Eco-design - FTP Directory Listing

Transcripción

Eco-design: European state of the art
Part I: Comparative analysis and conclusions
An ESTO project report
Prepared for the
European Commission — Joint Research Centre
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
Seville
by
Arnold Tukker
(TNO-STB, the Netherlands)
Erick Haag
(Kathalys/TNO Industrie, the Netherlands) and
Peter Eder
(IPTS, Spain)
Based on contributions by:
An Vercalsteren (Vito, Belgium); Thomas Wiedmann (VDI, Germany) and Ursula Tischner
(Econcept, Germany); Martin Charter and Inga Belmane (Centre for Sustainable Design, UK);
Geert Timmers, Machteld van der Vlugt and Erick Haag (Kathalys/TNO Industrie, the
Netherlands)
May 2000
EUR 19583 EN
About the IPTS
The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) is one of the eight institutes of the Joint
Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission. It was established in Seville, Spain, in September
1994.
The mission of the Institute is to provide techno-economic analysis support to the European decisionmakers, by monitoring and analysing science and technology related developments, their cross-sectoral
impact, their interrelationship in the socio-economic context and future policy implications and to
present this information in a timely and synthetic fashion.
Although particular emphasis is placed on key science and technology (S & T) fields, especially those
that have a driving role and even the potential to reshape our society, important efforts are devoted to
improving the understanding of the complex interactions between technology, economy and society.
Indeed, the impact of technology on society and, conversely, the way technological development is
driven by societal changes are highly relevant themes within the European decision-making context.
In order to implement this mission, the Institute develops appropriate contacts, awareness and skills for
anticipating and following the agenda of the policy decision-makers. In addition to its own resources,
the IPTS makes use of external advisory groups and operates a network of European institutes (ESTO)
working in similar areas. These networking activities enable the IPTS to draw on a large pool of
available expertise, while allowing a continuous process of external peer review of the in-house
activities.
The interdisciplinary prospective approach adopted by the Institute is intended to provide European
decision-makers with a deeper understanding of the emerging S & T issues, and is fully complementary
to the activities undertaken by other Joint Research Centre institutes.
For more information: http//:www.jrc.es [email protected]
About ESTO
The European Science and Technology Observatory (ESTO) is a network of leading European
organisations with expertise on Science and Technology Assessment. ESTO provides real-time
information on the socio-economic significance of scientific and technological advances. The ESTO
Network is directed and managed by the IPTS.
The ESTO network covers now all the fifteen EU Member States as well as Israel. Membership is
being continously reviewed and expanded with a view to match the evolving needs of the IPTS and to
incorporate new competent organisations from both inside and outside of the EU.
The ESTO Network was formally constituted in February 1997 and its principal tasks are:
•
•
•
•
To contribute to The IPTS Report with articles on relevant topics
To issue, on a periodic basis, a Techno-Economic Analysis report, which reviews socio-economic
developments either arising from technological change or driving it
To produce input to long-range Foresight Studies undertaken by the IPTS in response to EU policy
needs
To provide Quick Responses to specific S&T assessment queries.
For more information: http//:www.jrc.es Contacts: [email protected]
About the project partners
This particular project was executed by TNO-STB (the Netherlands), Vito (Belgium), VDI-TZ
(Germany), the Centre for Sustainable Design (CfSD, UK), and Kathalys/TNO Industrie (the
Netherlands), with the support of the IPTS. The contacts for this project of each participating institute
are listed below.
TNO-STB:
Arnold Tukker (project manager): [email protected]
Vito:
An Vercalsteren: [email protected]
VDI-TZ:
Thomas Wiedmann: [email protected]
Centre for Sustainable Design:
Martin Charter: [email protected]
Kathalys/TNO Industrie:
Erick Haag: [email protected]
IPTS:
Peter Eder: [email protected]
ã ECSC-EEC-EAEC, Brussels • Luxembourg, 2000
The views expressed in this study do not necessarily reflect those of the
European Commission (EC).
The European Commission retains copyright, but reproduction is
authorised, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is
acknowledged: neither the European Commission nor any person acting
on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be
made of the following information.
Printed in Spain
Contents
0
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 3
1
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 8
2
THE CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT .................................................................... 10
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
6
6.1
6.2
THE RELEVANCE OF A PRODUCT-ORIENTED ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ..................... 10
INTEGRATED PRODUCT POLICY AT EU LEVEL .......................................................... 10
THE POSITION OF ECO-DESIGN .................................................................................. 12
FACTORS THAT DETERMINE THE APPLICATION OF ECO-DESIGN PRACTICES............... 13
METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ..................................................................... 16
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 16
ANALYTICAL APPROACH .......................................................................................... 16
RESEARCH APPROACH AND LIMITATIONS ................................................................. 17
SUMMARY OF THE COUNTRY STUDIES......................................................... 20
BELGIUM ................................................................................................................. 20
DENMARK................................................................................................................ 21
GERMANY................................................................................................................ 22
GREECE ................................................................................................................... 23
SPAIN ....................................................................................................................... 23
FRANCE ................................................................................................................... 25
IRELAND .................................................................................................................. 25
ITALY....................................................................................................................... 26
LUXEMBOURG ......................................................................................................... 27
THE NETHERLANDS ............................................................................................. 27
AUSTRIA.............................................................................................................. 30
PORTUGAL........................................................................................................... 31
FINLAND .............................................................................................................. 31
SWEDEN .............................................................................................................. 32
UNITED KINGDOM ............................................................................................... 34
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ................................................................................. 36
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 36
ACTUAL ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DESIGN ........................................................... 38
METHODOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................... 41
DISSEMINATION ....................................................................................................... 45
EDUCATION ............................................................................................................. 47
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................... 49
POLICY IMPLICATIONS ...................................................................................... 52
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 52
CREATING MOTIVATION TO APPLY ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DESIGN ................... 52
1
IPTS 2000
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
METHODOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................... 53
DISSEMINATION ....................................................................................................... 54
EDUCATION ............................................................................................................. 55
OVERALL CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 56
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 55
7
ANNEX: MATURITY PROFILES ......................................................................... 60
Note: This volume (Part I) presents the overall analysis and conclusions of the study
“Eco-design: European State of the Art”. Part II of the study is available electronically
at ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/sps00140.pdf. Part II contains:
•
the results of a survey among the Fortune 500 large (transnational) companies;
and
•
15 country studies analysing for each EU Member State the state of the art of
eco-design.
2
IPTS 2000
0
Summary
The EU is developing an integrated product policy (IPP). Such a policy opens a new area for
environmental improvements. Rather than taking production processes or substances as the
focus, such a policy covers all products and their environmental effects, while taking a lifecycle perspective as the leading principle. So, the product innovation process forms a new
key to reducing environmental impacts. Eco-design (often called ‘design for environment’ in
the United States) refers to the systematic incorporation of environmental factors into product
design and development. It can play an essential role in IPP.
In this context, a number of European scientific institutes participating in the European
Science and Technology Observatory (ESTO) network have performed an analysis of the
state of the art of eco-design in EU Member States. Eco-design is a rather new phenomenon,
and is still in the diffusion stage. The project analysed the motives of industry to apply ecodesign in practice (demand side), and also analysed activities concerning method
development, dissemination and education (supply side). For each EU Member State, a
country study was performed (published in Part II of this study1). Furthermore, an inquiry
was made to the Fortune 500 transnational companies about the implementation of ecodesign (also published in Part II). Part I gives the comparative analysis and elaborates a
number of policy implications. The confines of the project in terms of time input per Member
State and project duration imply that this report primarily has to be seen as a quick scan of
the state of the art of eco-design in Europe, and a qualitative analysis of success factors. In
the view of the project team, any higher expectations have to be regarded as unrealistic, and
can only be met by a study that is set up on a fundamentally different footing.
Concerning the comparative analysis, the following main conclusions are drawn.
1. In general, countries such as Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden
are clear front-runners as regards method development, dissemination and education in
the field of eco-design. There, eco-design programmes have been available for some 10
years. There is another group of countries which started dissemination activities more
recently, and which try to benefit from the knowledge available in the front-runner
countries. The bottlenecks here appear to be cultural and language problems (e.g. most
manuals are in English, German, Danish/Swedish or Dutch, and there also seems to be a
need to readapt the material to the new context). In some EU Member States, hardly any
activities take place with regard to eco-design, apart from one or two firms or institutes
which are very active in the field.
2. As for actual environmental product design, it appears that some large multinationals
address the issue in a rather comprehensive way, particularly in the fields of electrical
and electronic goods, motor vehicles and packaging. For these firms, it is obvious that in
their product innovation process they cannot focus on economic and market aspects only,
but have to pay equal attention to environmental (and social) aspects related to their
1
ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/sps00140.pdf
3
IPTS 2000
products from a life-cycle perspective. They see them as strategic issues that may have an
influence on their competitive edge. These firms represent the factual best practice,
which consists of:
§
§
§
a clear management commitment to a sustainable environmental product policy;
implementation of responsibilities with regard to eco-design in procedures;
the availability of experienced eco-design staff, tools, manuals, and databases that
support the practical eco-design processes.
However, our research suggests that in many firms, particularly small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs), eco-design plays a very small role:
§
§
§
some SMEs have experience with eco-design in single (demonstration) projects, but
they rarely lead to implementation of eco-design in product development processes;
eco-design is not a management issue in SMEs: strategic goals regarding
environmental product policy are very rare;
when eco-design is practised by SMEs, the focus is on the environmental redesign of
products rather than the development of new product concepts (eco-innovation).
3. There is a mix of drivers that make firms apply eco-design in practice. We have the
impression that a main driver is that firms are convinced that eco-design will bring
benefits from a business perspective. These benefits could be related to customer
demands or (expected) costs related to environmental issues, for example by possible
demands with regard to recycling, eco-labels, specifications of clients, etc. However, it
seems that the final consumer is only in exceptional cases willing to pay a significant
premium for environmentally friendly products.
4. Concerning method development, the following elements constitute the best practice in
front-runner countries.
§
§
§
There is clear planning and coordination of method development.
Method development and testing in practice go hand in hand and are preferably
executed by institutes which are used to working on design issues with industry.
The toolbox available consists of at least the following elements:
G up-to-date databases and easy-to-use software tools for product analyses, which
are commonly accepted;
G manuals with schemes and procedures that help the implementation of eco-design
in companies;
G simplified tools (checklists, design rules, protocols) that are tailor-made with
regard to the environmental bottlenecks related to specific product groups and/or
industrial sectors, that can easily be applied by inexperienced (eco)designers,
firms with limited resources (SMEs), etc.
Apart from eco-design methods which are useful for functional innovations and in comanufacturer situations, this toolbox, available in the front-runner countries, can be
regarded as rather complete. However, so far the popularity of method development seems
4
IPTS 2000
not to have led to its practical use in companies. Particularly in the less advanced
countries, this may have to do with a lack of cooperation between method developers and
designers in industry.
5. To a large extent, dissemination of eco-design is strongly dependent on initiatives from
the government and financial support. There seems to be little coordination and
cooperation between several dissemination activities, both between and within countries.
Dissemination activities (e.g. workshops, pilot projects) only occasionally seem to lead to
structural application of eco-design. Best practice elements include a clear identification
of priority firms or sectors, planning of an overall dissemination strategy, performing
activities that lead to implementation rather than demonstration, active hands-on support
rather than financial support only, awareness campaigns, and easy information supply
(e.g. via Internet knots). Furthermore, dissemination is supported by a package of
measures that stimulate motivation (see point 3).
6. Eco-design education does not yet produce designers with an expertise in eco-design. It is
mainly an integrated part of design education and addresses basic eco-design knowledge.
However, many design schools do not yet include basic eco-design education in their
curriculum. A specialisation in specific environmental subjects is mostly not possible.
Eco-design is taught at universities rather than schools or academies. Current best
practice is that students at design academies obtain some knowledge of eco-design, but
technical engineers and management students do not, that there may be a chair in Ecodesign at a university, and that some commercial post-academic courses are offered. In
practice, the bulk of the education takes place through training on the job, learning via
networks, etc.
7. Concerning the relation between the extent to which actual environmental product design
is practised and the specific approach with regard to method development, dissemination,
and education, the confines of this study do not allow for quantitative and definite
statements. It seems obvious, however, that the countries which are the most developed
with regard to method development and dissemination, and are most active in providing
drivers, have the highest level of implementation of eco-design.
8. It has to be noted that eco-design is almost naturally practised by individual firms.
However, in several cases, functional (factor 4 or factor 10) innovations require rather
radical different production structures. Where firms like Shell, Philips or Toyota may still
be large and flexible enough to adapt — or even embark on functional innovations to
create competitive advantages — many firms may discover that functional innovations
mean the end of their current business. Hence, one may question the extent to which a
policy merely aimed at stimulating eco-design at individual firm level will lead to aboveincremental environmental product improvements.
From the above, it becomes clear that the most active parties developing and practising ecodesign are research institutes and universities. There is an important but small information
network in which a few eco-design specialists from universities and research institutes play
5
IPTS 2000
an important role. The emphasis is on methodological research and development. The
involvement of companies in these networks is rather small.
A policy aiming at improving the diffusion of eco-design practices could focus on the
following elements. For some of these elements, the EU can best instigate a stimulation
policy, where other elements clearly have to be organised at Member State level.
1. Set clear goals and plan support activities concerning eco-design. Identify priority
product groups and the industries where the main related design decisions take place.
Take into account both the demand side (i.e. willingness and needs) and supply side (i.e.
method development, dissemination, and education) of the eco-design diffusion process.
2. Create an EU network for eco-design, or support existing networks.
3. Ensure that a mix of communicative approaches and incentives is available that makes
clear to and reassures industry that investments in eco-design will have trade-offs. A
clear and credible overall environmental policy, based on goals related to the concept of
sustainable development, is an essential factor in this context. In addition, product-related
instruments such as eco-labels, public procurement policies, fiscal measures and productrelated performance agreements could be considered.
4. Focus tool/method development only on those elements that in the front-runner countries
are also still rather new. Examples include sector-specific tools for SMEs, tools and
approaches for environmental roadmapping (breakthrough concepts, functional
innovations, factor x improvements). Method development focused on system
optimisation, particularly in larger companies, is well developed in front-runner
countries/multinationals.
5. Stimulate tool transfer from front-runner countries to other EU Member States.
Translation, adaptation to the practical situation, and testing in practice with the target
group should be key elements in such activities.
6. Organise the practical dissemination activities at national or even local level. Focus
dissemination on priority SMEs, and let it be target-group specific. Ensure that hands-on
support is given, business organisations are involved, and that it is organised at regional
(or national) level. Implement support by a supplementary package of measures such as
Internet formation knots, eco-design awards, etc. The two elements could also be taken
up at EU level.
7. Ensure that students who follow a design education become acquainted with a basic level
of eco-design. Similarly, ensure that business and management students obtain a basic
level of insight into the strategic importance of environmental product policy for
business. These could be basic courses only. More extended knowledge can be obtained
by arranging dedicated courses; a market for such courses will automatically develop
once companies see the added value of eco-design and diffusion becomes more
widespread.
6
IPTS 2000
7
IPTS 2000
1
Introduction
The European Commission is working on the development of a coherent framework for an
integrated product policy (IPP). In this context, it is preparing a Green Paper on IPP, which is
due to be published in 2000. Special focus is likely to be given to further developing and
disseminating eco-design.
Eco-design refers to the systematic incorporation of environmental factors into product
design and development2. Eco-design is a rather new area. Consequently, the development,
dissemination and management of eco-design is in its early stages.
While eco-design objectives and strategies are prominent in environmental management and
policy discussions, they often appear to be vague and unclear, and there is little systematic
information on examples of best practice, concepts or models. In order to develop the
framework of an IPP with eco-design as one of its main elements, there is the need for
reliable information on the state of the art of eco-design in Europe today and on what it could
be if its potential were better developed.
This project aims to close this gap. It was based on a proposal developed by the Institute for
Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) and executed between August and December 1999
by a consortium of five institutes participating in the ESTO network. The tasks were divided
as follows:
•
•
operating agent (project management, conceptual framework, formatting, integration):
TNO (through its Institute for Strategy, Technology and Policy);
technical partner for country studies and input to conceptual framework: VITO
(Belgium), VDI (Germany), Centre for Sustainable Design at the Surrey Institute of Art
and Design (CfSD), University College (UK), and TNO subcontracting to its TU DelftTNO Eco-design Centre Kathalys (the Netherlands).
The project consisted of a number of parts. First, TNO has developed a structure for the
study. Second, the technical partners conducted the country studies. These country studies
including review tables have been combined in Part II of this study report3. Furthermore, the
CfSD performed an inquiry about the implementation of actual environmental design within
transnational companies, with the Fortune 500 companies as target group. The results of this
analysis are also included in Part II.
Based on this material, a comparative analysis was performed, and policy implications were
assessed. This work was again carried out by TNO. The other partners gave feedback during
2
3
While the term eco-design is commonly used in Europe, the concept is often called ‘design for environment’
(DfE) in the United States. In this report we will use only the term eco-design.
ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/sps00140.pdf
8
IPTS 2000
a meeting and made comments on the text4. The methodological approach, the comparative
analysis of the country studies and the policy implications are given in this part.
4
The meeting was also attended by Dr. Peter Eder (IPTS), who developed the project proposal, and Ir. Robert
Nuij (European Commission’s Environment DG), who is involved in preparing the EU’s Green Paper on IPP.
Their contributions during the meeting and comments during the study are greatly appreciated.
9
IPTS 2000
2
2.1
The context of the project
The relevance of a product-oriented environmental policy
There is a major difference between the natural metabolism and the current industrial
metabolism. The natural substance cycles of water, carbon, nitrogen, etc., are virtually closed:
the residues of one natural sub-cycle can be used in another natural sub-cycle. In the industrial
system, this is far from true. Closing industrial substance cycles is one of the main challenges in
order to make our current production system sustainable (Ayres and Simonis, 1994). A factor 4
or 10 reduction in environmental impacts per consumption unit is often seen as necessary to
compensate for the expected population and welfare growth (see, for example, Daly, 1992;
Weterings and Opschoor, 1992; von Weizsäcker et al., 1998).
It is obvious that such challenging goals cannot be reached by environmental improvements of
processes alone. There are physical limits to the energy and material efficiency that can be
reached when a product with a specific, fixed design is manufactured. In addition, in many
countries process emissions have diminished such that (often diffuse) emissions from the use
stage of products are now becoming dominant. By taking product functions as a starting point,
much larger degrees of freedom in and a more integrated view on the environmental
improvement process are available. Experience shows that where incremental improvements of
existing products may lead to some 25–50 % reduction in environmental pressure per
consumption unit, with redesign or functional innovation (where the same product function is
fulfilled in a totally new way) much higher factors are possible, though at, in general, larger
time horizons. This relation is reflected in Figure 2.1.
The above indicates the need for an environmental product policy for normative reasons (i.e. the
need to reach a factor x). Also, from a business perspective the need for such a policy is
obvious. It is increasingly accepted that a ‘triple bottom line’ of economic, environmental and
social factors forms the key elements that determine an industry’s competitive edge (see, for
example, Elkington, 1998; Stigson, 1998). Environmental demands in one way or another will
change the business environment — which can lead to both opportunities and threats for the
products and/or services an industry delivers. Obviously, those firms that are most adequately
able to foresee and to respond to such a changing business environment will end up with more
competitive advantages than firms which are caught by surprise by new developments or find
themselves back in a position where they cannot adapt quickly enough.
2.2
Integrated product policy at EU level
Given the above, various national governments in the EU have started to stimulate
environmental product policy. Such policies should be coherent in order to avoid barriers to
trade, which, apart from environmental reasons, form a further rationale that the EU should
also elaborate an active policy in the field.
10
IPTS 2000
Improvement of environmental efficiency
Figure 2.1: Levels of environmental product innovation (see, for example, RAND, 1997;
Weterings et al., 1997)
functional
innovation
system
redesign
factor 10
or more
system
optimization
factor 5
factor 2
5
10
20
Time horizon (years)
Against this background, the EU commissioned a study into the options and EU policy on IPP
(Ernst & Young and SPRU, 1998) and later organised a large workshop with stakeholders
from public authorities, industries, consumers and environmental organisations. The aim of
this workshop was to initiate a brainstorming discussion on the definition, objectives and
priorities for the development of IPP in the EU.
Both the Ernst & Young/SPRU study and the workshop results suggest that the following
elements could be relevant in a future EU policy (EU, 1998):
1. broad access to environmental information on products for all stakeholders (e.g. through
eco-labels, databases, independent product surveys);
2. a bigger and stable market for environmentally improved products, for example by
greening public procurement, the use of economic and fiscal regulatory instruments, etc.;
3. greening of product standards, implying further cooperation of the EU with the relevant
standardisation bodies;
4. pilot projects for selected product areas, with participation of all major stakeholders and
the use of all relevant regulatory tools;
5. environmental agreements, being a way to extend cooperation with industry in achieving
environmental targets;
6. a clear policy statement with mid- and long-term goals, based on the concept of
sustainable development.
The workshop report concluded that for a successful policy the following challenges have to
be overcome. IPP can only be a success if it relies on constructive cooperation between all
stakeholders. The relevance of IPP is still only recognised in a part of the EU. Furthermore,
11
IPTS 2000
any successful policy needs tools that can provide an overview of the relations between the
products of a company and their impacts. Finally, product policy has to find a delicate
balance between allowing market forces to help foster innovative product development in the
context of continuing economic growth, and taking targeted policy action to ensure that such
growth is sustainable in environmental terms.
2.3
The position of eco-design
Within companies, an environmental product policy has several relations with their ‘regular’
product policy and product portfolio management. In a very simplified manner, the product
development and innovation process can be described as follows. Decisions concerning
product development take place within the context of the general strategy and goals which a
firm pursues. Product ideas are generated, and for selected products actual design, production
planning and marketing planning takes place. On the basis of the result of these design and
planning activities, decisions about the actual design and production are made. This
description already indicates that environmental product design or eco-design does not
require a radically different approach to product development. Rather, it demands that
environmental aspects be taken into account in the various elements that influence design
decisions (Cramer et al. 1994).
In a strict sense, eco-design activities are often related to actual product design, a process
with a rather large operational component. Various tools and procedures can be used here.
Examples include manuals with environmental design rules and checklists with desirable/less
desirable materials/components, databases and software that enable a quick evaluation of the
environmental life-cycle performance5 of a specific design, books with examples, etc. Such
tools will, in any case, help to ensure that environmental aspects are taken into account in
actual design activities. Furthermore, where possible, the use of these tools should be
embedded in the procedures followed by a firm. However, in relation to the levels of
innovation reviewed in Figure 2.1, environmental aspects ideally are also taken into account
in the preceding stages of product development: idea generation and even the company’s
(product) strategy.
This requires additional tools and procedures (e.g. brainstorming techniques, scenario
analysis), and implies involvement of other actors in the firm than those normally involved in
product development. Particularly at the level of product strategy, environmental issues can
hardly be treated independently of other strategic issues, which implies that here those
normally involved in strategy development should also deal with environmental aspects as
well (Cramer, 1997; Cramer and Tukker, 1998). A truly comprehensive environmental
product policy implies that environmental aspects have an explicit place in the product
innovation policy at both the strategic and tactical levels in the firm at stake. Figure 2.2
reflects these levels and the related tools/approaches.
5
Or a life-cycle assessment (LCA).
12
IPTS 2000
Figure 2.2: The relation between product strategy, product development, production, and
tools for environmental improvements (adapted from Cramer et al., 1994)
Product innovation
Strategy formulation
Production/realisation
Product development
Idea generation
Development in strict sense
Planning
of
production
Goal and
strategy
formulation
Idea
generation
Policy
Product
idea
Planning
of sales
Typical tools used per phase
for environmental improvement
Strategy sessions
Scenario analysis
Backcasting
Stakeholder
involvement
Designing
the
product
Brainstorming techniques
Workshops
Environmental specifications
Production
plan
Product
design
Production
Distribution
and
sales
Use
Marketing
plan
Eco-design manuals
Environmental design rules
Book of examples
Short LCA; standard LCA data
Full LCA on example product
Cleaner production
Prevention manuals/projects
Good housekeeping rules
Ideally, all embeddedin a firm’s management procedures
2.4
Factors that determine the application of eco-design practices
As indicated in the introduction, eco-design is in its diffusion stage, and one of the main
goals of this project is to analyse how policy can act to support this diffusion process. We
opted to use a simple scheme to put the elements that determine the success of the diffusion
process into perspective. Simply stated, actual environmental product design will only take
place on a large scale if skills and knowledge are available (supply side), if firms are willing
and able to apply them, and if there are needs that make their application rewarding (demand
side). Figure 2.3 reflects this structure. In principle, the availability of knowledge (by
development of methods and tools, dissemination activities, and education), a proactive
stance by companies, and a business environment that rewards environmental product policy
(by consumer pressure, economic advantages, legal demands, etc.) will all contribute to the
diffusion of eco-design practices. Ultimately, one would like to see companies with selfspecifying capacity (i.e. which have a major influence on the design of a product) consider
the environment in their product design strategy.
13
IPTS 2000
Figure 2.3: Factors influencing the diffusion of eco-design practices
Needs(Factors influencing an environmental
sense of urgency)
•Stakeholder pressure
•Governmental policy
•Demands of clients
•Other
Willingness(Firm — internal
Skills and knowledge
:
factors)
•management commitment
Methodology development
•pro-activity
•management quality
•Other
Actual environmental
Dissemination
product design
Education
Area of influence of firms
14
IPTS 2000
15
IPTS 2000
3
Methodological approach
3.1
Introduction
In this study, we mainly focus on eco-design in a strict sense, though we will pay some
attention to the strategic aspects of environmental product development. Specific attention
will be paid to the following elements in Figure 2.3:
1. actual environmental product design;
2. research and development of methods and tools;
3. dissemination;
4. education.
In fact, we concentrate on the supply side of eco-design tools and knowledge (points 2 to 4),
and actual design (point 1). The reason for this is that the ‘state of the art’ can only be
assessed for these elements in Figure 2.3. However, during the research, insight was obtained
into the demand side: the drivers for firms to apply eco-design in practice. Hence, these
elements will also be discussed in this report, though the analysis could not be structured in
the same way as for the other elements. Below, we will discuss in more detail how the state
of the art with regard to the four main elements of the study was determined.
3.2
Analytical approach
3.2.1
Introduction
For each EU Member State, and each of the elements discussed in the former section, a
quality assessment was performed. For this, we applied the tool of maturity profiles. A
maturity profile basically consists of a small number of indicators (five to seven at most)
indicators that are important to measure the quality of the element (education, dissemination,
etc.) at stake. The level of quality can be expressed at five levels:
•
•
•
•
•
ignorance;
consciousness;
comprehension;
competence;
excellence.
The indicators and quality levels form a matrix. Each cell of the matrix is filled with
statements that, in words, correspond with the situation that should be reached at that specific
level of quality. Hence, a maturity matrix is an accessible A4 sheet of paper that allows an
expert or an individual in a specific company or institute to ‘score’ the quality level of the
methodology development, dissemination policy, educational structure and actual application
related to environmental product design. Below, we will discuss the main quality criteria with
regard to methodology development, dissemination, education and actual environmental
design. The quality indicators for each issue are summarised in Table 3.1.
16
IPTS 2000
3.2.2
Indicators for quality
With regard to actual environmental design, on the level of individual companies the
following elements were seen as important. First, experience and awareness in general was
seen as an important quality indicator. Second, management commitment was seen as crucial
for sound, successful implementation of eco-design. Third, the quality of environmental
knowledge and the extent of data collection are also important indicators of quality.
Furthermore, the way of organising and the level of responsibility with regard to
environmental matters in the product development team are important. The same applies to
the extent to which eco-design is embedded in procedures and structures in the firm. Finally,
the level of innovation with regard to eco-design was seen as important.
With regard to methodology development, the following elements have been chosen as
quality indicators. First, an analysis was carried out to determine if methodology
development took place within a coherent, national support structure, or if a national policy
was virtually absent (implying a bottom-up process of methodology development). Second,
the quality and competence of methodology development were seen as an important issue.
Third, the applicability and usability of methods were taken into account. Fourth, the
continuity of method development was seen as important. Finally, the variety of method
development (with regard to the stages in the design process, and the different target groups)
was taken into account. A country with a well-structured system of high-quality, continuous
and diverse methodology development, that also would cover environmental product
innovation at strategic level, was regarded as ‘excellent’.
Concerning dissemination, again it was felt important that a coherent, national dissemination
policy should be in place. Furthermore, the extent to which industry representative
organisations were active in dissemination, pilot and demonstration projects were available,
and other networks and publication structures were in place were seen as important elements
of a mature dissemination system.
With regard to education, on the level of individual educational institutes, elements of
maturity were considered such as management commitment to eco-design, knowledge, the
applicability in practice of the skills and education offered, and the extent to which the
programme is focused on eco-design.
As indicated, the situation with regard to education and actual environmental design was
evaluated initially on the level of individual institutes and firms. On this basis, a more
aggregated evaluation valid for the whole country was made, mainly using indicators such as
the percentage of self-specifying firms and the percentage of design schools achieving a
certain quality level.
3.3
Research approach and limitations
For each EU country, the responsible researcher for that country asked two or three experts in
the field of eco-design to give an initial review with regard to the quality of each of the four
issues investigated. In general, they were sent the maturity profiles attached as annex to this
17
IPTS 2000
report, and asked to indicate which maturity level in their view was representative of the
country investigated. After that, the research team responsible for a specific country
performed an inventory of the actual activities in that country on each of the four issues. On
the basis of this information, the researchers worked out an own judgment of the maturity
level per issue. Obviously, sometimes the judgments of each of the experts and/or the
researchers deviated. In such cases, a short bilateral discussion between the researchers and
expert usually took place to find out the reason behind the deviating assessment. Finally, the
researchers decided on the basis of all this input which maturity level they saw as most
appropriate. Hence, the maturity assessment reflects a kind of common accepted expert
judgment between a group of about four to five people with good insight into the state of the
art of eco-design in a specific EU Member State.
Although the researchers had been explicitly asked to try to obtain quantitative data where
possible (e.g. about the number of firms practising eco-design, the percentage of students at
design schools receiving eco-design education), it appeared that such data, in general, were
not easily accessible or available. Given the boundary conditions of this part of the project (a
time budget limited to seven or eight days per country and a research deadline of some two
and a half months), it was not possible for the researchers to elaborate such quantitative data
themselves. As a consequence, they had no option but to adopt a mainly qualitative approach.
After that, using the results of the country studies, Part I containing a cross-country analysis
was written. Also this part of the project had clear limitations: a time budget of some 10 days,
to be spent in a time frame of about one month. Ideally, one would like to see analyses that
show clear relations between the amount and type of activities in the fields of method
development, dissemination and education, on the one hand, and the extent of successful
implementation of actual design, on the other hand. But given the absence of quantitative
data in the country studies in the first place, and severe constraints in terms of time input and
quick deadlines in the second place, the project team regarded such types of results as
unrealistic. This study primarily has to be regarded as a four-month quick scan of the state of
the art of eco-design in Europe. The comparative analysis is constrained to the identification
of these state-of-the-art elements, and a very limited, qualitative analysis of failure and
success factors. We feel that achieving higher ambitions simply needs a study set up on a
fundamentally different footing to this one.
In the next chapters, we will give an overall analysis of the detailed and extensive inventory
and findings from the country studies. Chapter 4 summarises the country studies; reading this
chapter is not essential to follow the full line of the report. Chapter 5 concentrates on the
cross-country analysis. Chapter 6 ends with the conclusions and policy implications of this
study.
18
Table 3.1: Main indicators for the quality assessment of each issue
Main indicators
Actual design
Experience and awareness
Main indicator
National policy
Main
indicator
Dissemination
National
dissemination
policy
Support for methodology development
Management commitment
Competence of methodology development
The eco-design knowledge level in R & D
activities and method development
Environmental
knowledge
and data collection
Applicability and usability of methods
The extent to which methods are fit for
practical application
Organisation
and
responsibility in the product
development team
Level of implementation and
embedding in systems
Level of innovation
Continuity of development of methods
The extent to which methods fit with existing
knowledge and policies
Variety of methodology development
Depth and variety of the content of methods
being developed
Target groups
Groups and organisations for which methods
and tools are developed
The extent to which the
national
government
is
stimulating the adoption of
eco-design
Industry
dissemination
policy
The extent to which bodies of
industrial companies and
branch
organisations
stimulate the adoption of ecodesign
Pilot and demonstration
projects
The extent to which pilot and
demonstration projects in the
field of eco-design are
ongoing/have been executed
Networks,
relations,
publications
Existing formal and informal
groups for the exchange of
eco-design-related
knowledge
and
public
availability of eco-designrelated information
Main indicator
Education
Management commitment
Commitment of management to
make eco-design part of the
curriculum
Knowledge
The
availability
and
management of knowledge
within the institute
Applicability in practice
The extent to which the
education is adjusted to the
needs of business
Focus of education
The main focus of
education programme
the
IPTS 2000
4
Summary of the country studies
4.1
4.1.1
Belgium
General
In the Flemish Region of Belgium, eco-design became a topic of interest as a result of the
Flemish environmental policy plan 1997–2000 (Mina-plan 2). Within the framework of this
policy plan, the Flemish Government, together with research institutes, educational institutes
and industry, initiated eco-design activities and projects. For industries, particularly the larger
ones, eco-design was also a logical continuation of LCA studies and, in general, of evolving
from a process-integrated approach to a product-integrated approach.
There is a rather big gap between the research institutes that developed methods for ecodesign and the industry where eco-design is not yet widely spread or applied. To improve this
situation, a lot of attention has to be given to the dissemination of eco-design amongst
companies (especially SMEs, but also larger companies) and to the sensitisation of
companies (and customers) to eco-design.
4.1.2
Status
Regarding methodology development, for the Flemish Region the general level of maturity
has reached the level of comprehension. The other regions (Wallonia and Brussels) are
lagging behind. Many of the methods are based on developments in other countries and are
further elaborated for the Belgian situation.
The dissemination of eco-design is restricted to the execution of some pilot projects and some
presentations on eco-design in seminars and workshops. In order to increase the
dissemination activities and to coordinate these activities, a reference centre for eco-design
will be set up during the course of the year 2000.
So far, the eco-design education has been strictly limited to an initial introduction to ecodesign in engineering courses or product development courses. No practical experience has
been offered to the students.
Despite the large difference in actual environmental product development between large
companies and SMEs, it can be stated that the majority of companies are not working on ecodesign projects. The fact is that more than 50 % of all companies in Belgium do not know
what eco-design implies.
20
IPTS 2000
4.2
4.2.1
Denmark
General
Denmark is one of the first countries in the world to use the term eco-design, and to do
research and projects in this field. The country has a strong reputation for industrial design.
O2, the worldwide association and network for industrial designers concerned with the
environment, originates in Copenhagen. The government and the Danish Environmental
Protection Agency have been active in the development and stimulation of eco-design and
LCA methods.
Despite the influence of Miljöstyrelsen and the participation of companies in most of the
methodology research projects, the general feeling is that Danish companies still have to
adopt eco-design on a large scale. The level of competence amongst the front-runner
companies is still growing, creating an ever-wider gap between them and the majority of
small companies.
4.2.2
Status
Methodology development: Denmark has a long background in LCA development and
application in product development. Danish researchers cover a wide range of eco-design
related issues in their work. The main player is the Danish University of Technology (DTI).
The EDIP (‘Environmental design of industrial products’) project started in 1991 with the
goal of developing methods for including environmental aspects in the product development
phase, in close collaboration between the Danish EPA, the Technical University of Denmark
(Institute for Product Development and Department of Technology and Social Sciences),
Confederation of Danish Industries and five leading companies. As a follow-up the
evaluation, methods applicable to eco-design are developed further.
Miljöstyrelsen, the Danish EPA, is a strong party in dissemination of developments. It acts as
a focal point for information (data, legislation) and actively targets groups in society. Since
1996, it has had a policy regarding products and the environment and currently focuses on
textiles, electronics and freight transport as pilot areas. An action plan covering a five-year
period outlines a number of initiatives for integrated product policy, development of
pragmatic tools, information systems for consumers (eco-labels), green procurement and
launching a financial programme for which individual companies can also apply. The EDIP
project was the first dissemination project, combined with method development. Important
Danish industries such as Lego, GRAM, Danfoss, and Bang & Olufsen were involved in the
project. Furthermore, green public procurement is used as a tool for eco-design
dissemination.
Education: Environment is mentioned in almost all the curricula of Danish universities and
schools but teaching concerning eco-design seems to be concentrated at the DTI, which offers
a number of courses for those who want to study product development and eco-design.
Courses for professionals are available from universities and commercial consultants.
21
IPTS 2000
Concerning actual environmental product development, Denmark has a number of large
companies with experience in eco-design and it is mainly larger and medium-sized companies
that have adopted eco-design at an early stage: Lego, Danfoss, GRAM, Bang & Olufsen,
Grundfos, among others. There is little information on the smaller companies, but it seems
they are applying eco-design to a considerably lesser extent.
4.3
4.3.1
Germany
General
Germany is a highly industrialised country; most enterprises are medium-sized. Eco-design
became popular in the 1990s and is based on a more-than-20-year tradition of ‘classic’
environmental protection. Avant-gardists like Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker and Friedrich
Schmidt-Bleek pushed this development strongly. Recently, with the adoption of the
Kreislaufwirtschafts- und Abfallgesetz (Eco-cycle and Waste Law), legal demands have been
made on industry to apply approaches for integrated environmental protection. Eco-design is
now stimulated by many actors: research institutes, authorities, and (particularly larger)
companies, the latter often developing their own approaches. Interestingly, several nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) such as Greenpeace and BUND work together with
companies on eco-efficient products. However, there are only a very few consultancies which
are really specialised in eco-design..
4.3.2
Status
Methodology development: Germany has reached an advanced level in developing methods
for eco-design for different target groups. In practice, however, most of the companies do not
use these methods enough. There is still a lack of very simple and pragmatic tools that are
useable, particularly for SMEs. Main topics are: product analysis and benchmarking, design
for material and energy efficiency, design for end of life, design for avoidance of toxics and
waste, life-cycle thinking.
Dissemination: Although national and industrial dissemination policies as well as pilot and
demonstration projects are on a ‘comprehensive’ to ‘competent’ level, the situation of ecodesign networks in Germany has to be ranked as ‘conscious’ only. There are several different
activities, but Germany seems to be too big to have one coordinator or one network to get
them all together (keywords: communication problems, information demand).
Education: Although some of the design schools have integrated ecology into their
curriculum, there is no specialised university or school programme on eco-design, and there
are very few teachers who are eco-design experts. Students who want to learn more about
eco-design still have big problems in finding a good place to learn. A multidisciplinary
approach to eco-design at universities is very rare and in the classic education of designers
there is a lack of knowledge about ecological and economic coherences.
Actual product design: Quite a few companies practice eco-design, but mainly on the level of
minor improvements of existing products and technologies (eco-redesign). For most
companies, however, activities are limited to selecting environmentally friendly raw and
22
IPTS 2000
auxiliary materials. There is a lack of eco-innovation and ecosystems and eco-service design.
Most of the companies are aware that they have environmental responsibilities but, if there
are no external drivers such as customer awareness, regulations, competitors setting ecodesign standards, or internal drivers such as a strong person in the company who starts ecodesign activities, nothing happens.
4.4
Greece
There appears to be no active actors in the promotion of eco-design in Greece and no
activities regarding any of the four building blocks: methodology, dissemination, education
and product development.
There were two minor activities identified in Greece with a more indirect relation to ecodesign. One of them is the building of a database of more environmentally friendly products
and materials in the construction and building sector by the Greek Cleaner Production Centre,
‘Fivi Ltd’, and which the Ministry of Public Works sponsors. The other eco-design-related
activity was the establishment of an LCA network (Hellenic life-cycle assessment network —
Helcanet in February 1998) by the Laboratory of Heat Transfer and Environmental
Engineering of the Aristotle University Thessaloniki (AUT). There are some LCA studies
which have either beencompleted or are ongoing at the AUT (e.g. energy production, paper,
brick production). However, the studies appear to be completed as academic studies without
using the study results in industry.
The findings are consistent with the fact that environmental management as such is just
starting to develop in Greece. For instance, there are no reported ISO 14000 certifications for
Greece at the INEM (International Network of Environmental Managers) website
(www.inem.org) which holds information about majority of the ISO 14000 certifications in
countries worldwide and there is one EMAS certification reported. The Ernst & Young and
SPRU (Science Policy Research Unit) report on integrated product policy supports this, as it
indicated that there was no activity regarding environmental product policy in Greece (Ernst
& Young and SPRU, 1998).
4.5
4.5.1
Spain
General
Spain has a regional government structure comprising 17 regional governments, which are
responsible for the implementation of environmental policies. Three of these governments
have strong influence over their region (Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia), but
others are more dependent on central government. This regional structure poses difficulties in
encouraging information exchange between regional universities. While, in general, ecodesign is a new subject in Spain, Catalonia and the Basque Country are the two regions where
most of the eco-design activity takes place. The activities in each of the four fields (i.e.
education, methodology, dissemination and product development) appear to be strongly
influenced by the environment created through regional governments and by their
environmental policies and support. In a supportive environment, business becomes active in
23
IPTS 2000
eco-design. Catalonia has its own eco-labelling scheme and is administrating the EU ecolabelling scheme. It also has a green governmental purchasing policy and is funding some
research and development projects. The Basque Country appears to be less active but has also
initiated some pilot projects on eco-design.
4.5.2
Status
There is no special support for eco-design methodological development at national level.
Regional policy initiatives are, however, emerging in Catalonia (e.g. supporting UAB
Barcelona — Elisava Design College Research Group on Eco-design) and in the Basque
Country (e.g. discussion on developing a manual). This has led to some methodological work,
first primarily with a focus on LCA and now with a gradual shift towards eco-design. For
example, one of the major LCA consultancy companies is now developing software for ecodesign and there is a recently published book in Spanish on eco-design. The establishment of
a joint partnership on eco-design research between a design college and a department of
environmental studies of the university (which previously carried out several LCA studies) is
likely to create some new developments in the future.
The level of dissemination activities is determined by the different attitudes of the regional
governments. Again Catalonia and the Basque Country are quite active and have initiated
some pilot projects involving a number of industrial sectors, while the national Spanish
Government does not appear to have initiated substantial dissemination activities. Catalonia
is active in developing its own product policy (e.g. eco-labelling, greener public purchasing,
funding R & D support). Two Spanish environmental foundations have initiated a number of
conferences related to environmental product policy. Institutions in the more advanced
regions appear to have established good cooperation in their own regions and internationally,
but are unaware of activities in other Spanish regions. Furthermore, it seems that for broader
dissemination activities a lack of expertise is greater a barrier than a lack of funding
possibilities.
Education: There are not many universities involved with eco-design teaching. It appears that
only two universities — UAB Barcelona and University Pompeu Fabra (Elisava Design
College) — are integrating eco-design into their curricula. There seems to be a greater uptake
of LCA research than eco-design research.
Actual environmental product development: Some companies are responding to the
Catalonian environmental product policy and are actively carrying out eco-design in that
region, which is the most important industrial area in Spain. It is noteworthy that the
companies interviewed were green product developers, although they had not received any
special eco-design training. Awareness in these companies about other eco-design activities
within and outside their manufacturing sector in Spain was absent. Companies agreed that
eco-design is a new subject in Spain and that there is a need for more active dissemination of
eco-design in industry.
24
IPTS 2000
4.6
4.6.1
France
General
In France, the development of environmentally-friendly products, and the simultaneous
implementation of eco-design, are among other things, stimulated by means of the biennial
award ‘Ecoproduit’. This award has been granted since 1987 and is organised by the
Assemblée des chambres françaises de commerce et d'industrie (ACFCI). Another action
regarding environmentally-friendly products is the assigning of an eco-label to products.For a
number of years, the Association française de normalisation (AFNOR) has been the official
French organisation for the eco-labelling of products.
Because the French Ministry of the Environment aims to widely diffuse eco-design among
industry, a strong relationship was established between the Ministry of the Environment and
the French Agency of the Environment (ADEME). This has led to a number of initiatives
such as the EIME-tool, the EDIT-tool, the project ‘Eco-conception’ and the brochure Ninety
examples of eco-design.
While a lot of experience exists in France regarding methods and tools, the actual
implementation in companies is lagging behind. Efforts should be made to improve the
transfer of knowledge to industry.
4.6.2
Status
In France, few organisations have experience with eco-design, but those that do are very well
known and have a high level of competence. It is remarkable that no or few methodologies
are adopted from other countries. The research institutes and consultants develop their own
methods, which are used by industry.
In the past few years, too little attention has been paid to the dissemination of eco-design
among industry in France. At present, this has been recognised and several initiatives have
been undertaken such as the brochure Ninety examples of eco-design, training sessions and
the ADEME project ‘Eco-conception’.
Education: Only a few institutes or academies offer specialised courses on eco-design, but
these courses are very intensive and look at all aspects of eco-design.
In general, the number of companies in France that are applying eco-design or that have
cooperated in an eco-design project is rather limited. Particularly small companies are not yet
interested in eco-design. In some industrial sectors, however, coordinated actions are taken
regarding eco-design, for example in the electrical and electronics sector.
4.7
Ireland
Eco-design is a new subject in Ireland. It has not yet been identified as a priority by the
authorities. The driving force seems to be mainly ‘business-to-business’ pressures (e.g.
25
IPTS 2000
supply chain), followed by some legislative pressures (e.g. the proposed directive on Waste
Electrical and Electronical Equipment).
In this context, it is not surprising that there is almost no methodological development in
Ireland. The only tools’ development activity that was identified is eco-design training course
materials for electrical/electronic engineers designed by the Cork Cleaner Technology
Centre. The only significant eco-design dissemination activity is a pilot demonstration project
‘Environmentally superior products scheme’ initiated and organised by Enterprise Ireland (an
Irish business association). The scheme provides financial support to a selected number of
indigenous Irish manufacturing SMEs (approximately 10–15). Eco-design education has not
been identified. Probably mainly driven by the upcoming draft WEEE directive, actual
environmental product design was reported to be carried out primarily in electronics
multinationals (except for a small number of indigenous Irish manufacturers, for example
Semiconductor Ireland).
4.8
4.8.1
Italy
General
The Italian industrial system is characterised by the very significant role of SMEs (over 99 %
of all companies) and of the role of ‘industrial districts’. Famous fashion, consumer product
and industry designers come from Italy. Despite this important position of design, only very
few eco-design activities take place. In the last few years, some universities, associations, and
research centres have taken up the life-cycle idea and issues of environmentally friendly
product design.
However, development of methods, education and dissemination are limited to a few very
involved persons and institutes in Italy. Life-cycle assessment seems to be the main topic in
Italian eco-design activities. The actual development of eco-products is rare or not very
obvious, especially when compared with regular product design. In order to intensify the
dissemination of eco-design, further networks, programmes or mutual projects have to be
established. This could be supported by government funding of research and dissemination,
which currently does not exist.
4.8.2
Status
Methodology development: All indicators are on the ‘comprehension’ level except the
national policy as there is no governmental support for methodology development at present.
At least some universities and consultancies are actively involved in the development of
methods for life-cycle tools and design for the environment. Methodology development is a
relatively new activity for these institutions (less than five years). Some initial variation with
regard to target groups can be seen. LCA, disassembling and recycling are some of the main
topics in the eco-design methods used.
