Issue 4 : January 1998

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

1/68

The Journal of

Sustainable Product Design

ISSUE 4 : JAN UARY 1998

ISSN 13676679

Re-PAIR

Re-FINE

Re-DESIGN Re-THINK

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

2/68

Re-PAIR

Re-THINK

Re-DESIGN

Re-FINE

Battery-powered lawn

mower by Husqvarna

Analysis, page 7

Increased creativity and

innovation are critical

to sustainable solutions

Analysis, page 18 and Interview, page 38

Table made

from Metzzo

Gallery, page 40

Detail of carpet sweeper,

designed by Agim M eta

Analysis, page 28

Sketch for a table wi th a

glass top using Metzzo legs

Gallery, page 41

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

3/68

5 Editorial

Martin Charter, Joint Editor, The Journal of Sustainable Product Design

Analysis

7 Systemic shift: sustainable development and ID pedagogy

Stuart Walker, Associate Professor, Faculty of Environmental Design,

The University of Calgary, Canada, and Ralf Nielsen, Assistant Professor,

The University of Southern Louisiana, US

18 Unraveling the environmental product design paradox

H Scott Matthews, Doctoral Student in Economics, Carnegie Mellon, US

and Gregory C Chambers, Corporate Manager of Worldwide Environmental

Health and Safety for Quantum Corporation, US

26 The challenge of product chain thinking for product development

and design the example of electrical and electronic products

Anna Krn, Dorctoral Student, Helsinki School of Economics and Business

Administration, Department of Management, Finland and Eva Heiskanen,

Researcher, Universit y of Tampere, Finland

37 Automated disassembly support tool a knowl edge-based

support system for disassembly of tel evision sets

Niall Murtagh, Senior Research Scientist, FA Systems Department, Industrial

Electronics and Systems Laboratory, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Japan

Gallery

46 Greenfreeze refrigeration technology and Biopac starch-based packaging

Interview

48 Ralph Earle III, Director, Alliance for Environmental Innovation, US

Martin Charter, Joint Coordinator, The Centre for Sustainable Design, UK

Case study

51 Renewable energy in portable radios: an environmental

benchmarking study

Professor Ab Stevels, Professor at the Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering,

Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, and Arjen J. Jansen,

Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft

University of Technology, the Netherlands

O2 news

56 Special feature: O2 New York City (o2nyc)

Edited by Iris V. van de Graaf, the Netherlands, with contributions from Scott Bolden,

Wendy Brawer, Lewis Korn, Mark Randall, John Seitz, and Alexandra Sticher, US

59 Reviews

64 Diary of events

1998 The Centre for Sustainable Design.

All written material, unless otherwise

stated, is the copyright of The Centre

for Sustainable Design, Surrey, UK.

Views expressed in articles and letters

are those of the contributors, and not

necessarily those of the publisher.

ISSN 13676679

The Journal of

Sustainable Product Design

ISSUE 4 : JAN UARY 1998

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

4/68

Editors

Martin Charter and Anne Chick,

Joint Coordinators,

The Centre for Sustainable, Design, UK

Articles, Interview, O2 News and

Journal marketing: Marti n Charter

Gallery, Reviews, Diary and

Journal production: Anne Chick

The Journal of Sustainable Product Design

encourages response from its readers to

any of the issues raised in the j ournal.

Entries for the Diary of events and material

to be considered for review should all besent to the Editors at the address below.

All articles published in the Analysis

section are assessed by an external

panel of business professionals,

consultants and academics.

Subscription rates


is a quarterly journal appearing in the

months of April, July, October and January

each year. Subscription rates are 80.00

(paper-based) and 40.00 (online) for one

year (four issues). Special subscription

rates for developing countries and

students are available on application.

Cheques should be made payable to

The Surrey Institut e in sterl ing

and sent to:


The Centre for Sustainable Design

Faculty of Design

The Surrey Institut e of Art & Design

Falkner Road

Farnham

Surrey GU9 7DS

UKtel +44 (0)1252 732229

fax +44 (0)1252 732274

email: [email protected]

internet: http://www.cfsd.org.uk

Editorial Board

Africa

Gary Owen

CEO, ResponseAbility Alliance (Zimbabwe)

Australasia

Professor Chris Ryan

Director, Centre for Design, Royal

Mel bourne Institut e for Technology

(Australia)

Europe

Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel

Director, Industry and Environment, UNEP

(France)

Hans Peter Becker

Managing Director, Wilkhahn (UK) Ltd. (UK)

Professor Eric Billett

Warden, Brunel University College (UK)

Professor Dr Michael Braungart

Fachhochschule Nordostnierasachen,

(Germany)

Professor Han Brezet

Director, Section of Environmental Product

Development, Faculty of Industrial Design

Engineering, Delft University of Technology

(Netherlands)

Ian Dumelow

Dean, Faculty of Design,

Surrey Institute of Art & Design (UK)

Professor Dr Guenter Fleischer

Director, Instit fuer Technischen

Umweltschutz, Technische Universitat

Berlin (Germany)

Peter James

Director, Sustainable Business

Centre (UK)

Iris van de graaf de Keijser

Director, Kiva Product Ecology,

(Netherlands)

Professor Karl Lidgren

Director, The International Institute for

Industrial Environmental Economics,

Lund University (Sweden)

Dorothy MacKenzie

Director, Dragon (UK)

Professor Ezio M anzini

Director, Facolta di Architettura,

Unita di ricerca Progetto, Prodotto,

Ambiente, Politecnico di M ilano (Italy)

Dr Stefano Marzano

Head of Corporate Design,

Philips International (Netherlands)

Dr Diana Montgomery

Head of Environment, Automobile

Association (UK)

Professor Jeremy Myerson

Contemporary Design,

De Montf ort University (UK)

Jonathan Smales

CEO, The Earth Centre (UK)

Sam Towle

Head of Environmental Audit ,The Body Shop International Plc (UK)

Dr Hans van Weenen

Director, UNEP Working Group

on Sustainable Product Design,

International Centre, University

of Amsterdam (Netherlands)

Professor Jan-Olaf Wil lums

Norwegian School of Management,

Oslo (Norway)

Dr Jonathan Williams

Director, Group for Environmental

Manufacturing (UK)

US

Dr Brad Allenby

Director, Environmental,

Health & Safety, AT&T (US)

Professor Patricia Dillon

The Gordon Institute, Tufts University, (US)

Ralph Earle III

Director, The Alliance for Environmental

Innovation (US)

Professor John Ehrenfeld

Director, Technology, Business and

Environment Program, Massachusetts

Institute of Technology (US)Dr Joseph Fiksel

Senior Director, Strategic Environmental,

Health & Safety M anagement, Battelle

Memorial Institute (US)

James Hartzfeld

Vice President, Interface Research

Corporation (US)

Professor Will iam M cDonough

Dean, Faculty of Architecture,

University of Virginia (US)

GENERAL INFORMA TION

4 THE JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN JANUARY 1998

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

5/68

I t is essential that businessstarts to incorporate environ-mental and broader sustainabilitythinking at the start of theproduct development process,if we are to move towardsincreased quality of life world-

wide. If this does not happenopportunities will be missed. Toenable this will mean developingmechanisms to raise awarenessand understanding of issuesamongst all internal and externalstakeholders involved in theprocess. Part of this will mean

increasing education and train-ing, but may also mean re-education, dispelling popularmisconceptions. In addition,thinking broader than environ-mental sustainability will meanconsidering social and ethicalimpacts of the product develop-ment process. The Brent Sparissue clearly illustrated thatsociety does not necessarilybelief the hard science.Therefore, ignoring the softer

issues maybe costly from a stake-holder acceptance viewpoint.

Many of these issues are beinghighlighted in the electronicssector, which faces increasingpressures under producer respon-sibility, with most activity focus-

ing on end of life management(EOLM) rather than eco-design.

In October 1997 a draft discus-sion document on the manage-ment of end of life electricaland electronic waste wascirculated by the EuropeanCommission for commentamongst the European electron-ics industry. The paper has con-siderable implications for thedevelopment and design of prod-ucts, particularly the need to:

eliminate toxic materials

increase recyclability

increase dismantlability improve reverse logistics.

Companies in the electronicssector have highly complexsupply and value chains.Implementing eco-design willmean increasing informationrequirements from raw material,component and sub-assemblysuppliers, many of whom arelikely to be poorly prepared forthe situation. In addition, the

electronics sector is leading theway in the implementation ofthe international environmentalmanagement standard ISO14001,

which will also push companiesto greater understanding of thedirect and indirect environmen-

tal effects of products throughoutthe life cycle.

For eco-design to progress inthe electronics sector it mustbe integrated into existing busi-nesses through re-engineeringexisting business processes.There will need to be a learningcompany approach. Companiesare likely to make mistakes and

will need to avoid falling into thepitfall of the not invented heresyndrome, where new ideas fromoutside the company are notrecognised or nor absorbed as

quickly as they should be.Another key lesson will be aneed to adapt the eco-designprocess to company culturetaking account business functionpower structures eg. is the firmfinancially or marketing-driven?

It is essential to try and involveother business functions in theeco-design process. For examplemarketing and sales shouldparticipate to ensure that there

is dialogue and sensitivity tocustomers needs, so opportuni-ties are not missed. As previouslymentioned suppliers are a keystakeholder in the success of anyeco-design initiative. Eachelement of the value chain willneed to understand eco-goals for

EDITORIAL

5JANUARY 1998 THEJOURNAL OFSUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN

Welcome to the fourth issue ofThe Journal of Sustainable Product Design

M artin Chartern

Joint Editor, The Journal of Sustainable Product Design

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

6/68

the end product to enable themto take action. Education andre-education, training and re-training and clear communica-tions will be essential elementsto increasing stakeholdersenvironmental awareness eg.Electrolux have launched aneco-literacy programme throughits Intranet aimed initially atemployees.

There is a need for a overall

target for the eco-designprogramme and eco-performanceobjectives and metrics forspecific products or services.A key need is to broaden thediscussion into eco-productdevelopment and design, gettingeco-stimulus and creativity intothe idea generation phase. Thiscan produce breakthroughs eg.the solar powered lawnmowerand on-going innovation eg.dematerialisation (less energy,

less resources, more functional-ity) moving from books onpaper, to downloadable informa-tion from Internet.

There is also a need for newtools in the eco-product devel-opment and design process. Forexample, Nortel recently organ-ised customer eco-focus sessionsand Trucost in New Zealand havelaunched software that examinesecological costs of products. Inaddition, to enable improved andmore time-efficient decision-making companies such as BT, SCJohnson Wax and Philips are

exploring cut-down life cycleassessment (LCAs) tools.

The fourth issue of the Journalof Sustainable Design focuseson papers related to electronicproducts. Dr Stuart Walker,Associate Professor at theUniversity of Calgary and RalfNielsen, Assistant Professor atthe University of Louisianaexplore the need for a systemicshift to move towards sustain-

ability, with an emphasis on amovement towards local scaleproduction and consumption.The article illustrates the productdesign implications of 'productsharing' ie. viewing the portablepersonal computer as part of acommunity-based service ratherthan a series of single products.H. Scott Matthews, a doctoralstudent at Carnegie Mellon andGregory Chambers, CorporateManager of Worldwide

Environmental, Health and Safetyfor Quantum Corporation,explore the eco-design implica-tions of various end of lifemanagement (EOLM) options,using the example of disc drives.The paper suggests that compa-nies are not fully realising thecost:benefits of designing forimproved EOLM. Anna Krn, adoctoral student at the HelsinkiSchool of Economics and EvaHeiskanen, a Researcher at the

University of Tampere exploredifferent stakeholders attitudesto the greening of productchain management, particularly

illustrating the importance of theretailers and the need for reliableinformation. Niall Murtagh,Senior Research Scientist atMitsubishi Electric Corporationexamines the technical issuessurrounding the dismantling oftelevisions, providing implica-tions forproduct development and design.An interview with Ralph EarleIII, Director of the Alliance forEnvironmental Innovationfocuses on the need to considerthe decision-making fabric ofthe company when launchingeco-design, with examples ofprojects being undertaken withJohnson Wax and Starbucks, acoffee retailer. The Innovationsection provides a comparisonof the environmental impacts offour radios, with the conclusionthat human powered productsare not necessarily greener than

battery powered products, withmuch depending on the EOLMdisposal option chosen. The O2pages focus on the activities ofthe New York City chapter, andhighlight an interesting processthat has been developed toeducate designers aboutsustainable product design.

The Journal looks forward tocomments and responses toarticles, and encourages thesubmission of papers particularly

on eco-innovation and broaderperspectives of sustainableproduct development and design(SPDD).

EDITORIAL


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

7/68

The prece pts of sustainabili ty have

significant implications for the

future of product design and

production, and the meanings of

material culture. Considerable work

is currently being done in the devel-

opment of methodologies, such as

life cycle assessment (LCA), in

order to evolve conserving and

regenerative systems of production

and consumption. How ever, it isalso being wi dely recognised that

a more fundamental, systemic shift

in our approaches to product

design, manufacturing and our

material expectations will be

required if sustainability is to be

fully embraced.

In this discussion, the nature of this

systemic shift, and its meani ng in

terms of product design, are consid-

ered w ith particular reference to a

M asters degree project which

addresses product design within

the context of a sustainable

community. This projec t not only

ill ustrates an approach to sustain-

able product design, and the range

of factors which have to be consid-

ered, it a lso suggests an innovative

pedagogical model for learning.

The project w as placed within a

sustainable community scenario,

developed by urban planners. An

outline of this contextual setting is

included i n order to demonstrate

how a product in terms of its

design, its use and its overall

impacts, has to be considered

w ithin a broader system w hich

includes ways of living and work-

ing, and notions of independence

and inter-dependence. An account

of the approach a dopted during the

product design phase is given

together with an analysis of the

project, and the questions it raises.

This is followed by a discussion of

the potential of this example as a

pedagogical model which synthe-

sises sustainable development

with industrial design. Finally, the

implica tions of such an approach to

product design are discussed with

reference to the broader proposition

of a systemic change to production

and consumption, a proposition

which, increasingly, is being

acknowledged as a contingent

factor for achieving sustainability.

ANALYSIS

7

Dr Stuart Walker is an associate

professor and former director of the

Industrial Design Programme, in the

Faculty of Environmental Design at

The University of Calgary. In his

research and design activities he is

examining the issues surrounding

sustainable product design,

wi th particular emphasis

on product aesthetics.

Ralf Nielsen is an assistant

professor at The University of

Southern Louisiana where

he teaches sustainable

product design as part ofthe Industrial Design Programme.

JANUARY 1998 THEJOURNAL OFSUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN

Systemic shift: sustainabledevelopment and industrialdesign pedagogy

Stuart Walker & Ralf Nielsenn

Associate Professor, Faculty of Environmental Design,The University of Calgary, Canada

Assistant Professor, The University of Southern Louisiana, US

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

8/68

Introduction

This paper describes anapproach to sustainableproduct design developed toaddress the negative environ-mental and social effectsassociated with products whichare in a rapid state of technologi-cal advancement. The personalcomputer (PC) was chosen as the

vehicle for this conceptualexploration because it represents

a particularly problematic areafor the application of sustainableprinciples.

An introduction to sustainabledevelopment, and the shiftneeded to align our ways ofdesigning, producing, using anddisposing of products withsustainable principles, isfollowed by an overview of theproject and a discussion of themain findings. The approachadopted during this MastersDegree project suggests aninnovative pedagogical modelfor addressing sustainableproduct design. Suggestions fordeveloping this model to addressother, related areas of design areincluded.

Sustainable development

Over the last ten years, sincethe 1987 report Our CommonFuture (Brundtland et al, 1987),the terms sustainability andsustainable development havebeen used extensively to describemany different, and oftencontradictory, approaches toenvironmental and economicissues, and business planning.Despite their common usage,often the core meaning of theseterms, and the magnitude of the

changes they imply, are notwell understood. These termsencompass such considerationsas environmental stewardship,reductions in the use of naturalresources, and conservation ofhabitats. In addition to theseterms, sustainability andsustainable developmentrequire a commitment to socialissues to social equity withinand between countries.Furthermore, the termschallenge our ideas of growth;development and growth arefrequently seen as synonymous but development does not equate

with growth (Hawken, 1993).Growth, a word frequently usedin todays business environment,is a quantitative term, it meansincreasing in size; it seems that

whatever the current size of abusiness, there is always aperceived need to become

bigger; whatever the profits,there is always a perceivedneed to have more. Obviously,growth cannot be sustained.On the other hand, develop-ment is a qualitative term, itsuggests improvement in social,environmental and economicconditions. When linked tosustainable it suggests that suchadvancements be achieved in

ways which are consistent withcontinuous improvement.

The systemic shift

In order to align our ways ofliving and our current workingpractices with the principles ofsustainability many authors (eg.Fioruzzi, 1995 and Manzini, 1996)are suggesting that a fundamen-tal, systemic shift is needed. Themagnitude of change implied by

sustainability is so significantthat it cannot be achieved bysmall, incremental improvementsto our current approaches. It isthe current approaches them-selves which, in many respects,are the primary obstacle, there-fore small improvements tothose approaches are unlikelyto achieve the changes necessaryfor sustainability.

A number of writers in the field

(such as Van der Ryn andCowan, 1996, and Orr, 1992) havesuggested that one of the key

ways to move in a sustainabledirection is to shift our activitiestowards human scale and localscale endeavours. Such a shiftcould have major environmentaland social benefits and advan-tages but it would also meansignificant changes in the ways

we live and work, the natureof our material culture and the

ways we manufacture and useproducts.

In the field of urban planningdesigns have been developed forsustainable urban communities(Perks, Kirby and Wilton-Clark,1996). These community designsincorporate residences,businesses, and retail andrecreational facilities within acompact community form. Theyare designed to be sensitive toenvironmental and ecologicalissues and to provide employ-ment opportunities and facilitiesfor other human activities all

within easy reach of residences:by walking, cycling or by use ofpublic transport. These commu-nity designs have higher popula-tion densities than those ofconventional suburbs in NorthAmerican cities, and provide a

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

9/68

variety of housing types. Higherpopulation densities not onlyrequire less land use, they alsohelp to ensure that businesses,public transport and otherfacilities can be economically

viable. These explorations,which attempt to align ourforms of living with principles ofsustainability, have considerableimplications for the role of theindustrial designer.

Implications of sustainable

development

for product design

Sustainable community design,and investigations into ways ofliving which could provide bothenvironmental and socialbenefits, have a number of impli-cations for the design, manufac-ture and use of products impli-cations which can contribute to

our understanding of the termsustainable product design.

Local scale design and

production

Product design and productionwithin and for sustainablecommunities will require areorientation and restructuringof our ways of manufacturing.Sustainable development pointstowards smaller scale, flexiblemanufacturing facilities whichallow for a variety of products tobe produced for local or regionalmarkets. This, in turn, willrequire innovative designservices which allow products,through their design specifi-cations, to be manufactured, andre-manufactured economicallyin smaller quantities.

Local resources

Use of local energy and materi-als, and local knowledge andskills would enable products tobe designed and produced in

ways which are suited to theutilitarian and cultural needs ofthe area, and which are sensitiveto local environmental condi-tions. Such production wouldalso create local employmentopportunities and permit product

repair, maintenance, upgrading,re-production and recycling atthe local level. It would alsoreduce packaging and the needfor long distance shipping.

Dematerialisation, shared

products and a service based

economy

Another aspect of product designand sustainability is demateriali-sation. The concept of demateri-alisation relates to the replace-ment of products with services.

Technological advances could,conceivably, allow a transforma-tion to a more service-basedeconomy, where many currentproducts are no longer required.On-line services such as tele-phone directories, newspapers,

videos and music, could, poten-tially, obviate the need for manyindividual, autonomous products which all require materials,manufacturing, packaging andshipping. It is not yet clear ifsuch services would indeedreduce material consumption.For example, at one time it was

widely expected that officecomputers would reduce paperusage, whereas now it hasbecome apparent that paper usehas significantly increased withthe introduction of computers.However, there are other poten-

tial advantages of dematerialisa-tion within the sustainablecommunity model. Services

within such a community couldallow the use of many sharedproducts and facilities such aslaundry facilities, lawnmowers,public transport, etc. While suchservices still require products,their shared use means that theoverall number of products isreduced.

Case study

Technology and sustainability

a conceptual exploration

through design

This Masters degree project wasconducted to explore the poten-tial of designing products in ways

which adhere to the principlesof sustainable development.The focus of the project wasthe portable PC. This was chosen

because it seemed to be aparticularly problematic areafor the adoption of sustainableprinciples.

The technology of PCs has beenadvancing at a rapid rate for anumber of years. This has meantthat PCs have been becomingtechnologically obsolete withina short time of their purchase.The product might continue tofulfil its intended function, butadvances have meant that new,

more powerful machines offer agreater number of desired func-tions and faster operating speeds.As a result the machines arereplaced within a relatively shortperiod. The pace of developmentin PCs has been impressive current models are able tooperate in the order of threethousand times faster than the

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

10/68

original IBM PC introduced in1982 (Young 1993). However, thisrate of advancement has alsomeant that PCs are beingdiscarded at equally impressiverates it was predicted thatbetween 199296, 5070 millioncomputers would be disposed of(Aeppel, 1994).

The project set out to examine ifand how the industrial designercould make a contribution to

sustainability by addressing thisproblem of technological obso-lescence through a re-design ofthe PC.

The initial approach

modularity

The initial approach was toexplore the potential of amodular computer which couldbe readily upgraded by the user.It was recognised that the rateof technological obsolescenceof the different components

within a PC varies considerably,but the whole computer isreplaced when the weakest linkneeds to be upgraded. Forexample, a computer might bereplaced in order to take advan-tage of the latest developmentsin Central Processing Unit (CPU)speed or memory capacity, butthe screen, keyboard, disc driveand casing might still be func-tioning in a satisfactory and

acceptable manner. A modulardesign would, potentially, allowonly those components to bereplaced which have becometechnologically obsolete. This

would reduce the number ofcomponents being discarded, andalso allow the user to customisethe product according to theirparticular needs and economicmeans.

As an analogy, the 35mm singlelens reflex (SLR) camera is anexample of a product family

where different components canbe purchased and assembled bythe user. A basic camera bodyand standard lens can be supple-mented with telephoto and

wide-angle lenses, tripods, flash-units, motor-drives and so on.The backwards compatibility ofthis family of products allows thecamera to be adapted andupgraded, and the life of theproduct is extended. Over time,all of the original componentsmay have been replaced and theproduct will have evolved intosomething new.

Using the SLR camera as a model,the PC was divided up into its

various component parts comprising display devices, inputdevices, CPUs, power supplies,data storage devices and buses.Conceptually, these variouscomponents might be separateitems which could be easilyassembled by the user andexchanged as required.

Incidentally, some computermanufacturers are now exploringthis type of modular concept.

A series of design explorationswere conducted using themodular concept:

A systems approachStacking and snap-togethercomponents with standardelectro-mechanical connections

were explored to develop afolding notebook type product(Figure 1). However, it wasrealised that the spatial and volu-metric compatibility of compo-nents was a significant constraintin this concept. Future compo-nents would have to conform tothe established geometry of the

system, and as the spatial andvolumetric requirements of newtechnologies was unpredictable,this concept did not provide thenecessary flexibility for an adapt-able, and durable system.

A non-systems approach

The constraints discovered inthe systems approach led to theexamination of ways which wereconceptually more flexible and

ANALYSIS


Figure 1: A snap-together systems concept

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

11/68

ANALYSIS


adaptable to new technologies.As an example of the potentialflexibility required, the idea ofupgrading display devices froma flat screen to a virtual realityheadset was used. Similarly, adata-glove could, conceivably,replace a keyboard. Designinga product family which couldadapt to such changes was notpossible within the systemsapproach discussed above. In

the non-systems approach,the various components werephysically separated in order tofacilitate spatial and volumetricflexibility (Figure 2). Oneconcept utilised a folding folio,made from a fabric, used tohouse the components. Anotheridea was a belt or strap withpockets for the components.A further possibility used themetaphor of a students book-strap to bundle components.

These ideas would allow for thenecessary volumetric flexibility for upgrading, adaption andcustomisation and wouldcontribute to environmentalstewardship by reducing theamount of materials and prod-ucts entering the waste stream.However, despite these potentialadvantages, these concepts alsohad a number of significantdisadvantages. The relativelylarge number of separate compo-

nents linked by electro-mechani-cal connectors, and bundled ina particular configuration, wouldmean that the computer wouldhave to be unpacked and set-upfor use a potentially timeconsuming and awkward task,

which could also create wearproblems and damage. Thesefactors seemed to outweigh the

potential advantages of flexibil-ity, upgradability, etc.

A change of approach

delivery of computer services

in a sustainable community

Having explored the potential

of modular concepts both ina rigid systems format and ina more flexible, non-systemsformat, it became clear that thedesign of such a computer wasproblematic, for both technolog-ical and usability reasons. Whilethe basic criteria of upgradabil-ity, flexibility and user customi-sation appeared to fulfil manyof the environmental considera-tions by reducing materialsthroughput, the design of a

modular concept seemed tocreate as many problems as itsolved. Furthermore, familiarisa-tion with the issues during theseearly stages of the projectrevealed that, although themodular system would allowsome savings in terms ofresource use and wasteproduction, there would stillbe a requirement for packaging

and shipping a large number ofindividual components neededfor regular upgrades.

At this point it was decided toexplore a different strategy.The concept of product sharing,emanating from the work insustainable community designmentioned above, suggested anew service-oriented direction.A network system would allowmuch of the computer hardwareand software to be removedfrom the PC unit and wouldallow upgrades to be carried outonce for a large number of users.Such a system would require apersonal interface to be linkedto a central server system, rather

than remaining an independent,autonomous unit. However,the recent rapid developmentand use of on-line servicessuggested that this lack ofautonomy would not be asignificant problem.

The project at this point becamenot how to design a portablecomputer in a way which wascompatible with the principles

Figure 2: A non-systems approach offered greater spatial flexibility for upgrading

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

12/68

of sustainability? but how todeliver the services offered bythe portable PC in a way which

was compatible with the princi-ples of sustainability? There is asubtle but important differencein the phrasing of these twoquestions. The first questionconstrains the designer to thinkin terms of an autonomous unitsimilar to existing portablecomputers. The second has nosuch constraints, and allowsfresh ways of tackling theproblem.

The context of the projectremained the sustainable

community scenario developedby urban planners. The commu-nity network approach wasinitially conceived in a way

where file storage and softwarewould be located at a local,community-run computer facil-ity. Later it became apparentthat it was possible to extend thenumber of shared componentsto include CPUs, buses, power

supplies etc. which would, inturn, significantly reduce thenumber of components held bythe individual users. This conceptresulted in a significantly differ-ent computer architecture. Thepersonal product was reducedto a minimal dumb interfaceunit, with some form of displayand an input device such as akeyboard or pen. All othercomponents were located at thecommunity computer facility.The Personal Interface can beseen as a window to these sharedfacilities. This concept is notunlike that of mainframecomputers, X-Windows architec-ture, or some of the low costcomputers designed for accessingthe world wide web (WWW).

The community net appeared tosatisfy, to a much greater degreethan the previous ideas, many ofthe energy and materials issuesrelated to environmental stew-ardship, while also allowing usersto access a variety of hardware

and software which might bebeyond the economic meansof many computer users ifthey had to purchase equivalentproducts on an individual basis.Thus the concept also appearedto contribute to social equity,

which is one of the key elementsof sustainable development.

The personal net

This conceptual designreconfigures the architecture ofthe PC so that the majority ofhardware and software compo-nents are shared from a commu-nity facility, with minimal inter-face hardware held by theindividual user (Figure 3). Thecontext for use of this design isthe sustainable communityscenario. The product concept is,in many respects, compatible

with sustainable principles. Itsubstantially reduces energy andmaterials requirements formanufacturing because of the

ANALYSIS


Figure 3: The Personal Net: minimal interface connected to a community computer facility

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

13/68

shared nature of the majority ofcomponents, and it facilitates adegree of social equity in itsaccessibility. Furthermore, tech-nological advancements in CPU,computer memory and storage,peripheral hardware, and soft-

ware can be upgraded at thecentral facility, thus all usersbenefit from these upgrades andpremature obsolescence of manyindividual, autonomous products

is avoided.The viability of such an approach

was investigated once theconceptual design was found tobe technically feasible. It wasestimated that each communityfacility, or node, could serveapproximately 800 users. Linksbetween different communitynodes would facilitate communi-cations and allow users access todifferent resources. Thecommunity facility (node) would

be located in a convenientlocation within easy access forthe users. It was estimated thatthe higher population densitiesenvisioned for the sustainablecommunity designs would allowa centrally located node to be

within 4 minutes walk(approximately 400m) of800 users.

It was also estimated that amonthly service fee in the orderof $50 to $80 per month wouldcover costs of: start-up equip-ment, a building to house thecommunity computer facilities,the salaries of technical supportstaff and an administrator,hardware and software upgrades,and energy consumption of thefacility. While such a service feemight appear to be unattractive

to potential users it is costcompetitive with the alternativeof purchasing a new PC every 2to 3 years, while offering addedbenefits of technical support, anda broader range of up-to-datehardware and software. Addedto this are the environmentalbenefits of the concept and thesocial and community aspects ofthe central facility.For those in the communityrequiring only occasional use

of a computer, the communitycomputer facility could providea number of terminals on a pay-per-use basis. An additionaladvantage of the concept is thatindividual users can choose theirown personal interface equip-ment the development of aproduct family comprising a vari-ety of input, output and networkconnection devices would allow

ANALYSIS


Figure 4: Personal interface: Phonepad concept

The productconcept is, inmany respects,compatible withsustainableprinciples. Itsubstantiallyreducesmaterials andenergy require-ments formanufacturingbecause of theshared natureof the majorityof components,and it facilitatesa degree ofsocial equity inits accessibility.

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

14/68

users to select equipment appro-priate to their needs (Figures46). The minimal nature of thepersonal interface also lendsitself to portability a criterionof the design exercise.

This conceptual design fulfilsmany of the requirements set outin the initial project brief, whichsought to explore the potentialof redesigning a portable PC in a

way which would be aligned with

the principles of sustainability,and which would overcome,as far as possible, the negativeaspects of technological obsoles-cence. The benefits include:

resource use reduction:energy and materials usage aresignificantly reduced becausefewer products are manufac-tured. Use of paper productsis also reduced because fewermanuals and handbooks andless packaging are required.

extended product care:recycling, repair and reuseof components is facilitatedbecause the majority of hard-

ware is moved one step closerto the manufacturer. Thisallows manufacturers to trackand take increased responsibil-ity for their products, thusencouraging and supportingideas of extended producerresponsibility and the require-ments of product take-back

legislation. reduced impacts of tech-

nological obsolescence: thesharing of major hardware andsoftware components beginsto reduce the negative environ-mental effects of rapid techno-logical obsolescence. Designersand manufacturers would beable to place increased empha-sis on reliability, quality, and

ANALYSIS


Figure 5: Personal interface: notepad concept

Figure 6: Personal interface: laptop concept

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

15/68

maintenance of components.These factors could savesignificant amounts of energyand materials, not only duringthe manufacturing stages, butalso during the operational lifeof the products.

flexibility in upgrading andextended product life: theproblems encountered in theearlier modular concepts,related to the spatial and

volumetric constraints of newcomponents, are overcome byhousing most of the hardwarein a community facility. Thisallows relative freedom fromspatial constraints and facili-tates component upgrading bytrained technical support staff,

which in turn contributes toextending the useful life ofproducts.

product leasing and softwareprotection: local management

of the community facilitycould also allow more closelycontrolled leasing agreements

with hardware providers andsoftware developers, whichcould result in consistent,predictable sources of revenueand reduced losses due tosoftware piracy.

This conceptual design appears toresolve many of the conflictingpriorities which often seem to

exist between sustainable devel-opment and product design. Bytaking into consideration the

work of other disciplines (in thiscase urban planners), it illustratesa process of design which broad-ens the more traditional, productfocused approach. This broaderperspective resulted in a designconcept which was contextuallybased within a sustainable

community scenario. As a result,the insights of those working inother disciplines, at larger scalesof intervention, and the prioritiesincorporated into the communitydesign, were able to inform theproduct design process. Thisresulted in a conceptual designcapable of delivering PC servicesin a way which is compatible

with the overall communitydesign principles and infra-structure.

Potential for further w ork

This project prepares the ground-work for market and economicfeasibility studies which would benecessary prior to the detaileddesign of a family of productscapable of delivering computerservices via a community netapproach. In furthering this

work, a number of issues not

touched on during the project,could be considered. For exam-ple, the manufacturing of thecomputer products at the locallevel could be investigated. This

would create local employment,allow products to be tailored tolocal needs, allow the use oflocally available materials and soon. In considering these aspects,the relationship between mass-produced parts and locallyproduced parts and assembly

could be examined. In addition,the conceptual ideas for theinterface-hardware designs,developed during the project,adhere to our traditional notionsof product aesthetics whichhave evolved from a modernistic,industrial culture. The introduc-tion of locally appropriatedesigns which could be, at leastpartially, manufactured at the

ANALYSIS


By taking intoconsiderationthe work ofotherdisciplines[this conceptualdesign] illustrates aprocess ofdesign whichbroadens themore traditional,product focusedapproach.

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

16/68

local level, suggests that productaesthetics could also evolve in

ways which start to reflect andembody the sustainable ethos

which underpins the product.Such an evolution would startto reflect both sustainable

values and particular culturalpreferences.

The economic feasibility of theseideas would also have to beclosely examined. But this would

have to be done in a way whichrecognises the environmentaland social costs of our current

ways of manufacturing, distribut-ing and using products the socalled externalities which aregenerally not included in ourpresent economic models.Changes at the government(policy) level would be requiredto enable and encourage such ashift.

A pedagogical model

for sustainable product

development

As a pedagogical model foraddressing product design inthe context of sustainability,this project raises a number ofsignificant points and avenuesfor further exploration.

