The Transition to Sustainable Product Development and Manufacturing

  • Robert C. Carlson
  • Dariush Rafinejad
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 151)


In this chapter, we provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in sustainable product development and manufacturing and of the challenges in ubiquitous adoption of sustainable development practices in business. Environmental and business sustainability are examined in a holistic framework underscoring their interdependence on both spatial and temporal scales. We review the evolutionary rise in sustainability awareness including the development of methodologies for the assessment and development of sustainable products/manufacturing.


Supply Chain European Union Gross Domestic Product Product Life Cycle Ecological Footprint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We would like to thank Professor Feryal Erhun of the Management Science and Engineering Department at Stanford University for her valuable review comments that helped us improve the content and readability of thepaper.


  1. According to World Watch Institute, Vital Signs Report, 2006–2007, pp.122: In 2004, nearly 1,800 transnational corporations or their affiliates filed corporate responsibility reports, up from virtually none in the early 1990s. While this reflects growing transparency and commitment to social and environmental principles, 97.5% of the nearly 70,000 TNCs worldwide still do not file such reportsGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayres RU, van den Bergh JCJM, Gowdy JM (1998) View point: weak versus strong sustainability. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers, # 98–103/3. Available online at: http://www. Sept1998
  3. Carlson RC, Rafinejad D (2010) Economic models for environmental and business sustainability in product development and manufacturing. Stanford University Paper, MS&E June19, 2010Google Scholar
  4. Climate Change (2007) The physical science basis, UNEP Report by The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeGoogle Scholar
  5. The Stern Review (2006) The economics of climate change. A UK Government Publication, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  6. Harvard business review on business & the environment. (1999) HBS Press Book, Product No. 2336; 17 December 1999Google Scholar
  7. Ecosystem services include: air and water purification, water absorption and storage, sequestering and decomposition of wastes, regeneration of soil nutrients, pollination, seed, and nutrient dispersal, climate stabilization, etc. See Hassan R etal (eds) (2005) The millennium ecosystem assessment series & synthesis reports. Island; Available at the following link:
  8. Manahan S (1999) Industrial ecology. CRC, BocaRatonGoogle Scholar
  9. Graedel TE, Allenby BR (2003) Industrial ecology, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  10. Allen DT, Behmanesh N (1994) Wastes as raw materials. In: Allenby BR, Richards DJ (eds) The greening of industrial ecosystems. National Academy Press, Washington, pp.69–89Google Scholar
  11. Ayers RU, Ayers LW (1996) Industrial ecology: towards closing the materials cycle. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, (Chapter1)Google Scholar
  12. Wackernagel M etal (2002) Tracking the ecological overshoot of human economy. Proc Acad Sci 99(14):9266–9271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hart SL (1997) Beyond greening, strategies for a sustainable world, HBR Jan–Feb 1997, Reprint No.97105Google Scholar
  14. Chertow M (2000) The IPAT equation and its variants. J Ind Ecol 4(4):13–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. United Nations Statistics Division– National Accounts,
  16. China Daily, 12 June 2006Google Scholar
  17. International Herald Tribune, 4 May 2006Google Scholar
  18. The Guardian, 13 June 2006Google Scholar
  19. World Wild Fund (WWF)
  20. Shanghai Daily, 17–18 June 2006Google Scholar
  21. BBC, 16 April 2006Google Scholar
  22. Reuters, 11 June 2007Google Scholar
  23. Meadows DH, Randers J, Meadows DL (2004) Limits to growth: the 30-year update. Chelsea Green, VermontGoogle Scholar
  24. Billatos S, Basaly N (1997) Green technology and design for the environment. Taylor & Francis, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Cohen JE (1995) How many people can the earth support. Norton, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Wackernagel M, Rees W (1995) Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. New Society, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Maslow AH (1970) Motivation and personality, 2nd edn. Harper & Row, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  28. US Department of Commerce. “Who killed the electric car?,” a film by Chris Paine, DVD by Sony Pictures Classics,2006Google Scholar
  29. Friedman M (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. NY Times Magazine 33:122–126Google Scholar
  30. Anderson TL, Leal DR (1997) Enviro-capitalists, doing good while doing well. Rowman & Littlefield, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  31. Cobb–Douglas production function, where output Y=AL α K β;L=labor input, K=capital input and A,α, and β are constants determined by technology (α+β=1 and α,β≥0). Also, the individual utility function is modeled a logarithmic function of his/her consumption (that is, the contribution of an individual to production is proportional to his/her consumption (Kempf H, Rossignol S (2007) Is inequality harmful for the environment in a growing economy? Econ Polit 19:53–71)Google Scholar
  32. The following is a 2006 excerpt from Toyota–North America web site: “Our research continues to show that the majority of customers will not compromise performance for environmental benefits and are not inclined to pay a premium for an environmentally sensitive vehicle. However, with rising fuel prices, an increasing number of customers are considering the vehicle’s fuel economy as well as its price and performance, when they make purchase decisions. The onus is on the manufacturer to design and build environmental products with as few compromises as possible and sometimes in advance of market signals or regulatory requirements.”Google Scholar
  33. GE promotes an image of environmental leadership. “GE seeks leadership in environmental sustainability for shareholder value and not for charity”, said Jeff Immelt, the CEO in a 2006 interview with the Talk Show Host Charlie Rose. (b) BP undertakes a renewable energy ad campaign to overcome the negative public perception against oil companies. (c) Corporations communicate their triple-bottom-line programs to investors and customers in their annual sustainability reports.Google Scholar
  34. Wind turbines marketed by GE for power generation. (b) IBM created a new market opportunity as an element of its Product End-of-Life Management (PELM) program. IBM’s service is called Asset Recovery Solution and targets commercial customers to manage their computers and workstations at end-of-life. A limited service is also provided to individual consumers through an “advance recycling fee” program. Asset Recovery Solution includes: data security management, disk overwrites, resale of products (remarketing), refurbish, and recycling service. In 2003, 69,000 metric tons were processed and 830,000 PCs were recycled, reused, or resold. (c)3M has developed biodegradable paint remover without methylene chloride and nonsolvent-based ink without volatile organic compoundsGoogle Scholar
  35. Directive 2002/05/EC of The European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003: on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances (RoHS) in electrical and electronic equipmentGoogle Scholar
  36. Holliday C, Schmidheiny S, Watts P (2002) Walking the talk: the business case for sustainable development. Brett-Koehler Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  37. Michelsen O etal (2006) Eco-efficiency in extended supply chain: a case study of furniture production. J Environ Manag 79:290–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. For example, six or more packages are used in transporting and delivering tooth paste to a consumer, including: tooth paste plastic tube/plastic security seal wrap/paper box/plastic wrap for a dozen tubes/cardboard box/shippingcrateGoogle Scholar
  39. Graedel TE, Allenby BR (1998) Design for environment. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  40. Schmidheiny S, Business Council for Sustainable Development (1992) Changing course: a global business perspective on development and the environment. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  41. Efficiency means achievement of the intended performance with minimal utilization of resourcesGoogle Scholar
  42. BBC, April 16, 2006Google Scholar
  43. The Power Supply Design Guide is available on the web at:
  44. Stanford MS&E 268 Course– There are four stages in the strategic role of manufacturing in support of a firm’s business success. These stages in increasingly degree of contribution are: internally neural, externally neutral, internally supportive, and externally supportive. In the latter stage, manufacturing is a significant contributor to the firm’s competitive advantageGoogle Scholar
  45. Jawahir IS (2007) Machining process and other case studies in sustainable manufacturing. University of Kentucky, KentuckyGoogle Scholar
  46. Klostermann J (ed) (1998) Product innovation and eco-efficiency. Academic, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  47. Ayers RU, Ayers LW (2002) A handbook of industrial ecology. Edward Elgar,UKGoogle Scholar
  48. Applied Sustainability LLC, Business case for by-product synergy, Stanford, Prod No E118, 2–2002Google Scholar
  49. Sydney Morning Herald/Australia, Saturday, 23 June 2007Google Scholar
  50. Wenzel H etal (2000) Environmental assessment of products. Methodology, tools and case studies in product development, vol. 1. Springer, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Marshall SR, Brown D (2003) The strategy of sustainability: a systems perspective on environmental initiatives. California Manage Rev 46(1) Reprint CMR 271, 10/1/03Google Scholar
  52. Henrik W, Michael ZH, Alting L (2000) Environmental assessment of products. Methodology, tools and case studies in product development, vol. 1, 1st edn. Springer, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Frankl P, Rubik F, Institute for Ecological Economy, Germany (2000) Life cycle assessment (LCA) in industry and business (Adoption Patterns, Applications & Implications)– in Germany, Italy, Sweden, Switzerland, Springer, HiedelbergGoogle Scholar
  54. Billatos S, Basaly N, Tayler & Francis (1997) Green technology and design for the environment. University of Connecticut, Storrs,CTGoogle Scholar
  55. Giudice F, Rosa GL, Risitano A (2000) Product design for the environment. CRC, BocaRatonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Management Science and Engineering DepartmentStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations