Development of a tool for rapidly assessing the implementation difficulty and emissions benefits of innovations

Consumer goods manufacturers aiming to reduce the environmental impact associated with their products commonly pursue incremental change strategies, but more radical approaches may be required if we are to address the challenges of sustainable consumption. One strategy to realize step change reductions is to prepare a portfolio of innovations providing different levels of impact reduction in exchange for different levels of organizational resource commitment. In this research a tool is developed to support this strategy, starting with the assumption that through brainstorming or other eco-innovation approaches, a long-list of candidate innovations has been created. The tool assesses the potential greenhouse gas benefit of an innovative option against the difficulty of its implementation. A simple greenhouse gas benefit assessment method based on streamlined LCA was used to analyze impact reduction potential, and a novel measure of implementation difficulty was developed. The predictions of implementation difficulty were compared against expert opinion, and showed similar results indicating the measure can be used sensibly to predict implementation difficulty. The assessment of the environmental gain versus implementation difficulty is visualized in a matrix, showing the trade-offs of several options. The tool is deliberately simple with scalar measures of CO 2 emissions benefits and implementation difficulty so tool users must remain aware of other potential environmental burdens besides greenhouse gases (e.g. water, waste). In addition, although relative life cycle emissions benefits of an option may be low, the absolute impact of an option can be high and there may be other co-benefits, which could justify higher levels of implementation difficulty. Different types of consumer products (e.g. household, personal care, foods) have been evaluated using the tool. Initial trials of the tool within Unilever demonstrate that the tool facilitates rapid evaluation of low-carbon innovations. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A comparison of four sustainable manufacturing strategies

Effective use of materials is one possible component of a sustainable manufacturing strategy. There are many such strategies proposed in the literature and used in practice, with confusion over what they are, what the differences among them may be and how they can be used by practitioners in design and manufacture to improve the sustainability of their product and processes. This paper reviews the literature on sustainable manufacturing strategies that deliver improved material performance. Four primary strategies were found: waste minimisation; material efficiency; resource efficiency; and eco-efficiency. The literature was analysed to determine the key characteristics of these sustainable manufacturing strategies and 17 characteristics were found. The four strategies were then compared and contrasted against all the characteristics. While current literature often uses these strategy titles in a confusing, occasionally inter-changeable manner, this study attempts to create clear separation between them. Definition, scope and practicality of measurement are shown to be key characteristics that impact upon the ability of manufacturing companies to make effective use of the proposed strategy. It is observed that the most actionable strategies may not include all of the dimensions of interest to a manufacturer wishing to become more sustainable, creating a dilemma between ease of implementation and breadth of impact. © 2008 Taylor & Francis.

Material efficiency: providing material services with less material production.

Material efficiency, as discussed in this Meeting Issue, entails the pursuit of the technical strategies, business models, consumer preferences and policy instruments that would lead to a substantial reduction in the production of high-volume energy-intensive materials required to deliver human well-being. This paper, which introduces a Discussion Meeting Issue on the topic of material efficiency, aims to give an overview of current thinking on the topic, spanning environmental, engineering, economics, sociology and policy issues. The motivations for material efficiency include reducing energy demand, reducing the emissions and other environmental impacts of industry, and increasing national resource security. There are many technical strategies that might bring it about, and these could mainly be implemented today if preferred by customers or producers. However, current economic structures favour the substitution of material for labour, and consumer preferences for material consumption appear to continue even beyond the point at which increased consumption provides any increase in well-being. Therefore, policy will be required to stimulate material efficiency. A theoretically ideal policy measure, such as a carbon price, would internalize the externality of emissions associated with material production, and thus motivate change directly. However, implementation of such a measure has proved elusive, and instead the adjustment of existing government purchasing policies or existing regulations-- for instance to do with building design, planning or vehicle standards--is likely to have a more immediate effect.