A Framework for Green/Eco-Innovation Through Use of a Novel Measure: E/R

  • Liliya Hogaboam
  • Alptekin Durmusoglu
  • Turkay Dereli
  • Tugrul Daim
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


Eco-innovation has been a recent idea used to describe development of products, services and processes that contribute to sustainable development (SD) through commercial application of knowledge considering ecological facts. This chapter introduces a green/eco-innovation framework incorporating the uncertainties and acquisitions together. A measure is used to indicate the ratio between “possible risks” and “values added”. This measure is named as “E/R” ratio, where E represents “eco-innovative acquisitions provided by the proposed novelty” and R denotes the “risks which arise as the consequence of novelty”. A simple evaluation structure has been developed to calculate the value of E/R ratio for a certain novelty. Proposed framework is tested through the case of green buildings providing an insight into the risks associated with them.


Quality Function Deployment Green Building Product Durability Sustainable Innovation Indoor Environmental Quality 
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.


  1. 1.
    Mehta L (2007) Whose scarcity? Whose property? The case of water in western India. Land Use Policy 24(4):654–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    UN (2003) Water for people, water for life-UN World Water Development Report (WWDR), UNESCO and Berghahn Books, UNGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Malthus T (1798) An essay on the principle of population, as it affects the future improvement of society with remarks on the speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and Other WritersGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    WCED (2009) WCED-World commission on environment and development, our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Accessed 21 Aug 2009Google Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Krajnc D, Glavič P (2005) How to compare companies on relevant dimensions of sustainability. Ecol Econ 55(4):551–563Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gallagher A, Johnson D, Glegg G, Trier C (2004) Constructs of sustainability in coastal management. Mar Policy 28(3):249–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pearce D, Barbier E, Markandya A (2000) Sustainable development economics and environment in the third World. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blewitt J (2008) Understanding sustainable development. Earthscan, London, pp 21–24Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dunning B (2009) Sustainable sustainability. Skeptoid. Accessed 22 Aug 2009Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marshall JD, Toffel MW (2005) Framing the elusive concept of sustainability: a sustainability hierarchy. Environ Sci Technol 39(3):673–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carew AL, Mitchell CA (2008) Teaching sustainability as a contested concept: capitalizing on variation in engineering educators’ conceptions of environmental, social and economic sustainability. J Clean Prod 16(1):105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kropotkin P (1972) The Conquest of Bread. New York University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Carpenter RA (1995) Limitation in measuring ecosystem sustainability. In: Tryzna TC (ed) A sustainable world: defining and measuring sustainable development. Earthscan Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    CCPE-CEQB (1994). Accessed 17 Sept 2009
  16. 16.
    CCPE-CEQB (1994). Accessed 21 Aug 2009
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Vanegas JA, DuBose JR, Pearce AR (1995) Sustainable technologies for the building construction industry. In: Symposium on design for the global environment, Atlanta, GA. November 2–3, 1995Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Larson A (2000) Sustainable innovation through an entrepreneurship lens. Bus Strategy Environ 9:304–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    James P (1997) The sustainability circle: a new tool for product development and design. J Sustain Prod Des 2:52–57Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harris AT, Briscoe-Andrews S (2008) Development of a problem-based learning elective in “green engineering”. Educ Chem Eng 3(1):15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brügemann LM (2000) Innovation of an eco-efficient product-service combination. M.Sc. thesis, Delft University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roozenburg NFM, Eekels J (1991) Produktontwerpen, structuur en methoden Uitgeverij Lemma BV. Utrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hallenga-Brink SC, Brezet JC (2005) The sustainable innovation design diamond for micro-sized enterprises in tourism. J Clean Prod 13:141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anastas PT, Zimmerman JB (2003) Design of green engineering, through the 12 principles. Environ Sci Technol 37(5):94–101Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zimmerman JB, Clarens AF, Skerlos SJ, Hayes KF (2003) Design of emulsifier systems for petroleum and bio-based semi-synthetic metalworking fluid stability under hardwater conditions. Environ Sci Technol 37(23):5278–5288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zimmerman JB, Anastas PT (2005) The 12 principles of green engineering as a foundation for sustainability. In: Martin A (ed) Sustainability science and engineering: principles. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rocha M, Searcy C, Karapetrovic S (2007) Integrating sustainable development into existing management systems. Total Qual Manag 18:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Flores M, Canetta L, Castrovinci A, Pedrazzoli P, Longhi R, Boër CR (2008) Towards an integrated framework for sustainable innovation. Int J Sustain Eng 1(4):278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cerdan C, Gazulla C, Raugei M, Martinez E, Fullana-i-Palmer P (2009) Proposal for new quantitative eco-design indicators: a first case study. J Clean Prod 17(18):1638–1643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kahraman C, Buyukozkan G, Ates NY (2007) A two phase multi-attribute decision-making approach for new product introduction. Inf Sci 177(7):1567–1582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kayis B, Arndt G, Zhou M (2006) Risk quantification for new product design and development in a concurrent engineering environment. CIRP Ann Manu Technol 55(1):147–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kayis B, Arndt G, Zhou M (2009) Risk. Accessed 24 Aug 2009
