Integrating Sustainability Considerations into Product Development: A Practical Tool for Prioritising Social Sustainability Indicators and Experiences from Real Case Application

  • Gustav Sandin
  • Greg Peters
  • Annica Pilgård
  • Magdalena Svanström
  • Mats Westin
Conference paper

Abstract

In this paper, a tool for prioritising social sustainability parameters in product development is described. The tool's core element is a two-step Delphi exercise carried out in the product development team. The purpose of the tool is to (i) select critical social impact indicators suitable for guiding the product development process, (ii) enhance the product development team’s understanding in the field of social sustainability and (iii) engage the team in the sustainability assessment, with the further aim of ensuring the assessment’s influence on the product development process. Applied in a real product development project, the tool proved successful for selecting indicators and increase understanding of social sustainability within the product development team. Selected indicators' usefulness for the product development process remains an open question to be addressed later on as the project evolves.

Keywords

Life Cycle Assessment Product Development Product Life Cycle Delphi Method Sustainability Assessment 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ny H, Hallstedt S, Robért KH, Broman G (2008) Introducing templates for sustainable product development: a case study of televisions at the Matsushita Electric Group. J Ind Ecol 12:600–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maxwell D (2006) Enabling sustainable development through sustainable consumption and production. Int J Environ Sustainable Dev 5:221–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Zamangi A, Masoni P, Buonamici R, Ekvall T, Rydberg T (2011) Life cycle assessment: past, present and future. Environ Sci Technol 45:90–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Labuschagne C, Brent AC (2006) Social indicators for sustainable project and technology life cycle management in the process industry. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:3–15.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kruse SA, Flysjö A, Kasperczyk N, Scholz AJ (2008) Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycle assessment—an application to salmon production systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:8–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benoit C, Mazijn B (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Inititative, ParisGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jörgensen A, Le Bocq A, Nazarkina L, Hauschild M (2008) Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunkeler D (2006) Societal LCA methodology and case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:371–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:156–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klöpffer W, Renner I (2009) Life-cycle based sustainability assessment of products. In: Schaltegger S, Bennett M, Burritt RL, Jasch C (eds) Environmental Management Accounting for Cleaner Production. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lundie S, Peters G, Ashbolt N, Lai E, Livingston D (2006) A sustainability framework for the Australian water industry. J Aust Water Assoc 33:83–88Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dreyer LM, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:88–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dreyer LM, Hauschild MZ, Shierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA Part 1: Development of indicators for labour rights. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spillemaeckers S, Vanhoutte G, Taverniers L, Lavrysen, L, Van Braeckel D, Mazijn B, Rivera JD (2004) Ecological, social and economical aspects of integrated product policy. Integrated product assessment: the development of the label ’sustainable development’ for products. Belgian Science Policy, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rowe G, Wright G, Bolger F (1991) Delphi: a reevaluation of research and theory. Technol Forecast Soc Change 39:235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Linstone HA, Turoff M (eds.) (1975) The Delphi method: techniques and applications. Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Linstone HA (1978) The Delphi Technique. In: Fowles J (ed): Handbook of futures research, Greenwood Press, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miller G (2001) The development of indicators for sustainable tourism: results of a Delphi survey of tourism researchers. Tourism Manage 22:351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hugé J, Le Trinh H, Hoang Hai P, Kuilman J, Hens L (2009) Sustainability indicators for clean development mechanism projects in Vietnam. Environ Dev Sustainability 12:561–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gallego Carrera D, Mack A (2010) Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy 38:1030–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    UNEP/LCA Life Cycle Initiative, Methodological sheets for 31 subcategories of impact, <http://lcinitiative.unep.fr/default.asp?site=lcinit&page_id=A8992620-AAAD-4B81-9BAC-A72AEA281CB9.> (accessed 18.08.2010)
  22. 22.
    Krajnc D, Glavic P (2003) Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Technol Technol Environ Policy 5:279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Veleva V, Ellenbecker M (2001) Indicators of sustainable production: framework and methodology. J Cleaner Prod 9:519–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Global Reporting Initiative, Sustainability reporting guidelines, version 3.0, 2006, <http://www.globalreporting.org/ReportingFramework/ReportingFrameworkDownloads/.> (accessed 18.08.2010)
  25. 25.
    Blackburn WR (2007) The sustainability handbook: the complete management guide to achieving social, economic and environmental responsibility. Earthscan, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manhart A, Grieβhammer R (2006) Social impacts of the production of notebook PCs: contribution to the development of a Product Sustainability Assessment (PROSA). Öko-Institut eV, FreiburgGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    UCW (Understanding Children's Work), <http://www.ucw-project.org/.> (accessed 20.08.2010)
  28. 28.
    Dreyer LM, Hauschild MZ, Shierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA Part 2: implementation in six company case studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:385–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmidt I, Meurer M, Saling P, Kicherer A, Reuter W, Gensch CO (2005) SEEbalance ®: managing sustainability of products and processes with the socio-eco-efficiency analysis by BASF. Greener Manage Int 45:79–94Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grieβhammer R, Benoît C, Dreyer LC, Flysjö A, Manhart A, Mazjin B, Méthot AL, Weidema B (2006) Feasibility study: integration of social aspects into LCA. Discussion paper from UNEP/SETAC Task Force Integration of Social Aspects in LCAGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ILO (International Labour Organisation), <http://www.ilo.org/.> (accessed 20.08.2010)
  32. 32.
    Azapagic A, Perdan S (2000) Indicators of sustainable development for industry: a general framework. Trans IChemE 78:243–261Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baumann H, Tillman AM (2004) The hitch hiker's guide to LCA: an orientation in life cycle assessment methodology and application. Studentlitteratur, LundGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Clancy G, Fröling M, Peters G, Svanström M (2010) Environmental challenges when developing renewable materials to replace non-renewable materials – receiving guidance from LCA studies. The 9th International Conference on EcoBalance 2010, TokyoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gustav Sandin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Greg Peters
    • 2
  • Annica Pilgård
    • 1
  • Magdalena Svanström
    • 2
  • Mats Westin
    • 1
  1. 1.SP Technical Research Institute of SwedenBoråsSweden
  2. 2.Chalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations