Integration of MFA and LCA methodologies: the anthropogenic aluminium cycle in Italy

MFA and LCA methodologies were applied to analyse the anthropogenic aluminium cycle in Italy with focus on historical evolution of stocks and flows of the metal, embodied GHG emissions, and potentials from recycling to provide key features to Italy for prioritizing industrial policy toward low-carbon technologies and materials. Historical trend series were collected from 1947 to 2009 and balanced with data from production, manufacturing and waste management of aluminium-containing products, using a ‘top-down’ approach to quantify the contemporary in-use stock of the metal, and helping to identify ‘applications where aluminium is not yet being recycled to its full potential and to identify present and future recycling flows’. The MFA results were used as a basis for the LCA aimed at evaluating the carbon footprint evolution, from primary and electrical energy, the smelting process and the transportation, embodied in the Italian aluminium. A discussion about how the main factors, according to the Kaya Identity equation, they did influence the Italian GHG emissions pattern over time, and which are the levers to mitigate it, it has been also reported. The contemporary anthropogenic reservoirs of aluminium was estimated at about 320 kg per capita, mainly embedded within the transportation and building and construction sectors. Cumulative in-use stock represents approximately 11 years of supply at current usage rates (about 20 Mt versus 1.7 Mt/year), and it would imply a potential of about 160 Mt of CO2eq emissions savings. A discussion of criticality related to aluminium waste recovery from the transportation and the containers and packaging sectors was also included in the study, providing an example for how MFA and LCA may support decision-making at sectorial or regional level. The research constitutes the first attempt of an integrated approach between MFA and LCA applied to the aluminium cycle in Italy.

Not for Designers: On the Inadequacies of EU Design Law and How to Fix It

Design rights represent an interesting example of how the EU legislature has successfully regulated an otherwise heterogeneous field of law. Yet this type of protection is not for all. The tools created by EU intervention have been drafted paying much more attention to the industry sector rather than to designers themselves. In particular, modern, digitally based, individual or small-sized, 3D printing, open designers and their needs are largely neglected by such legislation. There is obviously nothing wrong in drafting legal tools around the needs of an industrial sector with an important role in the EU economy, on the contrary, this is a legitimate and good decision of industrial policy. However, good legislation should be fair, balanced, and (technologically) neutral in order to offer suitable solutions to all the players in the market, and all the citizens in the society, without discriminating the smallest or the newest: the cost would be to stifle innovation. The use of printing machinery to manufacture physical objects created digitally thanks to computer programs such as Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software has been in place for quite a few years, and it is actually the standard in many industrial fields, from aeronautics to home furniture. The change in recent years that has the potential to be a paradigm-shifting factor is a combination between the opularization of such technologies (price, size, usability, quality) and the diffusion of a culture based on access to and reuse of knowledge. We will call this blend Open Design. It is probably still too early, however, to say whether 3D printing will be used in the future to refer to a major event in human history, or instead will be relegated to a lonely Wikipedia entry similarly to ³Betamax² (copyright scholars are familiar with it for other reasons). It is not too early, however, to develop a legal analysis that will hopefully contribute to clarifying the major issues found in current EU design law structure, why many modern open designers will probably find better protection in copyright, and whether they can successfully rely on open licenses to achieve their goals. With regard to the latter point, we will use Creative Commons (CC) licenses to test our hypothesis due to their unique characteristic to be modular, i.e. to have different license elements (clauses) that licensors can choose in order to adapt the license to their own needs.”

Trayectoria reciente y perspectivas futuras de la industria naval pesada argentina : Los astilleros estatales

Con un marco regulatorio de tipo proteccionista que buscaba promover la construcción de barcos en el país, la industria naval argentina se consolidó y expandió hasta los años 80 gracias a una fuerte intervención estatal, iniciada durante el proceso de Industrialización por Sustitución de Importaciones (isi). El presente trabajo se propone describir la historia reciente de este sector industrial, desde 1950 hasta la actualidad, centrando la atención en dos aspectos fundamentales: por un lado, el rol central del Estado (y de su política industrial) como regulador, productor, cliente y agente de financiación de la industria naval; por otro, la activa participación de los actores sociales, especialmente los trabajadores organizados, en la supervivencia productiva del sector en la década del 90. Para llevar adelante este propósito, nos centramos en el estudio de los dos astilleros estatales de construcción y reparación naval más importantes del país: Astillero Río Santiago (ars) y Talleres Dársena Norte (Tandanor). A modo de conclusión, reflexionamos sobre los principales desafíos y la perspectiva futura del sector así como sobre las responsabilidades que, en tal sentido, les caben a los actores sociales más relevantes

Trayectoria reciente y perspectivas futuras de la industria naval pesada argentina : Los astilleros estatales

Con un marco regulatorio de tipo proteccionista que buscaba promover la construcción de barcos en el país, la industria naval argentina se consolidó y expandió hasta los años 80 gracias a una fuerte intervención estatal, iniciada durante el proceso de Industrialización por Sustitución de Importaciones (isi). El presente trabajo se propone describir la historia reciente de este sector industrial, desde 1950 hasta la actualidad, centrando la atención en dos aspectos fundamentales: por un lado, el rol central del Estado (y de su política industrial) como regulador, productor, cliente y agente de financiación de la industria naval; por otro, la activa participación de los actores sociales, especialmente los trabajadores organizados, en la supervivencia productiva del sector en la década del 90. Para llevar adelante este propósito, nos centramos en el estudio de los dos astilleros estatales de construcción y reparación naval más importantes del país: Astillero Río Santiago (ars) y Talleres Dársena Norte (Tandanor). A modo de conclusión, reflexionamos sobre los principales desafíos y la perspectiva futura del sector así como sobre las responsabilidades que, en tal sentido, les caben a los actores sociales más relevantes

Trayectoria reciente y perspectivas futuras de la industria naval pesada argentina : Los astilleros estatales

Con un marco regulatorio de tipo proteccionista que buscaba promover la construcción de barcos en el país, la industria naval argentina se consolidó y expandió hasta los años 80 gracias a una fuerte intervención estatal, iniciada durante el proceso de Industrialización por Sustitución de Importaciones (isi). El presente trabajo se propone describir la historia reciente de este sector industrial, desde 1950 hasta la actualidad, centrando la atención en dos aspectos fundamentales: por un lado, el rol central del Estado (y de su política industrial) como regulador, productor, cliente y agente de financiación de la industria naval; por otro, la activa participación de los actores sociales, especialmente los trabajadores organizados, en la supervivencia productiva del sector en la década del 90. Para llevar adelante este propósito, nos centramos en el estudio de los dos astilleros estatales de construcción y reparación naval más importantes del país: Astillero Río Santiago (ars) y Talleres Dársena Norte (Tandanor). A modo de conclusión, reflexionamos sobre los principales desafíos y la perspectiva futura del sector así como sobre las responsabilidades que, en tal sentido, les caben a los actores sociales más relevantes

Diverging Development Paths of the Electronics Industry in Korea and Taiwan

This paper examines the process and mechanism of economic development in the Republic of Korea and Taiwan through a comparative analysis of the electronics industry in each country. The paper will show that in its initial stage of development, the electronics industry in both economies had the same type of dual structure: a domestic demand sector based on the protected domestic market, and an export sector intended to capitalize on low-wage labor for the international market. However, this dual structure in the two economies faded away after the mid-1970s as their respective indigenous export-oriented enterprises began to develop. But the primary industrial players in each economy were very different. In Korea they were comprehensive electronics manufacturers affiliated with chaebols, and in Taiwan they were small and medium-size enterprises. Differences in the two economies' development mechanisms have brought about this divergence in development paths. In Korea this mechanism has been characterized by the government's positive role and the chaebol's readiness to react to the government's leadership. In Taiwan the development mechanism has been based on the private sector independent from the government. As an extension of such diverged development paths, ICs and personal computers showed spectacular growth in Korea and Taiwan after the 1980s. The development of ICs in Korea was primarily the result of a decisive role played by the chaebol's sizable financial resources, while the competitiveness in personal computers largely reflected the agility and flexibility of Taiwanese small and medium-size enterprises.

A Comparative Study of Development Mechanisms in Korea and Taiwan: Introductory Analysis

This article is the introduction to a special issue of The Developing Economies which presented the results of a research project by the Institute of Developing Economies that examined the development mechanisms in Korea and Taiwan. Our conclusion in this article is that their development mechanisms, despite their similar development patterns of export-led industrialization, have been essentially different: a government-led mechanism in Korea as opposed to a market-led mechanism in Taiwan. We verified this difference through comparative studies of the two economies covering trade balances, the growth of total factor productivity, the scale of enterprises and business groups, and the development processes of individual manufacturing sectors. In our explanatory discussion we propose that the difference in the mechanisms is based on: 1) the amount of accumulation in the economy at the time postwar industrialization started, 2) the relationship between government and society, and 3) the mechanism of social network formation.

Industrialization Policies of Korea and Taiwan and Their Effects on Manufacturing Productivity

In this paper the total factor productivity (TFP) of the manufacturing sectors in Taiwan and the Republic of Korean was measured and compared using the growth accounting method. Through descriptive analysis, inefficiency in the Korean manufacturing sectors was revealed, especially for the period prior to 1986. Also for the period posterior to 1986, it was found that TFP tended to contribute more to the value-added growth in both countries. An econometric analysis with industrialization-related variables revealed a contrast in the structure of TFP growth between the two countries. Import penetration, capital intensity, and growth of real output were estimated to exert a positive productivity impact in Taiwan, reflecting Taiwan's flexibility and superiority in factor utilization compared with Korea. It was estimated that the export ratio did not have any major productivity impact in both countries, in contrast with the results reported by the World Bank (The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).

An Asian Triangle of Growth and Cluster-to-Cluster Linkages

It is expected that an Asian triangle of growth will be formed in the coming few decades. China, India and ASEAN surround the Asian triangle, which is home to many industrial clusters. Multinational corporations will link these clusters together. Regional integration will help them in this task by lowering the barriers of national borders. This paper explains the necessity of regional integration for cluster-to-cluster linkages in the Asian triangle of growth.

Stunted and Distorted Industrialization in Myanmar

More than 15 years have passed since Myanmar embarked on its transition from a centrally planned economy to a market-oriented one. The purpose of this paper is to provide a bird-eye's view of industrial changes from the 1990s up to 2005. The industrial sector showed a preliminary development in the first half of the 1990s due to an "open door" policy and liberalization measures. However, a brief period of growth failed to effect any changes in the economic fundamentals. The industrial sector still suffers from poor power supplies, limited access to imported raw materials and machinery, exchange rate instability, limited credit, and frequent changes of government regulation. Public ownership is still high in key infrastructure sectors, and has failed to provide sufficient services to private industries. What the government must do first is to get the fundamentals right.

The "Catching up" Process of Manufacturing in East Asia

This paper examines the "catching up" process of manufacturing in East Asia within the framework of North and South location. Results of this study indicate that latecomers of the ASEAN Four and China have advanced the "catching up" process. At the same time, second-runners of the Asian NIES have more extensively increased their "catching up" with Japan. Most "catching up" was realized in a very short period in the 1990s, and the advancement of the "catching up" process has moved into various industries from nondurable products to light machinery products. However, it has not yet advanced in heavy machinery such as in the industrial machinery and machine tool industries.