This manuscript describes an innovative approach to socio-economic assessment of (advanced) engineered nanomaterials and nano-enabled products (NEPs) to support safe-and-sustainable-by-design (SSbD) decision making by industries in the early stages of product development. This semi-quantitative methodology is based on a sound conceptual framework grounded in the combination of social life cycle analysis and multi-criteria decision analysis methods and supports decision making based upon socio-economic impacts assessed over the full life cycle of a product. To facilitate its application by industries, the methodology was implemented as an Excel-based self-assessment tool. This easy-to-use, cost- and time-efficient tool can guide users through their SSbD decision making regarding newly developed nanomaterials and NEPs and can also be applied to re-evaluate existing materials and NEPs in order to improve their sustainability from a socio-economic perspective. The relatively low requirements of this tool regarding the level of efforts and expert knowledge needed for its application make it a good starting point for initial assessment to highlight socio-economic issues in the value chain. The results of this initial screening can be further used for more detailed analysis in the later stages of product development by performing a full social life cycle assessment (S-LCA).

To reach a sustainable future and meet the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), business model innovation (BMI) needs to explore theoretical and practical intersections of the traditional innovation management (IM) and new product development (NPD) processes with sustainability considerations. New environmental and health policy ambitions such as those presented in the European Green Deal and the EU Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) challenge traditional IM theories on BMI and NPD processes. The Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design (SSbD) concept is a central element of the CSS and demands a novel approach that integrates innovation with safety and sustainability (including circularity) of materials, products, and processes without compromising their functionality and/or commercial viability. Importantly, adopting such a concept can also prevent regrettable substitutions, future liability, and brand image issues for companies. To achieve this, companies must design products with minimal environmental impact, adopt circular economy principles, and ensure social responsibility throughout the value chain, while maintaining economic viability. By doing so, companies contribute to environmental, social, and economic sustainability. In this perspective, a conceptual framework is proposed on how to achieve sustainable BMI and NPD by integrating traditional IM tools with SSbD using life cycle thinking principles while considering external (changing legislation, new business standard requirements, competitive environments, technological developments, societal views) and internal drivers (company-specific targets, company culture, corporate strategy, management capabilities). SSbD and life cycle thinking should be embedded in newly developed training for IM professional designation. This is because innovation managers can play a key role in bringing this transition into practice.

The Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) framework for chemicals and materials was established under the European Green Deal Chemical Strategy for Sustainability, aiming for a zero-pollution economy and a toxic-free environment. In line with the European Commission’s SSbD recommendation and framework, a pre-market sustainability assessment must take a life cycle perspective covering all pillars of sustainability: environmental, social, and economic. While environmental and economic assessments are well established, Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) has been less explored, especially when applied to advanced materials. To contribute to Step 5 of the SSbD Framework, this study presents a S-LCA applied during early stages of product development and optimisation. The case study concerns a novel PFAS-free anti-sticking coating, assessed in comparison with a conventional benchmark. The screening-level analysis identified potential social risk hotspots along the supply chain. Results indicate that differences between alternatives are predominantly driven by suppliers’ geographical locations rather than by process-specific characteristics. The results highlight the value of early-stage social assessments in supporting informed decision-making during research and development, increasing awareness of potential supply-chain risks, and guiding innovation toward more sustainable outcomes.