Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Dalhousie University]On: 25 September 2013, At: 03:57Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Sustainable EngineeringPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsue20
From cleaner production and value management tosustainable valueJustina Catarino a , José João Henriques a , Anabela Maia b , Jorge Alexandre a , FátimaRodrigues a & David Camocho aa LNEG – Estrada do Paço do Lumiar, 1649-038, Lisboa, Portugalb LNEC – Av. Brasil, 101, 1700-066, Lisboa, PortugalPublished online: 21 Dec 2010.
To cite this article: Justina Catarino , José João Henriques , Anabela Maia , Jorge Alexandre , Fátima Rodrigues & DavidCamocho (2011) From cleaner production and value management to sustainable value, International Journal of SustainableEngineering, 4:02, 96-108, DOI: 10.1080/19397038.2010.540357
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2010.540357
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
From cleaner production and value management to sustainable value
Justina Catarinoa*, Jose Joao Henriquesa1, Anabela Maiab2, Jorge Alexandrea3, Fatima Rodriguesa4 and David Camochoa5
aLNEG – Estrada do Paco do Lumiar, 1649-038 Lisboa, Portugal; bLNEC – Av. Brasil, 101, 1700-066 Lisboa, Portugal
(Received 26 May 2010; final version received 9 November 2010)
Being part of an institution, where the main objective is research and its application to support enterprises in their challengesto improve competitiveness, innovation and sustainable development, leads to the dialogue between different research teamsabout the tools used and the results obtained. When the results of applications of cleaner production (CP) and value analysis(VA) were confronted, the possible synergies between them, the benefits of a joint approach and the complementaritiesseemed apparent and worth a research work, where these aspects could be developed. Bringing together the differentexperiences in the application of CP and VA and the state of the art of those methodologies, a new approach – sustainablevalue (SV) – was developed, materialised in a manual and tested in several companies. The results show the greatpotentiality of using this approach within companies namely in what concerns the reduction of useless and unnecessaryefforts (and resources), and encourage the orientation of limited resources towards areas, where they can lead to SV increaseand to attain sustainability.
Keywords: sustainable value; cleaner production; value analysis; entrepreneurial environmental management;eco-efficiency
1. Introduction
Entrepreneurial activities must change when taking into
account sustainable development (SD) paradigm, which is,
according to Brundtland Commission (1987), ‘meeting
the needs of the present without jeopardising the needs
of future generations’. This means economic growth that
does not deplete irreplaceable resources, does not destroy
ecological systems and helps to reduce some of the world’s
gross social inequalities (DeSimone and Popoff 2000).
Therefore any organisation can no longer work as a
‘black box’. Society wants to know about the impacts of
inputs and outputs of companies’ activities and, therefore,
a continuous process of transparency, communication and
continuous improvement is required. The value of a
company can no longer be seen only as the profit for its
shareholders, but must be extended in an objective way
to the other elements of sustainability: environment and
society (Henriques et al. 2006).
Companies have then a difficult challenge to answer:
create wealth, survive in an increasing competitive market,
generate stable working sources, promote the economical
and social development, guarantee the workers’ welfare
and reduce their products and processes environmental
impact (WBCSD 2006).
Eco-efficiency appears as an important concept to
prove the idea that economical and environmental
efficiencies can be attained simultaneously, without
prejudicing one another, focusing on the improvement of
resources productivity and on ‘producing more with less’.
Cleaner production (CP) and eco-efficiency are often
used interchangeably, but they should be viewed as
complementary concepts. They differ in their strategic
intent: eco-efficiency focusing on the strategic side of
business (‘value creation’) and CP on the operational side
of business (‘production’) (Glavic and Lukman 2007,
Howgrave-Graham and Van Berkel 2007, Van Berkel
2007).
Eco-efficiency becomes then a management strategy,
which aims at improving the economical and ecological
efficiency of companies, attaining a higher value with less
inputs, materials and energy and less outputs, waste
(i.e. pollution in the form of emissions and waste). It lays
on the prevention of materials, water and energy losses at
the origin, leading to functioning costs reduction and to
the improvement of the products environmental profile.
The result is a higher value for companies as well as the
increase in their competitiveness.
Several studies and reports confirm that pursuing
eco-efficiency does in fact improve environmental
performance and can result in economic benefits
(Five Winds International 2001).
Its practical and theoretical importance is in the fact of
combining two of the three axes of SD, the environmental
and the economical performances (Ehrenfeld 2005) and
although eco-efficiency does not directly address the
social dimension of SD (Brattebo 2005), it is an important
element in aligning any business with long-term social
needs (DeSimone and Popoff 2000).
ISSN 1939-7038 print/ISSN 1939-7046 online
q 2011 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/19397038.2010.540357
http://www.informaworld.com
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering
Vol. 4, No. 2, June 2011, 96–108
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
By promoting change towards sustainable growth, eco-
efficiency enables a company to grow in a qualitative
way (by adding value), while reducing adverse effects
on the environment. It also signals a significant shift in
focus to concentrate on real user needs (DeSimone and
Popoff 2000).
This concept was popularised by the WBCSD as the
‘business link to SD’ (Schmidheiny 1992, DeSimone and
Popoff 2000) and is now widely accepted as one of the
primary tools for advancing SD. The key aspect of
eco-efficiency is that it harnesses the business concept of
creating value (Five Winds International 2001) and most
companies have adopted it as their guiding principle
(Dyllick and Hockerts 2002, Seiler-Hausmann et al. 2004).
And it is exactly on the entrepreneurial concept of
creating value that this work is focused. It shows the
developed research on value concept as defined on value
management (VM) standards and its quantification
according to SD.
Stakeholders may have different understandings in
what concerns value meaning. VM aims at harmonising
those different points of view, enabling an organisation to
progress in the best way towards the settled objectives at
the lowest resources consumption.
According to Annex A of EN12973 ‘VA originated in
the United States around 1947 and was first applied
to redesign existing products. It has rapidly been put
into practice for new product development. Areas of
application have widened to include non-material subjects
such as administrative procedures or organisation systems.
The widening of the field of application of VA, the
expansion of VA techniques, particularly the application
of functional analysis and the value concept in manage-
ment practices, has given birth to VM, of which is one of
its core techniques’. VA is the basis from which VM has
developed being a method used when undertaking VM
studies. VA is there defined as an organised and creative
approach that uses a functional and economic design
process, which aims at increasing the value of a VA
subject. Applying VA makes it possible for the producer
and the user to design, produce, maintain and use the study
subject (new product or existing one, process, service,
system) effectively.
On the EN 12973, value is described as the relationship
between the satisfaction of need and the resources used in
achieving that satisfaction. Therefore, the higher value is
achieved with lower resources used and/or higher
satisfaction of needs.
If in the terms of this relationship, economic, social
and environmental aspects are taken into account, in a
systematic and objective way, then we are talking about
what we have defined as sustainable value (SV).
VM, involving the quantification and monitoring of
value and the focus on what things do rather than what
they are (functional approach), requires the development
of a value culture within the organisation and the focus on
users’ and other stakeholders’ requirements (EN 12973
2000). The challenge is to understand customer’s real
needs. Increasingly these needs are more for intangible
sources of value – goods and services that contribute to
quality-of-life (Five Winds International 2001).
VM methods and tools, namely value analysis (VA),
are considered mainly economic aspects in value
quantification (EN 12973 2000). But today, in order to
lead the company to SV creation, this methodology also
has to integrate environmental and social aspects.
VM and eco-efficiency together can constitute an
instrument to integrate the three components of sustain-
ability in the strategic management of companies and to
create SV.
To put into practice and test this idea, a tool from VM –
VA and another from eco-efficiency – CP were applied
together, in order to evaluate the benefits resulting from
the synergies and complementarities between them.
Good results were already obtained when applying CP
in companies – resources (materials, energy, water, etc.)
savings and waste reduction. The application of CP in
companies as a strategy to become more eco-efficient, if
it is applied through successive CP cycles, also helps
in continuously improving the environmental, economical
(and social) performance (EN 12973 2000). Eco-efficiency
has a high potential for effective contribution to SD,
primarily at company level. The strategy oriented to eco-
efficiency allows, not only an increase of companies’
ecological and economic performance, but also seeks to
respond to the increasing concerns on the environmental
safeguard at the regional level, where the companies are
located (Duarte et al. 1999, Duarte et al. 2005).
In what concerns VA, good results were attained
namely in the optimisation of value, as defined above,
by improving satisfaction of the needs of users and/or
reducing the resources involved (Henriques et al. 2003,
Henriques et al. 2006, Maia et al. 2006, Alexandre et al.
2006a, Alexandre et al. 2006b).
With these results and the experience acquired, the
question was how could those approaches be matched
and profit be taken from the synergies between them.
The answer was the concept of SV and the definition of a
new approach materialised in a methodology.
Will companies benefit from an approach that uses the
synergies between VA and CP? Will the concept of SV
work? These are the questions, this paper tries to answer.
2. Aim
The objective of this paper is to present SV methodology
(SVM) and the results of its application in seven
companies during Desenvolvimento Empresarial e Urbano
Sustentavel em Aveiro/Entrepreneurial and Urban SD in
Aveiro (DEUSA) project considered as representative
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 97
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
ones by the associations in the region, where the project
was developed.
3. DEUSA project
The SVM was developed and the corresponding working
forms were elaborated in order to support the application
of SVM within companies (Catarino et al. 2007).
The different steps of DEUSA were:
(1) Three entrepreneurial associations showed their
interest in applying the SVM in seven companies.
They got financial support to the development of
DEUSA project with the following objectives:
† to improve the opportunity of increasing SV of
companies and their products and to promote eco-
efficiency in the companies involved in the project
through the implementation of preventive manage-
ment strategies and tools such as CP – to do more
with a better quality with less materials, energy
and water, and VA – to evaluate the influence of
performance improvement (economical, environ-
mental and social) of a product and/or process in the
creation of more value for the company;
† to develop new competences in order to contribute
for more responsible companies and
† to promote the demonstration effect in Aveiro region.
(2) An initial conference took place in order to present the
project, its objectives and the different working phases.
National and local institutions (financial entities,
municipalities, local associations and university)
were invited to attend as well as companies, students
and consultants.
(3) The top management of each company engaged
themselves personally in the project and in the
application of the SVM. They signed a letter of
agreement and paid a symbolic fee to participate.
(4) INETI team trained the SV working teams from every
company involved – company internal team and
elements from the associations; an e-learning platform
was designed and adapted to the SVM application; and
this platform was online for two more years after the
end of the project.
(5) Each SV working team with the support of the INETI
team implemented the SVM during 12 months.
The analytic characterisations of emissions and
waste were performed by one of the associations
involved.
(6) There were two more open conferences, one in the
middle of the project and a final one, where each
company showed the results attained.
(7) After validation, the methodology was published in a
manual (available in Portuguese) [17].
(8) A brochure was published with the results of the
project within the companies. It was largely spread in
the Entrepreneurial Associations and in the press.
4. SV Methodology
Starting from the value concept, as defined in the European
standard: value a satisfaction of needs/use of resources, the
possibilities of profiting from the synergies between the
two methodologies VA and CP were explored, thus leading
to SVM. On one hand, being the VA methodology
characterised by a functional approach allows the problem
to be formulated in terms of end results and not in terms
of solutions which will enrich the creativity phase.
Introducing the ecological and social aspects beyond the
traditional, technical and economic ones enables the team
to go deeper in the study. The functional analysis is a good
tool to quantify the way, the study subject satisfies the user’s
needs. Using the CP methodology with the identification
and quantification of all the inputs and outputs allows the
team to quantify exhaustively the use of resources and,
therefore, to quantify what is here called the SV (because it
considers the three dimensions of sustainability). This is a
good indicator for the study subject that will lately be
compared to the ones obtained with the alternatives
generated during the study. This approach also points out
the inefficiencies, not only the eco ones (ecological and
economic), but also the social ones and the ones derived
from an incorrect satisfaction of needs.
The SVM is applied through an iterative process
composed by eight phases. In order to support the
application, for each phase, a certain number of working
forms must be filled and dated, and the person responsible
for completing them be identified.
Phase 1: general data about the company
Each company collects its general data: identification,
labouring conditions, staff flowchart and relationship with
stakeholders – Table 1.
Phase 2: specific data about the project
In the five forms to be filled during this phase, the
company top management has to define the study subject
(product and, or process), the working team, the objectives
Table 1. SVM Phase 1 – company general data.
General identificationName, Address, Localisation (industrial, urban, rural, mixed),
Contacts (phone, fax, e-mail . . . ), Workers (number), Mainproducts, Invoicing (total/year), Net value added (e/year),Sector
Labouring conditionsLabouring period (daily, weekly, yearly), Shift (number,
timetable)
Staff flowchart(Environmental manager should be identified)
Relationship with stakeholdersWorkers, Suppliers, Clients, Local community, Society, . . .
J. Catarino et al.98
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
and constraints. When the study subject is a product, more
information has to be collected namely in what concerns
the market – Table 2.
Phase 3: global inventory
During this third phase, a global inventory is structured
based in the CP methodology (Peneda et al. 2001) and the
costs (labour and equipment) are quantified. The working
team designs the study subject manufacturing diagram. All
the unitary operations are identified, as well as the inputs
and outputs of materials, energy and water for each of
them. The study subject is then divided into its
components, and displayed in a diagram.
All the collected information is treated and gathered in
the SVM 18 forms – Table 3. The detailed costs for each
operation related to the components are quantified in what
concerns labour, equipment, energy, materials, water, and
emissions and waste management. The diagram can then
be completed leading to a cost model.
For this purpose, each company has to list all the raw
materials, components, auxiliary materials, packages,
water, energy, final products, intermediary products,
wastewater, emissions, waste and noise. All of them are
characterised (in environmental, economic and social
terms) and quantified, thus allowing to build the cost
model and to detect the manufacturing inefficiencies
(mass and energy balances). In each form, there is a field to
be filled with an immediate analysis, mainly in what
concerns the effects on the environment and the
improvement opportunities. These results are the starting
points for the formulation of improvement proposals.
Phase 4: functional analysis
Functional analysis is one of the phases of the VA
methodology, and is a systematic process to describe
completely the study subject’s functions and their
relationships. They are systematically identified, charac-
terised, classified and evaluated (EN 1325-1 1996).
The study subject is no more analysed only as the
assembling of components, but is also characterised by a
set of functions. The level of satisfaction of the user will
depend on the performance of those functions, being the
user more and more aware of the environmental and social
aspects associated with the goods he uses.
In order to contribute for a progressive orientation of
companies towards sustainability, it is essential that when
performing this functional analysis phase, the stake-
holders’ needs (expressed in functions terms) take into
account not only social and economical worries, but also
the environmental aspect, so that companies will adopt the
new concept of SV.
During this phase, questions related to the study
subject, its interactive agents and functions are identified.
The relationships between cost and function as well as cost
and importance are evaluated. The level of performance
is defined and finally the SV is estimated. All this
information is quantified in the six forms designed for this
Table 2. SVM Phase 2 – project specific data.
Study subjectProcess – Total or partial (choose and identify)Product – Identification, Quantifying basis, Periodicity, Relationship towards total production (%), Relationship towards totalcompany invoicing (%)
Working teamName, Function, Department, Contact
ObjectivesInnovation (radical or incremental), Costs,a Satisfaction of the users’ needs,a Product design,a Eco-efficiency,a Marketing,a Others
ConstraintsInternal (Product or Company) – External – Other aspects
Information about the productNeeds to be fulfilledMarket definition Yearly sales expectations, Market distribution, Price the user is willing to pay,
Target consumers (age, purchasing power), Needs/demands not satisfied bythe market, Competition products, Selling places
Technical data Catalogues, Drawings, Photos, Standards, Patents, Claims, Final destination,Package destination
Product (stocking and distribution) Kind of package, Package alternatives, Needed protection, Used transportation(type, space management and course), Storage period and conditions
Others Delivery times, Materials whose cost has increased, Rejections %,Technological status, Specific after selling needs
a To keep or to improve (what aspects).
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 99
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
phase and will be used for the formulation of improvement
proposals – Table 4.
At the end of the phase, it is possible to quantify the
initial SV of the study subject (SV0). It is compared later
with the one that will be obtained by implementing the
proposals generated in Phase 6 (SV1). Value will then be
quantified by the relationship presented in Figure 1.
The indicator SV for the study subject is quantified
through the relationship
Pn
1Fn·Pen
Resourcesin which F weights the
relative importance of each function, Pen its performance
and n the number of functions. The sum (S) of Fn·Pen
quantifies the satisfaction of needs for the existing study
subject, while the resources come directly from the Global
Inventory. To compare function importance with its cost,
both must be presented in terms of relative percentage.
Phase 5: problems synthesis
During this phase, the eco-inefficiencies of the process
and its environmental impacts (Phase 3) are synthesised.
And from the analysis of the cost function matrix (Phase 4),
functions and components with high costs are identified.
Eventual non-conformances between costs and relative
importance of functions are detected.
This information will enable the working team to
evaluate the performance of the study subject and to
identify areas, activities or operations, where attention
must be focused – Table 5.
This synthesis of the information gathered until this
phase is essential to identify and generate ideas to solve the
detected problems.
Phase 6: previous identification and selection of ideas
The working team identifies ideas to improve the study
subject through creativity sessions or research of already
existing solutions for similar problems. The team lists,
classifies and eventually groups the ideas in order to make
Table 3. SVM Phase 3 – global inventory.