Issues-oriented design and

interdisciplinarity

It becomes evident that in orderto incorporate the principles ofsustainability, the focus has tochange from being productoriented to being issuesoriented. The conceptual basisof the approach had to embracethe broader issues which tend tocreate conflicts between our

ways of living and working, and

the priorities of sustainabledevelopment. This raised deeperquestions related to environ-mental, social and economicconditions. In order to explorethese issues, work from otherdisciplines was found to beimportant, particularly thesustainable community scenariosdeveloped by urban planners,

which provided a contextualanchor for the consideration ofproducts and product design. Thesustainable community scenario

was, in effect, a mechanism forfocussing the project.

The project suggests thatdesigners can use scenarios ofa preferred future as a tool tounderstand the steps which needto be taken in order to redirectour approaches to design. A widerange of studies can inform thedesigner when progressing theseconcepts, including anthropol-

ogy, sociology, economics andengineering. It is only by begin-ning to understand these broaderissues, and their relationships,that significant progress towardssustainability, and sustainableproduct design, can be effected.

Technological evolution and

sustainable development

The project illustrates anapproach to design by whichtechnological obsolescence

can be both acknowledged andincorporated into the processof product design, production,use and disposal. The projectdemonstrates that a harmony canbe achieved between two seem-ingly opposed sets of prioritiesie. technological evolution andsustainable development. Further

work in this area could explorethe feasibility of local scale

manufacturing and the develop-ment of product aesthetics. Suchinvestigations could enhanceopportunities for local employ-ment, use of local materials, andfor creating products attuned tocultural values and identity.

Dematerialisation

The project also addresses theconcept of dematerialisation.The PC was reduced to a mini-mum by allowing users to share

community facilities. This createsa service-oriented, rather thana product-oriented, focus. Astechnologies converge, thepotential of this conceptbecomes even more significant.In principle, many currentlyautonomous products all withtheir own manufacturing facili-ties, materials requirements,packaging and shipping, anddisposal problems etc. couldconverge into minimal interface

products. Televisions, radios,music equipment, newspapers,telephones, videos etc. could beaddressed in similar ways to thePC. With on-line services, manyof these products could, conceiv-ably, be eliminated. Thus, theproject suggests that service- orsystems-oriented designapproaches can be a valid areafor inclusion in industrial designeducation, especially if sustain-able product development is to

become incorporated into designcurricula.

Independence and

inter-dependence

Finally, the project raises issuesabout independence andinter-dependence, and aboutthe nature of community basedenterprises. Examination of the

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

17/68

logistics of running a a commu-nity based facility is required.The community server couldbe an entirely commercialenterprise, or it could be run asa community cooperative

where the users own the facilityand participate in its operation.A cooperative approach may alsobe appropriate for the actualmanufacturing of the products.The industrial cooperatives of

Mondragon, in the Basquecountry of northern Spain, havedemonstrated the economicfeasibility and social benefitsof such an approach (Morrison,1991).

Conclusion

The challenge of aligning thedesign, manufacturing, useand disposal of products withprinciples of sustainability is

both formidable and complex.When products which are in arapid state of technologicaldevelopment are considered, thischallenge becomes even moredifficult. The case study illustratesa possible approach which hasthe potential of overcomingmany of the apparent conflictsbetween sustainable develop-ment and our material needs anddesires. The adoption of such anapproach in the commercial

sector will require a number ofchanges, including governmentpolicy, so that manufacturingcorporations are encouraged toconsider alternative ways ofdelivering services, while ensur-ing economic viability.Furthermore, our predominantnotions of growth, which arestill prevalent in the commercial

sector, have to be challenged ifthe systemic shift is to beeffected in a timely manner. Theexploration of these potentiali-ties, through academic designprojects can illustrate and giveform to the opportunities whichexist for rethinking our ways ofliving and working. A shift indesign curricula, to recogniseand encompass ideas such asinterdisciplinary studies, scenario

building, economics (particularly

local scale economics), sociol-ogy, and sustainable develop-ment will help to provide thefoundations for addressing newapproaches to product design.This is, perhaps, the necessaryfirst step in the process ofchange.

A shorter version of this paper was

presented at the IDSA Educators

Conference, Washington DC, 1997.

ANALYSIS


References

Brundtland et al, Our Common Future, W orld Commission on Environmentand Development, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987).

Hawken, P., The Ecology of Commerce A Declaration of Sustainability,

(HarperCollins, New York, 1993) p.140.

Fioruzzi, M., From Eco-Design to Vision Design, (Draft Domus Ac ademy

Research Centre, 1995) (wit h permission).

Manzini, E., Sustainable Product-Services Development IntroductoryNotes, Pioneer Industries on Sustainable Service, (workshop organised by

UNEP-WG-SPD in the INES Conferenc e Challenges of SustainableDevelopment, Amsterdam, 22-25 August 1996).

Van der Ryn, S., and S. Cowan , Ecological Design, (Island Press,

Washington, 1996) pp 57-80.

Orr, D.W., Ecological Literacy Education and the Transition to

a Postmodern W orld, (State Universit y of New York Press, 1992) p.31.

Perks, W.T., R. Kirby, A. Wilton- Clark, Edgemont II A Study in Sustainable

Community Form, (The University of Calgary, Centre for LivableCommunities and Faculty of Environmental Design, 1996).

Young, J.E., Global Netw ork Computers in a Sustainable Soc iety,(Worldwatch Paper No. 115, Washington Worldwatch Institute, 1993).

Aeppel, T., For Computer Recyclers, Old Computers Offer New Niche,(Wall Stree t Jou rnal, August 8, 1994) B1-2.

Morrison, R., We Build the Road As We Travel, (New Society Publishers,

Philadelphia, 1991).

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

18/68

As global mandates on end of life

product disposal final ly go in to

effect, companies must begin to

define appropriate end of life

strategies. Business decision-

makers need to be more aw are

of the opportunities, issues, and

liabilities which will face the

company in the near future, and

w ill need to be able to sufficiently

address them. Environmental

Product Design (EPD) suggests

the need to consider the life cycle

environmental, health, and safety

impacts of a product early in devel-

opment. EPD increa ses the end of

life value of products, but seems

to decrease the bene fit to the

company. This paradox served as

the launching point for a study in

how to find benefits from EPD.

This paper presents a c ase study

of Quantum, a manufacturer of

electronic commodities and defines

the frameworks for analysing

product disposal a lternatives.

Alternatives studied includecontractual agre ements, total

destruction, total disassembly, and

reuse. One of the primary sources

of data used is a composition

analysis from an external recycler.

The analysis shows the optimal

strategies for each disposal option.

Further il lustrations show the

implementation of a management

information system to link disposal

w ith design.

Introduction

P roduct-environmentalconcerns in the electroniccommodities supply chain arebeing driven by OriginalEquipment Manufacturer (OEM)customer environmentalmanagement system require-ments. They are viewedincreasingly as business competi-tiveness decisions for both theOEM and the supplier.

Decisions on the materialscomposition, fabrication, assem-bly, and ultimate disposal ofa product should be made basedon end of (useful) life disposalalternatives [Fiksel 1994, Graedel1995, OTA 1992]. Emerging inter-national regulations requiretake-back and proper disposal ofproducts by commodity manufac-turers at the end of their usefullife [ASTM 1996, EU 1993].

Appropriate flexibility exists as towhere in the commodity manu-facturers supply chain this occurs.

At this time, European countriesare leading regulatory efforts, butit is only a matter of time untilmost industrialised nations havesome form of mandatory take-back. Even individual states (eg.Minnesota and New Jersey) in theUS have begun to consider take-

ANALYSIS


Unraveling the environmentalproduct design paradox

H Scott Matthew s & Gregory C Chambersn

Doctoral Student in Economics, Carnegie Mellon, US

Corporate M anager of W orldwide EnvironmentalHealth and Safety for Quantum Corporation, US

H. Scott M atthews i s a doctoral

student in economics at the business

school at Carnegie Mellon. He is

affiliated w ith Carnegie M ellons Green

Design Initi ative, an international

industry-academic research consortium

that seeks to improve the environmental

quality of products through managing

the use of toxics, renewable, and

non-renewable resources. His previous

research has consideredgreen pricing

and the lifecycle environmental impact of

electronic products, namely computers.His current research interests are in the

area of environmental product design

and Full Cost Accounting. He has a BS in

Computer Engineering and Engineering

and Public Policy and a MS in

Economics from Carnegie Mellon.