Dissemination: There is no government programme especially dedicated to the financial
support of eco-design but only to some cleaner production aspects like emission reduction.
Several industrial pilot projects and networks can be regarded as ‘comprehensive’. In Turin,
26
IPTS 2000
several rather new activities for the dissemination of eco-design have been established: a
special website, a European network, the environment park and special training courses for
designers or professionals from SMEs. The Italian Society on LCA disseminates life-cycle
assessment methodologies. Eco-design is also disseminated and offered by consultancies
where there is an actual demand for product improvements. The market (and not government
programmes) seems to be the driving force here.
Education: Only three Italian universities include eco-design in their education programmes,
so the status has been judged as ‘conscious’ on the country level. There are a few education
programmes for eco-design where it is possible to attain a Master’s degree as ‘eco-designer’
or ‘eco-compatibility expert’, but they are few.
Actual product design: There is not enough information to assess the maturity of eco-product
development of firms in Italy. About 200 enterprises have an ISO 14001 certification
(EMAS, eco-audit). Actual environmental product design is probably performed by a much
smaller number of firms. Compared with the widespread activities in classic product design,
environmental concerns seem to have a low impact on actual product development in Italy.
4.9
Luxembourg
In general, in Luxembourg no or very little research on eco-design is yet being carried out.
This implies that little information is available concerning eco-design, as all concepts of
integrated environmental protection are relatively new in this country.
Because the level of eco-design activities in Luxembourg can be defined as ‘ignorant’, no
extensive summary is included in this part. However, at present, activities in the field of
integrated environmental protection are expanding.
4.10 The Netherlands
4.10.1 General
The Netherlands is internationally at the forefront of eco-design development. The country
combines a high level of product development knowledge (and practice) with quite a strong
environmental profile. Dutch designers and researchers have access to every kind of method
and tool. Basic tools have been tested or developed in practice and have proved effective.
Many companies become acquainted with eco-design methods and tools either through
demonstration projects, internal test projects or student work.
The Dutch Government has given a lot of attention to the role of products and consumption
in its environmental and economic policies. In 1989, the national environmental policy plan
(Plus) 1990–94 (NMP+) was published, and included a number of actions related to product
improvement. In environmental product policy-making, there has been a lot of cooperation
between the Ministries of Environmental Affairs and Economic Affairs, leading to an
enhanced acceptance by Dutch companies. An immediate consequence of the NMP+ was the
memorandum ‘Product and environment’ (‘Nota Produkt en Milieu’) in 1993 of the Ministry
of Environmental Affairs. The main objective of the product policy is to reach a situation
27
IPTS 2000
where producers, retailers and consumers strive for a reduction in waste and emissions in the
chain of products.
4.10.2 Status
Dutch universities, research institutes and consultancies have all been very active in the
development of methodologies, approaches and tools for environmentally oriented product
development, from approximately 1991. Some major players in the Netherlands are: the
Centre for Environmental Sciences of Leiden University (CML), IVAM, TNO Industrie and
TNO MEP, Delft University of Technology, Pré Consultants, Bureau B & G, Philips and
NedCar.
Methodology development for ‘classic’ product-related eco-design has reached a state of
maturity in the Netherlands. The front-runners are now aiming at what is seen as the next step
after product optimisation: system or function improvement. This so-called process of
sustainable product innovation requires a renewed amount of methodology research into the
integration of ecological values into product and service innovation. Kathalys, Nido and
several other initiatives are now working on these themes.
In the Netherlands, many activities concerning dissemination are initiated. The main target
group for dissemination activities is small and medium-sized enterprises. Both the eco-design
project (1990–94 by TNO Industrie and TU Delft, cooperating with some 10 other design
offices and environmental experts) and the ‘Milion’ programme (1990–93 by the European
Design Centre with more than five partners) aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of ecodesign in industry, and generating examples of successful and ecologically sound products.
They introduced the term ‘eco-design’ and related terms to Dutch companies. The Dutch
innovation centres (now called ‘Syntens’) started a unique scheme on dissemination of ecodesign to SMEs, which was paid for by the Ministry of Economic Affairs. In a three-year
programme more than 650 companies received an ‘ecoscan’ in which one of their products
was scrutinised for environmental improvement, thus changing the product and also teaching
the approach to the company. The eco-design project targets, in particular, those SMEs that
largely define the specifications of their own products. These are the companies that have the
most scope to (re)design their products. The Eco-design consultants therefore concentrated
on the 4 500 companies that were self-specifying (Böttcher and Hartman, 1999).
The Dutch Government, either directly or indirectly through organisations such as Novem,
the Rathenau institute (then Nota) and Syntens (then InnovatieCentra), has had a strong
influence on dissemination of methods and experiences. In policy documents and in actual
support programmes or financial structures, it has influenced dissemination. The Dutch
Government has established various subsidy schemes to encourage the use and
implementation of eco-design in companies. Feasibility studies were supported, and credit
facilities were granted to promising, but risky, innovations. Recently, the Dutch Government
has started promoting sustainable technology development and sustainable product
innovation in a large subsidised programme called EET, aiming at innovations in economic,
ecological and technological development, and linking companies to knowledge institutes.
28
IPTS 2000
In an attempt to combine environmentally oriented product development with environmental
care systems, the Dutch Ministry of Environmental Affairs has developed the concept of
POEM (product-oriented environmental care). It is now promoted through campaigns and has
been provided with financial support.
Education: Most universities, schools and academies pay at least some attention to
environmentally conscious product development (all with their own focus).
The Delft University of Technology is the only university with a department specialising in
design for sustainability and which has an obligatory second year course on sustainable
product development in its curriculum. Approximately 15 % of the students do their
graduation project at the DfS department. There are two distinguished research programmes
at the DUT, ‘Eco-design methodology and implementation’ and ‘Eco-efficient services and
systems’.
Aspects of eco-design and product development are taught in several environmental material
science departments.
Design academies pay only little attention to eco-design in the curriculum; some students’
graduation projects take sustainability as a challenge for new product designs.
Both Delft University (Top Tech) and commercial institutes have offered courses in ecodesign for product development professionals, partly in the form of seminars or conferences,
and also in large courses. The interest for eco-design in that field now has mainly
disappeared.
Actual environmental product development: It is hard to overlook the actual eco-design work
carried out inside small and medium-sized companies, or design companies. Judging, for
example, submissions to goed industrieel ontwerp (good industrial design) and other design
quality trade marks, a lot of companies take at least a minimal environmental quality into
account and have a fair overview of the important themes and issues. Eco-design aspects are
put on the specification for a new design project, but very rarely are the direct reason for the
project. It can be said that some SMEs know what eco-design is but do not have the drive to
really promote it in their projects.
Larger Dutch companies involved in (consumer) products apply eco-design procedures in
their product development. Océ, Philips, NedCar (Volvo), Holec, DAF Trucks, Atag and
many others have developed or adopted their own procedures, manuals, sometimes databases,
tools and checklists. Many other large companies have done at least some test projects inside
their company. Philips should be mentioned separately for its extensive database, method and
tool development and demonstration projects; although not very openly, Philips plays a very
large role in Dutch eco-design developments.
29
IPTS 2000
4.11 Austria
4.11.1 General
Austria is one of the most active countries within the EU in terms of eco-design. Eco. This
started in the early 1990s when Austria was first involved in the European Prepare
programme. There is an advanced governmental and non-governmental support system for
enterprises. Since the beginning of the 1990s, sophisticated networks have provided
information on all eco-design-relevant issues (e.g. an information knot in the Internet). SMEs
profit from a good information policy and from special support programmes.
Eco-design has been recognised as a sustainable marketing strategy. An eco-design
competition prize is used by enterprises as an incentive in marketing and advertising
activities. Although there are support programmes and tools, educated people are still
required to implement all the knowledge in actual product design.
4.11.2 Status
Methodology development: There is a variety of recognised institutes that are actively
developing different eco-design methods for different target groups. Methods are
continuously evaluated and improved. Several formal and informal networks of actors are
involved in the transfer of eco-design knowledge and new methods and the government is
also actively involved in these activities. There are several simple and pragmatic tools which
are particularly suitable for SMEs.
Dissemination: The situation on the dissemination of eco-design in Austria is competent. For
several years, government programmes stimulated eco-innovations, implementation of ecodesign and environmental product care. Sophisticated networks provide information on all
eco-design-relevant issues (information knot). SMEs, especially, profit from this information
policy and from special support programmes. The business support institution, WIFI
Österreich, plays an excellent role in disseminating eco-design to enterprises. Eco-design has
even been recognised as a sustainable marketing strategy. Competitions for eco-design are
perceived as a strategic instrument for participating enterprises.
Education: The overall situation of eco-design education in Austria is good. Students have
the possibility to choose either supplementary courses at some universities or even longlasting special eco-design programmes. Since only three Austrian universities are known to
actively include eco-design in their education, the ‘competent’ situation of individual
programmes decreases to ‘conscious’ on the country level.
Actual product design: Quite a number of companies have implemented eco-design aspects
into their actual product development, but if the fields of method development, education and
also dissemination are taken into consideration, they could even be more.
30
IPTS 2000
4.12 Portugal
4.12.1 General
Eco-design is a new subject in Portugal and, in general, there is not much activity in relation
to environmental considerations and product development in the country. The activities of all
four fields of the study are mainly limited to the National Institute for Engineering and
Industrial Technology (INETI), which is the key knowledge and competence holder on ecodesign and related issues in Portugal.
National environmental policy does not pay a lot of attention to products and environment
and there is not much financial support from the national government. European support has
played an especially important role in the existing activities.
4.12.2 Status
Concerning methodological and tools development, INETI’s strategy is to adapt material
from overseas and also to develop its own tools targeted at the needs of Portuguese
companies. For example, INETI has developed a manual on eco-design in Portuguese.
Dissemination: INETI also publishes articles on eco-design mainly to raise awareness and
provide input into strategic thinking in Portugal. INETI has established itself as the
environmental management multiplier in Portugal, but it has an insufficient number of people
to actively disseminate eco-design projects and information. Furthermore, national
networking is faced with considerably more difficulties than international contacts, in which
INETI is very well integrated.
Education: There appears to be a growing demand from industry for know-how, but
education and research institutions are not able to fulfil this demand. Apart from some ‘oneoff’ lectures in universities, there are no substantial eco-design elements in university/design
school programmes. An interesting finding is that design itself is a relatively new discipline
in Portugal.
Actual environmental product development: This is mainly linked to the dissemination
activities of INETI and the authors have not identified any other substantial eco-design
practices in companies.
4.13 Finland
4.13.1 General
In Finland, a very small group of large and often multinational companies contribute almost
half the economic turnover of the country. Finnish design is known worldwide, mainly for
ceramics, glass, architecture and textile. Product development as such is not a well-known
concept. Eco-design has been adopted only recently and is not yet widespread. It can be
found in several universities, in the larger companies (Nokia, Stora Enso, ABB, Fujitsu) and
in building industry projects. Two large issues are ecological aspects in building industry and
in electronics industry. Finland takes part in projects by the Nordic Council of Ministers.
31
IPTS 2000
4.13.2 Status
Finnish (technical) universities (e.g. of Helsinki and Tampere) and research institutes (e.g.
VTT and HKKK) have been quite active in development of methods and tools for their own
country and industries. The Federation of Finnish Electrical and Electronics Industry (SET)
initiated a project on the environment and electronics. It has resulted in a handbook for ecodesign in the electronics industry, which can also be used in other sectors. Method
development is also part of a large programme called ‘Environmental technology in
construction’, financed by the national organisation for technology and innovation (Tekes)
and others. Generally, there seems to be good cooperation with industry, resulting in a
number of projects.
Dissemination: Government policies on the environment are not explicitly focused on
product development as a separate activity and so there is no policy directly regarding the
dissemination of eco-design, but there are interest and activities around product-oriented
environmental policy. Despite the absence of a large-scale dissemination plan at present (with
the exception of the building sector), companies are actively involved in eco-design tool and
method development and probably apply them in design.
Education: Eco-design is not integrated heavily into curricula in Finland; courses tend to be
offered on a voluntary or occasional basis. There are several reasons for this. First, the
concept is not yet totally clear, second, product development education is mainly a side-step
in mechanical engineering or linked to arts and crafts industrial design and, third, students in
Finland have a lot of freedom in choosing their own programme, so basically most subjects
are voluntary. There is therefore no clear framework for eco-design education. Education in
eco-design-related subjects does not seem to have a strong basis in companies’ requirements
or government policy.
Actual environmental product development: Eco-design is daily practice in the larger Finnish
companies; they are ‘comprehensive’ or sometimes ‘competent’ in that. They represent a
large part of Finnish economic production. Most smaller companies, however, qualify as
‘ignorant’ or at best ‘conscious’. They apply eco-design if asked by their clients, be it other
companies or government buyers.
4.14 Sweden
4.14.1 General
Sweden has a particular profile of industrial companies. On the one hand, it houses some very
large multinationals of Swedish origin, such as Electrolux, Volvo, SKF, SCA, Tetra Pack and
Ericsson, and, on the other hand, has an enormous amount of small companies with under 25
employees. The middle section is very small. This has an impact on the way eco-design, and
other knowledge, is spread throughout the country. In general, the larger companies are
capable of developing tools, data, and methods and have in-house test projects, while for the
small enterprises the situation is considerably more difficult.
32
IPTS 2000
While Sweden is very active in the field of eco-design and related developments, a coherent
policy and overview are lacking. This leads both to some overlapping work and to gaps in
information supply. The situation is similar for environmental research and development
budgets, which can now be obtained from a large number of places, without coordination.
A major pull for Swedish companies comes from institutional buyers (government,
communities, and schools) which have strong environmental demands on their suppliers.
Dissemination approaches could be diversified in order to rely less exclusively on conveying
handbooks and methods.
4.14.2 Status
Apart from industry, methodology development takes place in a large number of institutes
and universities. The most important players are Chalmers University of Technology in
Göteborg, KTH in Stockholm, the Institut for VerkstadsForskning in Göteborg and
Linköping, and IVL Svenska Miljö Institut in Stockholm. Nutek is the sponsor of some 10
method- and tool-oriented research projects within several Swedish institutes and
universities, all under the umbrella of ‘Environmentally oriented product development in
SME companies’. In actual practice, easy tools such as Eco-it and Ecoscan, along with
Simapro, are used quite commonly. The Dutch Eco-indicator is also quite accepted in
Sweden.
The Swedish Government has no overall dissemination policy; products and product
development have no separate place in environmental plans. The government, however, is
well aware of the existence of eco-design and favours it because it can increase the export
possibilities of Swedish products. Sweden (through IVF) is actively involved in a Nordic
Council of Ministers project on eco-design. The main dissemination activities are linked to
the aforementioned Nutek programme. The target group is different in every subprogramme
of Nutek: sometimes it is a branch, sometimes a region, and sometimes a broad selection of
participating companies. Altogether, it has involved over 50 companies between 1997 and
2000. Industriförbundet, Sweden’s organisation of industrial companies, is an active partner
in promoting environmental values to its members. Industriförbundet has published a number
of brochures, guidelines and books, including miljöanpassad produktutveckling, an extensive
handbook on eco-design for industry.
Education: Many universities and schools are paying attention to eco-design in their
curricula, but very often it is mainly a broad introduction to the subject. This may not be
enough at present for both industrial designers and product development engineers to ask the
right questions to environmental experts. In that sense, the education programmes could
develop further.
Concerning actual environmental product development, some of the larger multinational
companies in Sweden, notably Electrolux and Volvo, have a very good reputation. Others
often mentioned are Ikea, ABB, Stora, and Saab. They have the necessary overview as well
as the ability to develop methods, tools, data, demonstration projects, etc. These companies
introduce new environmental product concepts into the market. According to peers in the
33
IPTS 2000
field, eco-design is also practised in smaller companies, but while it is hard to know to what
extent there seems to be a big gap between the small companies and the large ones.
4.15 United Kingdom
4.15.1 General
There are some eco-design developments in the UK but, in general, the activity is rather new.
It is only in the last 12 to 18 months that the government and other dissemination bodies have
started to formulate a more strategic approach to eco-design. Before that, individual activities
had already been implemented following bottom-up initiatives.
4.15.2 Status
Methodology development: While a small number of eco-design manuals and other tools
have been developed in the UK mainly for use by engineers, there is the need for simpler
tools that are more suitable for use by business managers. Currently, there is a bias in tools
development towards the electronics sector and the scope needs to widened to other
industries.
The first government initiatives on eco-design dissemination are about to commence. The
‘environmental technology best practice’ programme (ETBPP), a joint venture between the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Department of Environment, Transport and
Regions (DETR), is launching a ‘cleaner design’ programme with the aim of raising
awareness in industry about eco-design. The DTI has also supported a small programme for
eco-design in the textiles and clothing industry in the UK. Furthermore, there are plans to
include eco-design of products in the ‘Sustainable technologies’ Initiative (STI) funded
through UK innovation/R & D sources. There are also a number of non-governmental
initiatives (e.g. by the Centre for Sustainable Design and green business clubs) involving
conferences, seminars, workshops and networking targeted at various industries.
Education: There are several ‘centres of competence’ in eco-design based in UK universities
and design colleges with a range of research activities on eco-design. However, there is little
integration of the eco-design component into undergraduate and postgraduate programmes.
Eco-design is more widespread in universities compared with teaching.
Actual application: This aspect of eco-design in UK industry is generally low and activity
tends to be more evolved in large organisations rather than SMEs. There are also different
levels of eco-design implementation among large companies and only a few of them have
integrated approaches to eco-design. Where eco-design is implemented, it likely will relate to
eco-(re)design rather than eco-innovation. The activity seems to be evolving in the sectors
that are covered or soon will be covered under ‘producer responsibility’ legislation, for
example packaging, motor vehicles, and electronics.
34
IPTS 2000
35
IPTS 2000
5
5.1
Comparative analysis
Introduction
As a generic and first step in the analysis, we have made a maturity profile that reflects the
position of each EU country with regard to the four issues analysed: methodology
development, dissemination, education and design. Obviously, this assessment has subjective
elements in it. Rather than trying to rank EU countries, we would rather like to use it as a
starting point for the comparative analysis, and to make some initial, generic observations.
It appears that three types of patterns are visible (see Tables 5.1 to 5.3). A group of frontrunner countries (particularly Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, and Sweden) are
advanced in method development and rather advanced in education and dissemination. A
second group of countries (e.g. Belgium, France and Italy) started somewhat later with these
activities and are, in general, a bit less advanced than the front-runners. Finally, there are
some Member States where there are virtually no activities with regard to eco-design. It has
to be noted these are generic characterisations, which do no justice to individual cases. In
some of the countries where eco-design in general is less advanced, we found individual
companies or institutes which belong to the front-runners in the EU.
The three tables make it very clear, however, that even where good support structures are in
place, actual design lags behind. Our findings suggest that even in the front-runner countries
90 % or more of the firms are at best aware of the issue of eco-design. This finding may
contain some bias, but is also logical. First, of the large number of firms that are part of a
sector for which eco-design could be relevant, only a part will truly be self-specifying. Ecodesign makes sense only for these firms; it is likely that for a large number of the SMEs,
which just routinely apply a specific process, design is no issue at all. Findings in the
Netherlands suggest that only for 10 % of the firms in the industrial sector such a selfspecifying capability or position in the chain is at stake. However, even taking into account
this effect, the number of firms in the category ‘comprehension’ or higher is rather low. In
this respect, it should not be forgotten that eco-design is still in its diffusion stage. From this
point of view, that method development, education and dissemination are more advanced is
less of a surprise.
In the next sections, a comparative analysis is given on each of the four issues indicated.
First, we give an analysis of the factors that appear to motivate firms to start eco-design
activities. It appears that countries such as Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal have
only minor eco-design activities, or activities concentrated in just one or two expert centres
and multinational firms. Hence, other countries, particularly the Scandinavian countries,
Germany, the Netherlands and Austria play a more important role in the analysis below.
36
IPTS 2000
Table 5.1: Situation per issue per country: the front-runner pattern
Quality
level/ Ignor-
issue
ance
Conscious- Compre-
Com-
Excel-
ness
petence
lence
hension
Methodology
development
Dissemination
Education
Actual design
Table 5.2: Situation per issue per country: second group pattern
Quality
level/ Ignor-
issue
ance
Conscious- Compre-
Com-
Excel-
ness
petence
lence
hension
Methodology
development
Dissemination
Education
Actual design
Table 5.3: Situation per issue per country: ‘inactives’ pattern
Quality
level/ Ignor-
issue
ance
Conscious- Compre-
Com-
Excel-
ness
petence
lence
hension
Methodology
development
Dissemination
Education
Actual design
37
IPTS 2000
5.2
5.2.1
Actual environmental product design
Actual application
From a country perspective, the following conclusions are possible with regard to the actual
application of environmental product design. In Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and
Sweden,quite a lot of companies in different fields and of different sizes take environmental
aspects into account in product design and engineering. In Belgium, Spain, France, Ireland,
Portugal, Finland and the United Kingdom, only some large companies practise eco-design.
In other countries, companies do not yet practise the concept of eco-design, except probably
the transnationals. However, we have the impression that even in countries where method
development education and dissemination are reasonably mature, actual environmental
product design still scores relatively low in the maturity profiles. The main reason for this is
that, while there are obviously quite a few companies displaying a high level of competence
in applying eco-design, the vast majority of firms in Europe, even in the front-runner
countries, seem to be conscious of the issue at best. In most cases, the activities are limited to
using green procurement lists, applying good housekeeping, and changing to some less toxic
or harmful raw material, rather than actually thinking in an integral way about product
design. In this respect, the results of the survey of the Fortune 500 firms (Part II) are
noteworthy. The response to this survey, sent to environmental directors or environmental
managers, was only 6 %. It may be that this response is low due to the fact that the most
appropriate target group was not approached or that eco-design for many companies is now
part of their strategic product development (and hence rather confidential). However, it may
also indicate that application of eco-design is not yet as extensive as it could be. Of those
firms which responded, the majority claimed to take environmental aspects into account in
the design process.
An interesting finding is that sometimes companies, which are forced by regulation to
improve the environmental load of products, introduce eco-design based on standard LCAs
without any previous knowledge of it (e.g. in Catalonia, Spain).
The intensity of eco-design activities in SMEs lags behind that in large companies. However,
there is a group of SMEs in frontrunner countries where the practice of ‘green production’
(but not yet ‘green design’) is quite common. There is a small group of SMEs (mainly in
Germany, Spain, the Netherlands and Sweden) with production and design dedicated to green
products. Some of these have found clear market niches for their products, and are very
conscious and advanced in thinking about marketing, developing and designing eco-efficient
products. But these are the exceptions. In relation to dissemination programmes set up, in
particular, in Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden, a few hundred SMEs in each of
these countries may have become acquainted with eco-design. However, this acquaintance
was often rather passive, limited to a one-off performance of an eco-scan with the help of an
external adviser, and, in many cases, did not lead to actual implementation. Within the
confines of this study, it could not be assessed quantitatively which of the front-runner
countries were relatively most successful in stimulating their SMEs to practise eco-design.
From the descriptions of the different countries in Parts II and IV, one could, with some
caution, get the impression that Austria may have been among the most successful ones.
38
IPTS 2000
In transnational companies, the situation is, in general, better. Decisions about eco-design or
related concepts are in almost half the cases made in the head office. Most eco-design
projects focus on the environmentally conscious redesign of existing products. Only on a very
few occasions has the eco-innovation of product concepts been seen (e.g. in Austria,
Sweden). This fact, and the low implementation rate in companies, means that the
environmental effect of eco-design is still low.
In terms of what is currently state of the art with regard to actual environmental product
design, the most advanced firms show the following characteristics.
1. There is a clear management commitment to take sustainable development into account
as an important factor in the company strategy. In the regular strategic assessments of a
company’s activities and product portfolios, long-term sustainability demands are among
the evaluation factors. Examples are the scenario-analyses that are performed on a regular
basis by Shell and the ‘Stretch’ methodology tried within Akzo Nobel and Philips;
2. On a tactical level, responsibilities and activities related to responsible care, and productrelated environmental activities, are clearly embedded in a firm’s procedures (e.g. via a
product-oriented environmental management system).
3. The firm has experienced staff, tools, manuals, and databases with environmental data
available for use in the eco-design process. These are used in all relevant product
development processes in a well-structured way.
4. In relation to point 1, there is not only room to embark on eco-redesign or incremental
product improvements, but also to investigate functional innovations.
However, as stated before, even in the rather small number of firms that do apply eco-design,
activities are limited to elements of points 2 and 3 at best. Particularly functional innovations
are currently rarely dealt with. It has to be noted that in several cases firms may feel reluctant
to push forward such functional innovations, since the result can well be that these require
radically different production routes — and thus the involvement of totally different
firmsfrom those in the original production structure. Hence, while particularly larger firms
may be flexible enough to deal with this, the question is to what extent a stimulating
application eco-design at individual firm level alone will eventually lead to factor 4 or factor
10 improvements.
5.2.2
Factors influencing the willingness and need to apply eco-design
The study was not designed to give a specific analysis of which factors motivate firms to
apply and implement eco-design. However, indirectly, and by some results from the inquiry
to the Fortune 500 companies, some insight was gained. These results have to be used
cautiously, since the response to this inquiry was rather low.
As indicated above, throughout Europe, some transnational companies consider
environmental issues in their product policy. SMEs seem to lag behind in practical
application. Within the major industries, eco-design is mainly applied by the electronics,
motor vehicle and packaging industries. Since it is exactly in these sectors that EU-wide endof-life regulations are in force or will be in force shortly, this suggests that (indirectly)
39
IPTS 2000
regulation is a main driver for eco-design activities6. This finding is consistent with the fact
that in the Fortune 500 survey costs in relation to the waste stage of products was mentioned
as the main driver for eco-design. However, the Fortune 500 survey suggests that customer
demands and better product/market opportunities seem to follow closely as the next
important driver7. This was also reflected in the country studies (e.g. customer drive in the
furniture, textile and food industries in Germany, marketing opportunities of the eco-label in
Spain, general customer awareness in Sweden). Some firms actually saw a chance to create
business for themselves by actively targeting a green niche market. In the Fortune 500 survey,
it was indicated that (environmental) pressure groups would form a relatively unimportant
driving force. In general, it seems that business considerations are the primary driver, and that
environmental concerns are a less important issue for most firms. In the Fortune 500 survey,
the main obstacles to incorporating environmental issues into product design reflect this. Ecodesign may not result in a longer product development process (negatively affecting the time
to market); furthermore, this survey suggested that higher costs cannot be tolerated since the
consumer seems unwilling to pay a significant premium for environmentally friendly
products8. Finally, in some cases, an important reason to engage in environmental product
design was that a key person in the company, for example the managing director, had become
very enthusiastic about the issue of sustainable development, and actively promoted this in
the company.
Besides regulation (take-back systems, packaging, energy labels, hazardous substances, etc.),
the following point also seems to have a positive effect on the practical application of ecodesign. There is a growing interest in environmental management systems (EMS), for
example EMAS and ISO 14001. Although the main focus as regards EMS is on the
production process, the design and engineering processes are starting to get more attention
(e.g. in Germany, Austria and Sweden). The advantages of such systems are that they tend to
embed activities in a structural way in a firm. By this implementation process, eco-design
becomes institutionalised and thus starts to gain a momentum of its own. As will be
explained in Section 5.4, this is one of the reasons that the Dutch authorities currently put the
emphasis on supporting the development of product-oriented environmental management
systems rather than eco-design pilot or demonstration projects.
6
Concrete examples given in the country studies include, for example, the WEEE directive in the electronics
industry in Ireland, local regulation on green purchasing in Spain, and packaging and take-back regulation in
Germany and the Netherlands.
7
This does not only include consumer demands. For instance, business-to-business suppliers of components and
raw materials (e.g. in Germany) are actively involved in eco-design. This is due to the stricter purchasing
requirements of their customers. Thus, eco-design activities often involve more than one actor in the
production chain.
8
Again, due to the qualitative nature of this study, we are unable to give hard evidence to back this statement. It
must be noted, however, that the authors have heard this argument quite often from industrial firms which
claimed to have learned this lesson the hard way. One of the institutes which reviewed this study on behalf of
ESTO, however, remarked that it had much more faith in the effects of raising consumer awareness, ecolabelling, etc.
40
IPTS 2000
5.3
5.3.1
Introduction
Front-runners in method development are Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and
Sweden. Their activities focus mainly on tools for short LCAs, databases with standard LCA
data, tools for design for end of life (e.g. design for disassembly, recycling, recovery), the
process of eco-design (handbooks, especially for SMEs) and implementation of eco-design
(product-oriented environmental management — POEM). In these countries, there is method
development both for the industry as a whole and for specific target groups. The actors are
universities and research institutes, but in most cases large industrial companies and private
consultancy companies are also actively involved.
There are some countries where method development for eco-design takes place, but is rather
new (three to five years). Belgium, Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, Finland and the United
Kingdom belong to this group. The focus of the development is on the adjustment of methods
that are developed in other European countries. Problems in adopting these methods include
language barriers (most manuals are in English, German or Danish/Swedish or Dutch),
cultural barriers, and sometimes the need and/or desire to redevelop (existing) approaches
within the new context. The content of the methods developed is mainly LCA-based product
analysis, handbooks for eco-design, and design for end of life. Most method developments in
these countries do not focus on a specific target group. The actors are mostly three to five
universities and research institutes.
The third group consists of countries where almost no method development for eco-design
takes place. Greece, Ireland and Luxembourg are in this group. When activities in method
development take place, they are often started by specific industries and reinforced by
legislation (e.g. take-back systems, energy use, and toxic emissions).
One could cautiously state that the toolbox developed in the front-runner countries covers
most of the tools needed in the practical design process. Obviously, databases and impact
assessment methods can always be improved, but, in these areas, the main overall problems
seem to have been resolved. However, also in the front-runner countries, a few elements are
still rather new: eco-innovation at the functional level (strategic improvements of a factor x),
benchmarking, development of eco-service systems, tailor-made tools for specific sectors of
SMEs, etc. Also, the ongoing process in industry in which original equipment manufacturers
(OEMs) become integrators of parts produced by their suppliers, rather than producing the
main part of their products themselves, has its consequences. Here, eco-design becomes a
network activity between the OEM and its suppliers, requiring adaptation of existing tools
and procedures.
5.3.2
The relation between methodology development and successful application
However, as can be concluded from Section 5.2, method development does not yet lead to
sufficient application in industry, especially in SMEs. Only in a few front-runner countries
(Germany, Netherlands, Sweden) are some specific tools (mainly for simple LCA-based
product analysis) used by industry. SMEs are lagging behind larger companies. In a few
41
IPTS 2000
exceptional cases, mainly concerning multinational companies, a process is ongoing to
implement eco-design in a structural way in the design process. Here, the tools developed by
research institutes often have to be tailored and redesigned to comply with the specific incompany procedures and management processes. Various companies are known to have
developed their own environmental design manuals, procedures and strategies.
The following reasons for this lack of application have been determined.
Lack of testing in practice
Many of the methods are developed by researchers within universities or research institutes.
In some cases, there is little or no testing of methods and tools in industrial practice. The
communication and cooperation between researchers and industry often leaves room for
improvement. Positive exceptions can be found in a few front-runner countries. The EDIP
project in Denmark was deliberately set up as a close cooperation between research institutes,
the Danish EPA, the Confederation of Danish Industries, and a number of leading companies
in the field of eco-design. For most methods developed in the Netherlands, such as the Ecoindicator ’95 and 99 and the Promise manual for eco-design, the same applies. Positive
factors in these countries may have been that institutes or consultancies in the field of product
design, which were already used to working on a regular basis with industry, played an
important role in method development. In Sweden, interestingly enough, industry seems to
have played an initiating role in tool development (i.e. the EPS system originally developed
by Volvo). Generally, there are inherent limits to generic tool and manual development, and
there is always a point after which a company has to translate and implement them tailormade to their own specific situation9. For Germany, however, only a few of the method
development projects we inventoried showed an cooperation between research institutes and
industry. In this context, it may not be surprising that the Danish, Swedish and Dutch
methods are seen as successful examples worldwide, where the country study on Germany
remarks that ‘most of the methods are too complicated and not pragmatic enough to be used
in practice’. The lesson is obvious: method development and practical application should go
hand in hand.
Lack of communication between actors
There is not much communication between the actors concerned with method development
within and between different European countries. There is only a very small international
eco-design network between several universities where exchange of methodological
knowledge takes place, but most universities and research centres do not know extensively
what colleagues in other countries do. In part, language barriers between countries form an
obstacle. Many manuals and tools are written in Dutch, German, English or the Scandinavian
languages, which makes them less accessible for the southern EU countries (including
France). Even within countries (also the more advanced ones), there is not always sufficient
exchange and adoption of methods between institutions. Sometimes this is due to cultural
9
A parallel can be drawn with environmental management systems. The ISO 14000 series provides a generic
framework that can be used by virtually any company. But to help implementation in a specific sector, one sees
that representative organisations or consultancies, often produce manuals or guidelines with an elaboration of
this standard for a specific industry sector. However, at firm level, this is not yet enough. On the basis of these
generic structures, a firm still has to write and develop specific procedures for its own practical situation.
42
IPTS 2000
barriers and/or differences in regional policies within countries (e.g. Belgium, Spain, where
some regions are ahead of others because of regional laws or incentives). Obviously, a cause
may also be that the institutes and/or consultancies in several cases are scientific or
commercial competitors10. Probably for reasons of country size, the coordination and
communication problems seem to be relatively less severe in countries like Denmark, the
Netherlands and Austria, than in, for example, Germany11. Also the extent to which
authorities actively promote this coordination, and play a structuring role in the development
of tools, dissemination programmes, etc., plays a role. On the basis of the country studies,
one could cautiously say that coordination problems in Denmark may be relatively limited,
due to the rather central position of Danish EPA in policy development, and the rather central
role of the EDIP project, which sought to include participation of the main stakeholders. The
same applies for Austria, where interestingly enough it is the Ministry of Science and
Transport that took up this rather central funding and information exchange role12. In
particular Sweden and to a lesser extent in the Netherlands, there is less central coordination,
and the country studies noted some coordination and communication problems13. Interesting
developments are the realisation of a government-sponsored eco-design reference centre in
Belgium and the creation of a special department on product-related environmental protection
in Germany. In countries where the government plays hardly any role, method development is
necessarily a bottom-up activity and coordination problems are almost unavoidable. In
essence, the message here is clear: funding for method development should be organised in
such a way that coordination and information exchange are a logical consequence of the
funding structure.
10
Generally, we found several examples of the ‘not invented here syndrome’ in our country studies. For some
reason, several institutes in the less advanced countries decided to develop their own methods rather than
adopting and/or adapting methods from the front-runners. Although this is in part understandable, since
methods often need adaptation to a specific national and cultural context, several of these examples in our view
form a duplication of work.
11
In the German country study, the remark is made that ‘Germany seems to be too big to have one coordinator or
one network to get them all together’.
12
The Ministry of Science and Transport initiates incentives and research and technology development
programmes with a view to sustainability. One of these initiatives is the Austrian eco-design information knot
(www.eco-design.at).
13
There may be different reasons for this, though. Sweden has a government structure of rather small core
ministries. Operational tasks are outsourced and in the hands of large professional organisations such as the
Swedish Chemicals Inspectorate and the Swedish EPA, that operate independently of government. Although
with a different task, their position can probably best be compared with government-funded research institutes
in other countries. Development of policy proposals on a specific new issue is, in general, delegated by
Parliament to a temporarily installed committee, consisting of politicians and societal actors. One can imagine
that in such a government structure, it takes a relatively long time before a new issue like integrated product
policy is operationally embedded in a central place. In the Netherlands, however, the reason is probably a
cultural one. Putting the initiative and power into the hands of a central body is against the Dutch way of
decision-making by negotiation and consensus-building (the famous ‘Poldermodel’). Thus, it is no surprise
that there are two ministries which are actively dealing with integrated product policy (Economic Affairs and
Environment), and there are two programming organisations for related projects (NOVEM and Senter), and
several other sources by which actors can get eco-design-related activities funded. Obviously, all these actors
try to communicate and coordinate, but if one party wants to go its own way, it usually has some chance to do
so.
43
IPTS 2000
Lack of clear target group
On many occasions — especially in countries where method development is relatively new
— the lack of distinct target groups (especially SMEs) is mentioned as a cause for poor
application of methods developed. This point is closely related to the lack of testing in
practice indicated above. Again, it is the more advanced countries which are aware of this
point. Particularly in Denmark, the follow-up on EDIP addresses this issue, and simple
guidelines are developed that address the key eco-design issues for specific product family
groups. By this, specific industrial sectors and a specific target group (i.e. designers with
relatively limited knowledge of eco-design) are addressed.
Lack of simple and easy-to-use tools
In most countries, method development has not yet led to simple and easy-to-use tools for
designers within the industry. In some front-runner countries, (software) tools for quick LCAbased product analysis with ecological indicators (for example Eco-indicator in the
Netherlands, SPI in Austria, EPS in Sweden) are common. The availability of such simple
tools for environmental product analysis (e.g. in Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria and
Sweden) appears to have a positive effect on practical application of eco-design. This makes
it easier for designers and engineers to indicate possible environmental improvements of
products. But these kinds of tools do not yet exist for other aspects of eco-design. In many
countries (e.g. Denmark, Greece, Spain, Ireland and United Kingdom), the shift in focus from
LCA to eco-design (using standard LCA data and simple LCA-based tools) has not yet been
made.
It seems that the level of method development for eco-design is strongly related to the level
of the industrial design discipline in a certain country. The more knowledge of the process of
design is gathered, the easier ecological aspects can be introduced into this process.
Examples are Finland, where both the design discipline and eco-design are not quite
developed, and Germany, where industrial design engineering is common practice and a
broad scope of methodological issues of eco-design is tackled.
5.3.3
Conclusion: best practice elements
To conclude, with regard to method development, the following elements constitute the best
practice in front-runner countries.
1. Method development takes place and is funded within a well-coordinated structure,
embedded in a clear overall policy with regard to environmental product development.
2. This structure ensures communication between actors, and excellent feed-back loops
between method development and practical testing and application.
3. The toolbox available consists at least of the following elements:
§ up-to-date databases and easy-to-use software tools for product analyses, which are
commonly accepted;
§ manuals with schemes and procedures that help the implementation of eco-design in
companies;
§ simplified tools (checklists, design rules, protocols) that are tailor-made with regard
to the environmental bottlenecks related to specific product groups and/or industrial
44
IPTS 2000
sectors, that can easily be applied without much training by designers still
inexperienced in the field of eco-design, firms with limited resources (SMEs), etc.
Ideally, the toolbox would also include methods that deal with breakthrough functional
product innovations and the related strategic issues14, and methods applicable in situations
where product design takes place in the form of co-makership between several individual
firms. However, even in the front-runner countries, methods dealing with these issues are still
at a very preliminary stage. Therefore, we have decided not to classify them as best practice
yet.
5.4
Dissemination
The countries where dissemination is well developed are Denmark, Germany, the
Netherlands, Austria and Sweden. In these countries, several initiatives have been taken by
governmental or non-governmental bodies and industrial companies (mainly SMEs) to
demonstrate the process of eco-design. These projects have been co-financed by the
government. Target groups are mostly SMEs of no specific industrial sectors, but already
some projects for specific branches have been carried out (e.g. for the furniture industry in
the Netherlands, for the electronic industry in Denmark). The typical package of
dissemination activities in front-runner countries consists of demonstration projects,
(travelling) conferences and information campaigns, the creation of information networks,
funding possibilities for obtaining experience with eco-design, and the ability to obtain
hands-on support by a representative of a trusted organisation that knows the daily practice in
a specific firm type quite well, in relation to the availability of dedicated tools and manuals
(see Section 5.3). For instance, the Netherlands and Austria deliberately used existing
structures that serve as a partner in innovation support for business as a vehicle to
disseminate eco-design to SMEs (notably the chambers of commerce in Austria and
‘Syntens’ (the former innovation centres) in the Netherlands). This is often combined with a
package of measures that indicates to firms that embarking on eco-design can be rewarding.
Examples are the development of green procurement guidelines for governmental
organisations (e.g. Denmark), eco-design awards (e.g. Austria), the publication of a book
with eco-design success stories (e.g. the Netherlands), and campaigns to enhance consumer
awareness and stimulate consumers to buy green (e.g. via the eco-label schemes available in
most of these countries). Within the confines of this qualitative study, it is difficult to
indicate which elements contribute most to success. As indicated, even in the countries with a
rather comprehensive dissemination strategy, actual environmental design lags behind. The
impression is that the marketing function of ecological product awards is fairly important15.
Thus, ecological product awards might be a powerful way to promote the business
opportunities of eco-design. In the Netherlands, it was found that performing an eco-scan
with priority SMEs helped to get them aware of the issue, but in general did not lead to
structural implementation. Hence, currently, more emphasis is placed on subsidising the
14
Which would include, for example, product-group-related scenario analyses, backcasting activities, and
strategy sessions.
15
Examples of such awards are are the IF Ecology award in Germany, contest for sustainable products and
solutions in Austria, and Design Sense in the UK.
45
IPTS 2000
implementation of product-oriented management systems. Such systems at least guarantee
that environmental product development will get a structural place in a firm, if only in a
rudimentary form; once this has been achieved, improving eco-design practices can follow.
The second group are countries where the concept of eco-design is relatively new: Belgium,
France, Ireland, Italy and the UK. Generally, a first pilot project has been started in these
countries with funding from the government. The eco-design initiative has been taken up by
one or two governmental institutes, but there is no broad network for information exchange
established yet. Specific industrial target groups have not yet been defined. In some cases, a
central body gets a specific assignment to play a role in an overall dissemination strategy. An
example is the creation of an eco-design reference centre in Belgium. An interesting
dissemination strategy was found in the UK, where green business clubs are in existence,
which are frequently used for dissemination activities with regard to eco-design.
To summarise, dissemination activities are strongly influenced by the government in almost
all countries, both through financial programmes (e.g. subsidised pilot projects in Belgium,
France and the UK) and by local regulation (e.g. regulations in Germany, Spain and the
Netherlands). In front-runner countries, a separate governmental policy concerning products
and the environment is being implemented or defined: for example in The Netherlands,
Germany, Austria and Sweden. In these product policies, long-term goals for eco-design are
defined. However, we have not found clear analyses in these policies which target groups of
prime importance with regard to eco-design. For instance, the fact that actual application of
eco-design in SMEs lags behind may be irrelevant if multinationals influence most design
decisions with regard to the products that cause the highest environmental burden16.
The role of the Internet is of growing importance for the dissemination of eco-design
knowledge. In countries where the concept of eco-design is not yet widely known, websites
with information and data are useful for people who want to know more (e.g. ADAPT
website in Italy, eco-design knot in Austria). Furthermore, specialists in some countries
(Portugal, UK, Denmark) have written informative books or specialised handbooks on ecodesign.
The most important conclusion with respect to dissemination is that the activities in this field
lag behind on the activities in the field of method development. A lot of methodologies are
available, but there seems to be less effort to translate them to functional tools and to
disseminate them into the industry.
A second conclusion is that in most countries, there is too little coordination between actors
involved in dissemination activities (Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United
Kingdom). Furthermore, not many examples of eco-design are available, though this is often
16
For example, during a lecture related to a draft of this report for Dutch eco-design experts, some people in the
audience suggested that some 500 key firms in the Netherlands would control the large majority of the
production chains of final consumer goods. In their view, targeting these firms would be a very effective
dissemination strategy since by their procurement policy these firms would stimulate their suppliers (among
which are many SMEs) to improve the environmental performance of their products. This statement can be
substantiated by: (a) the identification of priority product groups; and (b) the identification of the firms who
have the key influence with regard to design choices in this product chain.
46
IPTS 2000
stated as an important condition for eco-design dissemination. This leads to parallel
initiatives and ambiguity among companies about what eco-design is. The success of
dissemination projects is thus limited.
From the above, one can conclude that the following elements are part of ‘best practice’ with
regard to eco-design dissemination.
1. Dissemination activities are part of an overall plan with specified goals. For instance, it is
known that the priority with which industry design decisions are made has a major
influence on the overall product-related environmental impacts. Dissemination is targeted
at these firms.
2. Actors involved in dissemination are part of a network structure and coordinate their
activities.
3. There are activities that create consciousness about eco-design within the industry
(conferences, information campaigns, books with success stories, etc.).
4. Hands-on support and face-to-face contact between persons within the industry and
supporting organisations form one of the main dissemination vehicles.
5. Support is target-group specific.
6. The support is given via a body that has a clear understanding of the business
environment in which the target group at stake is working. Ideally, business organisations
and associated companies are actively involved.
7. Support is primarily aimed at structural implementation, not just at one-off demonstration
projects.
8. Necessary background information in the form of handbooks and easy-to-use software
tools is easily accessible, for instance via (Internet) information knots, etc.
9. There is a clear policy that encourages businesses to embark on eco-design. It includes
eco-design awards, a green procurement policy from governmental institutes and active
promotion of eco-labelling schemes; it also raises the awareness of consumers and
encourages them to ‘buy green’.
5.5
Education
Only a few European countries have educational courses specialised on eco-design: France,
Italy, the Netherlands, Austria and UK. There are some countries where there is no
educational course dedicated to eco-design, but where one or more institutes integrate
environmental aspects into design or engineering courses. The countries in this group are
Belgium, Germany and Spain. In other countries, there seems to be no substantial activity on
eco-design education. In most European countries (Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria
and the UK,), companies have regular private eco-design courses and lectures given by
experts.
Eco-design is mainly taught at universities and in postgraduate courses (e.g. in Belgium,
Germany, Spain and Italy). Only in a few countries (France, the Netherlands, Austria,
Sweden, the UK) is some education given in academies or schools. Due to the qualitative
nature of this study, exact figures are difficult to give. However, it is our opinion that only in
one or two of the front-runner countries (e.g. the Netherlands) a reasonable percentage (50 %
47
IPTS 2000
or more) of the students at educational institutes for designers are acquainted with basic ecodesign. However, even in the Netherlands, students following other courses (e.g. technical
engineers), and who may well end up in design jobs in industry, may never get any training in
eco-design. On a more general note, academies and schools throughout Europe are lagging
behind universities in eco-design knowledge and teaching programmes.
As for the strategic aspects related to integrated product policy, we feel this should be at least
an issue that should be dealt with by courses at management schools etc. Except for postacademic courses, we found little indication that strategic aspects of environmental product
policy, portfolio analysis, etc., play an important role in education.
As for the content of courses, the most important conclusion is that in educational
programmes throughout Europe, only basic eco-design knowledge (life-cycle thinking, ecodesign process, and environmental management) is being taught. For example, specialised
knowledge and tools on design for disassembly, recycling, environmental product analysis,
etc., is not yet widespread. Some dedicated courses in the field of LCA (e.g. in Spain) are
exceptions to this. Although most of the teaching universities are actively involved in
methodological research on specific eco-design issues, specialisation is not offered in
education. Both in intensity and in content, the activities in the field of education are not as
well developed as the activities in the field of method development. Thus, eco-design
education does not yet lead to educated experts in specialised fields. By stimulating the
transfer of methodological knowledge to educational programmes, both the quality and the
quantity of eco-design knowledge could significantly be improved.
The quality and depth of eco-design education is closely dependent on the quality level of
design and engineering courses, because in almost all countries, teaching of eco-aspects is
part of general design and engineering courses. In Finland and Portugal for example, where
design education is fairly new, eco-design education is not yet well developed.
Because eco-design is a quite new subject in most countries, there is only limited staff for
eco-design education. Only two countries (Germany and the Netherlands) have a dedicated
professorship at a university. Courses and lectures by visiting professors are more common
(e.g. in Spain, Italy and the UK). An important conclusion from the research is that the
potential of eco-design experts in education is quite strong (e.g. Italy, the Netherlands and
Portugal), because they play an important role (‘eco-design gurus’) in the dissemination of
eco-design, primarily to students but also to companies (e.g. through graduation projects). A
successful way of disseminating eco-design in companies is through education: students
perform practical (graduation) projects while educational staff provides company
management with background information.
To summarise, when it comes down to describing the best practice, it must be concluded that
eco-design education is relatively less developed than method development, and in quite
some countries also less developed than dissemination. The current best practice in the most
advanced countries is the following.
1. Students at design academies and faculties will obtain some basic eco-design knowledge;
48
IPTS 2000
2. Students on technical courses, who in their future career may be involved in taking
design decisions, get probably no eco-design education. They will get education about
generic environmental issues at best.
3. Students in business management will rarely get education in the strategic aspects of
sustainable development for industries’ environmental product policies.
4. In one or two places, there are specialist university departments headed by a professor
dedicated to eco-design.
5. Specialist courses are available for post-academic students.
6. Training on the job, and learning via networks, is in practice the main method of learning
about eco-design and related strategic product innovation issues.
It should be stated that, according to the authors, this current best practice is not a desirable
situation. Though we feel that training on the job probably always will be most important, we
also feel that those who have a fair chance of getting involved in practical design, or of
developing product innovation strategies, should get acquainted with some basic eco-design
and/or strategic aspects of sustainable development for industrial innovation.
5.6
Overall conclusions
In brief, the following main conclusions are possible:
1. As for actual environmental product design, it appears that some large multinationals and
some smaller niche players address the issue in a rather comprehensive way. These firms
represent the factual best practice, which consists of:
§
§
§
a clear management commitment to a sustainable environmental product policy;
the implementation of responsibilities with regard to eco-design in procedures;
the availability of experienced eco-design staff, tools, manuals, and databases that
support the practical eco-design processes.
However, our research suggests that in many firms, particularly SMEs, eco-design hardly
plays a role:
§
§
§
some SMEs have experience with eco-design in single (demonstration) projects, but
they rarely lead to implementation of eco-design in product development processes;
eco-design is not a management issue in SMEs: strategic goals regarding
environmental product policy are very rare;
when eco-design is practised by SMEs, the focus is on environmental redesign of
products rather than the development of new product concepts (eco-innovation).
2. There is a mix of drivers which make firms apply eco-design in practice. We have the
impression that a main driver is that firms are convinced that eco-design should bring
benefits from a business perspective. These benefits could be related to customer
demands or (expected) costs related to environmental issues, e.g. by possible demands
with regard to recycling, eco-labels, specifications of clients, etc. However, it seems that
49
IPTS 2000
only in exceptional cases is the final consumer willing to pay a significant premium for
environmentally friendly products.
3. Concerning method development, the following elements make up the best practice in
front-runner countries:
§
§
§
there a clear planning and coordination of method development;
method development and testing in practice go hand in hand and are preferably
executed by institutes who are used to work on design issues with the industry;
the toolbox available consists at least of the following elements:
G up-to-date databases and easy-to-use software tools for product analyses, which
are commonly accepted;
G manuals with schemes and procedures which assist the implementation of ecodesign in companies;
G simplified tools (checklists, design rules, protocols) that are tailor-made with
regard to the environmental bottlenecks related to specific product groups and/or
industrial sectors, and which can be easily applied by inexperienced
(eco)designers and firms with limited resources (SMEs), etc.
Apart from eco-design methods useful for functional innovations and in situations which
involve several parties, this toolbox, available in the front-runner countries, can be
regarded as complete. However, the popularity of method development seems not yet to
have led to practical application in companies. In the lesser advanced countries in
particular, this may have to do with a lack of cooperation between method developers and
designers in industry.
4. To a large extent, dissemination of eco-design is strongly dependent on government
initiatives and financial support. There seems to be little coordination and cooperation
between dissemination activities, both between and within countries. Dissemination
activities (e.g. workshops, pilot projects) only occasionally seem to lead to the structural
application of eco-design. Best practice elements include clear identification of priority
firms or sectors, planning of an overall dissemination strategy, performing activities that
lead to implementation rather than demonstration, active hands-on support rather than
just financial support, awareness campaigns, easy information supply (e.g. via Internet
knots). Furthermore, dissemination is supported by a package of measures that stimulate
motivation (see point 2).
5. Eco-design education does not yet lead to designers with an expertise in eco-design. Ecodesign is mainly an integrated part of design education and addresses basic eco-design
knowledge. However, many design schools do not yet include basic eco-design education
in their curriculum. A specialisation in specific environmental subjects is mostly not
possible. Eco-design is taught at universities rather than schools or academies. Current
best practice is that students at design academies obtain some eco-design knowledge, but
that technical engineers and management students do not, that there may be a chair in
Eco-design at a university, and that some commercial post-academic courses are offered.
50
IPTS 2000
In practice, the bulk of the education takes place by training on the job, learning via
networks, etc.
6. Concerning the relation between the extent to which actual environmental product design
is practised and the specific approach with regard to method development, dissemination,
and education, the confines of this study do not allow for quantitative and definite
statements. It seems obvious, however, that the countries who are the most developed
with regard to method development and dissemination, and are most active in providing
drivers, have the highest level of implementation of eco-design.
7. It has to be noted that, almost by nature, eco-design is practised by individual firms.
However, in several cases, functional (factor 4 or factor 10) innovations require rather
radical different production structures. Where firms like Shell, Philips or Toyota still may
be large and flexible enough to adapt — or even embark on functional innovations to
create competitive advantages — many firms may discover that functional innovations
mean the end of their current business. Hence, one may question the extent to which a
policy merely aimed at stimulating eco-design at individual firm level, will lead to aboveincremental environmental product improvements.
From the above it becomes clear that the most active parties developing and practising ecodesign are research institutes and universities. There is an important but small information
network in which a few eco-design specialists from universities and research institutes play
an important role. The emphasis is on methodological research and development. The
involvement of companies in these networks is rather small.
51
IPTS 2000
6
6.1
Policy implications
Introduction
Based on the conclusions in Chapter 5 a number of policy implications can be developed. As
a general remark, it can be stated that most of our findings support many of the
recommendations made in the IPP report by Ernst & Young and SPRU in 1998. Vision
development at EU level, diffusion of best practice, and support of effective implementation
are all key elements for a successful and broad application of eco-design in practice. Most of
all, we feel that how to reach the goals and objectives should be properly planned. There
should be a clear idea of priority sectors (e.g. identifying those sectors which are truly selfspecifying, and within these groups, the sectors that produce those products that are
responsible for the highest part of the environmental burden produced by society). In
addition, there should be an idea of how many of the firms at stake one would like to see
implementing eco-design, and to what extent (e.g. only simple checklists, or included in
strategic product development). Such planning and monitoring activities could be initiated at
EU level, initially on a project basis. Eventually, regular monitoring by institutes like
Eurostat or the European Environmental Agency (EAA) could be considered.
Below we will address what exactly can be done concerning methodology development,
dissemination, and education both at EU level and the level of EU Member States.
6.2
Creating motivation to apply environmental product design
As indicated, a main finding of this study is that the practical application of eco-design seems
to lag behind method development, education and dissemination. Hence, one of the actions to
be taken by policy could be measures that increase the willingness and needs to implement
eco-design. Some of the actions proposed have a clear relation with dissemination.
First, it has to be noticed that communicative approaches that make clear that an
environmental product policy and eco-design are crucial for obtaining competitive
advantages from a direct business perspective, could be among the most powerful ones.
Examples can be found in the work of the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development and the European Partners for the Environment (WBCSD, 1999; WBCSD/EPE,
1999), books by Fussler (1996) and Elkington (1999), and many conference proceedings (e.g.
Euro Environment, 1998). Policy could support such approaches, for example by
dissemination of success stories, supporting meetings and publications, etc. In addition, it
could be helpful to make the challenge to business transparent, for example by developing
sector-specific business scenarios paying explicit attention to (future) environmental
demands. Inspiration for such work can be found in the scenario-approaches developed, for
example, by Shell and the WBCSD (1997).
52
IPTS 2000
Furthermore, policy could try to support, to a reasonable extent, a market environment that
rewards a pro-active environmental product policy by industry. This does not necessarily
imply that governments have to embark on a policy that poses direct product-related
measures. A credible general policy aimed at reducing emissions, closing substance cycles,
and source-oriented measures could form an important basis in itself. Part of such a policy
could be developed in cooperation with industry. Such a policy, supported by logical
measures, sends a strong message to businesses that products which meet sustainability
requirements will, finally, end up with important competitive advantages. In order to avoid
the risk of current design choices leading to high costs in the future, businesses will have to
assess whether their products will meet future demands — including the environmental ones.
Examples of measures, which have such a clear, indirect effect on the promotion of ecodesign, are the implementation of take-back systems and recycling schemes, and sourceoriented measures to deal with certain harmful substances.
Obviously, more direct measures that will promote eco-design are also possible.
1. Eco-labelling schemes.
2. Public procurement measures (i.e. choosing environmentally sound products).
3. Sector-specific performance agreements about products (for instance, in some countries
targets with regard to fuel use of cars are considered).
4. The use of fiscal instruments (for instance, several EU countries promoted the
introduction of unleaded petrol by lowering taxes for this type of petrol).
Most of these actions are possible both at EU and Member State level. A major challenge for
the EU is to ensure that overall policy goals, and particularly the direct product-related
measures, are to a reasonable extent harmonised in the EU.
6.3
As for methodology development, Chapter 5 concluded that at least in the front-runner
countries some methods and tools for actual design have been developed. The main
challenges for further progress thus seem:
1. to ensure a higher degree of application of these tools, particularly by SMEs. Testing in
practice and elaboration of these tools for clear target groups forms a key element in this;
2. to ensure diffusion (and if necessary adaptation) of these tools to other EU Member
States. Translation, (if necessary) adaptation to local needs, and testing/application by
local actors are important aspects to consider in this diffusion process;
3. to promote a fruitful networking between tool developers and users EU-wide;
4. to develop and test methodologies and tools in practice that deal with issues which are
also relatively new to the front-runner countries. Such new issues include:
§
§
§
environmental benchmarking;
development of green product-service systems;
functional innovations: the development of new product concepts which fulfil the
user functions with a factor x improvement of eco-efficiency.
53
IPTS 2000
§
§
sustainable development: methods to take into account social (e.g. consumer
behaviour) and economic (business perspective) effects of environmentally conscious
product design.
virtual companies: there is a tendency for final producers to become organisers of
production networks rather than producing goods themselves. This may mean that
new tools and approaches towards eco-design are necessary.
Both at EU and Member State level, these suggestions can be used to set priorities within all
kinds of research funding programmes. Like under the fourth framework programme —which
set up networks like Lcanet, ConAccount and Chainet for LCA and mass flow analysis — the
organisation of a European network/concerted action in the field of eco-design could be
considered. Existing networks, such as O2, could be a vehicle for such an action.
Furthermore, diffusion of tools needs to take into account factors like language and cultural
barriers in the EU. This implies that tool diffusion projects, just like tool development
projects on the specific remaining issues indicated, has to take place in close cooperation
with the intended target groups. Classical tool development (e.g. eco-indicators, screening
LCAs) is no longer seen as a priority, nor is method development limited to larger companies.
The first is available in a number of EU Member States, and some large companies are quite
capable of developing their own procedures.
6.4
Dissemination
Chapter 5 indicates that the main challenge is to promote eco-design (in terms of business
potential, process management, data, tools, etc.) to the relevant target groups within SMEs.
This can be done by the dissemination activities discussed below, but we feel that providing
the right incentives (Section 6.2) is equally important. Furthermore, we feel that it is rather
important to analyse which companies have a key position with regard to the design decisions
that have the highest influence on the environmental performance of products. Addressing
SMEs in general is probably useless, since many SMEs are not involved in product-related
activities, or cannot influence the specifications of the products they make. On the basis of
Section 5.4, we feel that the following elements should be part of an optimal dissemination
strategy:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dissemination activities are part of an overall plan with specified goals;
Dissemination is well-coordinated;
Support is target-group specific;
Hands-on support is one of the main dissemination vehicles;
Business organisations and/or associate companies are actively involved;
The emphasis of the activities are to get people interested (hence point 5), to obtain
management commitment (e.g. by showing results can be achieved with limited effort —
indicate that quick and dirty LCAs will do the work, and avoid the use of LCAs), and to
focus on the integration of the use of tools into management procedures;
7. Awards, books of examples and success stories, (Internet) information knots, etc. are part
of a generic supplementary package of measures that supports dissemination.
Furthermore it seems important to:
54
IPTS 2000
8. Stimulate both the development of strategic long-term environmental goals and
translation into short-term environmental targets, preferably in a clear environmental
product policy. Environmental roadmapping can be used as a tool.
9. Provide support for substantial (technological) innovation rather than just for the
redesign of existing products.
At EU level, dissemination can in part be organised by accepting dedicated projects that fulfil
the criteria mentioned above in the different EU funding programmes. Furthermore, the
network proposed in the section on method development could be a platform for
communication of activities between EU Member States. Finally, certain support measures
such as Internet information knots and awards are also measures that could be considered at
EU level.
However, it is clear that many of the practical dissemination activities have to be executed at
national or even regional level. Target-group specific, hands-on support necessarily has to be
organised on local or regional scale. The role of the EU here seems to be limited to funding
and stimulation of national governments. It is the national Member States, however, who
have to organise this kind of dissemination activities in practice17.
6.5
Education
With regard to education, on the basis of Section 5.4 we feel that students following a design
education should be acquainted to a certain level with eco-design. A basic level is probably
sufficient; additional and dedicated training could be given when specific eco-design skills in
a specific situation are needed. However, it has to be noted that education on the importance
of environmental product policy is equally relevant for people involved in marketing and
strategy development in companies. Hence, it is advisable that such strategic aspects related
to eco-design are included in for example marketing and MBA-courses. In brief, in an ideal
situation, the following should be achieved:
1. a basic level of eco-design is part of the educational trajectories of those students who in
future are likely to become involved in product design;
2. a basic insight in the strategic issues related to environmental product policy are part of
marketing and management courses;
3. EU-wide, there are sufficient in-depth courses available that allow for specific training.
Again, the role of the EU with regard to education can lie mainly in providing support
funding for a number of the activities mentioned below. However, it seems that the EU
Member States, who probably have more influence on the educational programmes of
universities and design school, can play a more important role. Possible support activities
include:
17
After the State of the Art project was concluded, an ESTO project was started to analyse how eco-design could
best be disseminated to SMEs. The results of this project will give more guidance with regard to the
organisation of eco-design dissemination.
55
IPTS 2000
•
improvement of knowledge transfer between universities and schools and between
different EU Member States (e.g. by funding exchange programmes for qualified
personnel, between EU Member States);
• improvement of knowledge transfer to companies, for example by combining practical
student projects in companies and management support by eco-design experts;
• involvement of more eco-design experts in educational staff
• improvement of the content of educational programmes by offering in-depth knowledge
or specialisation in specific subjects (environmental analysis, design for end of life, design
for low energy use, materials knowledge)
To some extent, the development of educational programmes may be left in the hands of
market parties, for instance when it concerns dedicated postgraduate courses. A clear
boundary condition is that there already is an important demand for experts with in-depth
knowledge of eco-design. Hence, once again, this comes down to the question of whether
success can be achieved with regard to motivating the industry to apply eco-design on a large
scale.
6.6
Overall conclusion
From the analysis above, the following key messages seem to arise:
1. Set clear goals and plan support activities with regard to eco-design. Identify priority
product groups and the industries where the main related design decisions take place.
Take into account both the demand side (i.e. willingness and needs) and supply side (i.e.
method development, dissemination, and education) of the eco-design diffusion process
into account.
2. Create an EU network for eco-design, or support existing networks.
3. Ensure that a mix of communicative approaches and incentives is available which makes
clear and guarantees the industry that investments in eco-design will have trade-offs. A
clear and credible overall environmental policy, based on goals related to the concept of
sustainable development, is a key factor in this context. In addition, product-related
instruments like eco-labels, public procurement policies, fiscal measures and productrelated performance agreements could be considered.
4. Focus tool/method development only on those elements that are still quite new in the
front-runner countries. Examples include sector-specific tools for SMEs, tools and
approaches for environmental roadmapping (breakthrough concepts, functional
innovations, factor x improvements). Method development focused at system
optimisation, particularly with larger companies, is well developed in front-runner
countries/multinationals;
5. Stimulate tool transfer from front-runner countries to other EU Member States.
Translation, adaptation to the practical situation, and testing in practice with target
groups should be key elements in such activities;
56
IPTS 2000
6. Organise the practical dissemination activities at national or even local level. Focus
dissemination on priority SMEs, and let it be target-group specific. Ensure that hands-on
support is given, business organisations are involved, and that it is organised at regional
(or national) level. Implement support by a supplementary package of measures like
Internet formation knots, eco-design awards, etc. The latter two elements could be taken
up at EU level as well.
7. Ensure that students who follow a design education are acquainted with a basic level of
eco-design. Similarly, stimulate that business and management students obtain a basic
level of insight in the strategic importance of environmental product policy for business.
These could be basic courses only. More extended knowledge can be obtained by
arranging dedicated courses; a market for such courses will automatically develop once
companies see the added value of eco-design and diffusion becomes more widespread.
57
IPTS 2000
References
Ayres, R. U. and Simonis, U. A. (1994), Industrial Metabolism, United Nations University
Press, Tokyo, Japan.
Böttcher, H., R. Hartman. (1999), EcoDesign: winst voor het milieu én winst voor het bedrijf.
Publisher Amsterdam, Syntens.
Cramer, J. M. (1997), ‘ Environmental management: from “fit” to “stretch”’, abridged
version of the inaugural address given at the acceptance of the position of Professor of
Environmental Management at the Catholic University of Brabant, 11 April 1997. Dutch
version: Jan van Arkel Publishers, Utrecht, the Netherlands. English version: TNO Report
97/45, TNO-STB, Delft, the Netherlands.
Cramer, J. M. and Tukker, A. (1998), ‘ Product innovation and eco-efficiency in theory’, in
Klostermann, J. E. M. and Tukker A. (1998), Product innovation and eco-efficiency, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/London/Boston.
Cramer, J. M., Vermeulen, W. J. V. and Kok, M. T. J. (1994), Met beleid naar milieugerichte
productontwikkeling, NOTA, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Daly, H. (1992), Steady-state economics, Earthscan Publications, London, UK.
Elkington, J. (1998), Cannibals with forks, Capstone Publishing, Oxford, UK.
Ernst & Young and SPRU (1998), Integrated product policy, European Commission, DG XI,
Brussels, Belgium, March 1998. Available from the following address
(http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ipp/ippsum.pdf).
EU (1998), Integrated product policy, report of a workshop held on 8 December in Brussels,
Belgium. See Internet (europa.eu.int).
Euro Environment (1998), Conference proceedings of the Euro Environment Conference,
September 1998, Aalborg, Denmark.
Fussler, C. and James, P. (1996), Driving eco-innovation, Pittman Publishing, UK.
RAND (1997), Technologieradar, RAND Europe for the Dutch Ministry of Economic
Affairs, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Stigson, B. (1998), Preface, Klostermann J. E. M. and Tukker A. (1998), Product innovation
and eco-efficiency, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/London/Boston.
WBCSD (1997), WBCSD global scenarios 2000–50: exploring sustainable development,
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland (publishing
house: E & Y Direct, Tockwith, UK).
58
IPTS 2000
WBCSD (1999), ‘ Sustainability through the market’, executive brief, February 1999, World
Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland.
WBCSD/EPE (1999), ‘ European eco-efficiency initiative’, brief, January 1999, World
Business Council for Sustainable Development and European Partners for the Environment,
Geneva, Switzerland.
Weizsäcker, E. von, Lovins, A. B. and Lovins, L. H. (1998), Factor four — Doubling wealth,
halving resource use, Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, UK.
Weterings, R. and Opschoor, H. (1992), Environmental space as a challenge for technology
development, RMNO, Rijswijk, the Netherlands.
Weterings, R. et al. (1997), 81 mogelijkheden voor duurzame ontwikkeling (81 options for
sustainable development), Ministry of the Environment, The Hague, the Netherlands.