General manufacturing diagram(for global process: unit operations sequence, input and
output identification)
Specific manufacturing diagram(for study subject: unit operations sequence, input and output
identification and coding)
Study subject components(tree diagram)
Operations descriptionOperation code and designation, Finality, Equipment, Equipment
utilisation costs/operation, Energy costs/operation, Labourcosts/operation, Operation time, Opportunities
Raw materialsCode and designation, Operation, Annual amount, Annual cost,
Physical state, Composition, Origin, Resourcea,Hazardousness, Observationsb
Auxiliary materialsCode and designation, Operation, Annual amount, Annual cost,
Physical state, Composition, Origin, Aim, Resourcea,hazardousness, Observationsb
PackagesCode and designation, Operation, Kind of package, Annual cost,
Toxic compounds, Composition, Origin, Weight, Resourcea,Recyclability, Annual amount, Observationsb
WaterCode and designation, Operation, Availability, Annual
consumption, Aim, Quality, Requests, Treatment wastes,Origin, Costs, Observationsb
EnergyCode and designation, Operation, Type of energy, Aim, Nominal
power, Energy consumption, Observationsb
Final products By products Intermediary productsCode and designation, Operation, Annual amount, Composition,
Standards, Destination, Other relevant data, Observationsb
WasteCode and designation, Operation, Annual amount, Composition,
EU waste list, Physical state, Management procedure,Management costs, Legal compliance, Observationsb
Air emissionsCode and designation, Operation, Flow, Composition,
Management procedure, Management costs, Legalcompliance, Observationsb
WastewaterCode and designation, Operation, Flow, Destination,
Composition, Management procedure, Management costs,Legal compliance, Observationsb
NoiseCode and designation, Operation, Equipment/sector, Noise level,
Compliance, Observationsb
Mass balanceMaterial, Input, Output, Stocked, Waste
Cost model (e)Labour, Equipment, Energy, Materials, Water, Emissions and
waste management
a Rare, renewable, . . .b Impacts (water, air, soil, human health . . . ), opportunities, other aspects.
Table 4. SVM Phase 4 – functional analysis.
Functions listingThe study subject functions are listed. Each function is
expressed in two words, a verb and a noun.Functioning characterisationCriteria (technical, environmental, social), Performance existing
level, Performance desired level, Observations
Function weightingNot all the functions are equally important. Therefore, a
weighting figure must be allocated to each of the functionslisted and characterised. A weighting matrix can help inthis process.
Cost/functionThe cost/function matrix sets out the costs of the study subject
by function as well as by parts/operations.
Cost/importanceFunction cost is compared with function weight (%)
SV
SV0 ¼
Pn
1Fn·Pen
Resources
F, weighting figure for each function; Pen, Existingperformance satisfaction factor; n, function number
J. Catarino et al.100
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
a pre-selection of those whose viability will be analysed
during the next phase – Table 6.
Phase 7: viability analysis
The team will now make the viability analysis of the ideas
selected during the previous phase in what concerns
technical, environmental and social aspects, and evaluates
and selects the ideas taking into account their SV
(relationship between needs’ satisfaction and used
resources) – Table 7.
To quantify the SV of each idea, or group of ideas, the
same procedure of Phase 4 will be used – which means
that in the relationship, F weights the relative importance
of each function and Pen the new idea performance factor.
The sum (S) of Fn·Pen quantifies the satisfaction of needs,
while the resources represent the total costs for each idea.
Phase 8: action plan
Finally, action plans are defined their implementation
being dependent on top management decision.
This plan consists of the information needed to
implement the ideas selected in the previous phase, such as
the name of the responsible for the idea implementation,
the necessary resources (financial, human and others), the
time needed and which are the main benefits expected with
this implementation (economical, environmental, social
and SV).
5. Results
All the companies, in the DEUSA Project, were small and
medium enterprises (SMEs) and certified either at the
product or the process level. Two of them (A and F) were
larger, with 250 and 220 workers and an invoicing higher
than e20,000,000 The smallest one (B) had only 17
workers and an invoicing less than 1,000,000. They were
all in the metal mechanics area. Five of them selected the
process as the study subject, and the other two (F and G)
selected the product. While three companies (A, B and D)
chose only part of the process, the other two (C and E)
decided to study the whole process (Table 8).
The study span depends mainly on the study subject
and on the orientation given by the top management.
On the examples presented in this article, the span was
subjected to the duration of the project in which those
cases were included and, therefore, it took about 12
months. Normally, with a supportive top management and
a motivated team, 1 year will be enough to develop the
project until the implementation. This one will depend on
the proposals involving more or less development work.
On analysing the costs on Table 9, it can be concluded
that those concerning raw materials contribute to 27–74%
of total costs, while the labour ones represent between 2 and
34% (for those companies there seems to be an inverse ratio
between dimension and labour costs). As to energy costs,
they vary between 1 and 19% and the equipment ones
between 2 and 31%. Water costs are low, especially for
those companies that get water supply from bore holes and
only consider, as a cost, the energy for pumping it. The costs
with emissions and waste management are also low and only
have some weight for those companies that studied surface
treatment processes and have waste water treatment plant.
Table 10 is a summary of global inventory for
environmental aspects and shows that companies A and D
use zinc (surface-treatment processes) and company C
several different metals (in this company several unit
processes were studied) and all the others use steel.
The percentage of waste from raw materials is related to
percentage of costs with emissions and waste management:
Characterised by:
product
process
Needs/Functions
Value
Resources
α
evaluationcriteria
*
Function Analysis Phase
Information Phase
functions list*
operations flow chart*
operations form*
costs organisation*
functions characterisation*
functions weight*
function/cost matrix*
Characterised by:raw material*energy*water*
humanresources
*
time*waste*others*
*
* degree offlexibility
levels
Figure 1. Value definition.
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 101
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
companies A and D are those who produce a larger quantity
of waste and spend more with waste treatment (both
studied surface-treatment processes). The companies
having products as their study subjects identified lower
waste percentage from raw materials and lower waste
management costs. In what concerns toxicity, 100% of the
auxiliary materials used by companies A, D and G are
harmful: A and D due to the use of CrVI and G due to the
use of a large amount of oils and solvents. In all the
companies, there are problems with noise and also with
atmospheric emissions in stationary sources and diffused
sources (companies B, C, D and E).