Gregory Chambers is the Corporate

Manager of Worldw ide Environmental

Health and Safety for Quantum

Corporation. He is leading the develop-

ment and implemention of a corporate

environmental performance programme.

which has been focusing on issues of

products and the environment. He has

sixteen years experience as an environ-

mental health and safety professional

in the aerospace and high technology

electronics industries and has a MS in

Safety from the University of Southern

California, and a BS in Environmental

and Occupational Health fromCalifornia

State University at Northridge, California.

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

19/68

back. This trend in regulations isa direct result of the technologyadvances and shorter life cyclesof electronics commodities, thedecreasing amount of available

worldwide landfill space, and theincreasing level of worldwideenvironmental awareness. Theeconomic bottom line of thistrend is that all products used inlocales subject to environmentalrestrictions or take-back legisla-

tion will need to be reclaimed bythe manufacturer (or an agentthereof), regardless of eithertheir original point of sale, or theintermediary distributor of theproduct.

In this paper, we describe theenvironmental performanceissues facing Quantum, anAmerican manufacturer ofcomputer storage products. ForQuantum, environmental perfor-mance means considering the

environmental health and safety(EHS) impacts of products duringthe product development lifecycle and developing specificprogrammes that will result inmeasurable reductions in thoseimpacts over time. To putperspective on the magnitude ofimpacts, Quantum shipped over6.5 million drives to Europe andover 11 million in the US in 1996.

Because of Quantums positionnear the top of the supply chain(both buying parts and sub-assemblies for products andmanufacturing components foruse in customers products), thecompany receives many ques-tions from business partners andcustomers about the use ofrestricted substances in productsand processes. As part of thiseffort, Quantum has organised alist of environmentally relevant

substances and monitors theiruse across the supply chain.Quantum provides customers

with data about product compo-nent materials that helps themdetermine issues of recyclability,reuse, and restricted substancepercentage. QuantumsEnvironmental Product Design(EPD) programme is designed toreduce the negative impact onenvironmental and human health

and safety of all Quantumproducts, processes, operations,and facilities.

The essence of the EPDprogramme is in preventingnegative impacts before theystart by considering theseissues in product design andmaterials selection, as an integralpart of the product developmentcycle. EPD is thus positioned as abusiness issue.

Take-back issues

Electronic products areultimately used in every part ofthe world. Although warrantiesprovide an indirect contractbetween the end user and themanufacturer, with the onlydirect contracts being betweenproducer and customer. Thisindirect relationship will becomeincreasingly important in thefuture when legal obligations

require knowledge of a firmsbusinesses and products, and,more specifically, their environ-mental burden.

In short, manufacturers of elec-tronic goods are already incur-ring potential future liability forevery product which may reachthe end of its useful life in envi-ronmentally sensitive areas. Astraightforward mechanism for

measuring the actual liabilitywould be to create a comprehen-sive real-time product locationtracking system to monitor thenumber of products in eachlegislative region subject to envi-ronmental restrictions, and thecost of reclaiming such affectedcomponents or products. Ofcourse, this system is infeasible.In its absence, firms must resortto a least uncommon denomina-

tor approach of environmentalmanagement where the mereexistence of a material or processrestriction somewhere on theplanet leads to the eliminationof that material or process in allproducts produced for anyregion.

Similarly, all firms need tomonitor the environmentalperformance of their suppliers.By necessity, product take-backand materials specification comes

from the top of the supply chain[Stock 1992]. Even though insome instances products will becontained inside another supplychain as a sub-assembly (eg.internal hard disk drives withincomputers), it can be assumedthat if a product is returned toan OEM, they could return thesub-assembly to its manufacturer.Ultimately, suppliers should beprepared to take back all neces-sary products on their own. The

smart supplier makes the issue ofadapting to its reverse logisticsrequirements a non-issue for itscustomers.

Take-back relevant to Quantumat this time happens via theOEMs. However, recent discus-sions with key customers haveshown that their end of lifereverse logistics or product recla-mation facilities currently find it

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

20/68

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

21/68

ANALYSIS


where designers can be madeexperts. Few firms currently givesuch information to designers.However, adoption of a method-ology as described in this paperprovides the necessary tools tolink business environmentalstrategy with product design.

End of (useful) li fe

technology

Quantum is working to imple-ment FCA to address the needto link design stage decisions andend of life issues. This requires asignificant amount of knowledgeabout the end of (useful) lifefeatures of the product. Theincrease of detailed analysesis highlighting technologies andprocesses which allow for varioustake-back options. For example, ahard disk drive can be completelydestroyed, disassembled, or

reduced to its elemental compo-nents with available technologies.However, the optimal corporatestrategy for product disposaldepends not only on the bottomline, but also on the firms levelof commitment to the environ-ment and the proprietary natureof its products. In the absence ofproprietary concerns, cost-benefitanalysis would suffice in thedetermination of corporatestrategy. The existence of private

information in the form of tradesecrets complicates the optimisa-tion process.

Technologies which accept oldproducts as input and thendestroy, disassemble, or breakthem down into their rawmaterials are becoming increas-ingly efficient and cost-effective.Interviews and discussion with

major firms in this industrysuggest that total destruction is agrowing international industryresponse to product reclamation.Most major computer OEMs areopting for this strategy. In totaldestruction, an external contrac-tor promises to completelydestroy a product, and alsocertifies zero discharges to theenvironment from disposal(excluding energy needed

for destruction). This method ispopular amongst companies sinceit guarantees that no subsequentbrand recognition is possible.Brand recognition is important inthis sense because costs related tosuch things as Superfund liabilitycome as a direct result of agenciesfinding toxic waste sites andnoting which firms are theprimary users of the sites, andthen charging them for the cleanup. This is an attractive option

for Quantum, which stands outas one of a handful of electroniccompanies with zero liabilityunder the ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response,Compensation, and LiabilityAct (CERCLA).

End of life analysis

Quantum investigated the costsof dealing with end of life prod-ucts. The research involved only

the costs incurred by Quantumonce the products were back intheir control; it did not includethe costs associated with thelogistics of transferring theproduct from the end user toQuantum.

With this in mind, four hard diskdrive products manufactured in1996 were disassembled andsubject to materials analysis. To

The optimalcorporatestrategyfor productdispositiondepends notonly on thebottom line,but also onthe firmslevel ofcommitmentto theenvironmentand theproprietarynature of itsproducts.

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

22/68

add a level of insight, products Aand B had the same capacity (2Gigabytes) but different design.Products C and D are separate1.2 Gigabyte models. Using anindependent laboratory, theproduct was broken down intoits major sub-assemblies, andthen its materials.

The scenarios were consideredfor analysis based on the assump-tion that products were subject

to environmental restrictions andthus could not be disposed oflocally by the user. It should benoted that this does not mandateactual take-back just a respon-sibility on the part of theproducer to reclaim the productat the end of its useful life toprevent disposal. The fouroptions available to the manufac-turer were considered to be:

contractual reclamationand total destruction

materials reclamation sub-assembly reuse

product reuse.

A: Contractual reclamation

and total destruction

As noted above, total destructionis done to certify that the prod-uct has not been landfilled (andthus meets regulatory require-ments) and also serves as ameans of removing any linkagebetween the firm and any resid-

ual materials. The form of thecontractual arrangement is simi-lar to cardboard and mixed officepaper recycling, where therecycler agrees to take away theresidual materials and is allowedto process it in any way with noadded benefit to the manufac-turer. Implementation of thisoption would entail negotiating

many localised contracts to meeta firms worldwide disposalrequirements.

At estimated end of life returnvolumes, the option of contrac-tual destruction was quoted as acost of $5 per unit by recyclers.All in all, the recycler wouldbenefit even more than by the$5 contract fee by being able toreclaim the metals content of alldrives and keeping those profits

as well. In return, the manufac-turer receives a clear conscience.Using EPD, the recycler couldhave less materials to process,making recycling easier and moreprofitable.

B: Materials reclamation

Companies typically only moni-tor component level data fortheir products. For example, thecost and weight of the majorsub-assemblies. Typically, thesesub-assemblies are purchasedfrom a contractor for manufac-ture. However, necessary andrelevant information such as rawmaterials content and usage isnot monitored. Without thisknowledge, supplier question-naire responsiveness and regula-tory tracking are cumbersome.

Materials reclamation involvestaking components and perform-ing various reverse engineering

technologies to return them totheir raw materials composition.The only sub-assemblies notcompletely broken down inour analysis were memory andcontroller chips, since they hadpotential reclamation value.Chips were left in considerationas a sub-assembly.

This information hassubsequently been placed in aproprietary database tracking the

usage of materials. Althoughspecific actual data cannot beprovided, relevant ratios can beexpressed to show the magnitudeof the results. Table I shows thetotal weight, number of chipsand materials used, and currentmaterials value expressed as apercentage of original produc-tion cost for the four products.Again, the materials valuesshown do not include any costsrelated to take-back logistics,

just the benefits of raw materialsextraction.

Considered as a sub-assembly,chips were priced for their openmarket commodity value. Asurprising fact was that the chipsalready had a zero value in therecycled chips market after onlyone year. The firm providing thatquote noted that demand forsuch chips was zero for two

ANALYSIS


Produc t tota l w e ight c hi ps use d ma te ri al s use d ma te ri al s va lue

A 850g/1.9lbs 7 20 1%

B 510g/1.1lbs 5 22 1%

C 794g/1.8lbs 8 27 1%

D 482g/1.1lbs 6 25 1%

Table I: Materials specification for case study products

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

23/68

reasons. First, most of the chipswere proprietary and the manu-facturer was the only potentialuser. Second, the chips werealready outdated and demand hadshifted to faster, larger capacitydevices. Due to the nature ofdemand in this market, it wassafely assumed that there wouldbe no value by end-of-life.

EPD could potentially be usedin this scenario to reduce the

number of chips used in thedesign of the product, since itis reasonable to guess that they

will be worthless at end-of-life.Similarly, material substitutionscould be made to lower themetals count and to increaseend-of-life value.

C: Sub-assembly reuse

The option of reusing sub-assemblies must be consideredgiven the materials composition

results above. Since raw materialsextraction yields such minimalbenefit, it is clear that there isconsiderable value added inproduction. Thus if the high-

value pieces could somehow bereused, additional benefit couldbe realised.

Chips are one of the primaryvalue added components inelectronics today. However, asseen above, chips from recentlyproduced drives already had no

demand in the market. One ofthe reasons noted for this wasthe technology push to morecomplex components. Howeverthe more important issue is theproprietary nature of the chips.Most of the chips reclaimed wereQuantum-manufacturedcontroller chips, which are

worthless to all other manufac-

turers. Only Quantum couldcreate demand for this residualproduct. Due to quality concernsand future technology shifts,there is no plan to reuse thesechips.

Similar arguments were advancedabout reusing other high-techsub-assemblies such as heads,disks, and motors. To determinethe feasibility of reusing sub-assemblies, the materials extrac-tion data was generalised back upto the sub-assembly level. Table 2summarises average percentage

weight and raw materials values(as a function of total residualmaterials value) for the mainsub-assemblies across the fourproducts.

The only sub-assembly whichseems to pass quality and tech-nology reuse concerns is the

housing. Interestingly, the hous-ing accounts for 65% of theproducts weight and 70% of thepotential extracted materials

value. A real opportunity mayexist to maximise the end oflife investment by further study-ing the potential for reuse ofhousings. Reuse would decreasethe amount of metals discardedat end of life, decrease use of

raw materials, and would utiliseone of the components whichrepresents a considerable shareof value. However, successfuladoption of such a programmemust fit with all internal qualityassurance, production efficiency,and time to market values.

The only feasible scenario forreusing housings would be if thenet cost of reclaiming andpreparing old housings is lessthan the cost of simply buyingnew housings. [Note again thatthe tables do not adjust for recla-mation fees, thus even thebenefits from reusing housing

will cost money.] Since the rawmaterials value of housings isonly in the $1 range, the reclama-tion costs could prove prohibi-tive. This option is being studiedat this time.

Interestingly, working withOEMs to promote EPD givesthem greater insight into whichsubassemblies are the high valueparts. If at end of life the OEMselects just the high value piecesand returns the rest, the compo-nent manufacturer stands to losea large percentage of its end oflife investment.

ANALYSIS


Table 2: Percentage composition of weights and raw materials for

subassemblies in c ase study

Subassembly % Product W eight % Product Value

Housing 64.5 70.0

Magnet Plates 12.2 5.4

Disks 8.4 10.0

PCB 5.1 5.0

Motor 4.4 3.8

Head/Track Assembly 2.8 4.1

Other 2.6 1.7

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

24/68

D: Product reuse

Although not specifically studied,this option merits explanation.Similar to the problem withreusing component technologiesat the end of life, cumulativeproblems exist with attemptingto reuse total drive products. Theonly way to effectively reuseproducts is to identify thecomponents which are obsoleteand replace them. The key point,

however, is in how obsoletedrives are defined. Typicallydrives are completely obsoletein all areas of interest: capacity,speed, etc.

However, if the manufacturerwere to take-back products priorto end of life (eg. exchange orupgrade programmes), this couldbe an attractive and profitablebusiness. Clearly 13 year oldproducts still have a resale valuemuch higher than simply the raw

materials value. Again, reclama-tion costs could be prohibitive.

The EPD paradox revisited

All four options involve thetradeoff of processing costsand extracted end-of-life value.Implementing any of the fouroptions using EPD would costmore. We repeat the EPDParadox:

EPD increases product end of life

value, but decreases the benefit tothe company.

The caveat to the paradox is thatshort-sighted firms fail to recog-nise the benefits of EPD, whichare realised outside of traditionalaccounting methods. Currently,firms are unable to account formost of the costs and benefits

which are accrued by EPD. Manyfirms do not recognise thecurrent liabilities of their prod-ucts, and few recognise anypotential liabilities, due tofinancial reporting guidelines.Likewise, corporate accountingand finance systems fail to seethe benefits.

The true benefit of EPD can beseen in one of two ways. First,since each of the options above

have a cost to the manufacturer,it seems that take-back is anexercise in loss minimisation.Finding ways to lower costsimproves the attractiveness of anoption, eg. avoiding reclamationfees. Second, all else being equal,a product with an additionalend of life value designed intoit is superior to a product notdesigned for end of life invest-ment. Seemingly, this differencecan and should be seen as a

competitive distinction againstother products. If marketedcorrectly to customers(specifically OEM customers),this could be a valid reason tocommand a price premium overother products, generating addi-tional benefit to the company.Maximising the end of life

values of products is somethingall firms will need to beconcerned about in the future,and if a component manufacturer

is able to help in such overallefforts, they should be rewarded.

Information system

and results

The European Union eco-management and audit scheme(EMAS) and ISO 14000, requirecompanies to act as a good global

citizen in the procurement,specification and usage of materi-als which may cause environ-mental damage. In some cases,firms will require other firms tobe certified to these standards asa requirement for doing business.In most cases, though, firms willonly require companies to showthat they have considered theenvironmental impacts of itsproducts and have an environ-mental management system inplace to monitor these effects.

In preparation for such environ-mental management systems,Quantum has created a productdatabase for designers whichrecords data from the materialsusage level, through to the sub-assembly level and overall prod-uct composition level. The full

value of this additional informa-tion about products is bestrealised when made available to

designers and other decision-makers within the firm.

Designers will be able to see thematerials mix present in currentdrive sub-assemblies, and withthe addition of information onenvironmental restrictions, thenet impacts of these materialsselection decisions. As time goeson and additional products andregulations are added to thesystem, designers should gainsubstantial insight into howmaterials and componentdecisions change the end of life

value of the product. Thisinformation is invaluable inmaximising end of life value.

The information system allowsfor the generalisation andcomparison of various material,sub-assembly, and overall

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

25/68

product options relevant to theirenvironmental attributes. It is viathis system that some interestingspecific product conditions werediscovered. First of all, as seen inTable I, the products analysed hadsimilar features but differentdesigns. Although A and B were

virtually the same capacity drives,drive B was roughly half the

weight as A but added two mate-rials to the composition. One ofthe materials added now appearson restricted substance listingsprovided by our customers. Thus,one of the presumed reasons forbeing able to reduce the environ-mental impact of the drive (its

weight) actually introduced asubstance which may in thefuture prevent its disposal incertain areas. It is the identifi-cation of these instances whichpromotes usage of such a system.

ConclusionIt appears that companiesexpending resources on EPDseem not to directly realisereturn on their investment.However, on closer examination,under the revealing light of inno-

vative valuation methods, itbecomes clear that the value ofEPD flows directly

to the investing organisationthrough reduced risk, increasedcustomer satisfaction andimproved efficiency of operation.The increasingly tight-knit valuechain of international manufac-turing and consumption revealsthese benefits. For this reason,manufacturing organisationsshould embrace EPD as vital tobusiness performance.

FootnoteThis study was conducted aspart of an ongoing project toincorporate environmental costsinto corporate decisions andaccounting systems, sponsoredby a US National ScienceFoundation Management ofTechnological InnovationProgramme Grant, #DMI-9613405.

This is a slightly edited version of

a paper originally published by theInstitute of Electronic & Electrical

Engineers (IEEE).

1997 IEEE. Reprinted withpermission from the 1997 International

Symposium on Electronics and the

Environment, San Francisco, CA, US

(35 May 1997), pp. 1318.

