# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
A robust multi-trip vehicle routing problem of perishable products with intermediate depots and time windows
• NACO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
A study of numerical integration based on Legendre polynomial and RLS algorithm
December 2017, 7(4): 435-455. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017027

## An investigation of the most important factors for sustainable product development using evidential reasoning

 School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden

* Corresponding author

Received  October 2016 Revised  August 2017 Published  October 2017

Fund Project: This paper was prepared at the occasion of The 12th International Conference on Industrial Engineering (ICIE 2016), Tehran, Iran, January 25-26,2016, with its Associate Editors of Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization (NACO) being Assoc. Prof. A. (Nima) Mirzazadeh, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran, and Prof. Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

Those working in product development need to consider sustainability, being careful not to compromise the future generation's ability to satisfy its needs. Several strategies guide companies towards sustainability. This paper studies six of these strategies: eco-design, green design, cradle-to-cradle, design for environment, zero waste, and life cycle approaches. Based on a literature review and semi-structured interviews, it identifies 22 factors of sustainability from the perspective of manufacturers. The purpose is to determine which are the most important and to use them as a foundation for a new design strategy. A survey based on the 22 factors was given to people working with product development; they graded each factor by importance. The resulting qualitative data were analyzed using evidential reasoning. The analysis found the factors "minimize use of toxic substances, " "increase competitiveness, " "economic benefits, " "reduce material usage, " "material selection, " "reduce emissions, " and "increase product functionality" are more important and should serve as the foundation for a new approach to sustainable product development.

Citation: Farzaneh Ahmadzadeh, Kathrina Jederström, Maria Plahn, Anna Olsson, Isabell Foyer. An investigation of the most important factors for sustainable product development using evidential reasoning. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2017, 7 (4) : 435-455. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017027
##### References:
 [1] F. Ahmadszadeh and M. Bengtsson, Using evidential reasoning approach for prioritization of maintenance-related waste caused by human factors -a case study, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 90 (2017), 2761-2775. doi: 10.1007/s00170-016-9377-7. [2] F. Ahmadszadeh and M. Bengtsson, Classification of Maintenance-related Waste Based on Human Factors, Neuchatel, Switzerland, Conference on Operations, Management for Sustainable Competitveness (22nd EurOMA), 2015. [3] P. T. Anastas and J. B. Zimmerman, Through the 12 principles of green engineering, Environ. Sci. Technol, 1 (2003), 95-101. doi: 10.1021/es032373g. [4] C. A. Bakker, R. Wever, C. Teoh and S. De Clerq, Designing cradle-to-cradle products: a reality check, Internat J. Sus. Eng., 3 (2010), 2-8. doi: 10.1080/19397030903395166. [5] H. Baumann, F. Boons and A Bragd, Mapping the green product development field: engineering, policy and business perspectives, J. Cleaner Prod., 10 (2002), 409-425. doi: 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00015-X. [6] G. Beheiry, S. M. Beheiry and M. M. Beheiry, Investigating the use of green design parameters in UAE construction projects, Internat. J. Sus. Eng., 8 (2015), 93-101. doi: 10.1080/19397038.2014.895066. [7] M. Borchardt, M. H. Wendt, G. M. Pereira and M. A. Sellitto, Redesign of a component based on ecodesign practices: environmental impact and cost reduction achievements, J. Cleaner Prod., 19 (2011), 49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.08.006. [8] M. Braungart and W. McDonough, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, Vintage, London, 2008. [9] M. Braungart, W. McDonough and A. Bollinger, Cradle-to-cradle design: creating healthy emissions: a strategy for eco-effective product and system design, J. Cleaner Prod., 15 (2007), 1337-1348. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.08.003. [10] S. Byggeth, G. Broman and K. H. Robert, A method for sustainable product development based on a modular, J. Cleaner Prod., 15 (2007), 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.02.007. [11] S. Byggeth and E. Hochschorner, Handling trade-offs in Ecodesign tools for sustainable product development and procurement, J. Cleaner Prod., 14 (2006), 1420-1430. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.03.024. [12] S. Case, Zeroing in on zero waste, Gov Procurement, 19 (2011), 24. [13] M. del Val Segarra-Oña, M. De-Miguel-Molina and A. Payá-Martínez, A review of the literature on Eco-design in manufacturing industry: are institutions focusing on the key aspects?, Rev. Business Information Systems, 15 (2011), 61-67. doi: 10.19030/rbis.v15i5.6028. [14] R. Docksai, A world without waste?, Futurist, 48 (2014), 16-20. [15] J. Drexhage and D. Murphy, Sustainable Development: From Brundtland to Rio 2012, United Nations Headquarters, New York, 2010. [16] R. A. R. Ghazilla, N. Sakundarini, Z. Taha, S. H. Abdul-Rashid and S. Yusoff, Design for environment and design for disassembly practices in Malaysia: a practitioner's perspectives, J. Cleaner Prod., 108 (2015), 331-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.033. [17] K. Gowri, Desktop tools for sustainable design, ASHRAE, 47 (2005), 42-46. [18] P. L. Grogan, Zero waste: is ecotopia possible? BioCycle, 38 (1997), 86. [19] GSA U. S. General Services Administration, 2015. Available from: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/104462. [20] R. E. Hodgett, Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 85 (2016), 1-13. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-7993-2. [21] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 14000 family -Environmental management, Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html [22] E. Jacquet-Lagreze and J. Siskos, Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multi-criteria decision making: the UTA method, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 10 (1982), 151-164. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(82)90155-2. [23] A. Jayal, F. Badurdeen, O. Dillon Jr. and I Jawahir, Sustainable manufacturing: modeling and optimization challenges at the product, process and system levels, CIRP JMST, 2 (2010), 144-152. doi: 10.1016/j.cirpj.2010.03.006. [24] G. Johansson, Success factors for integration of ecodesign in product development, J. Environmental Management and Health, 13 (2002), 98-107. doi: 10.1108/09566160210417868. [25] S. J. Kim, S. Kara and B. Kayis, Economic and environmental assessment of product life cycle, J. Cleaner Prod., 75 (2014), 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.094. [26] M. Kumar Mehlawat and P. Gupta, A new fuzzy group multicriteria decision making method with an application to the critical path selection, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 83 (2016), 1281-1296. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-7610-4. [27] R. R. Lekurwale, M. M. Akarte and D. N. Raut, Framework to evaluate manufacturing capability using analytical hierarchy process, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 76 (2015), 565-576. doi: 10.1007/s00170-014-6284-7. [28] F. Lemke and J. P. P Luzio, Exploring green consumers' mind-set toward green product design and life cycle assessment, J. Ind. Ecol., 18 (2014), 619-630. doi: 10.1111/jiec.12123. [29] P. Llorach-Massana, R. Farreny and J. Oliver-Solá, Are cradle to cradle certified products environmentally preferable? Analysis from an LCA approach, J. Cleaner Prod., 93 (2015), 243-250. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.032. [30] E. Lombardi, Zero landfill is not zero waste, BioCycle, 52 (2011), 44-45. [31] E. Lombardi and J. Goldstein, Before zero waste comes producer responsibility, In Business, 23 (2001), 28-29. [32] C. Luttropp and J. Lagerstedt, Ecodesign and the ten golden rules: generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development, J. Cleaner Prod., 14 (2006), 1396-1408. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.022. [33] W. McDonough and M. Braungart, Overview of the Cradle to Cradle Certified (CM) Product Standard -Version 3.0, Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute, 2012. [34] Q. Meng, A rapid life cycle assessment method based on green features in supporting conceptual design, Int. J. of Precis Eng. and Manuf. -Green Tech., 2 (2014), 189-196. doi: 10.1007/s40684-015-0023-x. [35] V. Paramasivam, V. Senthil and N. Rajam Ramasamy, Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with digraph and matrix approach, AHP and ANP, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 54 (2011), 1233-1244. doi: 10.1007/s00170-010-2997-4. [36] S. Plouffe, P. Lanoie, C. Berneman and M. F. Vernier, Economic benefits tied to ecodesign, J. Cleaner Prod., 19 (2011), 573-579. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.12.003. [37] J. Pontus, L. Nordström and R. Lagerström, Formalizing analysis of enterprise architecture, in Enterprise Interoperability (eds. G. Doumeingts, J. M¨uller, G. Morel and B. Vallespir), Springer, London, (2007), 35–44. doi: 10.1007/978-1-84628-714-5_4. [38] S. Prendeville, D. F. O'Connor and L. Palmer, Barriers and benefits to Ecodesign: a case study of tool use in an SME, IEEE ISSST, (2011), 1-6. doi: 10.1109/ISSST.2011.5936850. [39] M. Rossi, S. Charon, G. Wing and J. Ewell, Design for the next generation -incorporating cradle-to-cradle design into Herman Miller products, J. Ind. Ecol., 10 (2006), 193-210. doi: 10.1162/jiec.2006.10.4.193. [40] G. A. Shafer, Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press, 1976. [41] Y. Umeda, A. Nonomura and T. Tomiyama, Study on life-cycle design for the post mass production paradigm, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, (2000), 149-161. [42] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 17 sustainable development goals, 17 partnerships, 2015. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/211617%20Goals%2017%20Partnerships.pdf [43] United Nations Goal 12: ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns, 2015. Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production/ [44] J. C. van Weenen, Towards sustainable product development, J. Cleaner Prod., 3 (1995), 95-100. doi: 10.1016/0959-6526(95)00062-J. [45] N. Vargas Hernandez, G. Okudan Kremer, L. C. Scmidt and P. R. Acosta Herrera, Development of an expert system to aid engineers in the selection of design for environment methods and tools, Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (2012), 9543-9553. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.098. [46] W. Wimmer, R. Züst and L. Kun-Mo, Ecodesign Implementation: A Systematic Guidance on Integrating Environmental Considerations into Product Development, Springer, Dordrecht, 2004. [47] World Comission on Environment and Development (WCED), Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, New York, 1987. [48] L. Xu and J. B. Yang, Introduction to multi-criteria decision making and the evidential reasoning approach, Manchester School of Management, Working Paper, 2001. [49] D. L. Xu, An introduction and survey of the evidential reasoning approach for multiple criteria decision analysis, Ann. Oper. Res., 195 (2012), 163-187. doi: 10.1007/s10479-011-0945-9. [50] D. L. Xu and and J. B. Yang, Intelligent decision system for self-assessment, J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal., 12 (2003), 43-60. doi: 10.1002/mcda.343. [51] J. B. Yang and M. G. Singh, An evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision making with uncertainty, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man and Cypernetics, 24 (1994), 1-18. doi: 10.1109/21.259681. [52] J. B. Yang, Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainties, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 131 (2001), 31-61. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00441-5. [53] J. B. Yang and D. L. Xu, On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainty, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man and Cypernetics, Part A. Systems and Humans, 32 (2002), 289-304. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802746. [54] A. U. Zaman, A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste management: lessons learned and guidelines, J. Cleaner Prod., 91 (2005), 12-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.013. [55] Zero Waste International Alliance, ZW definition: Zero Waste International Alliance, 2015. Available at: http://zwia.org/standards/zw-definition/ [56] Z. J. Zhang, J. B. Yang and D. L. Xu, A hierarchical analysis model for multi-objective decision making, IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 22 (1989), 13-18. [57] M. Öberg, Integrated Life Cycle Design -Applied to Concrete Multi-Dwelling Buildings, Doctoral thesis, Div of Building Materials LTH, Lund University, 2005.

show all references

##### References:
 [1] F. Ahmadszadeh and M. Bengtsson, Using evidential reasoning approach for prioritization of maintenance-related waste caused by human factors -a case study, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 90 (2017), 2761-2775. doi: 10.1007/s00170-016-9377-7. [2] F. Ahmadszadeh and M. Bengtsson, Classification of Maintenance-related Waste Based on Human Factors, Neuchatel, Switzerland, Conference on Operations, Management for Sustainable Competitveness (22nd EurOMA), 2015. [3] P. T. Anastas and J. B. Zimmerman, Through the 12 principles of green engineering, Environ. Sci. Technol, 1 (2003), 95-101. doi: 10.1021/es032373g. [4] C. A. Bakker, R. Wever, C. Teoh and S. De Clerq, Designing cradle-to-cradle products: a reality check, Internat J. Sus. Eng., 3 (2010), 2-8. doi: 10.1080/19397030903395166. [5] H. Baumann, F. Boons and A Bragd, Mapping the green product development field: engineering, policy and business perspectives, J. Cleaner Prod., 10 (2002), 409-425. doi: 10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00015-X. [6] G. Beheiry, S. M. Beheiry and M. M. Beheiry, Investigating the use of green design parameters in UAE construction projects, Internat. J. Sus. Eng., 8 (2015), 93-101. doi: 10.1080/19397038.2014.895066. [7] M. Borchardt, M. H. Wendt, G. M. Pereira and M. A. Sellitto, Redesign of a component based on ecodesign practices: environmental impact and cost reduction achievements, J. Cleaner Prod., 19 (2011), 49-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.08.006. [8] M. Braungart and W. McDonough, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, Vintage, London, 2008. [9] M. Braungart, W. McDonough and A. Bollinger, Cradle-to-cradle design: creating healthy emissions: a strategy for eco-effective product and system design, J. Cleaner Prod., 15 (2007), 1337-1348. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.08.003. [10] S. Byggeth, G. Broman and K. H. Robert, A method for sustainable product development based on a modular, J. Cleaner Prod., 15 (2007), 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.02.007. [11] S. Byggeth and E. Hochschorner, Handling trade-offs in Ecodesign tools for sustainable product development and procurement, J. Cleaner Prod., 14 (2006), 1420-1430. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.03.024. [12] S. Case, Zeroing in on zero waste, Gov Procurement, 19 (2011), 24. [13] M. del Val Segarra-Oña, M. De-Miguel-Molina and A. Payá-Martínez, A review of the literature on Eco-design in manufacturing industry: are institutions focusing on the key aspects?, Rev. Business Information Systems, 15 (2011), 61-67. doi: 10.19030/rbis.v15i5.6028. [14] R. Docksai, A world without waste?, Futurist, 48 (2014), 16-20. [15] J. Drexhage and D. Murphy, Sustainable Development: From Brundtland to Rio 2012, United Nations Headquarters, New York, 2010. [16] R. A. R. Ghazilla, N. Sakundarini, Z. Taha, S. H. Abdul-Rashid and S. Yusoff, Design for environment and design for disassembly practices in Malaysia: a practitioner's perspectives, J. Cleaner Prod., 108 (2015), 331-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.033. [17] K. Gowri, Desktop tools for sustainable design, ASHRAE, 47 (2005), 42-46. [18] P. L. Grogan, Zero waste: is ecotopia possible? BioCycle, 38 (1997), 86. [19] GSA U. S. General Services Administration, 2015. Available from: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/104462. [20] R. E. Hodgett, Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 85 (2016), 1-13. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-7993-2. [21] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 14000 family -Environmental management, Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html [22] E. Jacquet-Lagreze and J. Siskos, Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multi-criteria decision making: the UTA method, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 10 (1982), 151-164. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(82)90155-2. [23] A. Jayal, F. Badurdeen, O. Dillon Jr. and I Jawahir, Sustainable manufacturing: modeling and optimization challenges at the product, process and system levels, CIRP JMST, 2 (2010), 144-152. doi: 10.1016/j.cirpj.2010.03.006. [24] G. Johansson, Success factors for integration of ecodesign in product development, J. Environmental Management and Health, 13 (2002), 98-107. doi: 10.1108/09566160210417868. [25] S. J. Kim, S. Kara and B. Kayis, Economic and environmental assessment of product life cycle, J. Cleaner Prod., 75 (2014), 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.094. [26] M. Kumar Mehlawat and P. Gupta, A new fuzzy group multicriteria decision making method with an application to the critical path selection, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 83 (2016), 1281-1296. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-7610-4. [27] R. R. Lekurwale, M. M. Akarte and D. N. Raut, Framework to evaluate manufacturing capability using analytical hierarchy process, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 76 (2015), 565-576. doi: 10.1007/s00170-014-6284-7. [28] F. Lemke and J. P. P Luzio, Exploring green consumers' mind-set toward green product design and life cycle assessment, J. Ind. Ecol., 18 (2014), 619-630. doi: 10.1111/jiec.12123. [29] P. Llorach-Massana, R. Farreny and J. Oliver-Solá, Are cradle to cradle certified products environmentally preferable? Analysis from an LCA approach, J. Cleaner Prod., 93 (2015), 243-250. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.032. [30] E. Lombardi, Zero landfill is not zero waste, BioCycle, 52 (2011), 44-45. [31] E. Lombardi and J. Goldstein, Before zero waste comes producer responsibility, In Business, 23 (2001), 28-29. [32] C. Luttropp and J. Lagerstedt, Ecodesign and the ten golden rules: generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development, J. Cleaner Prod., 14 (2006), 1396-1408. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.022. [33] W. McDonough and M. Braungart, Overview of the Cradle to Cradle Certified (CM) Product Standard -Version 3.0, Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute, 2012. [34] Q. Meng, A rapid life cycle assessment method based on green features in supporting conceptual design, Int. J. of Precis Eng. and Manuf. -Green Tech., 2 (2014), 189-196. doi: 10.1007/s40684-015-0023-x. [35] V. Paramasivam, V. Senthil and N. Rajam Ramasamy, Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with digraph and matrix approach, AHP and ANP, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 54 (2011), 1233-1244. doi: 10.1007/s00170-010-2997-4. [36] S. Plouffe, P. Lanoie, C. Berneman and M. F. Vernier, Economic benefits tied to ecodesign, J. Cleaner Prod., 19 (2011), 573-579. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.12.003. [37] J. Pontus, L. Nordström and R. Lagerström, Formalizing analysis of enterprise architecture, in Enterprise Interoperability (eds. G. Doumeingts, J. M¨uller, G. Morel and B. Vallespir), Springer, London, (2007), 35–44. doi: 10.1007/978-1-84628-714-5_4. [38] S. Prendeville, D. F. O'Connor and L. Palmer, Barriers and benefits to Ecodesign: a case study of tool use in an SME, IEEE ISSST, (2011), 1-6. doi: 10.1109/ISSST.2011.5936850. [39] M. Rossi, S. Charon, G. Wing and J. Ewell, Design for the next generation -incorporating cradle-to-cradle design into Herman Miller products, J. Ind. Ecol., 10 (2006), 193-210. doi: 10.1162/jiec.2006.10.4.193. [40] G. A. Shafer, Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press, 1976. [41] Y. Umeda, A. Nonomura and T. Tomiyama, Study on life-cycle design for the post mass production paradigm, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, (2000), 149-161. [42] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 17 sustainable development goals, 17 partnerships, 2015. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/211617%20Goals%2017%20Partnerships.pdf [43] United Nations Goal 12: ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns, 2015. Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production/ [44] J. C. van Weenen, Towards sustainable product development, J. Cleaner Prod., 3 (1995), 95-100. doi: 10.1016/0959-6526(95)00062-J. [45] N. Vargas Hernandez, G. Okudan Kremer, L. C. Scmidt and P. R. Acosta Herrera, Development of an expert system to aid engineers in the selection of design for environment methods and tools, Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (2012), 9543-9553. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.098. [46] W. Wimmer, R. Züst and L. Kun-Mo, Ecodesign Implementation: A Systematic Guidance on Integrating Environmental Considerations into Product Development, Springer, Dordrecht, 2004. [47] World Comission on Environment and Development (WCED), Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, New York, 1987. [48] L. Xu and J. B. Yang, Introduction to multi-criteria decision making and the evidential reasoning approach, Manchester School of Management, Working Paper, 2001. [49] D. L. Xu, An introduction and survey of the evidential reasoning approach for multiple criteria decision analysis, Ann. Oper. Res., 195 (2012), 163-187. doi: 10.1007/s10479-011-0945-9. [50] D. L. Xu and and J. B. Yang, Intelligent decision system for self-assessment, J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal., 12 (2003), 43-60. doi: 10.1002/mcda.343. [51] J. B. Yang and M. G. Singh, An evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision making with uncertainty, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man and Cypernetics, 24 (1994), 1-18. doi: 10.1109/21.259681. [52] J. B. Yang, Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainties, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 131 (2001), 31-61. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00441-5. [53] J. B. Yang and D. L. Xu, On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainty, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man and Cypernetics, Part A. Systems and Humans, 32 (2002), 289-304. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802746. [54] A. U. Zaman, A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste management: lessons learned and guidelines, J. Cleaner Prod., 91 (2005), 12-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.013. [55] Zero Waste International Alliance, ZW definition: Zero Waste International Alliance, 2015. Available at: http://zwia.org/standards/zw-definition/ [56] Z. J. Zhang, J. B. Yang and D. L. Xu, A hierarchical analysis model for multi-objective decision making, IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 22 (1989), 13-18. [57] M. Öberg, Integrated Life Cycle Design -Applied to Concrete Multi-Dwelling Buildings, Doctoral thesis, Div of Building Materials LTH, Lund University, 2005.
Generic framework to assess general property
Visual representation of ER steps
Diagram showing the importance of factors for sustainable product development
Advantages and disadvantages of sustainable design strategies
 Method Advantages Disadvantages Eco Design Increased competitiveness [13] Decreased variable costs [32], [36] Less use of toxic materials [32] Increased product functionality [36], [46] Improved economic performance [36] Increased revenue [13] Increased sales volumes [13] Less energy usage [32] Prolonged product life [32], [36], [46] Improved company image [13] Reduced material use [7], [24], [32], [36], [46] Increased fixed costs [36] Only short term economic benefits [36] Green design Optimized operational practices [5], [17], [19] Reduced use of non-renewable resources [3], [19], [34] Waste minimized [6], [19], [34] Increased use of renewable materials [3], [34] Increased use of renewable energy [3], [19], [34] Social business strategies incorporated [10] Requires investment in new operating tools [5] Too many unclear suggestions [6] Cradle-to- cradle Waste eliminated [8], [9], [33] Products are biodegradable [9] Eternal recyclability [9] Increased economic activity [9] Increased job