The functional analysis results summarised in Table 11
show that companies identified between five and nine
functions for the selected study subjects.
The different SV0 estimated for each company cannot
be compared between them. They are only indicators that
allow the comparison, in each company, of the study
subject value, when beginning the project with the
different proposals resulting from the development of the
methodology.
During creativity sessions, using brainstorming, in
each company an average of 61 ideas were produced. Only
five of them, on average, were developed in each company
during this project. From the ideas produced, an average
of 17.3% were ideas for immediate implementation,
39.3% ideas to be studied and implemented at a medium
term, 27.9% at a long term and 15.6% to be eliminated
(Table 12).
Table 5. SVM Phase 5 – problems synthesis.
Phase Form Topics
1. Company generaldata
Relationship withstakeholders
Any aspect related with stakeholders that should be improved or considered.
2. Project specificdata
Objectives Highlights the objectives in order to be compared with final results
Constrains Points out the constraints during the studyInformation about
the productMarket, technical data, other aspects
3. Globalinventory
Operation description Necessary information to fill cost model
Raw materials andauxiliary materials
Total amount of raw materials and components; Costs per product unit kind of resources(scarce, . . . ); Hazardousness; Amount of dangerous materials versus total amount ofused materials; Compares with waste; Data from the immediate analysis field;Indicators
Packages Total amount; Costs per product unit; Recyclability; Compares with waste; IndicatorsWater Relates the water amounts and their origins with the most consuming operations; Relates
to wastewater; Amount of reused water versus total of consumed water; IndicatorsEnergy Energy consumed in each operation; If it exceeds 1000 TOE, the company is subjected to
specific regulation (energy auditing and energy rationalisation plans); Energycontribution to global heating (TOE; Euro; kgCO2eq); Indicators
Final products AmountsByproducts AmountsWaste Total; Hazardousness; Valourised amount (compared with the total produced);
Management costs; Relates costs and amounts by operation; Relates with inputmaterials
Atmosphericemissions
Management costs; Legal compliance; Number of emission sources Amount ofpollutants/year (the objective being to monitor and/or reduce)
Wastewater Total; Relates to input water (amount); Legal compliance; Management costs (relate to thetotal amount or with several partial effluents); Recycling rate
Noise Noisier equipments; Compliances; Existent levels; need of individual protectionequipments (IPE)
Mass balance Summarises the previous forms in what concerns materials inputs, incorporation in theproduct, waste and storage
Cost model Summarises the costs allocated to items and to operation4. Functional
analysisFunction
characterisationChecks which criteria and functions are below the performance desired level
Function weighting Checks the relative weight of functionsCost/function Checks functions, components, operations with higher costsCost/importance Diagram to compare the information from the previous steps in order to identify functions
whose weight is not in accordance with its costsSV Establishes the relationship between satisfaction of needs and cost and estimates the study
subject value which will be the reference to evaluate the improvement in the companyperformance (economic, environment and social levels)
J. Catarino et al.102
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
From all the ideas and in what concerns eco-efficiency
elements, an average of 41% had to do with materials
reduction, 17.6% with energy reduction, 19.4% with toxic
dispersion reduction, 12.3% with incentive to recyclability,
12.4% with maximisation of renewable resources con-
sumption, 2.4% with the increase in products durability and
3.9% with the increase in the intensity of goods service.
As to CP techniques, an average of 28% of the ideas were
related to process changes, 40% to good practices, 10.4% to
materials changes, 12.5% to product changes and 12.6%
had to do with options for internal valorisation.
The reductions attained by the companies, and resulting
from the development of the ideas selected by them, vary
from 0.5% up to 70% in what concerns water consumption,
10% up to 30% as to energy, 3% up to 100% for waste water
generation, 3% up to 10% for materials consumption, 2.9%
up to 44% for waste generation, 21% up to 62% for
hazardous materials consumption, 30% up to 90% for
generation of atmospheric emissions and 3% up to 12% for
the generation of hazardous waste. The toxicity linked to
the product (CrVI was substituted) were also reduced in A
and D. The closed nature of the cooling circuit (company
B), the improvement of the product environmental profile
(in five companies) and the reduction of times and steps in
the process (company E) are also results attained with this
project and to be mentioned. Also to be mentioned is the
development of products with new functions – a new wheel
supporting a tubeless tyre in company F and a new
panoramic wood stove, with improvement of aesthetics and
warming functions, for company G.
The ideas studied by the companies led to the study
subjects’ performance improvement, which varied from 11
to 57%, and to resources reduction from 3 to 20%, except
for companies A and G. Company A did not get costs
reduction, because when changing into less toxic
materials, it had higher acquisition costs, this being
neutralised by lower management costs. As to Company
G, designing a new panoramic heat recoverer needed to
incorporate bigger quantities of raw materials with the
resulting increase in necessary resources.
All the companies got an increase in their SV from the
5% attained in company G up to 86% in company D. This
company presented the highest costs with energy,
emissions and raw materials waste management, toxicity
and hazardous waste. It was also a company, where a high
number of ideas was generated during brainstorming and
Table 6. SVM Phase 6 – previous identification and selection of ideas.
Ideas listing and classificationFor each idea: Time for implementation A. Short term
B. Medium termC. Long termD. Absurd
CP practice Good housekeepingProcess modificationMaterial substitutionProduct changesInternal valourisationOther
Eco-efficiency elements Reduce material intensityReduce energy intensityReduce dispersion of toxic substancesUndertake recyclingMaximise sustainable use of resourcesExtend product life cycleExtend products service intensity
Ideas descriptionPotential advantages: environmental aspects, functional aspects and others
Definition of groups of ideasGrouping complementary ideas
Table 7. SVM Phase 7 – Viability analysis.
Technical viabilityTechnical criteria (ex. satisfactorily proved technology) are
defined and weighted. The way each group of ideas complywith those criteria permits to evaluate its technical viability
Environmental viabilityEnvironmental criteria (ex: materials consumption) are defined
and weighted. The way each group of ideas comply with thosecriteria permits to evaluate its environmental viability
Economical viabilityAs to the economical aspects the investment and exploration
plans are designed and the investment is analysed througheconomic indicators – payback period, internal rate of return,net present value)
SVFor each idea or group of ideas: S V ¼
Pn
1Fn·Pin
Resources
F, weighting figure for each function; Pi, New ideaperformance satisfaction factor; n, function number
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 103
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Tab
le8
.G
ener
ald
ata
abo
ut
com
pan
ies.
Co
mp
any
Item
AB
CD
EF
G
Wo
rker
s2
50
17
90
11
55
02
20
52
Cer
tifi
cati
on
ISO
90
01
:20
00
ISO
ITS
16
94
9:2
00
2IS
O9
00
1:2
00
0IS
O9
00
1:2
00
0IS
O9
00
1:2
00
0IS
O9
00
1:2
00
0IS
O9
00
1:2
00
01
40
01
:20
04
OS
HA
S1
80
00
Ty
pe
of
pro
du
cts
Iro
nw
are
(scr
ews)
Au
tom
oti
ve
com
po
nen
tsIr
on
war
eIr
on
war
eP
rog
ress
ive
too
lB
icy
cle
com
po
nen
tsW
oo
dst
ov
e
Inv
oic
ing
(e)
25
,50
0,0
00
95
8,0
00
6,1
00
,00
06
,50
0,0
00
1,7
50
,00
02
0,6
00
,00
03
,50
0,0
00
Stu
dy
sub
ject
Par
to
fth
ep
ro-
cess
:zi
nc
coat
ing
Oil
stic
km
anu
fact
uri
ng
pro
cess
To
tal
man
ufa
ctu
rin
gp
roce
ssP
art
of
the
pro
-ce
ss:
zin
cco
atin
g
To
tal
man
ufa
ctu
rin
gp
roce
ssP
rod
uct
:n
ewp
air
of
wh
eels
sup
po
rtin
ga
tub
e-le
ssw
ire
pro
du
ct:
new
pan
ora
mic
wo
od
sto
ve
Tab
le9
.C
ost
anal
ysi
s.
Co
mp
any
Co
sts
AB
CD
EF
G
Raw
mat
eria
ls(%
)3
16
36
62
73
07
07
4L
abo
ur
(%)
22
42
01
73
41
01
1E
ner
gy
(%)
19
58
11
19
1E
qu
ipm
ent
(%)
11
62
27
31
11
13
Wat
er(%
)1
61
,1
1,
1,
1,
1W
aste
man
agem
ent
(%)
21
14
17
4,
11
J. Catarino et al.104
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Tab
le1
0.
Glo
bal
inv
ento
ry.
Co
mpan
y
Item
AB
CD
EF
G
Raw
mat
eria
lZ
inc
Ste
elZ
amak
,al
um
iniu
m,
stee
lan
din
ox
,b
rass
Zin
cS
teel
Ste
elS
teel
Raw
mat
eria
l(k
g/y
ear)
62
,67
13
1,3
71
83
8,0
00
25
40
13
7,1
70
40
00
56
,56
4
Was
tefr
om
raw
mat
eria
l9
1%
31
%2
1%
90
%2
5%
7%
7%
Au
xil
iary
mat
eria
ls(k
g/y
ear)
62
,67
06
15
46
,00
09
15
22
00
16
.73
34
To
xic
ity
/haz
ard
sub
stan
ces
10
0%
(CrV
I)9
2%
(oil
,g
reas
ecl
ean
er)
70
%(o
il,
gre
ase
clea
ner
,p
ain
ts,
met
altr
eatm
ent)
10
0%
(CrV
I)1
5%
(oil
)8
0%
(oil
,so
lven
ts)
10
0%
(oil
,so
lven
ts))
Wat
erco
nsu
mp
tio
n(m
3/y
ear)
10
,73
73
14
37
39
70
09
05
31
0,0
00
59
.4
En
erg
yco
nsu
mpti
on
(TE
P/y
ear)
12
22
14
64
20
60
52
13
.8
Was
te(k
g/y
ear)
58
,87
21
2,1
40
26
1,8
64
15
16
0,7
37
33
84
97
4H
azar
dw
aste
4%
5%
20
%1
00
%4
0%
2%
4%
No
ise
Po
int
sou
rce
(in
com
pli
ance
)P
oin
tso
urc
el
(th
ree
pla
ces
no
tco
mp
lyin
g)
Po
int
sou
rce
(th
ree
pla
ces
no
tco
mp
lyin
g)
Po
int
sou
rce
two
pla
ces
no
tco
mp
lyin
g)
Po
int
sou
rce
(in
com
pli
ance
)P
oin
tso
urc
e(t
hre
ep
lace
sn
ot
com
ply
ing)
Po
int
sou
rce
(th
ree
pla
ces
no
tco
mp
lyin
g)
Atm
osp
her
icem
issi
on
sT
wo
-poin
tso
urc
es(n
ot
com
ply
ing)
Tw
o-p
oin
tso
urc
esan
dth
ree
dif
fuse
do
nes
(no
tco
mp
lyin
g)
Fiv
e-p
oin
tso
urc
esan
dsi
xd
iffu
sed
on
es(i
nco
mp
lian
ce)
On
e-p
oin
tso
urc
ean
dse
ver
ald
iffu
sed
on
esD
iffu
sed
sou
rces
(oil
emuls
ion
s,so
lven
ts)
Th
ree-
po
int
sou
rces
(in
com
pli
ance
)S
ix-p
oin
tso
urc
es(i
nco
mp
lian
ce)
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 105
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
where disparities at functional level were found, therefore
presenting a high potential for improvement (Table 13).