ANALYSIS


References

ASTM Draft InternationalStandard, Environmental

management systems general guidelines on princ iples,

systems, and supportingtechniques, ASTM PCN: 34-0140000-65, 1996.

Epstein, M., Measuringcorporate environmentalperformance: best practices

for costing and managing aneffective environmental

strategy, Irwin Publishing, 1996.

European Union (EU), Eco-Management and audit system,

Council Regulation No. 1836/1993OJ L 168/1 29.6.93.

Fiksel, J., and K. Wapman, How

to design for environment andminimise cost, in Proceedings

of the 1994 IEEE InternationalSymposium on Electronics andthe Environment, San Franci sco,

May 1994.

Graedel, T.E., and B.R. Allenby,Industrial ecology, Prentice Hall,

1995.

Office of Technology Assessmentof the US Congress (OTA), Green

produc ts by design, OTA-E-541,US GPO, 1992.

Stock, J.R., Reverse logistic s,White Paper. Council of LogisticsManagement, 1992, 11-13.

US EPA Office of PollutionPrevention and Toxics, Anintroduction to environmental

accounting as a businessmanagement tool: key concepts

and terms, Washington, DC,EPA-742-R-95-001.

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

26/68

Product development decisions

have a considerable impact on the

life cycle w ide environmental

performance of a product. However,

many stakeholders bring different

and sometimes conflicting require-

ments into the design process. One

w ay to understand the life cycle ofproducts is to gain a better under-

standing of the roles, perceptions

and positions of different stake-

holders in the product chain,

such as raw materials producers,

manufacturers, the trade and

consumers. This articl e presents

findings from a product chain

study concerning electrical and

electronic appliances. It also

discusses the impli cations of

product chain thinking for product

development and design.

Introduction

Product development anddesign have an increasinglyimportant role in environmentalimprovement. The shift fromend of pipe solutions to cleanerproduction has now moved tothe even more fundamental level

of cleaner products. Productdevelopment is increasinglychallenged to address the impactof design decisions on environ-mental burdens across the fulllife cycle of a product. Productdevelopment is well equipped

to address this task: it has beenestimated that up to 90% ofthe whole life cycle costs of aproduct are determined at thedesign stage (Keoleian &Menerey 1994). On the otherhand, product development doesnot operate in a void. Manystakeholders bring different andsometimes conflicting require-ments into the design process.

Life cycle design is becomingrelatively well-instituted.

Information and models forevaluating the life cycle wideconsequences of design alterna-tives have become available. Inmany of these models, the prod-uct life cycle is conceptualisedsolely as a system of physicalflows. In this article anotherapproach is introduced, whichrecognises that the product lifecycle also consists of stake-

ANALYSIS


Anna Krn is a PhD student at

the Helsinki School of Economics,

Department of Management. Her

doctoral thesis focuses on product-

oriented environmental management

(POEM) in t he Finnish electri cal and

electronic industry. Earlier studies

concerned eg. electronics wasterecycling and designing more

environmentally sound computers.

She has written a handbook on

environmentally oriented product

development for small- and medium-

sized companies (SMEs), publ ished

by the Federation of Finnish Electrical

and Electronic Industry in June 1997.

Eva Heiskanen is a researcher in

the doctoral student on Social Science

Environmental Research programme at

the University of Tampere. She is

preparing her thesis on Environmental

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) at the

Helsinki School of Economics,

Department of Management and

working together wit h colleagues

Anna Krn and Raimo Lovio. Earlier

publications concern consumers

environmental attitudes and behaviour

and business and public policy

use of environmental LCA.

The challenge of productchain thinking for productdevelopment and design the example of electricaland electronic products

Anna Krn and Eva HeiskanennDorctoral Student, Helsinki School of Economics andBusiness Administration, Department of Management,Finland, and Researcher , University of Tampere, Finland

8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

27/68

holders, who may either obstructor facilitate the integration ofenvironmental aspects in theproduct life cycle. Thus life cycledesign (LCD) is discussed withinthe broader context of life cyclemanagement (LCM).

LCM requires concerted actionby a number of different stake-holders. These stakeholdersinclude raw materials producers,manufacturers of finished goods,

the wholesale and retail trade,the maintenance and serviceindustries, as well as consumersand public authorities. The chainof actors involved in the envi-ronmental life cycle of the prod-uct is often nowadays called theproduct chain. The integration ofenvironmental aspects requires aflow of environmental informa-tion, corresponding to the flowof materials, products and money

within this chain of stakeholders.

In the following section, anoverview of the concept ofproduct chain thinking ispresented. Next, findings fromthe study concerning productchain stakeholders perspectiveson electrical and electronicproducts in Finland are high-lighted. Finally, there is adiscussion over the usefulnessof product chain thinking forproduct developers anddesigners.

What is product chain

thinking?

The focus on product chainsin the environmental context hasa number of different origins.Concepts such as integratedchain management, environ-mental co-makership (Cramer &

Schot 1993), product steward-ship (eg. Boons & de Groene1996), and value chain manage-ment (Linnanen & Halme 1996)are closely related. A rathersimilar, although somewhatbroader, concept used in theUS is industrial ecology (eg.Allenby 1994).

The idea of product chainmanagement (PCM) originatesfrom environmental life cycle

assessment (LCA). LCA has high-lighted the fact that many actorsalong the product life cycleinfluence the environmentalimpact of a product. For exam-ple, there are many groups thatmay influence the environmentalburdens of construction materi-als: starting from product devel-opers from the firms producingconstruction materials, throughto construction firms, their vari-ous sub-contractors, to residents

and municipal waste authorities(Essunger & Tell 1991).

Life cycle thinking links productissues to the environmentalmanagement strategy of a firm.Often, significant environmentalthreats and opportunities arerelated to a firms suppliers orcustomers. The first productstewardship programmes wereestablished in the chemicalsindustry, where the installationof the product is often the mostproblematic stage in the lifecycle. In recent years, theenvironmental evaluation ofsuppliers has also becomeincreasingly widespread.Environmental PCM includesdownstream steering (ie.product stewardship), upstreamsteering (placing demands onsuppliers) and finally, co-

operation with relevant stake-holders such as competitors orlocal authorities (Linnanen &Halme 1996).

Linkages between actors in theproduct chain may help tospread environmental improve-ments from one organisationto another (eg. Hass &Groenewegen 1996). Often,processes that lead to environ-mental improvement may

originate in one organisationor stakeholder that has specificpower or motivation to enableenvironmental improvement.Concepts such as key actors,ecological gatekeepers andenvironmental catalysts havebeen used to describe this typeof stakeholder. Conversely,industrial networks and buyer-supplier relationships in theproduct chain may obstruct thediffusion of environmental

improvement. Individualorganisations may find it difficultto change their activities due toresistance by customers orsuppliers, or due to missing linksin the chain of demand for envi-ronmentally improved products(Boons & deGroene 1996).

In order to succeed in themarket, environmentallyimproved products have to becredible. Some minimum levelof consensus on the goals andmeans of environmentalimprovement is also needed forconcerted action in the productchain (e.g de Man 1996). Theseare major challenges, becausethere is still considerablescientific and politicaluncertainty over environmentalpriorities. Customers frequentlydistrust manufacturers

ANALYSIS


8/14/2019 Issue 4 : January 1998

28/68

environmental claims, becausethey are perceived to be used togain competitive advantage, butcannot be tested by the customerhimself. Therefore, credibility,trust and a systematic flow ofenvironmental information aremajor issues in PCM.

Consumers are often mentionedas the driving force of industrialgreening. However, productchain studies have, until now,

usually not included consumersas stakeholders in the productchain. This focus is, however,changing. New initiatives arefocusing on demand managementand consumer involvement in thedevelopment of radically newproduct concepts (Jansen 1996).Other growing issues that havebeen highlighted in recentstudies are the roles of retailersand organisational buyers.

Conditions for environmental

improvement in the product

chain of electrical and

electronic appliances

in Finland

A study was undertaken withthe aim of clarifying the informa-tional, organisational andeconomic issues involved in PCMfrom the point of view of keystakeholders. The groups selectedas the most important andinfluential stakeholders in theproduct chain of the consumerproducts were consumers, tradeand producers.

One of the four product groupsstudied was electrical andelectronic appliances (see Note1). Product chains of appliancesare often long and consist ofmany stakeholders: raw materials

and component suppliers,end-product manufacturers,the wholesale and retail trade,consumers and businesscustomers, product maintenanceand repair services as well as

waste handlers. Manufacturing ofappliances is generally consid-ered to be a relatively cleanindustry, but most environmentalproble

Documents

Issue 4 : January 1998