As a graphic representation of the different managerial factors’ interconnectedness, Herrmann (2010) suggests an integrated model of LCM, the Total Life Cycle Management framework. It is developed to serve as a model defining relations with other management disciplines and as consistent frame-of-reference for LCM work and distinguishes two disciplines within Life Cycle Management: life cycle stage spanning management disciplines and life cycle stage related ones. Disciplines spanning over several life cycle stages in this framework are: • Social Life Cycle Evaluation; • Economic Life Cycle Evaluation; • Ecological Life Cycle Evaluation (i.e. Life Cycle Assessment); • Information and Knowledge Management; • Process Management. Disciplines focusing on a certain life cycle stage are • Product Management; • Production Management; • After-Sales Management; • End-of-life Management. The integrated model of Total Life Cycle Management is shown in Fig. 22.4


The integrated model of Total Life Cycle Management is shown in Fig. 22.4. As pointed out earlier, Life Cycle Management is no step-by-step methodology, but rather a management concept with an underlying mindset of thinking in life cycles and holistic contexts. Integrating this mindset into everyday practice of the organisation is key for a successful implementation of Life Cycle Management. This integration involves many different stakeholders as elaborated in the next section. 22.2 Who is Involved in LCM? Stakeholders and Their LCM Activities The archetypical organisation applying Life Cycle Management is probably a company doing business with products of some kind (Note: The term ‘products’ in this chapter is generally understood as ‘goods and/or services’, but ‘services’ is sometimes mentioned for reasons of practical clarity). Such a company may or may not have, for instance, own product development activities, own production facilities, own logistics operations, etc

Hauschild et al., LCA: Theory and Practice


Such a company may or may not have, for instance, own product development activities, own production facilities, own logistics operations, etc. However, it may just as well be a different type of organisation such as an NGO, e.g. a consumer organisation or environmental activists group, or it can be a governmental organisation (e.g. an Environmental Protection Agency). The key common characteristic is that the organisation exerts influence on life cycles of products and/or their surrounding systems through its decisions. Using an LCA term, this could be called influence on the ‘processes’ taking place during the life cycle. For any such organisation, and Life Cycle Management


that can be many, it may be meaningful to include Life Cycle Management in their management approach in order to exert the influence in a more structured, coordinated and informed way. As an example, for a company producing a certain type of windows and seeking the environmentally preferable solutions, the decision context can, for instance, consist in having to follow EU and national regulation on particularly their type of windows, or that for certain markets specific end-of-life regulation may be given which may even be contrary to end-of-life regulation on other markets. Life Cycle Management thus involves many stakeholders inside and outside the organisation with the organisation itself being a stakeholder too. All stakeholders have individual areas of influence; each can be a catalyst but also a potential unsurmountable obstacle for sustainability efforts, and each stakeholder may thus be able to substantially influence the success of such efforts


The separation of external and internal stakeholders in the following two sections is only generic and exemplary. Depending on the size of the organisation, the function of some stakeholders may be internal or external. In small companies, the function of a legal department may, for instance, be fulfilled by an external law firm, whereas in larger companies, this function will be represented by an in-house Fig. 22.4 A framework model for Life Cycle Management suggested by Herrmann (2010). This total Life Cycle Management model shows how sustainability as management philosophy can be unfolded in a consistent way in relation to management on different levels (normative, strategic, and operational level) and to the management objects (structures, activities, behaviour of/in the organisation)


The model also shows, how the different levels and objects relate to life cycle stage-focused management disciplines (product, production, after-sales, end-of-life) and life cycle-spanning disciplines being information/knowledge management, social evaluation, economic evaluation, process management and—environmental life cycle assessment (reproduced with permission from the author) N. Bey


department. However, the point is that a stakeholder dealing with legal issues needs to be taken into account, since, e.g. legal issues may hinder the implementation of any concrete optional solution. Thus, the LCM manager has to integrate this factor when selecting optional paths for solutions. 22.2.1 External Stakeholders Seen from the perspective of an industrial company, there is a variety of external stakeholders


22.2.1 External Stakeholders Seen from the perspective of an industrial company, there is a variety of external stakeholders. Three types of such external stakeholders can be separated as having a more or less direct influence on the way a company runs parts of its business and thus as having a more or less direct influence on activities and decisions made in the company: • Customers/Consumers—being the key targets of company activities; • Governmental bodies and authorities in general—setting legislative frames and regulatory requirements around the activities; • NGOs of various kinds characterised by not being formal governmental bodies or authorities and not being declared representatives of industry. This includes environmental organisations, standardisation bodies, think tanks and academia —setting societal agendas, providing scientific insight and influencing company activities through de-facto standards (e.g


a certain ISO standard may be a voluntary instrument, but can be a de-facto requirement for certain products and/or markets). Competitors could be considered a fourth one, but are here part of the stakeholder type Industry, incl supply chain since this is where competitors exert their indirect influence on activities of a given company. Similarly, other industrial companies could collectively be considered a fifth stakeholder, e.g. as in branch organisations, but they would not exert influence on the activities other than as covered by already mentioned types of stakeholders. Last but not least, shareholders are not described as distinct stakeholder because they do not exert direct or indirect influence on a company’s business offering. Figure 22.5 shows these three stakeholders as well as a company/industry offering the product or service


Figure 22.5 shows these three stakeholders as well as a company/industry offering the product or service. The figure also indicates each stakeholder’s direct or indirect influence on the product (or service), and thus their way of influencing the decision space of the company. Customer feedback on product performance, etc. is a very typical and direct source of influence on activities at companies, e.g. related to product design improvements. Authorities have a similar direct influence, e.g. via product-type-specific regulation (e.g. the European Directives and international trade requirements). NGOs, in contrast, have typically only indirect influence on products/designs but still potentially directly on the company itself (see note B in figure caption). Life Cycle Management


If the company for instance offers windows, a specific direct influence comes from international and national laws and regulations for buildings and from local authorities that the windows must comply with, and an incentive might come from potentially existing Green Public Procurement (GPP) schemes, as they exist, e.g. in Europe for some product types. The influences will differ depending on the different markets, i.e. regions, where the windows are intended to be sold. If the product shall be sold globally, obviously the number of influences (e.g. legal compliance requirements) increases highly. This means for Life Cycle Management work, that country/market-specific approaches may make sense, rather than trying to develop and apply one global approach. 22.2.2 Internal Stakeholders—Departments in an Organisation Seen from a company perspective there are also a number of internal stakeholders, being the departments with their individual agendas and targets


Internal stakeholders can exert a great push and/or pull on the LCM function and the product/service offering of the company; and this can relate to all, both top management as well as workers in the production shop. A generic set of internal stakeholders includes the following ones (below and Fig. 22.6): Industry C (interests/ requirements) Industry B (interests/ requirements) Customers/ Consumers Industrial Company (incl. its global supply chain) Politicians/ Authorities (inter-/national) NGOs (e.g. ISO, Greenpeace) Product/ Service Fig. 22.5 The three generic types of external stakeholders influencing (directly or indirectly) the product/service business solution offered by a company: customers, politicians/authorities, and NGOs, as well as industry (incl. competitors and supply chain). Mutual relations indicated by arrows. Note A Investors and potential shareholders are not shown since they normally do not exert influence on the product/service solution


Mutual relations indicated by arrows. Note A Investors and potential shareholders are not shown since they normally do not exert influence on the product/service solution. Note B Not all relations are indicated by arrows in order to keep simplicity in illustration, e.g. politicians/authorities’ relation with NGOs N. Bey


• Marketing • Research & Development (R&D) • Product development • Purchase • Production • Sales • Legal • Communication (to internal and external stakeholders) Typically, decision-making contexts have many elements, and the LCM manager can take the role of pulling these different elements together in order to create a broad basis for decision-making. Looking at the window case, it may be that the company identified a particular material combination as environmentally preferable. However, if the production department has, e.g. difficulties in producing larger quantities at same quality levels, and or the purchase department would not be able to secure large enough quantities of it, the material combination would not be a feasible solution anyway. The same goes without saying for cost issues, although these also depend on the applied cost calculation model and business model


The same goes without saying for cost issues, although these also depend on the applied cost calculation model and business model. Only when having such a broad, combined view of influencing factors, truly holistic business decisions can be made. The LCM function closely interacts with such classic functions, like purchase, and advocates sustainability-related matters in that function’s decision context, e.g. a ban of sourcing of conflict minerals (i.e. minerals mined in conflict zones) or e.g. a design for easier disassembly. Communication Sales R&D Logistics Marketing Production Product Development Purchase Legal Product/ Service Internal players e.g. departments within company LCM relates to all! Industrial Company (incl. its global supply chain) Fig. 22.6 The generic types of internal stakeholders of industrial companies, mutual relations between them and their (direct or indirect) influence on how the product/service is designed and marketed


22.6 The generic types of internal stakeholders of industrial companies, mutual relations between them and their (direct or indirect) influence on how the product/service is designed and marketed. LCM relates to all of them Life Cycle Management


22.3 How do LCA and LCM Relate to Each Other?—The Key Role of LCA in LCM Augmenting the LCA framework of ISO 14040, Sect. 22.1 already introduced a relation between Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Management in a graphic way. The present section elaborates this relation further and points out the key role that LCA can play for practicing Life Cycle Management. On a framing note, it can be stated that Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Management have a lot in common, but also have some clear differences. Both build upon life cycle thinking, both are a basis for decision-making, both only make sense within defined system borders, and both consider activities today or in the near future and address potential effects that may occur in the far future (which require the practitioner to make assumptions and build scenarios)


However, contrary to Life Cycle Assessment, LCM (usually) neither establishes concrete cause– effect chains—and not at all in a quantitative way using algorithms and computer models—nor does LCM employ the concept of impact categories, and midpoints and endpoints. Although, LCM can be practiced without employing LCA, and although LCA cannot support all decision-making in LCM (e.g. cost-related issues), the section shows that LCA offers support on two managerial key areas: status determination and target-setting. 22.3.1 LCA Provides Environmental Quantifications Needed for LCM A classic saying goes: “What you cannot measure, you cannot manage!” Environmental Life Cycle Assessment is a prominent tool that enables such measuring and performance tracking for managerial purposes. Using Life Cycle Assessment, a practitioner can, for example: • Determine in which environmental condition or state a given product system is, e.g


Using Life Cycle Assessment, a practitioner can, for example: • Determine in which environmental condition or state a given product system is, e.g. a product on the market (shown as its contributions to a number of environmental impact categories) • Identify environmental hot spots in that system • Compare potential alternative solutions (e.g. new design suggestions) • Make scenario analyses and establish a ranking of such alternative scenarios. Conducting Life Cycle Assessments requires both thinking backwards in time and thinking forwards/ahead—i.e. life cycle thinking. In addition, LCAs create outcomes in the form of insights and results, but also in the form of questions that arise along the way. The latter are dealt with through making assumptions on past and/or future conditions in the life cycle. However, LCA cannot provide suggestions for managerial actions that put such outcomes into practice within a decision N. Bey


context. For instance, an LCA-based overview of impact potentials of different options may show one option as being preferable. However, by definition, the LCA cannot show, whether an environmentally preferable option, e.g. a certain engineering material for a window frame, would still be preferable, if other aspects were taken into account, e.g. the capability of a potential supplier to deliver that preferable material in the required quantity, quality, price and time frame. Exactly here, Life Cycle Management comes into play, since LCM can be used to integrate several aspects and related tools, including LCA, into one holistic, sustainability-oriented set of decision criteria (see Sect. 22.1.1). 22.3.2 Developing Key Performance Indicators for Application in LCM Once an organisation has determined its mission, identified all its stakeholders, and defined its goals, it needs a way to measure progress towards those goals


Life Cycle Assessment is a crucial tool to conduct and support such progress measurements, since results from LCAs can be used to define performance indicators, which are a standard means used in management processes. Indicators are typically aggregated indications of the state of a given system at a certain point in time and/or of the performance of a system over a given period of time. One can distinguish several types of indicators; e.g. leading (target-setting) versus lagging (monitoring) indicators, result indicators versus performance indicators, and key result indicators (KRIs) as well as key performance indicators (KPIs), see, e.g. Parmenter (2015). Irrespective of what type of indicator the Life Cycle Manager decides to use, LCA results can often crucially enrich such indicators or even entirely populate them, since they are quantitative by nature, thus LCA is a key tool in setting targets in LCM


An example of an indicator in LCM may be energy requirement of a manufacturing process—or of an entire production site (then often further specified as energy requirement per product produced, per year, per production line, etc.). This indicator can be populated using different units, for instance Mega Joules [MJ], kilowatt-hours [kWh] or other physical SI units. However, it could also be quantified in LCA-based units such as Global Warming Potential [kg CO2-eq]. This could then support a comparison with and/or addition to other activities of the organisation. Transport and logistics activities of the organisation would, for instance, typically be monitored in terms of kilometres [km] (and as with production indicators, typically be specified further, e.g. per product). In the LCA context, one would additionally track employed means of transport (i.e. road, air, rail, ship) and potentially a particular vehicle type (e.g. five ton-truck, container vessel, bulk freight train, etc.)


road, air, rail, ship) and potentially a particular vehicle type (e.g. five ton-truck, container vessel, bulk freight train, etc.). Using LCA, the transport activities would be quantifiable in kilograms of CO2-eq as well, and a comparison with the above energy requirements of the production site or the entire organisation could be done —made possible through LCA. Life Cycle Management


Key aspects of managerial indicators are summarised below (compare, e.g. Gries and Restrepo 2011): • They help an organisation define and measure progress toward organisational goals • They are quantifiable metrics, agreed to beforehand, that reflect the critical success factors of an organisation • They differ depending on the organisation, e.g. – A company may have as one of its KPIs the percentage of its income that comes from return customers, or revenue from eco-labelled products – A school may focus its KPIs on graduation rates of its students • They must reflect the organisation’s goals, must be key to its success/activities, and must be quantifiable/measurable (!) • They need to be defined, incl.: – instructions on how to calculate them, => different individuals must always reach the same KPI value when calculating a particular KPI with the same background data – a definition that does not change from year to year (i.e


long-term definition needed); • They can be used to set targets When developing KPIs for any application context, the following needs to be observed: • The landscape of data sources may be non-harmonised (e.g. not all source data may cover the same year, same location, etc.). This means: Observe ‘data landscape’ and availability of input data • KPI inflation—Aim is not to measure what can be measured, but to measure what should be measured. This means: The fewer KPIs the better • Pseudo accuracy: since ‘Bad data in’ leads to ‘bad data out’, this means: Interpret the KPI values related to their underlying data quality In order to support the reader in developing KPIs genuinely meaningful for LCM work, and in reflection of current paradigm-setting developments in business and science, the remainder of this section deals with very concrete characteristics of environmental sustainability-relevant KPIs, points out problems and describes ways to address these


Based on studying company reporting, one can distinguish two types of environmental sustainability-related KPIs seen today in many companies’ communications: Intensity-based KPIs and company-wide KPIs, and e.g. (Bjørn et al. 2016a) pointed out problems that both types have: • Intensity-based KPIs: – Examples: kg CO2-eq emitted per product or Emissions per $ of revenue N. Bey


Main problems: – Performance depends largely on the chosen reference (e.g. last year’s product model? Market average? Competitor’s product?) – Total impact may still increase, if sales increase (which usually is a company target—depending on business model) • Company-wide KPIs: – Example: kg CO2-eq emitted per year Main problem: – Misleading, for example if company is outsourcing and does not account for the outsourced activities One can argue that an additional problem of both KPI types is, that they do not indicate how much impact reduction—or which concrete indicator value—would be enough in order to reach sustainable levels


Organisations such as the WBCSD and the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBT)—a collaboration established in 2014 between UN Global Compact, Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), World Resources Institute (WRI), and the World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF)—have begun to address this missing link in suggesting methods to determine concrete targets for application in the company context. The SBTs relate to greenhouse gas emissions only, i.e. they only relate to this part of environmental sustainability, see e.g. www.sciencebasedtargets.org and Krabbe et al. (2015). An example for such a KPI is given below, incl. related problems: • Absolute-target-based KPIs – “We as company x will by year y reduce our global emissions to z tons CO2-eq per year”. Problems with this absolute type of KPI are, however 1. When communicating such targets, the company is bound to them, since they are clear and trackable


Problems with this absolute type of KPI are, however 1. When communicating such targets, the company is bound to them, since they are clear and trackable. This kind of lock-in is by many companies considered a risk and thus not pursued by many companies, even if they recognise Earth as a finite system in their reporting, compare, e.g. (Bjørn et al. 2016a). 2. The challenge of defining targets for other environmental impact categories than Global Warming (i.e. for impact categories where there is no international agreement and/or where targets are per se more difficult to determine, e.g. for regional and local impact categories). The development of absolute KPIs is accelerated by the Two-degree-target agreed upon at the UN Climate Change summit COP21 in late 2015, where the global community committed to keeping greenhouse gas emissions at levels, so that average global temperature rise by the year 2050 stays well below 2 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels


It has also been shown, that such absolute indicators can be integrated into existing LCA methodology for other global impact Life Cycle Management


categories than Global Warming Potential, e.g. for Terrestrial Acidification (Bjørn and Hauschild 2015; Bjørn et al. 2016b). Ways of consistently breaking down high-level targets into targets for lower levels of decision-making are being suggested, e.g. by Rödger et al. (2016). In conclusion, the development of internationally agreed absolute indicator limits and their subsequent broad application cannot be seen to happen in the near future, but individual companies may adopt the principle and develop their own absolute indicators, as some companies already do. The above examples and issues show that KPI development requires overview, understanding and utmost care by the practitioner in order to produce meaningful KPIs, which can trustfully be used as the central management instrument they are. This is even more important when applied within LCM, since it can be considered an even more complex field than many other management fields


This is even more important when applied within LCM, since it can be considered an even more complex field than many other management fields. 22.4 How is LCM Applied in Practice? A Brief LCM Case Study Application of Life Cycle Management fundamentally incorporates that the practitioner makes choices before and during the application itself, rather than that she or he follows a predetermined procedure. The reason for this is that LCM is a management concept—as explained earlier in this chapter—and not a deterministic method or algorithm, with concrete steps or rules, that would lead to concrete, repeatable outputs, if triggered by same inputs. LCM application can be described as consisting of two elements: 1. Individually selecting one or several tools from the collection that may be called the ‘LCM toolbox’ (UNEP/SETAC 2007)—and; 2. Doing this in the concrete context of the given organisation—i.e


Individually selecting one or several tools from the collection that may be called the ‘LCM toolbox’ (UNEP/SETAC 2007)—and; 2. Doing this in the concrete context of the given organisation—i.e. in collaboration with different departments and under recognition of a variety of factors, such as the organisation’s position in supply chains and the intended application field Thus, there is never a one-size-fits-all way of applying LCM. Rather, each organisation needs to determine for itself and for the concrete product or activity, which combination of tools they consider appropriate for managing life cycle matters of that product or activity. A typical starting point for applying LCM is product innovation and product development processes. From here, LCM activities often radiate back and forth to and from production and operations and to and from marketing and communications, especially sustainability reporting (see e.g. McAloone and Bey (2009))


McAloone and Bey (2009)). Taking the example of deciding among alternative materials for a new type of façade window frames, an LCM practitioner may come into play in the following, diverse decision contexts: Starting point would probably be that the window company has decided which markets, i.e. global regions and/or countries, the new N. Bey


type of windows (and frames) shall be sold in, and in which target quantities and at which target sales price. In parallel, the design engineering/R&D (Research & Development) department has probably determined a number of technically feasible materials (e.g. a metal, a type of wood, and a composite material—plus maybe combinations of them). Although usually not practiced, the company might already here set a target environmental impact for the windows as LCM activity, and quantify this target in terms of a certain maximum Global Warming Potential the windows should not exceed (potentially further described, e.g. for modules of the window or for an annual production of all production sites or for one selected site, etc.). The target figure may be related to the window company’s sustainability strategy and sustainability targets, which they may have published in their sustainability reporting. Supportive methods for such detailed target-setting are suggested, e.g. by Rödger et al


Supportive methods for such detailed target-setting are suggested, e.g. by Rödger et al. (2016). Taking into account the different generic external and internal stakeholder types of customers, competitors, NGOs, governmental organisations as well as departments within the organisation (see Sect. 22.2), the company would check legal requirements and de-facto market requirements on the selected markets. This could refer to, e.g. legally banned materials or substances on that market for that type of product, but also to certain environmental labels and certifications that key competitors on that market have certified their products with. Or it could mean to apply for newly introduced, not yet widely applied labels that may represent a competitive edge on that market. Both, legislation and de-facto market requirements, are often quite different from country to country and especially from region to region, e.g. between Asia and North America


Both, legislation and de-facto market requirements, are often quite different from country to country and especially from region to region, e.g. between Asia and North America. Obviously, if the chosen market is global this would require further decisions, e.g. whether or not to prioritise one label over others or to work towards certification against all labels on the global market, which of course has an impact on the cost of the product. Also, sustainability-related campaigns by NGOs, e.g. against specific labour practices or certain technologies, would be mapped as far as possible and analysed in terms of potential threats to sales of the product on the selected market(s). If a stakeholder campaign or similar activity is identified, decision options are either to ignore, to fight or to accept the respective stakeholder demand. An example of the latter is the following one from the paper and pulp industry: the global tissue paper producer Kimberly-Clark Corp


An example of the latter is the following one from the paper and pulp industry: the global tissue paper producer Kimberly-Clark Corp. and Greenpeace agreed in 2009 on a new fibre policy and on a regular review process, ending a several-years Greenpeace campaign—an agreement to the benefit of all parties. Back to the window example: In parallel to related information becoming available for the LCM decision-maker, the window producer’s R&D department may practice ecodesign in making life-spanning scenarios for the product and taking design actions with focus on selected life cycle stages. The developers may, for instance, design the windows for easy disassembly (focus: end-of-life stage of the windows’ life cycle) or design them in a modular way, allowing to easily attach and exchange components such as blinds, motoric actuators, etc. or optimise insulation capabilities—all this for the different materials under consideration (i.e. focus: use stage)


or optimise insulation capabilities—all this for the different materials under consideration (i.e. focus: use stage). At the same time, purchasers and designers could be supported in Life Cycle Management


choosing the exact material composition, e.g. the alloy of a metal and the supplier(s) selected to deliver raw materials and semi-manufactured goods (focus: materials stage and transportation stage). Furthermore, the production department as well as logistics and also service/after-sales departments could be drawn into the materials decision in order to, e.g. ensure manufacturability and secure availability, etc. (focus: manufacturing stage). Early in this process, the respective departments would also identify legal requirements on the target markets, such as safety norms, flammability norms and insulation capacity as well as potentially important voluntary requirements, which represent de-facto market requirements, such as certain environmental labels (e.g. certified wood, or eco-labels for the entire product). Last, but not least, a core department responsible for business model options— i.e


certified wood, or eco-labels for the entire product). Last, but not least, a core department responsible for business model options— i.e. the board of management—would be strongly involved, if a material choice should represent a strategic change, as for instance seen in the shift to aluminium used for car bodies which some automotive companies and suppliers have made. In the window case, this could be the shift to composite materials, requiring, e.g. entirely new production technologies and design options and constraints. In conjunction with potential regulative developments, e.g. as currently seen in Europe towards Circular Economy and the released action plan (EU Commission 2015), the window producer could consider a business model that incorporates take-back of their windows at their end-of-life—an option which then would have to be analysed for its environmental and economic viability


22.5 What Does LCM Require and Yield in an Organisation? Application and Integration of LCM Life Cycle Management costs time, requires learning curves at the different departments and—in essence—necessitates new thinking by all involved individuals. Such costs and obstacles often surface in many places and on many occasions, e.g. in the course of time-consuming data collection, life cycle modelling, communications, or when trying to determine, what in the particular company’s context actually is meant with the term ‘sustainability’. However, although very difficult to pin-point and quantify, LCM also yields gains, e.g. in the form of increased knowledge about the organisation’s own processes and life cycle chains, incl. better insight into conditions at suppliers, due to the ‘total’ overview. LCM may also reduce risk and increase opportunities, as well as improve the ability to respond early to new legislation and market trends in the field


LCM may also reduce risk and increase opportunities, as well as improve the ability to respond early to new legislation and market trends in the field. In that sense, LCM generally increases the resilience of the organisation that practices LCM, since it encourages taking both short-term, detailed views and long-term, helicopterperspective views on company activities. Sustainability matters are manifold and so are the organisations that work with them. LCM can, of course, be practiced in the multi-national corporation, in the N. Bey


small or medium-sized enterprise, in the family-run company and in the one-person firm—and this irrespective of where on the Planet they are located. Since LCM is a translator of sustainability matters into business practice, LCM itself needs to be manifold and highly adaptable (a bit comparable to a Swiss Army knife which integrates many tools and makes them available in one pocket-sized product), so that pursuing LCM can produce improvements of the sustainability matters for any organisation and in any department of that organisation. Due to this necessarily multifaceted character, Life Cycle Management may well be perceived as diffuse. However, LCM is the means to put sustainability approaches into practice, since no measurement and assessment tool (such as LCA) can tell by itself what its results are to be used for or, e.g


However, LCM is the means to put sustainability approaches into practice, since no measurement and assessment tool (such as LCA) can tell by itself what its results are to be used for or, e.g. what ranges of these results the organisation should deem desirable (beyond legal threshold values, if applicable, and also this context is not known to the tool). Thus, having tools available in an organisation is not enough (even if these tools should in fact be easy and effective to use, which is not always the case): It requires an overall management concept, such as LCM, to reach a coherent, holistic approach, practiced in the relevant parts of the organisation. Last, but not least, the long-term survival—i.e. the long-term successful application—is key for any sustainability-supporting approach. Thus, the integration and anchoring of LCM in the organisation are just as important as the applicability of the tools it comprises


Thus, the integration and anchoring of LCM in the organisation are just as important as the applicability of the tools it comprises. Addressing this key aspect, approaches to map and quantify organisational maturity and to build adapted capability have been developed and are increasingly in focus (as introduced in Sect. 22.1.2). LCM can be integrated in an organisation in two principle ways: via projects and/or via functions (plus via combinations of both). The way of choice depends on the type of organisation and on preferences of the organisation. In project-based organisations, typically companies that design, produce and sell one-of-a-kind products or small series, most prominently construction companies, LCM can be integrated into the Stage/Gate process that the projects usually are managed by


Project managers and portfolio managers, in this case, need in to have a good understanding of the LCM concept and act as life cycle managers, unless a dedicated LCM specialist is included in the project team. This depends on the size of the project team and of the organisation behind, leading to the circumstance that often only larger teams and organisations have a dedicated LCM role in project teams— and this role can even be taken on by a consultant. In function-based organisations, typically mass-producing or batch-producing manufacturing companies (which our window company probably would be), and in combined structures, such as matrix organisations, Life Cycle Management can be integrated by establishing dedicated departments and/or appointing individuals and adapting set organisational processes, so that LCM aspects relevant in the particular company ultimately become integrated into day-to-day procedures


In larger organisations, Life Cycle Management is typically not one outspoken activity or position, but it is in the vast majority of such companies embedded in Life Cycle Management


and dealt with by several departments and under many titles, often two to three departments (typically a corporate one plus the production-environmental department plus, maybe, a product-related one, see Sect. 22.1.1), rather than by one department alone. Ultimate goal in both principal integration situations is, that all project members and all departments are aligned and that, eventually, the LCM function becomes obsolete and a self-running part of all other functions. In either way of integration, the definition of KPIs is key in order to be able to set targets and track performance (see Sect. 22.3.2), e.g. at departments. As explained earlier, any LCM approach is tailor-made in the course of finding the individually best-suited combination of tools that together represent the company-specific approach. Figure 22.7 shows an example of such a combined approach towards sustainability/LCM work at a company, integrating several elements. Fig


Figure 22.7 shows an example of such a combined approach towards sustainability/LCM work at a company, integrating several elements. Fig. 22.7 An example of an integrated approach (screen shot of an intranet page): The company Steelcase, globally providing office furniture and office space solutions, combined three elements/tools in their approach. Due to product type, material types, life cycles, markets and other factors, they chose to use both LCA, Materials Chemistry (i.e. cradle-to-cradle) and Reuse and recycling—already in 2007—and communicated this to internal and external stakeholders N. Bey


22.6 Conclusions This chapter described Life Cycle Management and the different aspects it involves —both from its contents and from its application and integration in organisations. Many examples relate to industrial companies but the principles are the same in municipalities and other organisations. In all contexts, Life Cycle Management has the below key characteristics: • LCM is no step-by-step methodology or one-size-fits-all approach but a management concept that can and needs to be adapted to any organisation’s context, i.e. LCM is always tailored to the specific organisation. • LCM deals with the managerial tasks related to practicing sustainable development in an organisation—it could thus also be referred to as Sustainability Management. • LCM requires collaboration between several departments within the organisation and with external stakeholders, such as supply chain partners


• LCM requires collaboration between several departments within the organisation and with external stakeholders, such as supply chain partners. • As with any other management discipline, practicing LCM requires setting targets and tracking performance. Such targets and related performance indicators can be set based on relative terms but may also be set as absolute terms. Practicing LCM in a consistent way aims at ensuring that improvements in system performance can be achieved while also making sure that this does not lead to either sub-optimisations or burden shifting in the company/organisation as a whole and/or in the relevant life cycles. Bjørn, A., Hauschild, M.Z.: Introducing carrying capacity based normalization in LCA: framework and development of references at midpoint level. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. (2015). doi:10.1007/ s11367-015-0899-2 Bjørn, A., Bey, N., Georg, S., et al.: Is earth recognized as a finite system in corporate responsibility reporting? J. Clean. Prod


Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. (2015). doi:10.1007/ s11367-015-0899-2 Bjørn, A., Bey, N., Georg, S., et al.: Is earth recognized as a finite system in corporate responsibility reporting? J. Clean. Prod. (2016a). doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.095 Bjørn, A., Margni, M., Roy, P.O., et al.: A proposal to measure absolute environmental sustainability in life cycle assessment. Ecol. Indic. (2016b). doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.046 EU Commission.: COM(2015) 614 final, ANNEX to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Closing the loop—An EU action plan for the Circular Economy (2015) GRI/UN Global Compact/WBCSD.: SDG Compass—UN Sustainable Development Goals Compass. www.sdgcompass.org (2015) Gries, B., Restrepo, J.: KPI measurement in engineering design—a case study. In: International Conference on Engineering Design ICED11 (2011) Guinée, J.B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., et al.: Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 90–96 (2011)


Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 90–96 (2011). doi:10.1021/es101316v Herrmann, C.: Ganzheitliches life cycle management. (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01421-5 ISO.: Environmental Management systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use (ISO 14001:2015), 3rd ed. ISO, The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2015) Life Cycle Management


Kloepffer, W.: State-of-the-art in life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int. J. LCA 13, 89–95 (2008). doi:10.1065/lca2008. 02.376 Krabbe, O., Linthorst, G., Blok, K., et al.: Aligning corporate greenhouse-gas emissions targets with climate goals. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 1057–1060 (2015). doi:10.1038/nclimate2770 Linkov, I., Seager, T.P.: Coupling multi-criteria decision analysis, life-cycle assessment, and risk assessment for emerging threats. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 5068–5074 (2011). doi:10.1021/ es100959q McAloone, T.C., Bey, N.: Environmental improvement through product development—a guide (DTU’s eco-design webpages www.ecodesign.dtu.dk) (2009) Parmenter, D.: Key Performance Indicators: Developing, Implementing, and Using Winning KPIs, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2015) Pigosso, D.C.A., Rozenfeld, H., McAloone, T.C.: Ecodesign maturity model: a management framework to support ecodesign implementation into manufacturing companies


Wiley, Hoboken (2015) Pigosso, D.C.A., Rozenfeld, H., McAloone, T.C.: Ecodesign maturity model: a management framework to support ecodesign implementation into manufacturing companies. J. Clean. Prod. 59, 160–173 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.040 Prado, V,, Rogers, K,, Seager, T.P.: Integration of MCDA tools in valuation of comparative life cycle assessment. In: Life Cycle Assessment Handbook: A Guide for Environmentally Sustainable Products. (2012). doi:10.1002/9781118528372.ch19 Rödger, J.-M., Bey, N., Alting, L.: The Sustainability Cone—a holistic framework to integrate sustainability thinking into manufacturing. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. (2016). doi:10.1016/j. cirp.2016.04.033 Sonnemann, G., Margni, M., et al.: Life cycle management. LCA Compend—Complete World Life Cycle Assess. (2015). doi:10.1007/978-94-017-7221-1 Swarr, T.E., Asselin, A.-C., i Canals, L.M., et al.: Building organizational capability for life cycle management. In: Sonnemann, G., Margni, M


(2015). doi:10.1007/978-94-017-7221-1 Swarr, T.E., Asselin, A.-C., i Canals, L.M., et al.: Building organizational capability for life cycle management. In: Sonnemann, G., Margni, M. (eds.) Life Cycle Management, pp. 239–256 (2015) UNEP/SETAC: Life cycle management: a business guide to sustainability. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Paris (France) (2007) UNEP/SETAC: LCM navigator for SMEs. www.lifecycleinitiative.org/LCM_navigator/index_c. html (2008) Author Biography Niki Bey mechanical engineer and expert in applied life cycle thinking in organisations. Works since the late 1990s with Ecodesign, Sustainable manufacturing, Product/Service Systems, Life Cycle Management and Sustainability strategy development in consultancy and academia across many industrial sectors with focus on integration of approaches in real life applications. N. Bey


Chapter 23 Ecodesign Implementation and LCA Tim C. McAloone and Daniela C.A. Pigosso Abstract Ecodesign is a proactive product development approach that integrates environmental considerations into the early stages of the product development process so to improve the environmental performance of products. In this chapter, the ecodesign concept will be discussed, in terms of its implementation into manufacturing companies. Existing methods and tools for ecodesign implementation will be described, focusing on a multifaceted approach to environmental improvement through product development. Additionally, the use of LCA in an ecodesign implementation context will be further described in terms of the challenges and opportunities, together with the discussion of a selection of simplified LCA tools. Finally, a seven-step approach for ecodesign implementation which has been applied by several companies will be described


Finally, a seven-step approach for ecodesign implementation which has been applied by several companies will be described. Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, the reader should be able to: • Define ecodesign and understand its importance in the context of sustainability. • Understand the extensive variety of ecodesign methods and tools. • Understand the main challenges of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) implementation in the context of ecodesign. • Understand how to communicate LCA results within an ecodesign activity. • Explain simplified LCA approaches for implementation into ecodesign programmes. • Understand how to measure progress and set goals for ecodesign implementation. • Carry out a seven-step approach for ecodesign implementation into companies. T.C. McAloone (&)  D.C.A


• Understand how to measure progress and set goals for ecodesign implementation. • Carry out a seven-step approach for ecodesign implementation into companies. T.C. McAloone (&)  D.C.A. Pigosso Section of Engineering Design and Product Development, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: tmca@dtu.dk © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_23


23.1 Introduction to Ecodesign There are many reasons for the environmental problems we experience in the world. Massive population growth and an increase in relative wealth (and thus growing consumerism) on a global level are two significant contributors to the strain on our fragile ecosystem. Manufactured products are essential for the wealth of society and for our desired quality of life. However, our growing consumption of products lies directly or indirectly at the root of a great deal of the pollution and depletion of resources that the consumerist society causes (Commission of European Communities 2001). Environmental impacts are caused by every product in some way or another, from the extraction of raw materials, through their production and use, to the management and final disposal of waste (Baumann et al. 2002)


2002). Regardless of the nature, size and time of occurrence of environmental impacts for a product, the vast majority of environmental impacts are actually decided already in the very early phases of product development. In fact it is estimated that approximately 80% of a product’s environmental performance1 is fixed during the early phases of the product development process (McAloone and Bey 2011). It is during product development that materials, technologies and the product’s lifetime are decided. The product developer has thus a great influence on the product’s life cycle and therefore also on the later occurring environmental impacts and on the environmental performance of the products. For this reason, it is important that the product developer integrates environmental considerations carefully and systematically into the product development activity (McAloone and Bey 2011). This integration of environmental considerations into product development is called ecodesign