  34. 34.
    Chin KS, Tang DW, Yang JB, Wong SY, Wang H (2009) Assessing new product development project risk by Bayesian network with a systematic probability generation methodology. Expert Syst Appl 36(6):9879–9890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hüsig S, Kohn S (2009) Computer aided innovation-state of the art from a new product development perspective. Comput Ind 60(8):551–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Trott P (1998) Innovation management and new product development. Great Britain, Financial Times-Prentice Hall (Pearson Education)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dereli T, Durmuşoğlu A (2008) Technology selection based on patent information. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on intelligent and manufacturing systems IMS’2008 October 14–17, Sakarya, Turkey, pp 773–782, 2008Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dulken SV (1999) Free patent databases on the Internet: a critical view. World Patent Inf 21(4):253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schwander P (2000) An evaluation of patent searching resources: comparing the professional and free on-line databases. World Patent Information, 22, 3, 2000, pp.147-165, 2000Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dereli T, Durmuşoğlu A (2009) A trend-based patent alert system for technology watch. J Sci Ind Res 68:674–679Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dereli T, Durmuşoğlu A (2007) Surviving with the new product development capabilities. In: Gindy N, Hodgson A, Morcos M, Saad S (eds) Proceedings of ICRM2007 4th international conference on responsive manufacturing, ISBN 978-0-85358-239-7. The University of Nottingham, Sept 17–19, Nottingham, UKGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Buyukozkan G, Dereli T, Baykasoglu A (2004) A survey on the methods and tools of concurrent new product development and agile manufacturing. J Intell Manuf 15(6):731–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
  44. 44.
    U.S. (2009) Environmental protection agency. Green building basic information. Accessed 10 Feb 2011
  45. 45.
    Live Green and Prosper (2001) Glossary of terms. Accessed 10 Feb 2011
  46. 46.
    Glossary (2011) Sunstyles. Accessed 20 March 2011
  47. 47.
    Green building (2011) Wiktionary. Accessed 20 March 2011
  48. 48.
  49. 49.
  50. 50.
    Building and their Impact on the Environment: A Statistical Summary (2009) Accessed 20 March 2011
  51. 51.
    Chew MYL, Das S (2008) Building grading systems: a review of the state-of-the-art. Archit Sci Rev 51(1):4Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Newsham GR (2010) The energy performance of green buildings: there’s good news, and bad news. Can Consul Eng Mag 50(7):19–21, 1, 2Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Arelli PD (2008) Selling and governing the green project: owner risks in marketing, entitlement and project governance. Real Estate Issues 33(3):15–22Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    AMD Achieves Gold Certification in Austin (2009) Environmental leader. Accessed 18 March 2011
  55. 55.
    AMD Lone Star Campus Receives LEED Gold Certification. (2009) WorldTech24. Accessed 18 March 2011
  56. 56.
    Building a Sustainable Future (2008) AMD Lone Star Campus. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Accessed 18 March 2011
  57. 57.
    Steve Groseclose (2008) Building a sustainable future. Amd’s Global Climate Protection Plan. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Accessed 18 March 2011
  58. 58.
    Vittori G, Fitch A (2008) The AMD Lone Star Campus: assessing green strategies. Center for maximum potential building systems. Accessed 18 March 2011
  59. 59.
  60. 60.
    Pursuing LEED certification leads unexpected benefits (2011) Building commissioning for better public buildings. Case study. Accessed 17 March 2011
  61. 61.
    Feds are Looking into Salem’s Courthouse Square Scandal (2011) HinesSight. Accessed 17 March 2011
  62. 62.
    Engineers Offer Blueprint of a Breakdown at Courthouse Square (2010) Statesman Journal. Accessed 18 March 2011
  63. 63.
    Cheatham C (2010) LEED building vacated due to structural Issues: green building law update. 18 March 2011
  64. 64.
    Rose M (2010) Engineers blame design, concrete for problems with Courthouse Square building. Statesman Journal. Accessed 18 March 2011
  65. 65.
    Vorenberg S (2010) Study sought for Courthouse Square debacle. Daily Journal Commerce. Accessed 18 March 2011
  66. 66.
    Remediation Study Final Report (2011) Marion County Courthouse Square 555 Court Street NE, Salem Oregon. Accessed 21 March 2011

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liliya Hogaboam
    • 1
  • Alptekin Durmusoglu
    • 2
  • Turkay Dereli
    • 2
  • Tugrul Daim
    • 3
  1. 1.Nascentia CorporationPortlandUSA
  2. 2.Gaziantep UniversityGaziantepTurkey
  3. 3.Portland State UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations