A Product-Based Environmental Management System

Donnelly, Kathleen M.; Salemink, Arjen; Blechinger, Frederick; Schuh, Albrecht; Boehm, Theresa

doi:10.9774/gleaf.3062.2004.su.00007

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, at the service units of both General Electric (GE) and Lucent, customer‐contact personnel first recognized that competitors were capturing their brands at end of life (EOL) to provide low‐cost replacement components. To remain competitive, their service units requested the development of reverse logistics that captured EOL product and prevented competitors from gaining access to those replacement components (Donnelly et al ; Martin et al ). That EOL and subsequent design for reuse strengthened competitiveness by reducing part costs, increasing competitor costs, and enabling the provision of the widest variety of original equipment repairs.…”

Section: Benefits Related To Products and Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits Organizations Pursue when Seeking Competitive Advantage by Improving Environmental Performance

Finster

Hernke²

2014

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryOrganizations cognitive of the strategic risk and opportunities associated with environmental challenges may employ industrial ecology (IE) concepts, methods, and tools to develop capabilities that both enhance environmental performance and provide competitive benefits. We introduce a typology of strategic benefits related to competitive advantage that are enabled by improved environmental performance. Industry examples illustrate how organizations embed IE concepts and methods into systems to generate capabilities that deliver these benefits and configure them for competitive advantage. The examples demonstrate the idiosyncratic, path-dependent nature of capability development that helps sustain advantage, especially when competitors lack cognition of the global scope of the challenge, and the risks and benefits involved.

show abstract

Section: Benefits Related To Products and Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits Organizations Pursue when Seeking Competitive Advantage by Improving Environmental Performance

Finster

Hernke²

2014

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Donnelly et al [81] developed a framework, the Product-Based Environmental Management System (PBEMS), using the Design for Environment (DfE) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach. The framework system implements environmental management through sustainable development, especially in the early design stage, to improve product quality.…”

Section: Design Evaluation and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 25,32,55,60,67,68,71,75,78,82,88,92] (ii) Products are easy to recycle at the end of product life, based on to the material used. [25,[30][31][32]55,67,68,70,71,73,81,92,96] Design suitable for assembly and disassembly (i) A new product must be designed efficiently for disassembly. [31,67,70,71,75,82,96] (ii) Identify the joints and fasteners that are easy to access and separate using standard tools.…”

Section: Design Suitable For Recyclingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review on Sustainability Characteristics Development for Wooden Furniture Design

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design of furniture products is influenced by increasing consumer interest in green products and sustainability values. However, although the demand for sustainable furniture products is high, the standardization of sustainability characteristics in furniture design has still not been achieved. A thorough literature review was conducted, which considered various sustainability characteristics that apply in industries that design furniture. This review paper aimed to identify common sustainability characteristics so that a new standard for furniture industries can be established. In this review, numerous themes were explored relating to design guidelines, design criteria, design preferences, design optimization, design evaluation and assessment, design decision making, strategic planning, design strategies, the integration of eco-design, and eco-design tools. A total of 137 articles were reviewed regarding their sustainability characteristics according to the triple bottom-line framework for a relevant product sector. Due to the limited reports on the sustainability characteristics of furniture design activities, this paper also tried to include common sustainability characteristics of non-furniture products that are available on the market. Through the review, 10 sustainability characteristics were identified for the environment, 17 for the economy, and 16 for the social dimension as being common among manufacturers when designing their products. A further in-depth analysis was conducted by mapping the characteristics to those that were significantly implemented in the design process, of which five (5) were environmental, two (2) were economic, and five (5) were social sustainability characteristics. This review is significant in helping furniture designers to use appropriate and effective sustainability standards in the design and manufacture of products that meet customers’ demands. Previous literature reviews have not clearly measured the triple bottom line. Furthermore, no definite characteristics were proposed in previous works regarding wooden furniture design, leaving a gap to be closed by future works.

show abstract

“…This leads to reaping the value of GPD that is both good for the environment and sound business sense (Donnelly et al 2004;Donnelly et al 2006). Furthermore, Donnelly et al (2006) state that a product-based EMS, in contrast to location-based, addresses the impacts hardware products have on the environment.…”

Section: Implementation Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lean and green product development: two sides of the same coin?

Johansson

Sundin

2014

Journal of Cleaner Production

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares and contrasts the lean product development (LPD) and green product development (GPD) concepts through a systematic literature review including 102 journal publications. The review resulted in 14 findings that were organised according to four dimensions: general, process, people and tools/techniques. A number of similarities between the concepts were found. For example, implementation of both concepts calls for a systems perspective where the dimensions of process-people-tools/techniques are linked holistically. Differences between the LPD and GPD concepts lie in: their goal and focus, value construct, process structure, performance metrics, and tools/techniques used. The findings do not unambiguously support that "green thinking is thinking lean" and consequently it cannot be argued that LPD and GPD are two sides of the same coin, meaning that LPD automatically leads to greener products or that GPD ensures improvements and efficiency in the product development process. However, it is reasonable to conclude that LPD and GPD belong to the same "currency". That is, the concepts share a number of similarities that indicate a synergistic relationship. This synergistic relationship has been accentuated by a nine propositions where the potential for cross-field learning is shown.

show abstract

A Product-Based Environmental Management System

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Benefits Organizations Pursue when Seeking Competitive Advantage by Improving Environmental Performance

Benefits Organizations Pursue when Seeking Competitive Advantage by Improving Environmental Performance

A Review on Sustainability Characteristics Development for Wooden Furniture Design

Lean and green product development: two sides of the same coin?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About