This integration of environmental considerations into product development is called ecodesign. Ecodesign is a proactive approach to environmental management during product development, with the aim of integrating environmental considerations into the product development process. The goal is to minimise environmental impacts throughout the product’s life cycle, without compromising other essential criteria such as performance, functionality, aesthetics, quality and cost (Johansson 2002; van Weenen 1995). Ecodesign requires a balanced view of the whole product life cycle, focusing attention on the reduction of the major environmental impacts of the product, throughout its lifetime


Ecodesign requires a balanced view of the whole product life cycle, focusing attention on the reduction of the major environmental impacts of the product, throughout its lifetime. Ecodesign calls on the knowledge and competencies of many disciplines in the product development process, as considerations about materials, processes, logistics, recyclability—and many more—are likely to arise as potential contributors to an improved environmental profile of the product design in hand (Brones and Carvalho 2015). The involvement of many functions and professions in this process gives rise to multiple viewpoints and increases the likelihood for optimal solutions (McAloone and Bey 2011). 1The environmental performance of a product can be determined by the sum of all the environmental impacts it causes during its lifetime (Nielsen and Wenzel 2002). T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


Taking a systematic approach to understanding where and why a product has environmental impacts in its lifetime can lead to competitive advantages for the company. It has been demonstrated, for instance, that environmental thinking in product development leads to efficient products, which are both economically viable to produce, cheaper to operate and maintain, and more robust during their lifetimes (de Caluwe 2004; Eagan and Finster 2001). Designing products with improved environmental performance is a necessary action for industries to ensure both competitive and environmental advantages (Bey et al. 2013). The systematic incorporation of environmental considerations during the product development process (i.e. ecodesign implementation) is not an easy task, especially in the early stages, which are characterised by greater degrees of design freedom, but also limited information about the product and its pending manufacturing processes


Over the past couple of decades, several approaches and methodologies have been developed to support manufacturing companies to integrate ecodesign into their product development processes (Baumann et al. 2002; Pigosso et al. 2014). For ecodesign to be successful, activity at three main levels of the company is required: • Strategic (or managerial), to set the goals and expectations throughout the whole organisation; • Tactical, to schedule and prioritise the good intentions of management; and • Operational, to deploy ecodesign methods and tools directly, within product development projects. Strategic approaches are related to the integration of ecodesign into the strategic decision-making and business processes


Strategic approaches are related to the integration of ecodesign into the strategic decision-making and business processes. Some examples of activities carried out in the context of a strategic ecodesign implementation include: definition of environmental targets for the product portfolio; deployment of responsibilities across different hierarchical levels; development of a communication strategy to customers and stakeholders; development of strategic competences in the organisation; etc. In other words, strategic-level ecodesign implementation creates the foundation, the goals and the resources in the organisation for the ecodesign process to be a success (Pigosso et al. 2013a, b). At the tactical level of the company, the task is to ensure that the goals, strategies, and visions of the strategic management group are prioritised and organised in a way that they can be integrated into the product development process


This activity is very important, as without it, no decisions can be made to ensure a systematic approach to ecodesign. It is at this level that: (1) candidate ecodesign projects are chosen, (2) methods and tools are prioritised and integrated into the product development process and (3) the product development process is generally updated to include environmental considerations. It is also here that ecodesign implementation roadmaps are made and deployed (Pigosso et al. 2013a, b). The actual development of products with improved environmental performance takes place during the so-called operational ecodesign implementation, which starts Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


in the early phases of the product development process, where the greatest improvement opportunities lie. Identifying the desired environmental performance of products, the environmental hotspots (environmental aspects and life cycle stages that have the highest environmental impact), developing alternative product concepts based on ecodesign guidelines, selecting concepts to be further developed based on their environmental performance, etc., are some examples of activities carried out in the operational implementation of ecodesign. The ambition for ecodesign implementation is often correlated to the main internal and external drivers of the company for ecodesign implementation. Usually, companies that are applying ecodesign due to a legislative compliance driver (e.g. compliance with European directives) have a lower ambition when compared to companies that are implementing ecodesign due to an internal strategic driver (e.g. to a sustainability strategy or organisational values)


to a sustainability strategy or organisational values). Companies that are implementing ecodesign due to customer requirements, for example, usually begin the ecodesign implementation with a limited ambition, which is subsequently expanded as the companies learn the other business benefits linked to ecodesign implementation. 23.2 Ecodesign Methods and Tools Since the establishment of ecodesign as a product development practice and as a research object for scientists, several ecodesign methods and tools have been developed—both by academics and in industry. Currently, more than 150 ecodesign methods and tools exist (Pigosso et al. 2014), and the number continues to grow. The methods and tools that exist have various goals and focuses, such as “evaluate environmental impacts”, “reveal potential trade-offs” (Byggeth and Hochschorner 2006) and “facilitate the choice between different aspects” (Baumann et al. 2002; Byggeth and Hochschorner 2006)


2002; Byggeth and Hochschorner 2006). In this section, we provide an overview of a selection of existing ecodesign methods and tools. Ecodesign methods and tools are defined as any systematic means for the management and implementation of ecodesign at an operational level. Ecodesign methods and tools are usually applied in the early phases of the product development process (Fig. 23.1), where the largest improvement opportunities lie. Fig. 23.1 One way to depict the product development process (Andreasen and Hein 1987) T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


As mentioned earlier, a large amount of the environmental impacts of a product’s life cycle are determined in the early phases of its development (McAloone and Bey 2011). According to their main purpose, the ecodesign methods and tools can be classified into three main groups (Pigosso et al. 2011a, b): • Prescriptive: Present generic guidelines (from a pre-established set of best practices to minimise the environmental impacts); • Comparative: Compare the performance of different products, concepts or design alternatives for a given product; • Analytical: Identify improvement potentials by means of an assessment of the most relevant environmental aspects. A few examples of ecodesign methods and tools, classified according to the product development phase (Fig. 23.1) and type of tool (prescriptive, comparative and analytical), are presented in Table 23.1


23.1) and type of tool (prescriptive, comparative and analytical), are presented in Table 23.1. Most of the existing ecodesign methods and tools are focused on the early stages of product development, mainly in the “product principle” and “product design” phases. Furthermore, there is a tendency to the use of analytical tools rather than to comparative and prescriptive ones. The ecodesign methods and tools presented in Table 23.1 are further described in Table 23.2, with an indication of references, where more information can be obtained. 23.3 LCA and Ecodesign In this section we explore in some more depth, how LCA can be used in an ecodesign context, to support the development of products with improved environmental performance


23.3 LCA and Ecodesign In this section we explore in some more depth, how LCA can be used in an ecodesign context, to support the development of products with improved environmental performance. Table 23.1 Examples of ecodesign methods and tools (all are cited in Tables 23.2 and 23.3) Analytical Comparative Prescriptive Recognition of need Eco-QFD STRETCH (Strategic environmental challenge) Investigation of need Eco-roadmap EcoBenchmarking Product principle Eco-function matrix LiDs wheel Ten golden rules Product design LCA Environmental effect analysis (EEA) DfE matrix MECO matrix EcoDesign pilot Production preparation – – – Execution EcoValue Eco communication matrix Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


Table 23.2 Description of presented ecodesign methods and tools Method/tool Description Eco-QFD (quality function deployment) (Ernzer et al. 2005) Supports the transfer of market insights to the product’s requirements list. In this method, the environmental demands are acquired from an expert team instead of directly from the customer. It allows the product developer to focus on the internal (product properties) and not the external environmental parameters (e.g. generating energy, waste treatment) STRETCH (strategic environmental challenge) (Cramer and Stevels 1997; Stevels 2007) Focuses on assessing improvements in the most promising environmental opportunities throughout the product life cycle. Considers product business units and market strategies, in addition to potential changes in environmental pressure exerted by external stakeholders


Considers product business units and market strategies, in addition to potential changes in environmental pressure exerted by external stakeholders. It consists of five steps: (1) Identify the major forces that influence business strategy, (2) Develop scenarios that the company can adopt based on core strengths and develop a list of potential marketing strategies for the product. (3) Specify opportunities for environmental improvements for each scenario. (4) Select the environmental challenges that will lead to substantial improvements in the environmental performance of products. (5) Address the selected environmental challenges Eco-roadmap (Donnelly et al. 2006a, b) Concise graphical tool that captures short- and long-term environmental drivers (legislation [enacted and future] and customer requirements) in one document. The eco-roadmap contains the actual product-relevant legislation and customer requirements in the scope of sustainable and environmentally compliant product design


The eco-roadmap contains the actual product-relevant legislation and customer requirements in the scope of sustainable and environmentally compliant product design. The eco-roadmap also highlights draft legislation, emerging customer requirements, and industry trends for future sustainable and environmentally compliant product features EcoBenchmarking (Boks and Diehl 2005; Boks and Stevels 2003; Wever et al. 2005, 2007) Supports organisations to understand and develop a critical attitude towards their own products, to create awareness about environmental issues in and outside a company, and thus to find environmental improvement options for their products that are feasible for implementation. The method is based on 10 steps with specific goals and questions to be answered and can be adjusted in two ways (light vs. extended; information vs. physical) depending on the context and needs Eco-function matrix (Lagerstedt et al


extended; information vs. physical) depending on the context and needs Eco-function matrix (Lagerstedt et al. 2003) A communication platform for functional priorities and environmental impacts is established by combining the Environmental Profile and Functional Profile of the product. The functional profile describes and evaluates properties, areas and activities that are associated with the functionality of the product and its commercial viability. The Environmental Profile identifies the characteristics of the products that are correlated with the generation of environmental impacts. It can be applied at different stages of product development, according to the degree of specification and detailing of Environmental and Functional Profile (continued) T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