59
IPTS 2000
7
Annex: Maturity profiles
60
Maturity profile for actual environmental product design (evaluation on individual firm level)
,QGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
([SHULHQFHDQGDZDUHQHVV
(FRGHVLJQLVQRWFRQVLGHUHGLQWKH
7KHUHLVDZDUHQHVVRI/&$DVDQ
7KHUHLVDQXQGHUVWDQGLQJWKDWHFR
6RPHHFRGHVLJQSLORWSURMHFWVKDYH
$FRPELQDWLRQRIGLIIHUHQWHFRGHVLJQ
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWSURFHVV
HQYLURQPHQWDOHYDOXDWLRQSURFHVV
GHVLJQQHHGVWRFRQVLGHU
EHHQFRPSOHWHGXVLQJµFXWGRZQ¶/&$V
PHWKRGRORJLHVKDYHEHHQXVHGLQHDFK
7KHOHYHORISUDFWLFDO
H[SHULHQFHZLWKHFRGHVLJQ
(QYLURQPHQWDODFWLYLWLHVIRFXVRQ
(FRGHVLJQLVFRQVLGHUHGWREHHFR
DQGVWDWHRINQRZOHGJHDERXW
PDQXIDFWXULQJ
UHGHVLJQRIH[LVWLQJSURGXFWV


HDFKVWDJHRIWKHSURGXFW
$UDQJHRIHFRGHVLJQWRROVKDYHEHHQ
GHYHORSPHQWSURFHVV3'3
XVHGE\GHVLJQHUVDQG
1HZJUHHQIODJVKLSSURGXFWVKDYHEHHQ
HDFKVWDNHKROGHULQ3'3
VWUHQJWKVZHDNQHVVHVJDSVLQWRRO
ODXQFKHGWKDWKDYHXVHGHFRGHVLJQ
GHYHORSPHQWKDYHEHHQLGHQWLILHG
PHWKRGRORJLHVDWHDFKVWDJHRI3'3
QRWDSDQDFHDDQGWKDWVLPSOHUOLIHF\FOH
7KHFRPSDQ\GRHVRUGHYHORSV
$IXOOSRUWIROLRRIHFRGHVLJQWRROVDUH
DQGHFRGHVLJQWRROVDUHQHHGHG
VXVWDLQDELOLW\UHYLHZVRI
DYDLODEOHYLDWKHFRPSDQ\LQWUDQHW
SURGXFWVVHUYLFHV
UDQJLQJIURPµGHVLJQIRUGLVPDQWOLQJ¶

ZKDWHFRGHVLJQPHDQV
(QYLURQPHQWDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDUHQRW
7KHUHLVVRPHDZDUHQHVVWKDW/&$LV
FRQVLGHUHGLQ3'3
GLIIHUHQWIURPOLIHF\FOHWKLQNLQJ
6XVWDLQDEOHGHYHORSPHQWPHDQVµ\HDU
7KHUHLVVRPHNQRZOHGJHRIWKH
RQ\HDU¶JURZWKLQHDUQLQJVSHUVKDUH
%UXQGWODQGUHSRUW
VWDJHRIWKH3'3
DOOOLIHF\FOHLPSDFWV
7KHUHKDVEHHQUHFRJQLWLRQWKDW/&$LV
VRIWZDUHWRVLPSOH
VSLGHUZHE
7KHUHLVVRPHH[SHULHQFHZLWKWRROVRU
7KHUHLVQRH[SHULHQFHZLWK
7KHFRPSDQ\LVDZDUHRIHQYLURQPHQWDO
HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWDQDO\VLVZLWKLQ
VXVWDLQDELOLW\FRQFHSWV
WKHFRPSDQ\


HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWDQDO\VLV
7KHFRPSDQ\XVHVPDUNHWDQGVRFLHWDO
GLDJUDPV
VFDQQLQJWHFKQLTXHVDWWKHVWDUWRIWKH
HFRHIILFLHQF\
7KHUHLVDZDUHQHVVWKDWVXVWDLQDEOH
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWSURFHVVWRLGHQWLI\
(QYLURQPHQWDOUHYLHZVDUHFDUULHGRXW
IDFWRU[
GHYHORSPHQWLQFOXGHVHFRQRPLFDQG
HQYLURQPHQWDORSSRUWXQLWLHVDQGWKUHDWV
UHJXODUO\±LQFRPELQDWLRQZLWKRWKHU
7KHZRUG/&$LVQRWNQRZQE\SHRSOH
EXWQRWFOHDUDERXWKRZFRQFHSWVDIIHFW
HQYLURQPHQWDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQVDVZHOO
LQSURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
3'3
DVVRFLDODQGHWKLFDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQV
UHYLHZVLQHYHU\SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
$Q/&$KDVEHHQPDGHRIVRPH
WUDMHFWRU\
UHSUHVHQWDWLYHSURGXFWVRIWKHFRPSDQ\
7KHUHLVDFRPSDQ\VSHFLILFPHWKRGIRU
7KHUHDUHVWDQGDUGDQGIL[HG
7KHFRPSDQ\KDVGHFLGHGWRIRFXVDW
HQYLURQPHQWDOUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUDOO
WKLVVWDJHRQHFRHIILFLHQF\DVSHFWV
6WDQGDUGVRIWZDUHWRROVIRUTXLFN/&$
HQYLURQPHQWDODQDO\VLVEDVHGRQWKH
SURGXFWVEDVHGRQFRPSOLDQFHWRUXOHV
ZKLOVW
NHHSLQJDEUHDVW
RIWKHEURDGHU
DUHXVHGQRZDQGWKHQE\DQ
PRVWLPSRUWDQWHQYLURQPHQWDODVSHFWV
DQGUHJXODWLRQV
VXVWDLQDELOLW\DJHQGD
HQYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVW
RIWKHSURGXFWDQGWKHFRPSDQ\¶V
,QIRUPDWLRQDERXWHQYLURQPHQWDO
$OLIHF\FOHDQDO\VLVRIRQHRIWKH
%DVHGRQ/&$UHVXOWVDFRPSDQ\
DQDO\VLV/&$VRISURGXFWVFRPSDUDEOH
FRPSDQLHVSURGXFWVKDVEHHQPDGH
VSHFLILFPHWKRGIRUHQYLURQPHQWDO
/&$VRISURGXFWVDUHFDUULHGRXWE\DQ
WRWKHFRPSDQ\¶VSURGXFWVLVDYDLODEOH
RQFH
SURGXFWDQDO\VLVKDVEHHQGHYHORSHG
HQYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVWRQDUHJXODU
7KHUHDUHIL[HGUHTXLUHPHQWVIRU
0RUHWKDQRQHSHUVRQLVDEOHWRFDUU\
HQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVLQWHJUDWHGLQWKH
RXWDQHQYLURQPHQWDODQDO\VLVLQ
(QYLURQPHQWDOEHQFKPDUNLQJLVXVHGWR
SURGXFWVSHFLILFDWLRQV
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
FRPSDUHWKHHQYLURQPHQWDODVSHFWVRI
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\
EDVLV
ZLWKLQWKHRUJDQLVDWLRQ
WKHFRPSDQ\¶VSURGXFWVZLWKFRPSHWLQJ
SURGXFWV
7KHUHDUHDIHZSHRSOHLQSURGXFW
GHYHORSPHQWZKRKDYHH[SHULHQFHZLWK
HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWDQDO\VLV
0DQDJHPHQWFRPPLWPHQW
(QYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQWLVQRWDQ
7KHUHLVGLVFXVVLRQLQWKHPDQDJHPHQW
7KHUHLVDQRYHUDOOVWUDWHJLF
7KHUHLVDQRYHUDOOVWUDWHJLF
7KHWDUJHWVLQWKHRYHUDOOVWUDWHJLF
LVVXHIRUWRSPDQDJHPHQW
WHDPDERXWKRZWRFRSHZLWK
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\ZLWKTXDOLWDWLYH
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\ZLWKTXDQWLWDWLYH
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\DUHUHYLHZHGDQG
UHJXODWLRQVLIQHFHVVDU\
JRDOVIRUWKHUHGXFWLRQRIZDVWHDQG
WDUJHWVIRUUHGXFWLRQRIZDVWHDQG
DGMXVWHGE\WRSPDQDJHPHQWUHJXODUO\
HPLVVLRQV
HPLVVLRQVLQWKHQH[WILYH\HDUV
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFK
PDQDJHPHQWWDNHVSDUW
7KHTXDOLW\PDQDJHURUSURGXFWLRQ
DFWLYHO\LQWKHLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
PDQDJHULVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKH
7KHTXDOLW\PDQDJHULVUHVSRQVLEOHIRU
RIHFRGHVLJQDQGJLYHVLW
REOLJDWLRQWRZDVWHDQGHPLVVLRQUXOHV
WKHREOLJDWLRQWRHQYLURQPHQWDOUXOHV
7KHUHLVDQHQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHU
7KHUHLVDWHDPZLWKGLUHFWFRQWDFWVZLWK
SROLF\SDUWRIWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\
SULRULW\
DQGUHJXODWLRQV
DQGUHJXODWLRQV
ZKRLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUHQYLURQPHQWDO
WRSPDQDJHPHQWZKLFKLVUHVSRQVLEOH
LQZKLFKWDUJHWVIRUUHGXFWLRQRI
FDUHDQGZKRKDVGLUHFWFRQWDFWVZLWK
IRUHQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\
HQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRISURGXFWVDUH
7KHUHLVDSHUVRQLQWKHFRPSDQ\ZKR
7KHUHLVDQHQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFW
7KHUHDUHSURDFWLYHDFWLRQVEHLQJWDNHQ
FROOHFWVLQIRUPDWLRQRQHQYLURQPHQWDO
LVVXHV
VWDWHG
WRSPDQDJHPHQW
7KHHQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHULV
IRUJUHHQSURGXFWLRQDQGUHGXFWLRQRI
(QYLURQPHQWDOFDUHLVRQHRIWKHPDLQ
UHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHFROOHFWLRQRI
HPLVVLRQVDQGZDVWH
DVVHWVRIWKHFRPSDQ\IRUVWDNHKROGHUV
HQYLURQPHQWDOGDWDDQGKDVDEXGJHWWR
YLVLWFRQIHUHQFHVDQGZRUNVKRSVDERXW
6RPHWRSPDQDJHUVDUHSHUVRQDOO\
UHOHYDQWDVSHFWV
HQJDJHGZLWKFDUHIRUWKHHQYLURQPHQW
(YHU\HPSOR\HHNQRZVWKHFRPSDQ\¶V
DWWLWXGHDQGSROLF\WRZDUGV
HQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQW
,QGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
(QYLURQPHQWDONQRZOHGJH
'DWDRQHQYLURQPHQWDOLVVXHVRI
7KHHQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHURURWKHU
3URGXFWGHYHORSPHQWWHDPVKDYHVRPH
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWWHDPFDQFRQVXOW
$QHQYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVWWDNHVSDUWLQ
DQGGDWDFROOHFWLRQ
SURGXFWVLVQRWEHLQJFROOHFWHGRQD
VWDIIPHPEHUFROOHFWVHQYLURQPHQWDO
NQRZOHGJHDERXWWKHPRVWLPSRUWDQW
DQHQYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVWZLWKLQWKH
HYHU\SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWWHDP
VWUXFWXUDOEDVLV
GDWDUHOHYDQWWRWKHFRPSDQ\¶VSURGXFWV
HQYLURQPHQWDOLVVXHVRISURGXFWV
FRPSDQ\ZKHQHYHULQIRUPDWLRQDERXW
NQRZOHGJHLQWKHRUJDQLVDWLRQ
7KHUHLVQRVWUXFWXUHIRULQWHUQDO
(QYLURQPHQWDOGDWDRISURGXFWVLV
DQGWKHZD\LQZKLFKQHZ
FRPPXQLFDWLRQRIHQYLURQPHQWDO
FROOHFWHGE\WKHHQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHU
7KHUHLVDSHUVRQLQWKHSURGXFW
HQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRIWKHQHZO\
HFRGHVLJQGDWDLVEHLQJ
SURGXFWLQIRUPDWLRQ
RURWKHUVWDIIPHPEHUDQG
GHYHORSPHQWWHDPZKRLVUHVSRQVLEOHWR
GHYHORSHGSURGXFWDQGFRRSHUDWHVZLWK
FRPPXQLFDWHGWRWKHSURMHFWPDQDJHULQ
JDWKHUWKHQHFHVVDU\HQYLURQPHQWDO
WKHWHDPPHPEHUZKRLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRU
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
LQIRUPDWLRQIRUQHZO\GHYHORSHG
FROOHFWLRQDQGFRPPXQLFDWLRQRI
SURGXFWV
UHOHYDQWHQYLURQPHQWDOGDWD
7KHOHYHORIHFRGHVLJQ
HQYLURQPHQWDOLVVXHVLVQHFHVVDU\
FROOHFWHG
7KHSURMHFWPDQDJHURIWKHSURGXFW
GHYHORSPHQWWHDPPRQLWRUVWKH
(YHU\HPSOR\HHLQSURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
JHWVEDVLFWUDLQLQJLQHQYLURQPHQWDO
SURGXFWGHVLJQ
2UJDQLVDWLRQDQG
(FRGHVLJQLVFRQVLGHUHGWREHD
$FRQVXOWDQWLVHPSOR\HGWRZRUNZLWK
(FRGHVLJQLVFRQVLGHUHGWRFRYHUWKH
$QHFRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWLVDSSRLQWHGWR
(FRGHVLJQLVLQWHJUDWHGLQWRIXQFWLRQDO
UHVSRQVLELOLW\LQWKH
WKHRUHWLFDODFDGHPLFGLVFLSOLQH
HQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQWGHVLJQHUV
OLIHF\FOHRIWKHSURGXFWRUVHUYLFHDV
PDQDJHHFRGHVLJQ
EXVLQHVVVWUDWHJLHV
RQDVSHFLILFHFRGHVLJQSURFHVV
ZHOODVFRYHULQJPDWHULDOVHQHUJ\DQG
$OOGHVLJQHUVKDYHEDVLFNQRZOHGJHRI
(FRGHVLJQLVLQWHJUDWHGLQWR
DQGWRROVIRUHFRGHVLJQ
PDLQVWUHDPGHVLJQSURGXFW
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWWHDP
ZDWHUDOOHQYLURQPHQWDOPHGLD
1RRQHLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUHQYLURQPHQWDO
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKHFR
WDUJHWVRIQHZO\GHYHORSHGSURGXFWV
GHVLJQLVLQWHJUDWHGLQWKH
7KHSURMHFWPDQDJHULVQRWDFWLYHO\
GHYHORSPHQWDQGPDUNHWLQJWRROVHJ
LQYROYHGLQHQYLURQPHQWDOGHFLVLRQVLQ
7KHUHLVDQHQYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVW
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
ZLWKLQWKHRUJDQLVDWLRQZKRLVFRQVXOWHG
(QYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWDQDO\VHVDUH
E\SURGXFWGHYHORSHUVZKHQLQIRUPDWLRQ
FDUULHGRXWE\WKHSURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
>(QYLURQPHQWDOWHDP@
RUJDQLVDWLRQDQGKRZWKH
>(QYLURQPHQWDOVSHFLDOLVWLQWKHSURGXFW
UHVSRQVLELOLW\IRU
GHYHORSPHQWWHDP@
(FRGHVLJQWRROVDUHFRQVLGHUHGWREHD
LVQHHGHGUHJDUGLQJWKHHQYLURQPHQWDO
WHDPVXSSRUWHGE\DQHQYLURQPHQWDO
(YHU\SURGXFWGHVLJQHUKDVDEDVLF
HQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVLV
>5HVSRQVLELOLW\IRUHQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWV
YHUWLFDOVSHFLDOLVHGGLVFLSOLQHHJ
HIIHFWVRIWKHSURGXFW
VSHFLDOLVW
WUDLQLQJLQHFRGHVLJQ
GLYLGHG
LQWHDP@
GHVLJQIRUUHF\FOLQJLVHFRGHVLJQ
&HUWDLQHFRSURGXFWPDQDJHPHQW
7KHSURMHFWPDQDJHULVUHVSRQVLEOHIRU
(QYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVDUHVHWDQG
VFKHPHVKDYHEHHQHVWDEOLVKHGHJ
WKHUHDOLVDWLRQRIWKHHQYLURQPHQWDO
HYDOXDWHGGXULQJGHVLJQUHYLHZVE\D
3URGXFW6WHZDUGVKLS
WDUJHWVDQGIRUNQRZLQJZKLFKDUH
PXOWLGLVFLSOLQDU\WHDP
&DGFDP
FULWLFDO
7KHUHLVDQHFRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWZKR
DFWLYHO\VXSSRUWVHYHU\SURGXFW
GHYHORSPHQWWHDPDQGFROOHFWVWKH
LQIRUPDWLRQQHHGHG
/HYHORI,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ
(FRGHVLJQLVSHUFHLYHGWREHGRQHE\
5HFRJQLWLRQWKDW,62LQWHJUDWHG
$QHFRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWKDVEHHQ
(QYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQWKDVVRPH
(FRGHVLJQWRROVKDYHEHHQGHYHORSHG
DQGHPEHGGLQJLQV\VWHPV
RWKHUFRPSDQLHVLQµJUHHQ¶QLFKHV
SURGXFWSROLF\,33DQGQDWLRQDO
DSSRLQWHGWRGHWHUPLQHLQWHUQDODQG
H[SHULHQFHLQPDQDJLQJWKHHFRGHVLJQ
IRUHDFKVWDNHKROGHULQWKH3'3DQGIRU
HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWSROLFLHV(33
H[WHUQDOHFRSURGXFWLVVXHVHJHFR
SURFHVV
HDFKSKDVHRI3'3
ODEHOOLQJFRPSHWLWLYHDFWLYLW\
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKHFR
(QYLURQPHQWDOLVVXHVDUHDµQRULVN¶
FRYHUWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOLPSDFWVRI
GHVLJQLVLQWHJUDWHGZLWKLQ
LVVXHIRUWKHILUPµZHZLOOFRPSO\ZLWK
SURGXFWVDQGDZDUHQHVVWKDWHOHPHQWV
3URGXFWGHVLJQHUVKDYHXVHGOLIHF\FOH
$VWUDWHJLFHFRGHVLJQWRROKDVEHHQ
H[LVWLQJSURFHGXUHVDQG
OHJLVODWLRQZKHQZHKDYHWR¶
RI(33LQFOXGHµSURGXFHUUHVSRQVLELOLW\¶
7KHHFRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWKDVSUHSDUHG
WKLQNLQJFKHFNOLVWVDQGµFXWGRZQ¶/&$V
GHYHORSHGIRUVHQLRUPDQDJHPHQWDQG
OHJLVODWLRQJUHHQHUSXEOLFSURFXUHPHQW
DSODQWRLQWHJUDWHHFRGHVLJQLQWR(06
'HYHORSPHQWRILQIRUPDWLRQV\VWHPVWR
VWUDWHJLFFRUSRUDWHSODQQHUV
V\VWHPVIRUSURGXFW
GHYHORSPHQW
1RHQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVVHW
FROOHFWH[SHULHQFHIURPXQGHUWDNLQJ
HFRDQGHQHUJ\ODEHOOLQJ
7KHUHDUHQRFOHDUTXDQWLILHG
HFRGHVLJQDQGDQDO\VLVRI
'HYHORSPHQWRIDIXOOLQWHJUDWHGSURGXFW
$QDGKRFSURMHFWKDVEHHQHVWDEOLVKHG
HQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVVXFFHVVLV
VWUHQJWKVZHDNQHVVHVRIWRROV
GHYHORSPHQWZKHUHE\HQYLURQPHQWDO
YLDDXQLYHUVLW\DQGRUVWXGHQW
PHDVXUHGDGKRF
FRQVLGHUDWLRQVDUHLQWHJUDWHG
4XDQWLILHGHFRGHVLJQWDUJHWVDUHLQ
SODFHPHQW
GHYHORSPHQWPRQLWRULQJDQGHYDOXDWLRQ
4XDQWLILHGHFRGHVLJQREMHFWLYHVDUH
RIUHVXOWVOHDYHDGKRFVWDJH
DYDLODEOHDVZHOODVPHDVXUHPHQW
PHFKDQLVPV
/HYHORILQQRYDWLRQ
7KHLQQRYDWLYLW\RIHFRGHVLJQ
(FRGHVLJQLVDORZWHFKQRORJ\DFWLYLW\
7KHUHLVDZDUHQHVVRIWKHFRQFHSWRI
7KHUHLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJWKDWWKHUHDO
2QDUHJXODUEDVLVEUDLQVWRUPLQJ
7KHFRPSDQ\LVDFWLYHO\LQYROYHGLQWKH
HFRLQQRYDWLRQDQGWKDWDERRNKDV
HFRLQQRYDWLRQFRPHVIURPLQWURGXFLQJ
ZRUNVKRSVDUHKHOGWRH[SORUHQHZ
GHYHORSPHQWRIWKH
WULHGDQGWHVWHG
EHHQZULWWHQYLD'RZ&KHPLFDOV
HQYLURQPHQWDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQVLQWRWKH
HQYLURQPHQWDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQV
ZRUNVKRSVDQGWRROVWKDWSURGXFH
LQLWLDWLYHVDQGDFWLRQV
LGHDJHQHUDWLRQDQGFRQFHSWHYDOXDWLRQ
7KHFRPSDQ\UHDOLVHVWKDW/&$LVDQ
SKDVHVRIWKH3'3
HQYLURQPHQWDOHYDOXDWLRQWRROWKDW
UHODWHVWRH[LVWLQJSURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
(FRLQQRYDWLRQFDQQRWEHSURSHUO\
LPSOHPHQWHGDVWKHUHDUHYHU\IHZWRROV
FRYHULQJHFRLQQRYDWLRQ
JUHHQHUSURGXFWV
Maturity profile for method development (evaluation on country level)
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
1DWLRQDOSROLF\
(FRGHVLJQDQGGLVVHPLQDWLRQDUHQR
7KHUHLVVRPHPHWKRGRORJ\
7KHUHDUHDIHZSURJUDPPHVUHODWHGWR
7KHUHDUHVRPHGHGLFDWHGSURJUDPPHV
7KHUHLVDVWUDWHJLFWKLQNWDQNWKDW
LVVXHVLQQDWLRQDOJRYHUQPHQWDOSROLF\
GHYHORSPHQWPDLQO\VXSSRUWHGYLD
PHWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWUHOHYDQWIRU
IRUPHWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWIRUHFR
GHYHORSVDVWUDWHJ\IRUDFWLYLWLHVZLWK
LQWHUQDWLRQDOSURJUDPPHV
HFRGHVLJQLQJHJ/&$PHWKRGRORJ\
GHVLJQLQSDUWLFXODU
UHJDUGWRPHWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQW
6XSSRUWIRUPHWKRGRORJ\
PDQXDOVHWF
GHYHORSPHQW
3URJUDPPHVDUHHYDOXDWHGLQJHQHUDO
7KHUHLVVWUXFWXUDOIXQGLQJRI
3URJUDPPHIXQGLQJLVQRW\HWVWUXFWXUDO
OHDGLQJWRDGMXVWHGIROORZXS
SURJUDPPHVFRYHULQJDEURDGVHWRI
7KHUHLVQRW\HWDFOHDUVWUDWHJ\IRU
7KHUHLVDEDVLFVWUDWHJ\WKDWLQGLFDWHV
PHWKRGGHYHORSPHQWRQQDWLRQDOOHYHO
ZK\FHUWDLQSURJUDPPHVDUHQHHGHGRU
SURJUDPPHVDUHODXQFKHGRQDQXPEHU
DUHSULRULWLVHG
1DWLRQDOJRYHUQPHQWUHFRJQLVHVWKH
YDOXHRIHFRGHVLJQEXWQRVSHFLILF
UHOHYDQWPHWKRGVVHHEHORZ
VXSSRUWSURJUDPPHVIRUPHWKRG
GHYHORSPHQWDUHLQSODFH
RIµREYLRXV¶LVVXHV
&RPSHWHQFHRIPHWKRGRORJ\
7KHLQVWLWXWHVLQWKHFRXQWU\DWVWDNHDUH
5HSUHVHQWDWLYHVRILQVWLWXWHVLQWKH
7KHUHLVDEURDGVHWRIZRUOGZLGH
GHYHORSPHQW
QRWYLVLEOHLQWKHLQWHUQDWLRQDOQHWZRUNRI
FRXQWU\DWVWDNHDUHVRPHWLPHVSUHVHQW
FRXQWU\DWVWDNHSXEOLVKLQVFLHQWLILF
FRXQWU\DWVWDNHSXEOLVKLQVFLHQWLILF
UHFRJQLVHGLQVWLWXWHVDFWLYHLQWKHILHOGRI
HFRGHVLJQ/&$HWF
DWFRQIHUHQFHV
MRXUQDOVDQGVSHDNDWFRQIHUHQFHV
MRXUQDOVDQGVSHDNDWFRQIHUHQFHV
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
7KHHFRGHVLJQNQRZOHGJH
RFFDVLRQDOO\DVLQYLWHGVSHDNHUV
OHYHOLQ5'DFWLYLWLHVDQG
7KHOHFWXUHVDQGSUHVHQWDWLRQVRIFRXQWU\
7KHQXPEHURILQVWLWXWHVWKDWDFKLHYHV
PHWKRGGHYHORSPHQW
FRXQWU\KDUGO\HYHUSXEOLVKLQIRUPDWLRQ
UHSUHVHQWDWLYHVGHDOPRVWO\ZLWK
WKLVKRZHYHULVVPDOO
DERXWHFRGHVLJQRUYLVLWFRQIHUHQFHV
WKHRUHWLFDOEDFNJURXQGRIHQYLURQPHQWDO
ZKHUHHFRGHVLJQLVDNH\VXEMHFW
PDQDJHPHQWDQGQRWZLWKSUDFWLFDOHFR
,QVWLWXWHVDQGRUJDQLVDWLRQVKDYH
UROHLQWKHGHYHORSPHQWRIQHZHFR
$WDOOLQWHUQDWLRQDOFRQIHUHQFHV\RXVHH
GHVLJQH[SHULHQFHV
DGRSWHGPRVWRIWKHLUNQRZOHGJHIURP
GHVLJQPHWKRGV
DWOHDVWRQHNH\QRWHVSHDNHUIURPWKLV
7KHFRXQWU\LVZLGHO\VHHQDVRQHRIWKH
7KHUHLVRQHRUDVPDOOQXPEHURI
FRXQWU\
RWKHUFRXQWULHVDQGDUHQRZDSSO\LQJLWLQ
,QVWLWXWHVJRWRDOHDUQLQJSKDVHWKH\DUH
IURQWUXQQHUVLQPHWKRGGHYHORSPHQW
LQVWLWXWLRQVWKDWSOD\DNH\LQWHUQDWLRQDO
WKHLURZQFRXQWU\
7KHUHLVDWOHDVWRQHSHUVRQLQWKH
EHJLQQLQJWRDGRSWWKHNQRZOHGJHRI
FRXQWU\LQWHUQDWLRQDOO\NQRZQIRUKLV
7KHUHLVDQHWZRUNRIHFRGHVLJQ
RWKHUFRXQWULHV
NQRZOHGJHRQHFRGHVLJQUHODWHGLVVXHV
SURIHVVLRQDOVZLWKLQWHUQDWLRQDOIDPH
ZKHUHHFRGHVLJQNQRZOHGJHLVVKDUHG
DQGGHYHORSHG
$SSOLFDELOLW\DQGXVDELOLW\RI
7KHUHLVQRDFWLYHPHWKRGRORJ\UHVHDUFK
7KHUHLVVRPHPHWKRGRORJ\
0DQXDOVKDYHEHHQGHYHORSHGZLWKD
7KHUHLVDUXGLPHQWDU\IHHGEDFN
0HWKRGVKDYHEHHQYHU\ZHOOWHVWHGDQG
PHWKRGV
DQGGHYHORSPHQWLQWKHILHOGRIHFR
GHYHORSPHQWEXWWKLVOHDGVWRUDWKHU
FOHDUH\HRQSUDFWLFDODSSOLFDWLRQ
PHFKDQLVPEHWZHHQPHWKRGRORJ\
HYDOXDWHG
GHVLJQ
WKHRUHWLFDOUHVXOWV
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKPHWKRGV
GHYHORSHUVDQGSUDFWLWLRQHUV
7KHUHLVDPLUURUJURXSRISUDFWLWLRQHUV
7KHPHWKRGVGHYHORSHGDUHVHHQE\
DUHILWIRUSUDFWLFDODSSOLFDWLRQ
3XEOLFDWLRQRIUHVXOWVWDNHVSODFHPDLQO\
SUDFWLWLRQHUVDVLQVSLULQJKRZHYHULQ
6RPHSUREOHPVRFFXUULQJLQSUDFWLFHZLWK
OHDGLQJWRLQVLJKWZKHUHSUDFWLFDO
LQVFLHQWLILFOLWHUDWXUH
SUDFWLFHWKH\KDYHWRXVHVWLOODORWRZQ
WKHPHWKRGVDWVWDNHKDYHEHHQVROYHG
LPSURYHPHQWVDUHQHHGHGZKLFKDUH
WKHQLPSOHPHQWHG
FUHDWLYLW\WRGHDOZLWKXQIRUHVHHQ
,IDQ\PDQXDOKDVEHHQSURGXFHGLW
&RQWLQXLW\RIGHYHORSPHQWRI
SUREOHPV
PDLQO\VWDQGVRQVRPHVKHOIDQGLV
0HWKRGRORJ\ERRNVDUHZHOOVROGDQG
KDUGO\WRXFKHG
KLJKO\DSSUHFLDWHGE\SUDFWLWLRQHUV
0HWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWLVPDLQO\D
0HWKRGVDUHLPSURYHGEXWRQDQDGKRF
7KHUHLVDUDWKHUFRQWLQXRXVSURFHVVRI
0HWKRGVDUHFRQWLQXRXVO\HYDOXDWHGDQG
RQHRIIHYHQW
EDVLV
PHWKRGRORJ\LPSURYHPHQW
LPSURYHG
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKPHWKRGVILW
0HWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWLVDUHODWLYHO\
7KHUHLVQRFRQWLQXRXVHQODUJHPHQWRI
7KHUHLVDFRQWLQXRXVVHDUFKIRUQHZDQG
ZLWKH[LVWLQJNQRZOHGJHDQG
QHZDFWLYLW\IRUVRPHUHVHDUFKLQVWLWXWLRQV
WKHVFRSHRIHFRGHVLJQPHWKRGV
PRUHFRPSUHKHQVLYHDSSURDFKHVHJ
GHYHORSPHQW
RQFHPHWKRGVIRULQFUHPHQWDO
PHWKRGV
7KHUHLVKDUGO\DQ\PHWKRGGHYHORSPHQW
SROLFLHV
LPSURYHPHQWZHUHPDWXUHµ)DFWRU¶
0HWKRGVZLWKWKHVDPHJRDODUHEHLQJ
GHYHORSHGE\GLIIHUHQWLQVWLWXWLRQVZLWKLQ
7KHUHLVDQLQIRUPDOQHWZRUNEHWZHHQ
GHVLJQEHFDPHDQHZFKDOOHQJHWRGHDO
WKHFRXQWU\WKHUHLVOLWWOHNQRZOHGJH
VHYHUDODFWRUVLQHFRGHVLJQZKHUH
ZLWK
WUDQVIHUEHWZHHQGLIIHUHQWLQLWLDWLYHV
NQRZOHGJHDQGQHZPHWKRGVDUH
WUDQVIHUUHG
7KHUHDUHVHYHUDOIRUPDODQGLQIRUPDO
QHWZRUNVRIDFWRUVLQHFRGHVLJQZKHUH
NQRZOHGJHDQGQHZPHWKRGVDUH
WUDQVIHUUHG
7KHJRYHUQPHQWLVDFWLYHO\LQYROYHGLQ
NQRZOHGJHJURXSVIRUHFRGHVLJQ
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
PHWKRGRORJ\DQGPRQLWRUVZKHWKHUWKH\
ILWZLWKLQWKHJRYHUQPHQWDOSROLF\
9DULHW\RIPHWKRGRORJ\
(FRGHVLJQPHWKRGVFRQVLVWRIVWDQGDUG
,IWKHUHDUHPHWKRGVGHYHORSHGWKH\
7KHUHLVVRPHYDULDWLRQLQPHWKRGRORJ\
7KHUHLVVRPHDGGLWLRQDOYDULDWLRQLQ
0HWKRGVDUHEHLQJGHYHORSHGE\DODUJH
GHYHORSPHQW
FKHFNOLVWVIRUHQYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQW
PDLQO\GHDOZLWKRQHDVSHFWRIWKHHFR
GHYHORSPHQWHJZLWKUHJDUGWRWDUJHW
PHWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWSDUWLFXODUO\
YDULHW\RILQVWLWXWLRQVLQYROYLQJVSHFLDOLVWV
IURPOLWHUDWXUH
GHVLJQSURFHVVLHDFWXDOGHVLJQDQG
JURXSV60(VODUJHUFRPSDQLHV
ZLWKUHJDUGWRVWHSVLQWKHHFRGHVLJQ
RIGLIIHUHQWGLVFLSOLQHV
'HSWKDQGYDULHW\RIWKH
SURFHVV
ZLWKLQFUHPHQWDOLQQRYDWLRQV
FRQWHQWRIPHWKRGVEHLQJ
7KHUHDUHGLIIHUHQWPHWKRGVEHLQJ
0RVWHFRGHVLJQPHWKRGVGHDOZLWK
GHYHORSHG
6RPHWLPHVPHWKRGVIURPRWKHUFRXQWULHV
HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWDQDO\VLVEDVHGRQ
%HVLGHVWRROVIRUSURGXFWDQDO\VLVVRPH
GHYHORSHGGHGLFDWHGWRGLIIHUHQWWDUJHW
DUHDGDSWHGIRUORFDOXVH
/&$
GHGLFDWHGPHWKRGVDUHEHLQJGHYHORSHG
JURXSVHJ60(VODUJHILUPV
IRUWKHDQDO\VLVRIHQGRIOLIHHIIHFWVRU
PHWKRGVIRUHFRGHVLJQLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
0HWKRGVGHYHORSHGUHODWHWRGLIIHUHQW
WLPHKRUL]RQVHJVKRUWWHUP
LQFUHPHQWDOLPSURYHPHQWVDQGORQJ
WHUPVWUDWHJLFGHVLJQLVVXHV
0HWKRGVGHYHORSHGDUHGHGLFDWHGWR
GLIIHUHQWVWHSVLQWKHHFRGHVLJQLQJ
SURFHVV
7DUJHWJURXSV
7KHUHLVQRGLVWLQFWWDUJHWJURXSIRUHFR
7KHUHLVVRPHRFFDVLRQDOPHWKRGRORJ\
7KHUHLVPHWKRGRORJ\GHYHORSPHQWEXW
'LIIHUHQFHLVPDGHEHWZHHQDQXPEHURI
GHVLJQPHWKRGV
GHYHORSPHQWPDLQO\UHODWHGWR
QRGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQWDUJHWJURXSVLV
PDLQWDUJHWJURXSVHJ60(VDQGRWKHU
*URXSVDQGRUJDQLVDWLRQVIRU
LQWHUQDWLRQDOSURJUDPPHV,WLV
UHDOO\PDGH
ILUPV
ZKLFKPHWKRGVDQGWRROVDUH
FRLQFLGHQWDOZKRLVLQYROYHG
GHYHORSHG
7KHUHLVDODUJHGLYHUVLW\LQWDUJHWJURXSV
IRUZKLFKWKHPHWKRGVDUHGHYHORSHG
•
•
GLIIHUHQWEUDQFKHV
GLIIHUHQWILUPVL]HV
Maturity profile for dissemination (evaluation on country level)
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
1DWLRQDOGLVVHPLQDWLRQ
7KHJRYHUQPHQWKDVGHILQHGVRPHRYHUDOO
1DWLRQDOHQYLURQPHQWDOWDUJHWVDUH
7KHJRYHUQPHQWDOHQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\
7KHUHLVDGLVWLQFWJRYHUQPHQWDOSROLF\WR
7KHUHLVDORQJWHUPJRYHUQPHQWDO
SROLF\
WDUJHWVWREULQJGRZQHQYLURQPHQWDOLPSDFW
WUDQVODWHGLQWRSROLFLHVIRUWKHVWLPXODWLRQ
LVEDVHGRQVXVWDLQDEOHGHYHORSPHQW
EULQJGRZQWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRI
VWUDWHJ\IRUWKHVWLPXODWLRQRIHFRGHVLJQ
RILQGXVWULDODFWLYLWLHVHJUHGXFWLRQRI&2 RIJUHHQHUSURGXFWLRQHJUHGXFWLRQRI
DQGFRQWDLQVORQJWHUPJRDOVIRUWKH
LQGXVWULDOO\SURGXFHGJRRGV
ZLWKFOHDUORQJWHUPDQGVKRUWWHUP
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKWKH
HPLVVLRQEXWWKHVHDUHQRWWUDQVODWHGLQWR
LQGXVWULDOZDVWHHPLVVLRQVHQHUJ\XVH
UHGXFWLRQRIWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRI
QDWLRQDOJRYHUQPHQWLV
SROLFLHVWRVWLPXODWHFRPSDQLHVWRPHDVXUH
XVHRIUHVRXUFHV
SURGXFWVHQGRIOLIHXVHRIPDWHULDOV
7KHUHDUHJRYHUQPHQWDOSURJUDPPHVWR
VWLPXODWLQJWKHDGRSWLRQRIHFR
DQGORZHUWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOLPSDFWRIWKHLU
HQHUJ\XVHHWF
VWLPXODWHHFRGHVLJQSLORWSURMHFWV
GHVLJQ
SURGXFWV
PRVWLQGXVWULDOFRPSDQLHVDQG
7KHJRYHUQPHQWKDVGHILQHGD
7KHJRYHUQPHQWRUJDQLVHVPHHWLQJVWR
LQVWLWXWLRQVGRQ¶WNQRZDERXWLW
FRPPXQLFDWLRQVWUDWHJ\WRVWLPXODWH
LQIRUPLQVWLWXWLRQVDQGFRPSDQLHVDERXW
RUJDQLVDWLRQVWRDGDSWWKHLU
HFRGHVLJQSROLF\
7KHUHLVQREXGJHWRIWKHJRYHUQPHQWIRU
WDUJHWV
WKHGLVVHPLQDWLRQRIHFRGHVLJQNQRZOHGJH
7KHUHLVQRQDWLRQDOUHJXODWLRQZKLFK
0RVWLQGXVWULDOFRPSDQLHVGRQRWNQRZRI
VWLPXODWHVWKHDGDSWDWLRQRIHFRGHVLJQ
DQ\JRYHUQPHQWDOSROLF\UHJDUGLQJWKH
PHWKRGVHJREOLJDWLRQWRFRPPXQLFDWH
HQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRILQGXVWULDOSURGXFWV
WKHHQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRISURGXFWV
7KHUHLVDUHJXODWLRQZKLFKIRUFHV
FRPSDQLHVWRWDNHEDFNSURGXFWVDWWKH
7KHUHLVVRPHJRYHUQPHQWDOSROLF\EXW
HQGRIWKHLUOLIHF\FOH
7KHUHDUHJRYHUQPHQWDOSURJUDPPHVWR
VWLPXODWHHFRLQQRYDWLRQLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\YROXQWDULO\
%HVLGHVOHJLVODWLRQYROXQWDU\
RIHFRGHVLJQDQGHQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFW
6RPHWDUJHWVWRUHGXFHWKH
DJUHHPHQWVEHWZHHQLQGXVWU\DQGWKH
FDUH
HQYLURQPHQWDOLPSDFWRILQGXVWULDO
JRYHUQPHQWDUHHVWDEOLVKHGWRUHGXFH
SURGXFWVKDYHEHHQWUDQVODWHGLQWR
WKHHQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRISURGXFWV
7KHJRYHUQPHQWKDVDVXEVWDQWLDO
OHJLVODWLRQHJUHJDUGLQJKD]DUGRXV
EXGJHWWRVWLPXODWHNQRZOHGJH
ZDVWH
GLVVHPLQDWLRQDERXWHFRGHVLJQ
ILQDQFLDOO\
7KHUHDUHDORWRIIRUPDODQGLQIRUPDO
QHWZRUNVIRUNQRZOHGJHGLVVHPLQDWLRQ
DERXWHFRGHVLJQ
7KHJRYHUQPHQWLVDFWLYHO\LQYROYHGLQ
GLVVHPLQDWLRQSURMHFWVDQGKDV
VXEVWDQWLDONQRZOHGJHRIWKHWRSLF
7KHJRYHUQPHQWVWLPXODWHVHGXFDWLRQDO
LQVWLWXWHVWRWHDFKDERXWHFRGHVLJQ
,QGXVWU\GLVVHPLQDWLRQ
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVDQGLQGXVWULDO
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVKDYHIROORZHG
7KHUHLVDQDFWLYHOREE\RIEUDQFK
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVKDYHVRPHHFR
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVSOD\DNH\UROHLQ
SROLF\
QHWZRUNVKDYHQRNQRZOHGJHRIHFRGHVLJQ
LQWHUQDWLRQDOGHYHORSPHQWVDQGDGRSWHG
RUJDQLVDWLRQVWRLQIOXHQFHWKH
GHVLJQVSHFLILFVXSSRUWLQLWLDWLYHV
GLVVHPLQDWLQJLQIRUPDWLRQDERXW
DSURGXFWVWHZDUGVKLSSURJUDPPH
JRYHUQPHQWDWPDNLQJDQHQYLURQPHQWDO
QHWZRUNVH[FKDQJHSURJUDPPHVHWF
HQYLURQPHQWDOSROLF\VWLPXODWLRQ
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKERGLHVRI
(QYLURQPHQWDOPDQDJHPHQWLVQRLVVXHIRU
LQGXVWULDOFRPSDQLHVDQG
GLVFXVVLRQLQQHWZRUNVRILQGXVWULDO
7KHSURGXFWVWHZDUGVKLSSURJUDPPHLV
EUDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVVWLPXODWH
FRPSDQLHV
QRWDFWLYHO\SURPRWHG
(QYLURQPHQWDOFDUHLVKDQGOHGUHDFWLYHO\E\
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVIROORZ
WUDQVODWHWKLVWRVXSSRUWHFRGHVLJQLQ
EUDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQV
GHYHORSPHQWVZLWKUHJDUGWRVXVWDLQDEOH
VSHFLILF
SURJUDPPHVDQGLQLWLDWLYHVLQWKHILHOGRI
SROLF\
WKHDGRSWLRQRIHFRGHVLJQ
7KHEUDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQLVDFWLYHO\
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVSURPRWHSURGXFW
HQFRXUDJLQJPHPEHUVWRMRLQHFRGHVLJQ
VWHZDUGVKLSSURDFWLYHO\EXWGRQRW
SURJUDPPHV
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVWDNHXSLQLWLDWLYHV
WRSURYLGHLQIRUPDWLRQDERXWHFRGHVLJQ
$FRPSUHKHQVLYHSROLF\IRUHFRGHVLJQ
DQGUHODWHGWRSLFVWRWKHLUPHPEHUV
GLVVHPLQDWLRQLQGLIIHUHQWWDUJHWJURXSV
GHYHORSPHQWEXWGRQRWSOD\DSURDFWLYH
UROH
HFRGHVLJQ
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVKDYHFUHDWHG
LVQRW\HWHVWDEOLVKHG
,QLWLDWLYHVWRSURYLGHLQIRUPDWLRQDQG
VXSSRUWRQHFRGHVLJQIRFXVRQGLIIHUHQW
QHWZRUNVIRUFRPSDQLHVWRH[FKDQJH
WDUJHWJURXSV60(VODUJHUFRPSDQLHV
LQIRUPDWLRQDERXWVXVWDLQDEOH
$QXPEHURIIURQWUXQQHUILUPVDUH
GHYHORSPHQWLVVXHVEXWQRW\HWIRUHFR
SDUWLFLSDWLQJLQSURJUDPPHVEXWRWKHU
GHVLJQLQSDUWLFXODU
WDUJHWJURXSVHJ60(VDUHQRW
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVKDYHDORWRI
FRYHUHG
NQRZOHGJHDERXWHFRGHVLJQDQGDUHDQ
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVDUHSHUFHLYHGDV
LPSRUWDQWVRXUFHRILQIRUPDWLRQIRU
UHODWLYHO\SURDFWLYHZLWKUHJDUGWR
JRYHUQPHQWDOERGLHV
VXVWDLQDEOHGHYHORSPHQWLVVXHV
7KHUHDUHVHYHUDOMRLQWHFRGHVLJQ
%UDQFKRUJDQLVDWLRQVUHFRJQLVHWKHUROH
SURMHFWVLQZKLFKFRPSDQLHVZRUN
RIHFRGHVLJQEXWGRQRWGHYHORS
WRJHWKHUDQGH[FKDQJHLQIRUPDWLRQ
SUDFWLFDOVXSSRUWDFWLYLWLHV
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
3LORWDQGGHPRQVWUDWLRQ
&RXQWU\ZLGHWKHYDOXHRISLORWSURMHFWVRU
6RPHGHPRQVWUDWLRQSURMHFWVKDYHEHHQ
7KHUHKDYHEHHQDQXPEHURISLORWDQG
7KHUHDUHVHYHUDOSLORWDQG
7KHUHLVDFRPSUHKHQVLYHVWUDWHJ\ZLWK
SURMHFWV
GHPRQVWUDWLRQSURMHFWVLQWKHILHOGRIHFR
FDUULHGRXWEXWWKH\GLGQRWOHDGWR
GHPRQVWUDWLRQSURJUDPPHVIRUHFR
GHPRQVWUDWLRQSURJUDPPHVWKDWKDYH
UHJDUGWRHFRGHVLJQGLVVHPLQDWLRQLQ
GHVLJQLVQRWUHFRJQLVHG
VXEVWDQWLDONQRZOHGJHDERXWHFRGHVLJQ
GHVLJQLQSDUWLFXODUOHDGLQJWRVRPH
VWUXFWXUDOIXQGLQJ
ZKLFKWKHSLORWVKDYHDORJLFDOSODFH
SURFHVVDQGUHVXOWV
XVHIXOHFRGHVLJQH[SHULHQFHV
7KHQXPEHURIEUDQFKHVFRYHUHGLV
7KHUHDUHDORWRILQLWLDWLYHVDQGSURMHFWV
3LORWSURMHFWVZHUHIXQGHGE\ODUJH(8
(FRGHVLJQSLORWSURMHFWVKDYHEHHQ
UDWKHUFRPSUHKHQVLYH
IRUWU\RXWVGHPRQVWUDWLRQDQGSLORW
SURJUDPPHVRUJHQHULFFOHDQHU
FDUULHGRXWLQVHYHUDOEUDQFKHV
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKSLORWDQG
GHPRQVWUDWLRQSURMHFWVLQWKH
3LORWSURMHFWVWRLPSURYHWKHHQYLURQPHQWDO
ILHOGRIHFRGHVLJQDUHJRLQJ
ORDGRISURGXFWVKDYHQRWEHHQFDUULHGRXW
RQKDYHEHHQH[HFXWHG
SURMHFWVLQDOOEUDQFKHVLQFOXGLQJ60(V
$EDVLFVWUDWHJ\KDVEHHQGHYHORSHG
SURGXFWLRQSURJUDPPHV
2QO\DIHZODUJHUFRPSDQLHVKDYHWDNHQ
EHKLQGWKHGHPRQVWUDWLRQSURJUDPPHLQ
7DUJHWJURXSVDUHDFWLYHO\DSSURDFKHG
SDUWLQHFRGHVLJQSLORWSURMHFWV
RUGHUWRHQVXUHHIIHFWLYHQHVV
DQGVWLPXODWHGWRSDUWLFLSDWH
%XGJHWFRQWLQXLW\RIWKHSURJUDPPHVLV
7KHUHDUHDPELWLRXVTXDQWLWDWLYHJRDOV
QRW\HWHQVXUHG
ZLWKUHJDUGWRSDUWLFLSDWLRQRIUHOHYDQW
ILUPVHJ!RIWRWDO
1HWZRUNVUHODWLRQV
1RSXEOLFDFFHVVWR/&$GDWDRIFRPPRQ
'DWDDUHDYDLODEOHYLDLQIRUPDOQHWZRUNV
7KHUHLVDWOHDVWRQHSXEOLFGDWDEDVH
(FRGHVLJQPHWKRGVH[SHULHQFHVDQG
7KHUHLVDZLGHVSUHDGXVHRIGDWDEDVHV
SXEOLFDWLRQV
SURGXFWLRQSURFHVVHVDQGPDWHULDOV
RUFRPPHUFLDOGDWDVXSSOLHUV
DQGVHYHUDORWKHULQIRUPDWLRQVRXUFHV
GDWDFDQEHFROOHFWHGIURPVHYHUDOGDWD
ZLWKFRPPRQSURGXFWLRQSURFHVVHVDQG
XVHIXOIRUHFRGHVLJQSUDFWLWLRQHUV
VRXUFHVDWKDQG
PDWHULDOV
([LVWLQJIRUPDODQGLQIRUPDO
1RUHVHDUFKRUHGXFDWLRQDOLQVWLWXWHVZLWKD
6RPHHGXFDWLRQDOLQVWLWXWHVSD\
JURXSVIRUWKHH[FKDQJHRI
IRFXVRQWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRI
DWWHQWLRQWRHQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFW
0RVWHGXFDWLRQDOLQVWLWXWHVSD\DWWHQWLRQ
(FRGHVLJQLVDVSHFLILFSRLQWRIDWWHQWLRQ
7KHUHDUHVHYHUDOUHVHDUFKFRQVXOWDQF\
HFRGHVLJQUHODWHGNQRZOHGJH
LQGXVWULDOSURGXFWV
GHVLJQ
WRHQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWGHVLJQ
RIHGXFDWLRQDOLQVWLWXWHVEXWWKH\DUHQRW
DQGHGXFDWLRQDOLQVWLWXWHVZKLFK
\HWµFHQWUHVRIH[FHOOHQFH¶LQWKHFHQWUH
VSHFLDOLVHLQHFRGHVLJQDQGWKH
RIDVSLGHUV¶ZHE
HQYLURQPHQWDOORDGRILQGXVWULDOSURGXFWV
DQGSXEOLFDYDLODELOLW\RIHFR
GHVLJQUHODWHGLQIRUPDWLRQ
7KHUHDUHYHU\IHZFRQIHUHQFHVZRUNVKRSV
7KHUHLVDQRFFDVLRQDOFRQIHUHQFHRU
7KHUHDUHDIHZ\HDUO\FRXUVHV
DQGOHFWXUHVZLWKDIRFXVRQHQYLURQPHQWDO
VWXG\GD\EXWWKHVHDUHRQHRIIHYHQWV
ZRUNVKRSVRUFRQIHUHQFHVPDLQO\
GHDOLQJZLWKWKHRUHWLFDOLVVXHV
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWRUSURGXFWLRQ
7KHUHDUHQRLQIRUPDORUIRUPDOQHWZRUNV
HDFKRWKHUEXWWKHUHLVQRLQVWLWXWLRQDO
7KHUHLVDIRUPDOQHWZRUNRIVSHFLDOLVWV
UHODWHGWRHFRGHVLJQ
LQIUDVWUXFWXUHIRUH[FKDQJH
UHODWHGWRSURGXFWSROLF\HJDVXE
,QIRUPDWLRQDERXWHFRGHVLJQLVPRVWO\LQ
HFRGHVLJQRUUHODWHGWRSLFV
ERRNVDQGPDJD]LQHVEXWPDLQO\DV
RFFDVLRQDOSDSHUVDUWLFOHV
7KHUHDUHOLWWOHRUQRPHGLDWKDWSD\
DWWHQWLRQWRHFRGHVLJQ
,WLVKDUGWRILQGXSWRGDWHLQIRUPDWLRQ
EHIRXQG
DQGFRXUVHVWKDWFRYHUYDULRXVDVSHFWV
(FRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWVNQRZKRZWRILQG
,WLVGLIILFXOWWRILQGQDWLRQDOSXEOLFDWLRQVRQ
DQGZKHUHDOOUHOHYDQWLQIRUPDWLRQFDQ
7KHUHDUHVHYHUDOW\SHVRIFRQIHUHQFHV
LQWKHHFRGHVLJQSURFHVV
7KHUHDUHPDQ\FRQIHUHQFHVZRUNVKRSV
DQGOHFWXUHVRQHQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFW
VHFWLRQRIDJHQHULFSURIHVVLRQDO
7KHUHLVDWOHDVWRQHIRUPDOQHWZRUNRI
GHYHORSPHQWIRFXVLQJRQWKH
HQYLURQPHQWDOQHWZRUN
HFRGHVLJQVSHFLDOLVWVLQLWVRZQULJKW
LPSOHPHQWDWLRQLQLQGXVWULDOFRPSDQLHV
(FRGHVLJQRUSURGXFWSROLF\DQGUHODWHG
7KHUHLVDWOHDVWRQHVSHFLDOLVHG
DVSHFWVDUHGHDOWZLWKLQDVWUXFWXUDOZD\
PDJD]LQHLQHFRGHVLJQ)XUWKHUPRUH
(FRGHVLJQHFRLQQRYDWLRQVXVWDLQDEOH
LQZULWWHQPHGLDHJDVDVSHFLILF
PHGLDOLNH79DQGWKH,QWHUQHWDUH
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWLVDPDWXUHZRUN
VHFWLRQ
EHJLQQLQJWREHRWKHULPSRUWDQWVRXUFHV
ILHOGDQGWKHUHDUHVHYHUDOQHWZRUNVWR
RILQIRUPDWLRQ
H[FKDQJHNQRZOHGJHDERXW
VSHFLILHGE\WDUJHWJURXS
7KHUHDUHDIHZLQVWLWXWLRQVDQG
HQYLURQPHQWDOSURGXFWGHVLJQ
RUJDQLVDWLRQVZKRSD\VSHFLDODWWHQWLRQ
WRHFRGHVLJQRQWKHLUZHESDJH
7KHUHDUHSURIHVVLRQDOPDJD]LQHV
MRXUQDOVSHULRGLFDOVDQGZHEVLWHV
GHGLFDWHGWRHFRGHVLJQDQGUHODWHG
WRSLFVDGLYHUVLW\RIPHGLDLVXVHG
Maturity profile for education (evaluation of individual programmes)
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
0DQDJHPHQWFRPPLWPHQW
&RPPLWPHQWRIPDQDJHPHQW
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
([FHOOHQFH
(FRGHVLJQLVYROXQWDU\LQWKHHGXFDWLRQ
(FRGHVLJQLVLQWHJUDWHGLQWKHHGXFDWLRQ
$QLQGLYLGXDOVPDOOFRXUVHRQHFR
(FRGHVLJQLVDFRPSXOVRU\GHWDLOHG
SURJUDPPHQRWDQLQGLYLGXDORUDQ
SURJUDPPHLQWHJUDWHGFRXUVHHJ
SURJUDPPHDVDOLPLWHGSDUWRIVSHFLILF
GHVLJQLVLQFOXGHGLQWKHHGXFDWLRQ
FRXUVHLQWKHPDLQHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPH
LQWHJUDWHGFRXUVH
HQJLQHHULQJVWXGLHV
VWXGLHVHQJLQHHULQJPDUNHWLQJHWF
SURJUDPPHRIVSHFLILFVWXGLHV
RIVSHFLILFVWXGLHVPDUNHWLQJ
HQJLQHHULQJPDUNHWLQJHWF
HQJLQHHULQJHWFDQGDOVRRIIHUHGDVDQ
WRPDNHHFRGHVLJQSDUWRIWKH
FXUULFXOXP
&RPSHWHQFH
(FRGHVLJQLVQRSDUWRIWKHHGXFDWLRQ
LQGLYLGXDOFRXUVH
7KHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHLVGUDZQXS
3HUVRQVZLWKRXWSUDFWLFDOH[SHULHQFHOLQH
E\SHUVRQVZLWKQRFRQWDFWVZLWKSUDFWLFH
XSWKHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHE\
E\SURIHVVRUVZKRUHJXODUO\FRQVXOW
FRQVXOWLQJUHSRUWVDQGRWKHUGRFXPHQWV
SHUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\
E\SURIHVVRUVLQFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWK
3HUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\ZKRDUHZHOO
SHUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\DQGSHUVRQVIURP
DZDUHRIWKHVWDWHRIWKHDUWRQDOO
HQYLURQPHQWDOUHVHDUFKLQVWLWXWHV
DVSHFWVRISURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
1RDFWLRQVDUHSODQQHGIRUDGMXVWLQJWKH
ZULWWHQE\LQGXVWU\
3HUVRQVZLWKLQWKHLQVWLWXWHDUHVHWWLQJXS
HGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHUHJDUGLQJHFR
LQFOXGLQJHFRGHVLJQDUHUHVSRQVLEOH
7KHLQVWLWXWHUHFRJQLVHVWKHQHHGWR
DFRQVXOWDWLRQJURXSWRUHJXODUO\FRQVXOW
PDNHDGMXVWPHQWVWRWKHHGXFDWLRQ
HDFKRWKHUUHJDUGLQJWKHHFRGHVLJQ
$SRVWJUDGXDWHFRXUVH3K'LQ
7KHUHDUHQR3K'SRVWJUDGXDWHFRXUVHV
SURJUDPPHKRZHYHUQRFRQFUHWH
SURJUDPPH
LQWHJUDWHGSURGXFWGHVLJQRUVLPLODU
UHODWHGWRHFRGHVLJQRUJDQLVHG
DFWLRQVDUHSODQQHG\HW
GHVLJQDVSHFWV
3RVWJUDGXDWHFRXUVHV3K'VDUH
IRUWKHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPH
FRXUVHVLVRUJDQLVHGZLWKVSHFLILF
$SRVWJUDGXDWHFRXUVH3K'LQHFR
DWWHQWLRQWRHFRGHVLJQ
GHVLJQLVDYDLODEOH
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVSODQQLQJWRRIIHU
RUJDQLVHGZLWKKRZHYHUOLWWOHDWWHQWLRQ
3K'SRVWJUDGXDWHFRXUVHVRQHFR
WRHFRGHVLJQHJSURGXFWGHYHORSPHQW
7KHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHLVHYHU\±
7KHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHFRQWHQWV
GHVLJQRUUHODWHGDVSHFWVLQWKHFRPLQJ
FRXUVH
\HDUVFKHFNHGLQFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWKVLPLODU
WHDFKLQJPHWKRGVLVFRQWLQXRXVO\
LQVWLWXWHVDQGLQGXVWU\
VFUHHQHGDQGLPSURYHGLQDFFRUGDQFH
\HDUV
ZLWKRWKHULQVWLWXWHVUHVHDUFK
RUJDQLVDWLRQVDQGLQGXVWU\
7KHUHDUHDOVRWDUJHWVVHWXSTXDOLW\
V\VWHPIRUWKHTXDOLW\VFUHHQLQJ$JURXS
RISHUVRQVLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUVHWWLQJXS
WKHTXDOLW\FKHFN
7KHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHLVXSGDWHG
\HDUO\LQFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWKUHVHDUFK
LQVWLWXWHVDQGLQGXVWU\
.QRZOHGJH
1RVSHFLILFNQRZOHGJHRQHFRGHVLJQLV
3HUVRQVZLWKOLWWOHWKHRUHWLFDODQGQR
3HUVRQVZLWKDJHQHUDOWKHRUHWLFDO
3HUVRQVWKDWDUHLQYROYHGLQHFRGHVLJQ
3HUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\SUDFWLFDO
DYDLODEOHLQWKHLQVWLWXWH
SUDFWLFDONQRZOHGJHRIHFRGHVLJQDUH
NQRZOHGJHRIHFRGHVLJQDUHJLYLQJWKH
UHVHDUFKDUHSUHVHQW
H[SHULHQFHDQGUHVHDUFKDFWLYHLQHFR
SUHVHQWLQWKHLQVWLWXWH
FRXUVHVLQWKHLQVWLWXWH
7KHDYDLODELOLW\DQG
GHVLJQDFWLYLWLHVDUHWHDFKLQJHFRGHVLJQ
PDQDJHPHQWRINQRZOHGJH
1RQHWZRUNLQJRQHFRGHVLJQQR
ZLWKLQWKHLQVWLWXWH
SDUWLFLSDWLRQLQMRLQWUHVHDUFK
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVDZDUHRIWKHH[LVWHQFHRI
3DVVLYHSDUWLFLSDWLRQLQQHWZRUNVDQG
FRRUGLQDWLQJDQGSODQVIRUFRRSHUDWLRQ
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVFRQWLQXRXVO\VHDUFKLQJIRU
SURJUDPPHVRULQYROYHPHQWLQVWXGHQW
QHWZRUNVMRLQWUHVHDUFKSURJUDPPHVDQG
SODWIRUPVMRLQWUHVHDUFKSURJUDPPHV
ZLWKRWKHUVLPLODULQVWLWXWHV7KHLQVWLWXWH
QHZNQRZOHGJHGHYHORSPHQWVLQWHUQDO
H[FKDQJHSURJUDPPHV
FRRSHUDWLYHSURMHFWVKRZHYHUWKH\DUH
SODQVIRUPRUHDFWLYHLQYROYHPHQW
LVWU\LQJWRWDNHSDUWLQMRLQWUHVHDUFK
DQGH[WHUQDO$UHVHDUFKLQVWLWXWHLV
SURJUDPPHV
DOOLHGWRWKHLQVWLWXWH
$FWLYHLQYROYHPHQWLQQHWZRUNVQRW
QRWLQYROYHGLQDQ\RIWKHVH
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVDWWKHPRPHQWORRNLQJIRU
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVDZDUHRIWKHQHHGIRU
H[WHUQDOSDUWQHUVIRUGHYHORSLQJWKH
7KHLQVWLWXWHEULQJVLQH[WHUQDOSDUWQHUVWR
7KHLQVWLWXWHLVDFWLYHDVFRRUGLQDWRULQ
NQRZOHGJHGHYHORSPHQWRQHFRGHVLJQ
LQWHUQDONQRZOHGJHRQHFRGHVLJQ
GHYHORSNQRZOHGJHLQWKHILHOGRIHFR
QHWZRUNVRQHFRGHVLJQDQGFRRSHUDWHV
GHVLJQDQGLVVHWWLQJXSDQLQWHUQDO
DFWLYHO\ZLWKRWKHULQVWLWXWHVDQGLQGXVWU\
KRZHYHUQRDFWLRQVDUHWDNHQ\HW
UHVHDUFKJURXSRQHFRGHVLJQ
)RUDIHZ\HDUVWKHLQVWLWXWHKDVEHHQ
7KHLQVWLWXWHSXEOLVKHVDUWLFOHVLQ
DFWLYHO\LQYROYHGLQMRLQWUHVHDUFK
PDJD]LQHVHWFPRVWO\RQDQDWLRQDO
SURJUDPPHVRQHFRGHVLJQLVDOVR
OHYHOLVDOVRSUHVHQWDWWKHODUJHVWHYHQWV
FRQWLQXRXVO\VFUHHQLQJWKHPDUNHWIRU
RQHFRGHVLJQDQGUHODWHGDVSHFWV
SRVVLELOLWLHV
7KHLQVWLWXWHSXEOLVKHVUHJXODUO\DUWLFOHV
DQGEURFKXUHVWRDQQRXQFHWKHLU
DFWLYLWLHVQDWLRQDODQGLQWHUQDWLRQDOOHYHO
DQGRUJDQLVHVHYHQWVRQHFRGHVLJQDQG
UHODWHGDVSHFWV7KHLQVWLWXWHDLPVDW
EHLQJSUHVHQWDWPRVWRIWKHHFRGHVLJQ
UHODWHGHYHQWV
0DLQLQGLFDWRU
$SSOLFDELOLW\LQSUDFWLFH
,JQRUDQFH
&RQVFLRXVQHVV
&RPSUHKHQVLRQ
&RPSHWHQFH
([FHOOHQFH
1RWKHVLVKDVWREHGRQHZLWKLQWKH
$FWLRQVDUHWDNHQDQGSUHSDUDWLRQVDUH
$WKHRUHWLFDOOLWHUDWXUHVWXG\IRUPVSDUW
7KHVWXGHQWVKDYHWRSHUIRUPD
$ELJSDUWRIWKHFRXUVHFRQVLVWVRIWKH
IUDPHZRUNRIWKHFRXUVHRQO\WKHRUHWLFDO
PDGHWRZRUNWRJHWKHUZLWKFRPSDQLHVWR
RIWKHHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPH1RSUDFWLFDO
WKHRUHWLFDOYROXQWDU\SUDFWLFDOWKHVLV
H[HFXWLRQRIDSUDFWLFDOWKHVLVDWD
7KHH[WHQWWRZKLFKWKH
FRXUVHVDUHSDUWRIWKHHGXFDWLRQDO
JLYHVWXGHQWVWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRJDLQ
WKHVLVKDVWREHGRQHDQGQRFRRSHUDWLRQ
DOZD\VLQFRRSHUDWLRQZLWKDFRPSDQ\
FRPSDQ\0RVWWKHRUHWLFDOFRXUVHVDUH
HGXFDWLRQLVDGMXVWHGWRWKH
SURJUDPPHDQGQRSODQVIRUWKHIXWXUH
SUDFWLFDOH[SHULHQFHE\GRLQJDWKHVLVLQ
ZLWKFRPSDQLHVIRUWKHH[HFXWLRQRIWKLV
FRRSHUDWLRQZLWKDFRPSDQ\
OLWHUDWXUHVWXG\+RZHYHUSODQVDUH
([DPSOHVIURPLQGXVWU\DUHJLYHQE\WKH
PDGHWROLQNWKLVOLWHUDWXUHVWXG\ZLWK
OHFWXUHUV
QHHGVRIEXVLQHVV
1RSUDFWLFDOEXVLQHVVFDVHVDUHVWXGLHG
PRVWO\WKHRUHWLFDOFRXUVHV
JLYHQE\SHUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\
%XVLQHVVFDVHVIRUPSDUWRIWKH
'XULQJWKHFRXUVHVRPHH[SHULHQFHV
JDLQLQJSUDFWLFDOH[SHULHQFHLQ
HGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPHSHUVRQVIURP
IURPLQGXVWU\DUHPHQWLRQHGEXWQRW
FRPSDQLHV
LQGXVWU\SUHVHQWWKHLUSUDFWLFDO
H[SHULHQFHVDQGH[DPSOHV
IXUWKHUH[SODLQHG
6RPHSUDFWLFDOH[DPSOHVDUHJLYHQ
5HVHDUFKSURJUDPPHVLQFRRSHUDWLRQ
GXULQJWKHFRXUVHKRZHYHUQRWYHU\
ZLWKFRPSDQLHV
GHWDLOHG
)RFXVRIHGXFDWLRQ
,QFDVHRIDQHQYLURQPHQWDOO\WDUJHWHG
,QFDVHRIDFRXUVHRQHFRGHVLJQ
&RXUVHRQHFRGHVLJQLQWHJUDWHGLQ
FRXUVHQRVSHFLILFIRFXVRQHFRGHVLJQ
LQWHJUDWHGLQXQLYHUVLW\FRXUVHVHFR
XQLYHUVLW\FRXUVHVUHIHUHQFHLVPDGHWR
XQLYHUVLW\FRXUVHV6RPHDVSHFWVRIHFR
XQLYHUVLW\FRXUVHV'HWDLOHGFRXUVHRQDOO
7KHPDLQIRFXVRIWKH
UHODWHGDVSHFWVPRUHRQVDWLVI\LQJOHJDO
GHVLJQLVPHQWLRQHGZLWKLQDJHQHUDO
LQWHUHVWLQJSURMHFWVDQGEXVLQHVVFDVHV
GHVLJQDUHORRNHGDWLQPRUHGHWDLO
HFRGHVLJQDVSHFWV/&$TXLFN/&$
HGXFDWLRQSURJUDPPH
UHTXLUHPHQWV
IUDPHZRUNZKDWZKRKRZEXWQRW
SURMHFWVWKDWDUHSHUIRUPHGZLWKLQGXVWU\
PHWKRGRORJ\LQVWUXPHQWV'I;SUDFWLFDO
LQVWUXPHQWVPHWKRGRORJ\LQWHUQDWLRQDO
UHDOO\GLVFXVVHG
HWF1RWHQRXJKGHWDLOVWREHDEOHWRVWDUW
H[DPSOHVHWFDOVRUHIHUHQFHVWRPRUH
H[SHULHQFHV'I;VWUDWHJLHV
ZLWKHFRGHVLJQMXVWRIIHUVDJHQHUDO
GHWDLOHGLQIRUPDWLRQVRXUFHV
6KRUWSUDFWLFDOWUDLQLQJQRWGHWDLOHGRI
,QFDVHRIDFRXUVHRQHQYLURQPHQWDO
WKHHFRGHVLJQLQVWUXPHQWV
YLHZRIHFRGHVLJQ
LVVXHVLQWHJUDWHGLQVSHFLILFXQLYHUVLW\
,QGLYLGXDOFRXUVHVUHODWHGWRHFRGHVLJQ
FRXUVHVHQJLQHHUHWFQRPHQWLRQLQJRI
JHQHUDODVSHFWVRIHFRGHVLJQDUH
HFRGHVLJQRUUHIHUHQFHVWROLWHUDWXUH
PHQWLRQHGGXULQJWKHFRXUVHWKHUHDUH
QRLQGLYLGXDOFRXUVHVIRUVSHFLILFWDUJHW
6RPHDVSHFWVRIHFRGHVLJQDUHORRNHG
'HWDLOHGFRXUVHRQDOOHFRGHVLJQ
,QWHQVHHFRGHVLJQWUDLQLQJDOODVSHFWVRI
,QGLYLGXDOFRXUVHVUHODWHGWR
JURXSV'XULQJWKHFRXUVHUHIHUHQFHLV
DWLQPRUHGHWDLOPHWKRGRORJ\
DVSHFWV/&$TXLFN/&$LQVWUXPHQWV
HFRGHVLJQDUHORRNHGDWLQGHWDLODQG
HQYLURQPHQWDODVSHFWVDPRQJRWKHUV
PDGHWRLQWHUHVWLQJOLWHUDWXUHDQG
LQVWUXPHQWV'I;SUDFWLFDOH[DPSOHV
PHWKRGRORJ\LQWHUQDWLRQDOH[SHULHQFHV
DOVRWKRURXJKSUDFWLFDOWUDLQLQJLQ
HFRGHVLJQRQO\PHQWLRQVRPHJHQHUDO
EXVLQHVVFDVHVSURMHFWVWKDWDUH
HWFDOVRUHIHUHQFHVWRPRUHGHWDLOHG
'I;VWUDWHJLHV
DSSO\LQJGLIIHUHQWWRROV
DVSHFWVRIHFRGHVLJQQRWLQGHWDLODQG
SHUIRUPHGZLWKLQGXVWU\HWF1RWHQRXJK
LQIRUPDWLRQVRXUFHVPRUHDLPHGDW
6KRUWSUDFWLFDOWUDLQLQJQRWGHWDLOHGRI
QRUHIHUHQFHWROLWHUDWXUHSUDFWLFDO
GHWDLOVWREHDEOHWRVWDUWZLWKHFRGHVLJQ
µ*UHHQ%XVLQHVVHV¶
WKHHFRGHVLJQLQVWUXPHQWV
H[DPSOHVHWF
MXVWRIIHUVDJHQHUDOYLHZRIHFRGHVLJQ
7DUJHWJURXSSHUVRQVIURPLQGXVWU\
7DUJHWJURXSSHUVRQVLQYROYHGLQSURGXFW
FRXUVHVRQHQYLURQPHQWDODVSHFWVDV
7DUJHWJURXS
7KHLQVWLWXWHRIIHUVJHQHUDOLQGLYLGXDO
7DUJHWJURXSQRVSHFLILFWDUJHWJURXS
7DUJHWJURXSSHUVRQVIURPWKHSURGXFW
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWWKDWZDQWWRNQRZ
GHYHORSPHQWZLWKLQDFRPSDQ\
ZHOODVHFRGHVLJQDQGUHODWHGDFWLYLWLHV
&RXUVHIRUSHUVRQVWKDWZDQWWRNQRZD
GHYHORSPHQWGHSDUWPHQWWKDWZDQWWR
PRUHDERXWHFRGHVLJQLQRUGHUWR
HQJLQHHUV
DQGWKHHFRGHVLJQSURJUDPPHFDQEH
ORWDERXWµHQYLURQPHQWDODFWLYLWLHV¶LQ
OHDUQDERXWWKHJHQHUDODVSHFWVRIHFR
HYDOXDWHWKHSRVVLELOLWLHVIRUWKHLU
JHQHUDO
GHVLJQDPRQJRWKHUWKLQJVEXWGRQRW
FRPSDQ\
LQWHQGWRDSSO\LWLQWKHQHDUIXWXUH
DGMXVWHGWRWKHWDUJHWJURXSRIWKHFRXUVH
'HWDLOHGFRXUVHIRUSHUVRQVLQYROYHGLQ
GHVLJQHUVHQJLQHHUVPDUNHWHHUV
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWKRZHYHUQR
PDQDJHUVHWF
VSHFLILFFRXUVHIRUPDQDJHUVDQG
PDUNHWHHUVWRRGHWDLOHG
7DUJHWJURXSVDUHSHUVRQVIURPDOONLQGV
RIGHSDUWPHQWVZLWKLQDFRPSDQ\
SURGXFWGHYHORSPHQWHQJLQHHULQJ
PDUNHWLQJHWFDQGDOVRPDQDJHUV

Eco-design - FTP Directory Listing

Transcripción

Documentos relacionados

Presentation leaflet: Education at the Council of Europe

Holy Cross Catholic Church

Corpus Christi Catholic Parish

For 26 years, we`ve highlighted the world`s visionary solutionaries