages to startups. We seek to fill this gap by conducting a systematic literature review on the competitive advantages of sustainable startups. We used the PRISMA 2020 protocol to conduct a comprehensive search in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, which led to the inclusion of 44 articles in the final review. The results indicate that sustainable startups align economic and environmental benefits, promote continuous innovation, attract investment, mitigate regulatory risks, and adapt quickly to market changes. The analysis reveals that adopting advanced technologies and circularity strategies is critical to operational efficiency and regulatory compliance. In addition, this study has mapped gaps in the literature, identifying key areas for future research into the competitive advantages of sustainable startups.

Ecodesign consists of integrating environmental considerations into the product development process by means of practices that involve the use of methods, techniques, tools, and guidelines. However, many published practices do not incorporate important environmental issues, often resulting in a product development process that is ineffective from an ecodesign standpoint. This paper’s aim is threefold: (i) Identifying environmental and operational criteria and determining weights to these criteria; (ii) assessing and selecting quality function deployment (QFD)-based ecodesign methods using environmental and operational criteria, and (iii) analyzing the practitioners’ perception of the most suitable QFD-based method identified by the second aim. To that end, a comprehensive literature review of ecodesign practices based on QFD and its requirements was carried out, and a survey was conducted with environmental science and product development experts, whose answers enabled the prioritization of the characteristics those practices must meet from environmental and operational standpoints. Thereafter, a workshop was carried out with design engineers from an automotive company in Brazil. This study’s findings indicate that many QFD-based ecodesign methods fail to consider the life cycle perspective, do not assess environmental impacts, and have not been tested before being published. Another finding from industry designers suggests that ecodesign methods should be easy to use and not time-consuming.