opportunities [9] Certification available [33] Might be overconfident [4] Design for environment Waste is reduced [16], [45] Improved material chemistry [39] Improved design for disassembly [16], [39], [45] Increased recyclability [39], [45] Too many tools and techniques [45] Zero Waste Pollution is prevented [30], [55] Waste eliminated [18], [31], [55] Reduced toxicity [30], [55] Increased recyclability [18] Increased reuse of materials [55] Decreased costs of waste disposal [12], [18], [31] Increased revenue by selling used materials [14] Requires transformation of current systems [54] Increased short- term costs [14] Life-Cycle approaches Reduced long term environmental impact of the product [29], [38] Decreased costs for service [41] Increased environmental impact awareness [57] Holistic approach [4], [38], [57] Often used in retrospect [28], [38] Cannot be used properly for reused, recycled and re- manufactured products [41]
 Method Advantages Disadvantages Eco Design Increased competitiveness [13] Decreased variable costs [32], [36] Less use of toxic materials [32] Increased product functionality [36], [46] Improved economic performance [36] Increased revenue [13] Increased sales volumes [13] Less energy usage [32] Prolonged product life [32], [36], [46] Improved company image [13] Reduced material use [7], [24], [32], [36], [46] Increased fixed costs [36] Only short term economic benefits [36] Green design Optimized operational practices [5], [17], [19] Reduced use of non-renewable resources [3], [19], [34] Waste minimized [6], [19], [34] Increased use of renewable materials [3], [34] Increased use of renewable energy [3], [19], [34] Social business strategies incorporated [10] Requires investment in new operating tools [5] Too many unclear suggestions [6] Cradle-to- cradle Waste eliminated [8], [9], [33] Products are biodegradable [9] Eternal recyclability [9] Increased economic activity [9] Increased job opportunities [9] Certification available [33] Might be overconfident [4] Design for environment Waste is reduced [16], [45] Improved material chemistry [39] Improved design for disassembly [16], [39], [45] Increased recyclability [39], [45] Too many tools and techniques [45] Zero Waste Pollution is prevented [30], [55] Waste eliminated [18], [31], [55] Reduced toxicity [30], [55] Increased recyclability [18] Increased reuse of materials [55] Decreased costs of waste disposal [12], [18], [31] Increased revenue by selling used materials [14] Requires transformation of current systems [54] Increased short- term costs [14] Life-Cycle approaches Reduced long term environmental impact of the product [29], [38] Decreased costs for service [41] Increased environmental impact awareness [57] Holistic approach [4], [38], [57] Often used in retrospect [28], [38] Cannot be used properly for reused, recycled and re- manufactured products [41]
Factors identified in sustainable design and the corresponding strategies
 Factors Design Strategy Reduce energy usage Eco-design Reduce material usage Eco-design, Life-cycle approaches Reduce use of non-renewable resources Green design Reduce waste Design for Environment Eliminate waste Cradle-to-cradle, zero waste Eliminate emission Zero waste Minimize use of toxic substances Eco-design, zero waste Minimize waste Green design Recycle materials/components Cradle-to-cradle, design for environment, zero waste, life-cycle approaches, eco-design Reuse materials/components Zero waste, life-cycle approaches, eco-design, cradle-to-cradle Increase product functionality Eco-design Increase product lifespan Eco-design Increase use of renewable energy Green design, cradle-to-cradle Increase use of renewable materials Green design, life-cycle approaches, cradle-to-cradle Increase use of biodegradable materials Cradle-to-cradle Closed loop material flow Cradle-to-cradle Holistic approach Life-cycle approaches, cradle-to-cradle Sustainable social standards Green design, cradle-to-cradle Economic benefits Eco-design, cradle-to-cradle, zero waste Increase competitiveness Eco-design
 Factors Design Strategy Reduce energy usage Eco-design Reduce material usage Eco-design, Life-cycle approaches Reduce use of non-renewable resources Green design Reduce waste Design for Environment Eliminate waste Cradle-to-cradle, zero waste Eliminate emission Zero waste Minimize use of toxic substances Eco-design, zero waste Minimize waste Green design Recycle materials/components Cradle-to-cradle, design for environment, zero waste, life-cycle approaches, eco-design Reuse materials/components Zero waste, life-cycle approaches, eco-design, cradle-to-cradle Increase product functionality Eco-design Increase product lifespan Eco-design Increase use of renewable energy Green design, cradle-to-cradle Increase use of renewable materials Green design, life-cycle approaches, cradle-to-cradle Increase use of biodegradable materials Cradle-to-cradle Closed loop material flow Cradle-to-cradle Holistic approach Life-cycle approaches, cradle-to-cradle Sustainable social standards Green design, cradle-to-cradle Economic benefits Eco-design, cradle-to-cradle, zero waste Increase competitiveness Eco-design