It can be concluded that the global results of the
application of this methodology, during the project, in the
seven SME were as follows:
At economic level: diagnosis of manufacturing
processes at economical level and optimisation of
manufacturing processes; identification, control and
reduction of cost; reduction of materials, energy and water
consumption; companies’ eco-efficiency improvement;
At environment level: diagnosis of manufacturing
processes at environmental level and adoption of
environmental best practices; reduction of materials,
energy and water consumption; waste preventive
approach; reduction of toxic dispersion; companies eco-
efficiency improvement;
At social level: diagnosis of manufacturing processes
at social level; improvement of internal and external
communication; attitudes and behaviour change, namely
in what concerns health and safety working conditions;
new competences development in companies and entre-
preneurial associations; adoption of more social respon-
sible behaviour by the companies.
The implementation of the methodology also led to a
more precise expression of user’s needs and for the
companies that had chosen the product as study subject,
the development of new ones.
For all the companies, there was an increase in the SV,
which will be reflected in the companies’ competitiveness
improvement.
The demonstration effect in Aveiro region was attained
through the news in local newspapers and technical
magazines, as well as the final conference where the seven
companies presented posters and an oral presentation
about the work developed in the project. This conference
had the participation of technical and scientific community
at the national level.
6. Three years later . . .
As seen on the previous item where the results were
presented, when the project ended, only an average of five
of the proposed ideas had already been developed in each
company. Three years later, all the involved companies
were questioned about further developments:
(A) The company not only replaced the use of CrVI but,
also changed all the zinc coating line where that
chemical was used. This meant a higher investment
than the one previously foreseen, but with greater
process improvements such as the removal of
chlorides from wastewater and with easier operations
in the waste water treatment plant. After the end of the
project, the company tried to apply by itself the SVM
to other areas of the process, and succeeded in doing it.
(B) Several ideas were studied and implemented during the
development of the project such as closing the furnace
water cooling circuit replacement of the outlet valve in
the drilling operation and implementation of a new
exhaustion system in the degreasing operation. Nowa-
days, the production of the part that was studied has
decreased, and the company is now manufacturing new
products to answer the market needs.
(C) The company changed the whole surface treatment
line (lac), where the bigger environmental and cost
problems were detected. For the last three years, after
the end of the project, the environmental management
system has been implemented and the company
recognises the importance of the project to this
implementation, namely in what concerns the gather-
ing and management of the information.
(D) The ideas concerning good practices were
implemented during the project. Meanwhile, the
working team members responsible for the SV
implementation were transferred to other companies
in the group, and the action plan was not completely
implemented.
(E) The ideas not requiring investments were
implemented immediately. The way of evaluating
the resources allocated to each product changed with
the project and the company adopted the new one
proposed by the SVM.
Table 11. Functional analysis.
Company
Item A B C D E F G
Number of functions 5 5 6 9 5 8 7VS0 3.4 0.4 2.0 18.4 0.01 15.8 3.9
Table 12. Generated ideas.
Company
Item A B C D E F G
No. of generated ideas 32 66 65 95 30 84 56No. of developed ideas
(at the end of theDEUSA project)
3 3 7 6 7 5 6
J. Catarino et al.106
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
(F) The pair of wheels developed during the project was
commercialised. The measures for resources reduction
were not implemented.
(G) Two years after the end of the project, a new
panoramic wood stove was on the market, with
changes relatively to the prototype resulting from the
SVM application.
Several papers were presented in national and
international conferences showing the development and
results of this project. Two academic works (master thesis)
were developed based on the implementation of the SVM
in the companies.
7. Comments and conclusions
The SV concept worked and helped the companies to
direct their options towards sustainability.
The SVM used enabled the companies to diagnose the
main problems concerning their manufacturing processes
and products (for those that made an integrated study of
the product), leading to the quantification of the total costs
including the environmental and social ones.
Summarising the results, it can be said that the
application of the SVM that brings together VA and CP,
leads to:
. improvement in the functional performance of the
study subject, improving the satisfaction of user’s
needs, taking into account a pollution preventive
approach. Therefore, the eco-efficiency principles
were used (namely, the progress in recyclability and
product durability, the reduction of toxic dispersion
and the maximisation of the use of renewable
resources and of the service intensity) to quantify
the increase in the satisfaction associated with each
function and. reduction in costs associated with the study subject,
taking into account the minimisation of resources
intensity (materials, energy, water, operation time,
. . . ) of products and processes.
The application of the SVM leads to ideas that enabled
to increase the SV of the study subject of each company
and to improve communication. It also led to the adoption
of more responsible corporate social behaviour by the
companies as well as to the increase of their competitive-
ness. The methodology shows a high potential to be used
as an operational tool for the development of sustainability
at entrepreneurial level, as its application lead to
improvement of the sustainability of the companies
involved and Aveiro region. The success of such an
approach depends on the effective support of company’s
top management, namely in what concerns the working
team and on implementing the ideas, even when they
imply investments.Tab
le1
3.
Ev
alu
atio
n.
Item
Co
mp
any
AB
CD
EF
G
Wat
erco
nsu
mp
tio
nre
du
ctio
n0
.5%
28
%3
2%
44
%–
–7
0%
En
erg
yco
nsu
mp
tio
nre
du
ctio
n–
––
10
%2
2%
30
%–
Was
tew
ater
red
uct
ion
3%
10
0%
c3
2%
73
%–
––
Mat
eria
lsco
nsu
mp
tio
nre
du
ctio
n3
%–
–7
%1
0%
––
Was
tere
du
ctio
n3
%2
0%
32
%4
4%
0%
–,
Haz
ard
mat
eria
lsre
du
ctio
n2
1%
–3
7%
–6
2%
––
No
ise
red
uct
ion
–2
5%
––
––
–A
tmo
sph
eric
emis
sio
ns
red
uct
ion
–9
0%
––
–3
0%
–H
azar
dw
aste
red
uct
ion
––
12
%–
3%
––
Oth
ers
Cu
to
ut
CrV
I,
pro
du
ct
tox
icit
y
Co
oli
ng
wate
rin
acl
ose
dci
rcu
it
Imp
rov
emen
to
fth
ep
rod
uct
en
vir
on
men
tal
pro
file
Cu
to
ut
CrV
I,
pro
du
ct
tox
icit
y
Red
53
%o
fp
rod
ucti
on
tim
e
Dev
elo
pm
ent
of
an
eww
hee
lsu
p-
po
rtin
ga
tub
eles
sty
re
Dev
elo
pm
ent
of
an
ewp
ano
ra-
mic
wo
od
sto
ve
wit
him
pro
ve-
men
to
fae
sth
etic
san
dw
arm
ing
fun
ctio
ns
Per
form
ance
"3
6%
"1
1%
"1
1%
a"
49
%"
14
%"
20
%"
57
%R
eso
urc
es–
#5
%#
4%
a#
20
%#
14
%#
3%
"5
0%
SV
1"
36
%"
17
%"
16
%a
"8
6%
b"
33
%"
24
%"
5%
aIn
zam
akfo
un
dry
pro
cess
.b
Ina
spec
ific
zin
cco
atin
gp
roce
ss(M
ZA
S).