Table 23.2 (continued) Method/tool Description EcoStrategy wheel (Knight and Jenkins 2009) Contains eight strategies (function optimisation, reducing the impact on the use stage, reducing the use of materials, choosing the right materials, optimisation of lifetime, production optimisation, optimisation of treatment of end of life, improved distribution) to environmentally improve products and is based on knowledge of the team members. Strategies are used as a checklist and are sources of inspiration to support meetings using brainstorming techniques Ten golden rules (Luttropp and Lagerstedt 2006) Consists of a summary of several guidelines and manuals used by companies from various sectors, with recommendations of environmental strategies. It can be used to improve the environmental performance of the concept of a product or to compare various alternative concepts


It can be used to improve the environmental performance of the concept of a product or to compare various alternative concepts. In order to be used by a particular company, it must first be transformed and customised according to the characteristics of the company and its developed products Life cycle assessment (LCA) (Bhander et al. 2003) Quantifies environmental impacts of the whole life cycle of goods and services. It involves all successive stages of a product system, ranging from extraction of raw materials and energy required in manufacturing, use and distribution until the final disposition of the product, which may include recycling of materials and components, and other ways of post-consumption treatments Environmental effect analysis (EEA) (Lindahl 1999, 2000) Qualitative dialogue process with a starting point in the use of available experiences and environmental requirements from stakeholders


The tool was developed to assist product development teams in quick and effective assessment of environmental issues, clarifying their goals and objectives, and toward fulfilling them in real product development efforts. The basic principle is to list all activities considered to have significant environmental influence, and for each activity judge the quantity and seriousness of each aspect, as well as to suggest ways for making improvements that will reduce the impacts of the proposed product DfE (design for environment) matrix (Eagan and Finster 2001) The matrix raises questions about the environmental impacts of a product through 100 issues that allocate a wide range of environmental and design issues and provides a semi-quantitative analysis of the product design alternatives


The totals for each life cycle stage (pre-manufacturing, manufacturing, packaging and distribution, use and maintenance, end-of-life) and environmental impacts indicate improvement areas in terms of the environmental attributes of a product throughout its life cycle. The total score of the matrix is a relative measure of environmental product attributes and complements the economic parameters of customer value and manufacturability that should also be evaluated (continued) Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


Table 23.2 (continued) Method/tool Description MECO matrix (Hochschorner and Finnveden 2003; Wenzel et al. 1997) Estimates the environmental impact of each life cycle stage (raw material, manufacturing, use, disposal and transport) and is performed by estimating the amount of material (M), energy (E), chemical (C) and other materials (O) used in the product life cycle. All input and output flows must be considered for a category in relation to a time base according to the functional unit of product and the stage of the life cycle chosen EcoDesign pilot (Wimmer et al. 2005) Once the environmental strategies are selected for the improvement of an existing product, different design rules and guidelines guide the designer during the design process. To improve the environmental performance, each product requires specific measures depending on its environmental impact at different stages of its life cycle (extraction of raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, use and disposal)


A good set of measures of the design rules and guidelines can be found in the EcoDesign PILOT software EcoValue (Gheorghe and Ishii 2007; Jones et al. 2001; Kengo et al. 2001; Pascual and Stevels 2005, 2006) Ecovalue is defined as the ratio between a monetary amount (price) and the environmental load over the life cycle of the product/service concerned. Ecovalue acknowledges market diversity, where consumers value different attributes in products. For this purpose, the criteria used to set priorities rely on market composition, consumption power, and a product’s environmental load. Units used include retail price in monetary units and a product’s environmental load, expressed in millipoints (mPt) Eco communication matrix (Stevels 2001) Supports the development of the marketing and communication strategies. Most of the data necessary for completing the matrix are derived from the earlier phases of the project (benchmarking, ecodesign matrix, etc.)


Most of the data necessary for completing the matrix are derived from the earlier phases of the project (benchmarking, ecodesign matrix, etc.). Comparisons can be made between products of different generations and/or of competing products. The rows of the matrix correspond to energy consumption, materials, packaging and transportation, substances, durability/recyclability, manufacturing and life cycle perspective. The columns of the matrix correspond to the company internal benefits, benefit to clients/customers and benefits to stakeholders and society. Each of these benefits are divided into tangible, intangible and emotion perception T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


LCA is one of the most well-known methods that can support ecodesign implementation (Brezet et al. 1999; Cappelli and Delogu 2006; Hunkeler and Vanakari 2000; Munoz et al. 2006). It provides a quantification of environmental aspects and impacts across the product life cycle and supports the between concepts and design options. LCA involves all successive stages of a product life cycle, ranging from extraction of raw materials through the environmental impacts of manufacturing, distribution and use of the product, all the way until its final disposal, which may include subsequent activities such as recycling of materials and components, plus other ways of treating post-consumption (Azapagic and Clift 1999). LCA has gained broad acceptance in industry as a trustworthy method to quantify the environmental aspects and potential impacts of the life cycle of products


LCA has gained broad acceptance in industry as a trustworthy method to quantify the environmental aspects and potential impacts of the life cycle of products. The LCA methodological framework is defined by ISO 14040 and 14044 standards (ISO 2006a, b), which describe the minimum requirements for its correct use and performance. The holistic systems perspective, which is applied in LCA, enables the company to disclose the ‘problem shifting’ which occurs when solutions to environmental problems at one place in a product’s life cycle create new problems elsewhere in the life cycle (Jeswiet and Hauschild 2005). 23.3.1 LCA Challenges It is important to understand the challenges and limitations of LCA in the context of ecodesign, in order to be able to use the two approaches to product environmental improvement. Many authors have written about the challenges of LCA within ecodesign (Alting et al. 2007; Keoleian et al


Many authors have written about the challenges of LCA within ecodesign (Alting et al. 2007; Keoleian et al. 1994; Portney 1993), which can be expressed in five main areas, as described in the following. The first challenge relates to the dilemma of opportunity (and cost) versus knowledge (and numbers). In the early phases of the product development process, the cost of making a design decision is very low and the window of opportunity to affect ecodesign improvements and integrate environmentally enhancing features into the product is the largest (Bhander et al. 2003; Keoleian et al. 1994). However, by nature of this early phase of the project, it is here where we know the absolute least about our product, thus rendering it very difficult to quantify the contents of related processes for the manufacture of a product that has not yet even been fully conceptualised (Bhamra et al. 1999; Tchertchian et al. 2013)


1999; Tchertchian et al. 2013). The later in the product development process one waits, the more quantitative the data one has to model in an LCA, yet the smaller the window of opportunity to affect any changes—and the higher the cost of doing so. A number of tools and guidelines exist, to bridge this opportunity-knowledge gap, but it remains a limitation. One obvious action is to perform an LCA on a previous product or a competitor’s product, as there is almost always some product on the market with similar functionality and ingredients to the product we are designing. Challenge number two relates to the required knowledge and competencies of the product developer (Portney 1993). LCA is in itself a detailed and highly specialised Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


approach, belonging to a strong scientific knowledge domain (Ny et al. 2006). Ecodesign, within the context of product development, is usually dominated by well-trained, highly skilled and well-practiced designers and engineers, with competencies in the systematic design and development of products and systems (Diehl 2005; Hesselbach and Herrmann 2003). In other words, LCA is a highly analytical (natural science dominated) activity and ecodesign is a highly synthesis-oriented (technical, engineering) activity. LCA has two important places in a manufacturing company: (i) the environmental, health & safety (EH&S) function of the organisation, where reporting and high-level (maybe product family) assessments are carried out; and (ii) in the product development department, where the knowledge of products, processes, ecosystems and use scenarios provide important guidance for ecodesign


The challenge is always, how to ensure the right level of LCA knowledge in the mind of the product developer and/or how to compensate for the lack of LCA knowledge through a combination of bridging tools (Poudelet et al. 2012; Tchertchian et al. 2013), plus the pairing of LCA specialists with product development specialists. The solution to this challenge lies in strategic management recognition, paired with a tactical management prioritisation. The third challenge with LCA in the ecodesign activity relates to completely new products, where we cannot rely on previous product releases or competitors’ products, to create some form of benchmark for the ecodesign effort in especially the early phases of product development (Trappey et al. 2011)


2011). Completely new products are more of a marginal case, when compared to incrementally innovated products, but there are still examples that need environmental attention (e.g., electronic products, many clean-tech products, nano-based products, etc.). In such product development cases, LCA tends to play a lagging, rather than a leading role (Poudelet et al. 2012). Challenge number four relates mostly to the misconception of the scope and merits of LCA. LCA is an analysis method—a very well developed and accepted one at that. Challenges arise when the company expects great product development and ecodesign advances, based alone on the results of an LCA (Brezet et al. 1999; Russo et al. 2014). It is not possible to “analyse oneself to a better product”, i.e. to improve a product solely based on an analysis of its environmental performance, and therefore LCA should not be deployed as the only method to ecodesign improvement for a project


to improve a product solely based on an analysis of its environmental performance, and therefore LCA should not be deployed as the only method to ecodesign improvement for a project. Instead, one should pair the analysis activity with the task of synthesis (product development), as the methods and tools exist in abundance, to support the good ecodesign process afterwards. The fifth and final noteworthy challenge that LCA as a scientific field faces lies in the claims from “competing approaches”. A popular claim within the current Cradle to Cradle (C2C) approach is that LCA belongs to the realm of eco-efficiency, which is a reductionist and limiting agenda, whereas C2C belongs to an agenda of positivism, growth and innovation (Hauschild 2015; McDonough and Braungart 2010; Rossi et al. 2006; see Chap. 25). Whilst the mental model created by this claim is compelling and easy to understand, it is not necessarily entirely useful


2006; see Chap. 25). Whilst the mental model created by this claim is compelling and easy to understand, it is not necessarily entirely useful. Ecodesign, LCA, C2C and a number of other approaches to enhancing T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


environmental performance of products, can easily be used interchangeably and must respect each other’s basic philosophies and scientific bases, if they really are to be deployed with successful environmental improvement to follow (Bakker et al. 2010; Bjørn and Hauschild 2011; Reay et al. 2011). 23.3.2 Using and Communicating LCA for Ecodesign in the Organisation Referring again to the two key areas of a company in which LCA plays a role, namely the EH&S department and the product development department, it may be that the company has LCA information, data and results available, but the question is, how to access these data and what to use them for (Miettinen and Hämäläinen 1997). If a full LCA has been carried out, the final improvement assessment phase ought to point to areas of ecodesign priority for a particular product


If a full LCA has been carried out, the final improvement assessment phase ought to point to areas of ecodesign priority for a particular product. However, it may be that only the inventory analysis and impact assessments have been carried out, which will pose difficulties for the ecodesign activity within the company, to directly use the data (Poudelet et al. 2012). The age and the scope of existing LCA studies in the company will also dictate their usefulness for the ecodesign process, but nevertheless, key focus areas should be possible to derive from the LCA activity (Chang et al. 2014). Importantly also, the existence of LCA studies inside the company indicates that some previous attention has been given to the environmental improvement of products and processes in the organisation


Importantly also, the existence of LCA studies inside the company indicates that some previous attention has been given to the environmental improvement of products and processes in the organisation. Tracing the people, the projects and the types of data gathered and analysed will give a good idea of the intentions of the company with respect to ecodesign improvements and give good starting points for future activities. Especially understanding the goals and scope for existing LCA studies in the company is important, as it will uncover some details regarding the existing (or maybe earlier) environmental strategy of the company. Identifying existing LCA results is one important task, and communicating these across the organisation is another


Identifying existing LCA results is one important task, and communicating these across the organisation is another. Understanding how to interpret and communicate LCA results is very important, in order to ensure that both management and product development professionals understand how to make further improvements based on the results calculated (Tingström and Karlsson 2006). There are a number of ways in which an LCA can be reported, and for the sake of ecodesign, it is important to choose a presentation of LCA studies in a way that supports the product development task. In other words, a presentation of environmental impact categories (global warming potential, air pollution, solid waste, etc.) is probably less useful for a product developer than presenting a more detailed model of the actual product or system (down to component level), showing comparative analyses, maybe with aggregated calculations (person equivalents, eco-points, energy, etc.)


It may also be sufficient to carry out a faster but less detailed screening LCA to support the Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


ecodesign task, as opposed to a much more trustworthy but also relatively time-consuming full product LCA (Simon et al. 2000). 23.3.3 Simplified Approaches Aimed At Integrating LCA Into Ecodesign The practical use of environmental LCA methods and software tools in industry has revealed the need for simplification for product development projects. Hence, streamlined life cycle assessment methods have been derived from experience with the complex full methods (Jeswiet and Hauschild 2005). Simplified LCA, also known as Streamlined LCA, has emerged over the years, as an efficient way to evaluate the environmental attributes of a product, process, or service life cycle. The aim of simplifying LCA is to provide essentially the same type of results as a detailed LCA, i.e. covering the whole life cycle, but in a superficial way (e.g. using qualitative and/or quantitative generic data), followed by a simplified assessment, thus reducing significantly the expenses and time expended


using qualitative and/or quantitative generic data), followed by a simplified assessment, thus reducing significantly the expenses and time expended. Simplified LCA should still include all relevant aspects, but good explanations (e.g. company guidelines, materials negative lists or materials black lists, preferred mode of transportation) can to some extent replace resource-demanding data collection and treatment. The assessment should focus on the most important environmental aspects and/or potential environmental impacts and/or stages of the life cycle and/or phases of the LCA and give a thorough assessment of the reliability of the results (Zackrisson et al. 2008). Full-scale LCA is traditionally quantitative. However, it is recognised that where quantification is not possible (for reasons of time, cost or data availability, for example), qualitative aspects can—and should—be taken into account (Heijungs et al. 2010)


2010). Simplified-LCA (S-LCA) is not meant to be a rigorous quantitative determination, but rather a tool for identifying environmental “hot spots” and highlighting key opportunities for effecting environmental improvements. It is not complicated to apply quantitative and detailed LCAs to simple products, such as packaging, since they consist of few components or types of material, where information on most of the commonly used materials is available (and, if necessary, it is quick and easy to collect). For more complicated products, such as, e.g. televisions, a complete LCA may prove to be very resource-demanding and at the same time somewhat imprecise, due to the number of possible processes, materials, suppliers, etc., being very high and varied. Furthermore, the database on “not so common” materials is limited so for these cases, S-LCAs are more helpful, especially in the early stages of product development


Furthermore, the database on “not so common” materials is limited so for these cases, S-LCAs are more helpful, especially in the early stages of product development. In the case of improvements in already existing product systems, the use of (full) LCA may become easier, once data from a reference system can be used (with a well-known life cycle). T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


Streamlined approaches and other ecodesign methods and tools, such as design checklists and matrices, are essential to support ecodesign implementation in the early design phases. The practical use of these tools in product development depends on the nature and complexity of the product system (e.g. new vs. established), the product development cycle (time-to-market constraints), availability of technical and financial resources, and the design approach (integrated vs. serial). These factors influence the role and scope of LCA in an ecodesign process. Effective communication and evaluation of environmental information and the integration of this information with cost, performance, cultural and legal criteria will also be critical to the success of design initiatives based on the life cycle framework. Some examples of simplified LCA methods and tools are presented in Table 23.3


Some examples of simplified LCA methods and tools are presented in Table 23.3. These methods and tools present a life cycle perspective and provide an analysis or comparison of the environmental impacts associated to a product, using or providing qualitative or semi-quantitative data. In order to avoid repetition, the simplified LCA methods and tools presented in Table 23.2 [STRETCH (Strategic Environmental Challenge), and MECO matrix)] are not replicated in Table 23.3. Table 23.3 Simplified LCA methods/tools (Pigosso et al. 2011a, b) Ecodesign method/tool Summary Criteria for assessment Approach Design abacus (Bhamra and Lofthouse 2007) Used to rate a product on social, economic and environmental areas, in both the analysis and planning of a design


It helps you identify design goals, compare many design variables and compare different product designs across the product life cycle Defined by the user (example: energy, material, usability, cost, life span, end of life) Qualitative Eco-compass technique (Sun et al. 2003) Used to evaluate the environmental impact of an existing product. Combining the cost and benefit, a product’s life locus tree can be built up and the environmental impact of a product is assessed on the performance of process and life stages of a product using these eight indices Mass intensity, energy intensity, health and environmental potential risk, revalorisation, resource conversation, and service extension Semi-quantitative ECODESIGN checklist method (ECM) (Wimmer 1999) Points out purposefully redesign tasks in order to increase the environmental performance of a product


Based on a holistic view of the product in three analysis levels (part-, function-, Usability of product (customer’s needs oriented), low energy consuming Semi-quantitative (continued) Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


Table 23.3 (continued) Ecodesign method/tool Summary Criteria for assessment Approach and product level) the method shows clearly, where the weak points of a product are and how to realize reuse, recycling of parts, where to integrate, omit or create functions and where to reduce consumption or increase efficiency, usability of the whole product product (use stage), low resource consumption and avoiding waste (manufacturing stage),durable product, reuse of product-parts, recycling of product-materials Ecodesign web (Bhamra and Lofthouse 2007) Provides a quick way of helping designers to identify which areas of the product should be focused on to improve its environmental performance. It works by comparing seven design areas with each other to identify a “better than”/“worse than” output Materials selection, materials usage, distribution, product use, optimal life, end of life Qualitative Environmental design strategy matrix (EDSM) (Lagerstedt et al


2003) Identifies some design strategies based on characteristics of products at the different life cycle stages Life cycle length, energy consumption, resource consumption, material requirement, configuration and disposal route Qualitative Green design advisor (GDA) (Ferrendier et al. 2002) Provides a direction of improvement, as well as the design features with the highest improvement potential and shows the weak points, as well as good design features. Additional design guidelines exist; however, there are no automatically generated design alternatives Number of materials, mass, recycled content, recyclability, toxicity, energy use, time for disassembly, disposal cost Semi-quantitative Green design tool (Kassahun et al. 1995) Based on analysing “top level greenness attributes” of a product, providing to the designer an overview of the environmental status of product design