Assigned weights, belief degrees and calculated probability masses
 Evalutation Grade Weight Belief $H_1, H_2, H_3$ $\omega_i$ $\beta_{1, i}$ $\beta_{2, i}$ $\beta_{3, i}$ $\beta_{H}$ $\varepsilon_1$ 0.35 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 $\varepsilon_2$ 0.65 0.1 0.75 0.15 0 Probability Mass $m_{1, i}$ $m_{2, i}$ $m_{3, i}$ $m_{H, i}$ $\bar{m}_{H, i}$ $\tilde{m}_{H, i}$ 0.14 0.175 0 0.685 0.65 0.035 0.065 0.4875 0.0975 0.35 0.35 0
 Evalutation Grade Weight Belief $H_1, H_2, H_3$ $\omega_i$ $\beta_{1, i}$ $\beta_{2, i}$ $\beta_{3, i}$ $\beta_{H}$ $\varepsilon_1$ 0.35 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 $\varepsilon_2$ 0.65 0.1 0.75 0.15 0 Probability Mass $m_{1, i}$ $m_{2, i}$ $m_{3, i}$ $m_{H, i}$ $\bar{m}_{H, i}$ $\tilde{m}_{H, i}$ 0.14 0.175 0 0.685 0.65 0.035 0.065 0.4875 0.0975 0.35 0.35 0
Factors identified in sustainable design and the corresponding strategies
 Evaluation grade (%) Factors H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 Unassigned Reduce energy usage 5 15 27 24 10 19 Reduce material usage 1 5 22 31 37 4 Reduce use of non-renewable resources 1 21 21 18 23 16 Reduce waste 1 4 28 41 10 16 Reduce emissions 1 4 18 38 21 18 Eliminate waste 11 14 30 23 13 9 Eliminate emissions 10 5 24 31 8 22 Minimize use of toxic substances 0 0 8 26 50 16 Minimize waste 3 3 30 37 5 22 Recycling components/ materials 0 17 29 26 18 10 Reusing components/ materials 11 17 12 34 19 7 Increase product functionality 0 2 29 27 26 16 Increase product lifespan 3 19 36 26 14 2 Increase use of renewable materials 0 8 20 40 10 22 Increase use of renewable energy 2 8 20 29 19 22 Increase use of biodegradable materials 1 13 36 30 5 15 Sustainable material selection 0 9 15 47 25 4 Circular material flow 0 7 28 11 5 49 Holistic view 4 6 9 28 16 37 Sustainable social standards 4 3 21 26 20 26 Economic benefits 0 1 26 22 40 11 Increased competitiveness 0 1 27 31 38 3
 Evaluation grade (%) Factors H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 Unassigned Reduce energy usage 5 15 27 24 10 19 Reduce material usage 1 5 22 31 37 4 Reduce use of non-renewable resources 1 21 21 18 23 16 Reduce waste 1 4 28 41 10 16 Reduce emissions 1 4 18 38 21 18 Eliminate waste 11 14 30 23 13 9 Eliminate emissions 10 5 24 31 8 22 Minimize use of toxic substances 0 0 8 26 50 16 Minimize waste 3 3 30 37 5 22 Recycling components/ materials 0 17 29 26 18 10 Reusing components/ materials 11 17 12 34 19 7 Increase product functionality 0 2 29 27 26 16 Increase product lifespan 3 19 36 26 14 2 Increase use of renewable materials 0 8 20 40 10 22 Increase use of renewable energy 2 8 20 29 19 22 Increase use of biodegradable materials 1 13 36 30 5 15 Sustainable material selection 0 9 15 47 25 4 Circular material flow 0 7 28 11 5 49 Holistic view 4 6 9 28 16 37 Sustainable social standards 4 3 21 26 20 26 Economic benefits 0 1 26 22 40 11 Increased competitiveness 0 1 27 31 38 3
Important design factors, relevant score and rank
 Factors Ranking score (%) Rank Minimize use of toxic substances 82 1 Increase competitiveness 76 2 Economic benefits 75 3 Reduce material usage 74 4 Sustainable material selection 72 5 Reduce emissions 69 6 Increase product functionality 69 7 Reduce waste 64 8 Increase use of renewable energy 64 9 Sustainable social standards 64 10 Increase use of renewable materials 63 11 Holistic view 62 12 Recycling components/materials 61 13 Reduce use of non-renewable resources 60 14 Minimize waste 59 15 Reusing components/materials 58 16 Increase use of biodegradable materials 58 17 Increase product lifespan 57 18 Eliminate emissions 56 19 Reduce energy usage 55 20 Circular material flow 54 21 Eliminate waste 53 22
 Factors Ranking score (%) Rank Minimize use of toxic substances 82 1 Increase competitiveness 76 2 Economic benefits 75 3 Reduce material usage 74 4 Sustainable material selection 72 5 Reduce emissions 69 6 Increase product functionality 69 7 Reduce waste 64 8 Increase use of renewable energy 64 9 Sustainable social standards 64 10 Increase use of renewable materials 63 11 Holistic view 62 12 Recycling components/materials 61 13 Reduce use of non-renewable resources 60 14 Minimize waste 59 15 Reusing components/materials 58 16 Increase use of biodegradable materials 58 17 Increase product lifespan 57 18 Eliminate emissions 56 19 Reduce energy usage 55 20 Circular material flow 54 21 Eliminate waste 53 22
Important design factors and corresponding design strategy
 Most important identified factors Design strategy (%) Minimize use of toxics substances (82%) Eco-design and Zero waste Increased competitiveness (76%) Eco-design Economic benefits (75%) Eco-design, Cradle-to-cradle and Zero waste Reduce material usage (74%) Eco-design and life-cycle strategies Material selection (72%) $\cdots$ Reduce emissions (69%) $\cdots$ Increase product functionality (69%) Eco-design
 Most important identified factors Design strategy (%) Minimize use of toxics substances (82%) Eco-design and Zero waste Increased competitiveness (76%) Eco-design Economic benefits (75%) Eco-design, Cradle-to-cradle and Zero waste Reduce material usage (74%) Eco-design and life-cycle strategies Material selection (72%) $\cdots$ Reduce emissions (69%) $\cdots$ Increase product functionality (69%) Eco-design
 [1] P. C. Jha, Sugandha Aggarwal, Anshu Gupta, Ruhul Sarker. Multi-criteria media mix decision model for advertising a single product with segment specific and mass media. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (4) : 1367-1389. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.1367 [2] Bin Dan, Huali Gao, Yang Zhang, Ru Liu, Songxuan Ma. Integrated order acceptance and scheduling decision making in product service supply chain with hard time windows constraints. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (1) : 165-182. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017041 [3] Po-Chung Yang, Hui-Ming Wee, Shen-Lian Chung, Yong-Yan Huang. Pricing and replenishment strategy for a multi-market deteriorating product with time-varying and price-sensitive demand. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (4) : 769-787. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.769 [4] Harish Garg. Some robust improved geometric aggregation operators under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment for multi-criteria decision-making process. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (1) : 283-308. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017047 [5] Eugene Kashdan, Svetlana Bunimovich-Mendrazitsky. Multi-scale model of bladder cancer development. Conference Publications, 2011, 2011 (Special) : 803-812. doi: 10.3934/proc.2011.2011.803 [6] John Erik Fornæss. Sustainable dynamical systems. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2003, 9 (6) : 1361-1386. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2003.9.1361 [7] Sebastián Donoso, Wenbo Sun. Dynamical cubes and a criteria for systems having product extensions. Journal of Modern Dynamics, 2015, 9: 365-405. doi: 10.3934/jmd.2015.9.365 [8] Igor Nazarov, Bai-Lian Li. Maximal sustainable yield in a multipatch habitat. Conference Publications, 2005, 2005 (Special) : 682-691. doi: 10.3934/proc.2005.2005.682 [9] Hamed Fazlollahtabar, Mohammad Saidi-Mehrabad. Optimizing multi-objective decision making having qualitative evaluation. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2015, 11 (3) : 747-762. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2015.11.747 [10] Sandeep Dulluri, N. R. Srinivasa Raghavan. Revenue management via multi-product available to promise. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2007, 3 (3) : 457-479. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2007.3.457 [11] O. İlker Kolak, Orhan Feyzioğlu, Ş. İlker Birbil, Nilay Noyan, Semih Yalçindağ. Using emission functions in modeling environmentally sustainable traffic assignment policies. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (2) : 341-363. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.341 [12] Nir Avni, Benjamin Weiss. Generating product systems. Journal of Modern Dynamics, 2010, 4 (2) : 257-270. doi: 10.3934/jmd.2010.4.257 [13] Stefano Luzzatto, Marks Ruziboev. Young towers for product systems. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2016, 36 (3) : 1465-1491. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2016.36.1465 [14] Chang-Shou Lin. An expository survey on the recent development of mean field equations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2007, 19 (2) : 387-410. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2007.19.387 [15] Cornel M. Murea, H. G. E. Hentschel. A finite element method for growth in biological development. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2007, 4 (2) : 339-353. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2007.4.339 [16] David J. Silvester, Alex Bespalov, Catherine E. Powell. A framework for the development of implicit solvers for incompressible flow problems. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2012, 5 (6) : 1195-1221. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2012.5.1195 [17] Boris Hasselblatt and Jorg Schmeling. Dimension product structure of hyperbolic sets. Electronic Research Announcements, 2004, 10: 88-96. [18] Ana F. Carazo, Ignacio Contreras, Trinidad Gómez, Fátima Pérez. A project portfolio selection problem in a group decision-making context. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2012, 8 (1) : 243-261. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2012.8.243 [19] Ruiyue Lin, Zhiping Chen, Zongxin Li. A new approach for allocating fixed costs among decision making units. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (1) : 211-228. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.211 [20] G.S. Liu, J.Z. Zhang. Decision making of transportation plan, a bilevel transportation problem approach. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2005, 1 (3) : 305-314. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2005.1.305

Impact Factor:

## Tools

Article outline

Figures and Tables

[Back to Top]