cC
oo
lin
gw
ater
ina
clo
sed
circ
uit
.
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 107
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Future developments of the methodology will include
better characterisation and quantification of social aspects,
namely in what concerns a more accurate quantification of
needs and the way they are satisfied (functional analysis
quantification). Other aspects to be considered are the
improvement of the SV working team operation as well as
the warranty of the real involvement of top management in
the implementation of the methodology in the companies.
Another objective for future actions is to continue
implementing the methodology in other companies and
areas of application in order to enlarge the sample and
confirm the results attained until now.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the entrepreneurial associations that promotedDEUSA project and the enterprises involved in the project. Theyalso thank the PRIME Program that financed the DEUSA projectthrough its Measure 6 – Apoio a cooperacao, observacao,Informacao e Apoio Especializado as PME’s (Support tocooperation, observation, information and specialised supportto SME).
Notes
1. Email: [email protected]. Email: [email protected]. Email: [email protected]. Email: [email protected]. Email: [email protected]
References
Alexandre, J., Henriques, J.J., and Catarino, J., 2006a. How candesign, value management and cleaner production worktogether? 2nd International Conference on Quantified Eco-Efficiency Analysis for Sustainability, Egmond aan Zee,Holanda, 28–30 Junho, in abstract book (pp 14).
Alexandre, J., et al., 2006b. How to measure value from asustainable point of view. Conf “Delivering Value Today &Tomorrow”, Brighton, UK, 14–15 Sept, in conference papers(Paper 19) pp.
Brattebo, H., 2005. Toward a methods framework for eco-efficiency analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9 (4),Special Issue on Eco-Efficiency, Fall.
Bruntland Commission, 1987. Our common future. Oxford:Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-282080-X.
Catarino, J., et al., 2007. Manual Valor Sustentavel, INETI/CENDES.
DeSimone, L.D. and Popoff, F., 2000. WBCSD. In: Eco-efficiency – the business link to sustainable development.Cambridge: MIT Press.
Duarte, A.P., et al., 1999. Notes from the field sustainableproduction programme in setubal region (PROSSET) –preliminary results. Journal of Cleaner Production, 7,295–298.
Duarte, A.P., et al., 2005. Sustainable production programme insetubal region (PROSSET)—final results. Journal of CleanerProduction, 13 (4), 363–372.
Dyllick, T., and Hockerts, K., 2002. Beyond the business case forcorporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environ-ment, 11, 130–141.
Ehrenfeld, J.R., 2005. Eco-efficiency – philosophy, theory andtools. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9 (4), Special Issue onEco-Efficiency, Fall.
European Standard EN 12973, 2000. Value management.European Standard EN 1325-1, 1996. Value Management, Value
Analysis, Functional Analysis Vocabulary, Part 1: ValueAnalysis and Functional Analysis.
Five Winds International. 2001. Eco-efficiency and materials.International council on metals and the environment.Ottawa: ICME, ISBN 1-895720-34-6.
Glavic, P. and Lukman, R., 2007. Review of sustainability termsand their definitions. Journal of cleaner Production, 15,1875–1885.
Henriques, J.J., et al., 2006. Sustainable value. 5th WorldCongress on Cost Engineering, Project Management &Quantity Surveying, Ljubljana, Slovenia 23–26 Abril, 2006,in book of abstracts (OVM-04) pp.
Henriques, J.J., Alexandre, J., and Peneda, C., 2003. ManualAnalise do Valor Orientada para a Sustentabilidade, dosconceitos a pratica, INETI/CENDES.
Howgrave-Graham, A. and van Berkel, R., 2007. Assessment ofcleaner production uptake: method development and trialwith small businesses in Western Australia. Journal ofCleaner Production, 15, 787–797.
Maia, A., et al., 2006. Eco-efficiency in mineral extractiveindustry – a strategy to sustainable development.2nd International Conference on Quantified Eco-EfficiencyAnalysis for Sustainability, Egmond aan Zee, Netherlands.28–30 June 2006, in abstract book pp34.
Peneda, C., et al., 2001. Manual PREPOL – Prevencao/Mini-mizacao da Poluicao nas Empresas. Cadernos do INETI,3a ed. Lisboa: INETI.
Schmidheiny, S., 1992. Changing course: a global businessperspective on development and the environment.Cambridge: MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-69153-1.
Seiler-Hausmann, J.D., Liedtke, C., and Weizsacker, E., 2004.Eco-efficiency and beyond – towards the sustainableenterprise. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing, ISBN 1-874719-60-8.
Van Berkel, R., 2007. Cleaner production and eco-efficiencyinitiatives in Western Australia 1996–2004. Journal ofCleaner Production, 15, 741–755.
Word Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2006.Business for development. Business solutions in supportfor millennium development goals. Switzerland: Atar RotoPresse SA.
J. Catarino et al.108
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Dal
hous
ie U
nive
rsity
] at
03:
57 2
5 Se
ptem
ber
2013