1995) Based on analysing “top level greenness attributes” of a product, providing to the designer an overview of the environmental status of product design. It can be applied using the basic concept of the product Reusability, label, internal joints, material variety, material identification, recycled content, chemical usage, additives, surface Semi-quantitative (continued) T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


23.4 Creating Goals and Measuring Progress with Ecodesign Whether it be LCA-driven/supported or not, any ecodesign process is best supported if a set of measurable goals and performance indicators are established for the activity. These are a fundamental element of any successful ecodesign activity, as they can provide an early warning to prevent environmental damage (Issa et al. 2013). The use of environmental performance indicators (EPIs) to monitor product performance is often identified as one of the successful factors for effective ecodesign implementation, as such indicators can help to pinpoint improvement opportunities and prevent environmental damage through the product under development (Fiksel et al. 1998; Herva et al. 2011)


1998; Herva et al. 2011). Most methods and tools to measure the environmental performance of products, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), still present high complexity and large data Table 23.3 (continued) Ecodesign method/tool Summary Criteria for assessment Approach finishes, external joints and hazards level of material MET matrix (Byggeth and Hochschorner 2006b) Aims to find the most important environmental problems during the life cycle of a product, which can be used to define different strategies for improvement. The environmental problems should be classified into the categories Material cycle, energy use, toxic emissions Qualitative or quantitative The environmentally responsible product assessment matrix (ERPA) (Hochschorner and Finnveden 2003) The central feature of ERPA assessment is a 5  5 matrix. One dimension is the life cycle stages and the other is environmental concerns


One dimension is the life cycle stages and the other is environmental concerns. The method can be used to evaluate products, processes, facilities, services or infrastructure. Each element of the matrix is assigned a rating from 0 (highest impact) to 4 (lowest impact), according to a checklist. The rating is based on the seriousness but also on whether possibilities of reducing impacts have been utilized or not Materials choice, energy use, solid residues, liquid residues and gaseous residues Semi-quantitative Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


requirements to the ecodesign activity (Hur et al. 2005), providing results that can be classified as lagging EPIs. Lagging EPIs measure the product’s impacts on the environment, as a final result of a process. In contrast to lagging EPIs, leading EPIs aim to produce simpler measures of environmental aspects that can inspire effective actions towards improving products’ environmental performance. Environmental aspects are defined as elements of the organisation’s activities, products or services that interact with the environment. In this context, the use of leading product-related EPIs can be seen as a simpler and faster quantitative approach to ensure performance measurement and improvement during the product development process (Bovea and Perez-Belis 2012). Databases of leading product-related EPIs exist, in some cases including accompanying guides, with the aim of supporting companies to select the most relevant EPIs, based on the developed products and their strategies (see e.g


Issa et al. 2015). 23.5 Carrying Out Ecodesign, Step by Step Many approaches and processes are advocated and published, proposing a process of ecodesign (Bhamra et al. 1999; Brones and Carvalho 2015; Herva et al. 2012; Kengpol and Boonkanit 2011; Luttropp and Lagerstedt 2006; Pigosso et al. 2013a, b; Poole et al. 1999; Rio et al. 2013), and in at least a large company setting, the absolute most important route to success is to integrate ecodesign decisions and considerations into the established product development process for the company (Pigosso et al. 2013a, b). However, a generic process of decision-making and ecodesign implementation can be derived from the various ways and processes suggested. One such approach has been published by the Technical University of Denmark (DTU), as the result of a sponsored campaign by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency and the Confederation of Danish Industry


The approach, named Environmental Improvement through Product Development: A Guide (McAloone and Bey 2011), describes seven generic steps towards ecodesign implementation, and is created based on a detailed analysis of other existing approaches, plus a number of trial implementations in industry. The following gives a summary of this approach, which steps the user through an analytical point of departure, through a creative-synthesis ecodesign approach, before considering how to implement the proposed ecodesign changes in the organisation on a more permanent basis. Examples of the application of each one of the proposed steps can be found in the guide. T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


23.5.1 Environmental Improvement Through Product Development: A Seven-Step Approach The following seven steps guide the user through a solution-oriented process, towards environmental improvement. The seven generic steps are meant to provide a simple and inspiring way of approaching ecodesign, by isolating the task from the ordinary product development tasks in the company, the idea being to gain focus in the product development team, about the “ideal ecodesign approach” in a workshop setting. The approach attempts to create space for innovation by focusing solely on environmental issues. At the end of the approach, it is the intention that the practitioner considers how to integrate the seven steps into their own organisation’s product development process


At the end of the approach, it is the intention that the practitioner considers how to integrate the seven steps into their own organisation’s product development process. The approach is constructed with a focus on: • Gaining an overview of a current product’s environmental problems; • Providing insight into important details concerning the product’s environmental impacts, its use and its users; • Creating solutions and concepts that lead to environmental improvements; and • Creating foresighted proposals for the creation of an environmental strategy for product development. The approach is designed as a chain of exercises that ought to be completed from start to finish, in the order that the steps are presented. The approach charts an eco-redesign process, so as to ensure that there is an established benchmark product beforehand; it therefore requires that a product is chosen in advance as the object for environmental improvement


The product can be either an already marketed product, which will serve as a reference product, or a product that is currently under development. The first case is the simplest, as it is easier to identify data about the product’s life cycle. The first six steps of the seven-step approach isolate the environmental task and focus on identifying environmental problems. Subsequently improvement proposals are created. Step 7 provides a framework for an action plan and the basis for systematic integration of the proposed environmental improvements into the product development process. See Fig. 23.2. Step 1: Describe the use context As the very first exercise, it is important to reach a common understanding of the product and its value contribution under use. This provides a common starting point for discussions about the environmental product improvement possibilities for the product, for use later in the process, when the creation of product alternatives is in focus


It is important that the alternatives created meet the same requirements for the customer. Redundant product attributes should be considered as waste, both from an environmental and a customer perspective. Step 1 is intended to reach a Ecodesign Implementation and LCA


description of the product’s functionality to the user. This description provides the benchmark for all subsequent decisions and can also be used when, for example, alternative concepts shall be compared. The description of the use context is achieved by answering the following questions: • “What should the product be used for?” which leads to a description of the basic task that the product must carry out for the user. • “What does the product do?” which allows for a description of the product’s functionality, including the technological principle and the features that the product must possess in order to deliver the service to the user. • “... For whom?” leads to a description of the main user or user group. • “... How long?” and “... how often?” lead to a definition of the time frames in which the product must operate. • “... Where in the world?” leads to a definition of the geographical area in which the product must operate


how often?” lead to a definition of the time frames in which the product must operate. • “... Where in the world?” leads to a definition of the geographical area in which the product must operate. The responses to the above questions lead to a clear description of the product in the form of the value contribution that the product delivers to the user, or in other words, the product’s functional unit. Step 2: Create an overview of the environmental impacts In this step, the aim is to create an overview of the product’s life cycle and all significant environmental impacts that may occur throughout the life cycle of the product. A product life cycle typically consists of five main stages: Fig. 23.2 Seven-step approach to ecodesign, as described by McAloone and Bey (2011) T.C. McAloone and D.C.A. Pigosso


• Materials covers materials extraction and manufacturing (e.g. the manufacture of plastic granules from crude oil) and semi-finished products (e.g. steel profiles from iron ore), etc. • Manufacture includes the purchase of components, plus the manufacturing and assembly processes, both at suppliers and in in-house production facilities. • Transport covers the entire logistics chain, from suppliers to the end-user and beyond, including distribution activities by ships, trains, planes, trucks, vans and cars. • Use includes the actual usage and possible ancillary products that are necessary for the product to perform its function (e.g. paper filters for a coffee maker). The use stage also includes installation and possible maintenance activities. • Disposal includes reuse/recycling, incineration and landfill


paper filters for a coffee maker). The use stage also includes installation and possible maintenance activities. • Disposal includes reuse/recycling, incineration and landfill. The actual distribution of these disposal options depends on many factors, including regulatory requirements where the product is disposed of, who disposes of the product (an individual or a company), etc. It is obviously difficult to predict how the product will be disposed of, as this stage is typically far in the future. Depending on preference, one may choose to integrate the transport life cycle stage into all of the other product life stages, as transport is in itself the “glue” between each life cycle stage. However, many choose to specify and gather all transport activities into one stage for itself, so as to (i) remember to pay attention to transport’s environmental impacts and (ii) highlight the transport activity’s contribution to the overall environmental footprint of the product


Figure 23.3 shows a picture of how one could organise the overview of environmental impacts by means of adding sticky notes to a schematic of the product life cycle. The advantage of this approach is that it is a simple way of granting access to all team members in the product development team, to come with their own proposals of environmental impacts. Step 3: Create your environmental profile and find root causes Having created an overview of the product’s main life cycle stages and environmental impacts in Step 2, the idea of Step 3 is to begin to categorise the identified environmental impacts according to their type. Subsequently the possible causes for the environmental impacts’ emergence should be noted, before beginning to gather data on the environmental impacts that can be quantified. The idea with this step is to create a more nuanced picture of the physical relationships that underpin each environmental focus area, than was created in Step Fig


The idea with this step is to create a more nuanced picture of the physical relationships that underpin each environmental focus area, than was created in Step Fig. 23.3 Identifying environmental impacts throughout the product’s life cycle Ecodesign Implementation and LCA