A comparison of four sustainable manufacturing strategies

Figures & data

Table 1. Selected definitions of waste minimisation.

Author(s)	Waste minimisation
US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) (1986)	As the reduction, to the extent feasible, of hazardous waste that is generated or subsequently treated, sorted or disposed. It includes any source reduction or recycling activity undertaken by a generator that results in either (1) the reduction of total volume or quantity of hazardous waste, or (2) the reduction of toxicity of hazardous waste, or both, so long as such reduction is consistent with the goal of minimising recent and future threats to human health and the environment.
Bates and Philips (1998)	Waste minimisation is the reduction of waste at source, recognising that is cheaper not to produce waste in the first place.
The UK Chartered Institution of Waste Management (formerly IWM), 1996 (as cited in Read et al. 1998)	Prevention and/or reducing the generation of waste, improving the quality of waste generated, including reduction of hazard and encouraging re‐use, recycling and recovery.
OECD, 1996 (Riemer and Kristoffersen, as cited in Pongrácz et al. 2004)	According to which it encompasses these three elements in the following order or priority: preventing and/or reducing the generation of waste at source; improving the quality of the waste generated, such as reducing the hazard; and encouraging re‐use, recycling and recovery.
ETC/W (Riemer and Kristoffersen, as cited in Pongrácz et al. 2004)	Waste minimisation/cleaner production is only related to preventive measures. Waste minimisation includes: waste prevention, i.e. reduction of waste by application of more efficient production technologies; internal recycling of production waste.
	Source‐oriented improvement of waste quality, e.g. substitution of hazardous substances; re‐use of products or parts of products, for the same purpose.
The UK Environment Agency, 1997 (as cited in Phillips et al. 1999)	‘…describes waste minimisation as: the reduction at source, by understanding and changing processes to reduce and prevent waste. This is also known as process or resource efficiency. Waste minimisation also includes the substitution of less environmentally harmful materials in the production process.

Table 2. Selected definitions of material efficiency.

Author(s)	Material E\efficiency
Worrell (Worrell et al. 1997)	The definition of material efficiency as ‘the amount of primary material that is needed to fulfil a specific function’. Material efficiency improvement allows the same function to be fulfilled but with a reduced amount of material.
Glossary of EEA (EEA 2006)	Material productivity is an indicator of the output or value added generated per unit of material used.

Table 3. Selected definitions of dematerialisation.

Authors	Dematerialisation
van der Voet et al. (2004)	Dematerialisation is the reduction of the throughput of materials in human societies.
De Bruyn (1998)	The concept of dematerialisation refers to the decline of material use per unit of service output.
Herman et al. (1990)	‘…the word dematerialisation is often broadly used to characterise the decline over time in weight of the material used in industrial end products.’
Wernick et al. (1996)	More broadly, dematerialisation refers to the absolute or relative reduction in the quantity of materials required to serve economic functions.
Bernardini and Galli (1993)	‘…as the reduction of raw material (energy band material) intensity of economic activities, measured as the ratio of material (or energy) consumption in physical terms to gross domestic product (GDP) in deflated constant terms.’

Table 4. Selected definitions of resource efficiency.

Author(s)	Resource efficiency
UK policy (Environmental agency, R&D technical report, 2004) (Thomas and Iles 2004)	At a national policy level, resource efficiency and resource productivity can be defined as the efficiency with which energy and materials are used throughout the economy, i.e. the value added per unit of resource input.
	At the installation level this means ‘making more with same quantity of raw materials’.
Commission of the European Communities (2003)	Resource efficiency or resource productivity can be defined as the efficiency with which we use energy and materials throughout the economy, i.e. the value added per unit of resource input.
Cabinet Office, UK (2001)	Resource productivity measures the efficiency of the economy in generating added value from the use of natural resources.
Pearce (2001)	Suggested the ratio of ‘output’ (Y) to natural resource ‘input’ (R). Where is Y could be GNP and R may be materials or energy input.

Table 5. Selected definitions of eco‐efficiency.

Author(s)	Eco‐efficiency
Stephen Schmidheiny, Chairman of the Business Council for Sustainable Development, 1992 (as cited in WBCSD 2000a).	Coined the term ‘eco‐efficiency’ to describe ever more useful goods and services while continuously reducing resource consumption and pollution.
The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2000a)	Eco‐efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality to life, while progressively reducing ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout the life cycle, to a level at least in line with the earth's estimated carrying capacity.
President's Council on Sustainable Development (1996)	Eco‐efficiency can broadly define as the production, delivery, and use of competitively priced goods and services, coupled with the achievements of environmental and social goals.
Welford (1997)	Improvement in ‘eco‐efficiency’ defined as ‘adding maximum value with minimum resource use and minimum pollution’.

Table 6. Comparison of four sustainable manufacturing strategies.

Strategies		Waste minimisation	Material efficiency	Resource efficiency	Eco‐efficiency
Characteristic
Definition	Type	Concrete (1,2)	Concrete	Concrete	Philosophical (3,4,5)
	Orientation	Goal oriented	Action oriented	Action oriented (9)	Measurement oriented
	Focus	Effect‐waste (1)	Cause‐material	Cause‐resources	Cause/effect–resources/pollution
	Main goal	Reduce waste and pollution	Efficient use of resources (both material and energy)	Efficient use of resources	Efficient use of resources, reduce waste and pollution, quality of life
		Reduce cost (1,6)	Reduce waste and pollution (7)	Reduce waste and pollution	Earth carrying capacity (8)
Scope	Systems boundaries	Limited‐downstream	Upstream–downstream (7)	(i) Do not cover upstream and downstream activities (9)	Claimed to cover upstream–downstream by addressing all stages of product life‐cycle (11) but seen as debateable (12)
				(ii) Cover upstream and down stream by measuring MIPS (10)
	Influence over externalities	Limited	Yes	Yes	Yes – supposedly big influence
	Level usually used	Process, company and national	Process, product (7)	Product, company and national (13)	Product, company and national (3,4,5)
	Depth of issues to be tackled to achieve goal	Relatively easy	Potentially difficult	Difficult	Very difficult (3)
	Concerns (e.g. economy, ecology, social)	Limited	Limited (14)	Broad	Broad (3,4,5)
	Utility being assessed	Weight, volume, cost	Functionality/services	Unit of value added	Unit of value added (8,15)
Practicality	Measurement and target	Direct/simple (1,16)	Potentially complicated quantitative	Complicated quantitative (17)	Complicated (3)
		Quantitative (1,6)			Quantitative (17) and Qualitative
	Indicator effectiveness	Yes	Potentially difficult	Difficult	Very difficult (20)
	Technical feasibility	Yes	Potentially difficult	Difficult (17,18,19,20,21)	Difficult
	Data availability	Easy (1)	Potentially yes	Difficult	Difficult
	Easy of communication	Yes	Potentially yes	Potentially yes	Difficult
	Does it guide actions	Yes	Potentially yes	Potentially yes	Debateable (3,4,20,22,23)
Compatibility	Between goal and measurement	Yes	Potentially yes	Potentially yes	No – difficult to determine on earth's carrying capacity (3)
Authors:
(1) Bates and Philips (1998); (2) Clelland et al. (2000); (3) Ehrenfeld (2005); (4) McDonough and Braungart (1998); (5) Honkasolo (2007); (6) Cheeseman and Philips (2001); (7) Worrel (1997); (8) WBCSD (2000a); (9) Commission of European communities (2003); (10) Schmidt‐Bleek (1995); (11) Mosovsky et al. (2000); (12) Warhust (2002); (13) Cramer and van Lochem (2001); (14) Worrell (1995); (15) OECD (1997); (16) Hanssen et al. (2003); (17) Reijnders (1998); (18) Hawkins and Shaw (2004); (19) Pearce (2001); (20) Foxon (2000); (21) Figge and Hahn (2004); (22) Huesemann (2004); (23) Jansen (2003)

Figure 1 The hierarchy of sustainable strategy.

Bates , M. P. and Phillips , P. S. 1998 . Waste minimisation in the food and drink industry. . Nutrition and Food Science , 98 (6) : 330 – 334 .

 Google Scholar

Read , A. D. , Philips , P. S. and Murphy , A. 1998 . Wastes minimization as a local government issue: fact or fiction? . Sustainable Development , 6 (2) : 78 – 91 .

 Google Scholar

Pongrácz , E. , Phillips , P. S. and Keiski , R. L. From waste minimization to resources use optimization: definitions and legislative background. Proceedings of the waste minimization and resources use optimization conference , pp. 11 – 20 . Oulu : University of Oulu Press . 10 June 2004, Oulu

 Google Scholar

Phillips , P. S. 1999 . UK waste minimisation clubs: a contribution to sustainable waste management. . Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 27 (3) : 217 – 247 .

 Google Scholar

Worrell , E. 1997 . Potentials and policy implications of energy and material efficiency improvement , New York : United Nations Publications .

 Google Scholar

EEA . 2006 . EEA multilingual environmental glossary, [online] European Environment Agency. Available from: http://glossary.eea.europa.eu/EEAGlossary/ [Accessed 17 June 2006]

 Google Scholar

van der Voet , E. , van Oers , L. and Nikolic , I. 2004 . Dematerialization: not just a matter of weight. . Journal of Industrial Ecology , 8 (4) : 121 – 138 .

 Google Scholar

De Bruyn , S. 1998 . “ Dematerialisation and rematerialisation. ” . In Managing a material world , Edited by: Vellinga , P , Berkhout , F and Gupta , J . 147 – 161 . Dordrecht : Kluwer Academic Publishers .

 Google Scholar

Herman , R. , Ardekani , S. A. and Ausubel , J. H. 1990 . Dematerialization. . Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 38 (3) : 333 – 347 .

 Google Scholar

Wernick , I. K. 1996 . Materialization and Dematerialization: measures and trends. . Daedalus , 125 (3) : 171 – 198 .

 Google Scholar

Bernardini , O. and Galli , R. 1993 . Dematerialization: long‐term trends in the intensity of use of materials and energy. . Futures , 25 (4) : 431 – 448 .

 Google Scholar

Thomas , R. and Iles , A. 2004 . IPPC and resource efficiency: a review of progress , Bristol : Environment Agency .

 Google Scholar

Commission of the European Communities . 2003 . Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament; towards a thematic strategy on sustainable use of natural resources , Brussels : Commission of the European Communities .

 Google Scholar

Cabinet Office . 2001 . Resource productivity: making more with less , London : Cabinet Office .

 Google Scholar

Pearce , D. Measuring resource productivity , Paper to DTI/Green Alliance Conference, February 2001, London

 Google Scholar

WBCSD . 2000a . Eco‐efficiency: creating more value with less impact , Geneva : World Business Council for Sustainable Development .

 Google Scholar

President Council on Sustainable Development . 1996 . Eco‐efficiency task force report , US : President Council on Sustainable Development .

 Google Scholar

Welford , R. 1997 . Hijacking environmentalism: corporate responses to sustainable development , London : Earthscan Publications Ltd .

 Google Scholar

Clelland , I. J. , Dean , T. J. and Douglas , T. J. 2000 . Stepping towards sustainable business: an evaluation of waste minimization practices in US manufacturing. . Interfaces , 30 (3) : 107 – 124 .

 Google Scholar

Ehrenfeld , J. R. 2005 . Eco‐efficiency: philosophy, theory and tools. . Journal of Industrial Ecology , 9 (4) : 6 – 8 .

 Google Scholar

McDonough , W. and Braungart , M. 1998 . The NEXT industrial revolution. . Atlantic , 282 (4) : 82 – 92 .

 Google Scholar

Schmidt‐Bleek , F. 1995 . Increasing resource productivity on the way to sustainability. . Industry and Environment , 18 (4) : 8 – 12 .

 Google Scholar

Mosovsky , J. , Dickinson , D. and Morabito , J. Creating competitive advantage through resource productivity, eco‐efficiency, and sustainability in the supply chain. Proceedings of the international symposium on electronics and the environment , pp. 230 – 237 . 2000, San Francisco, CA, 230–237, Report for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions Sustainable Development Unit, UK

 Google Scholar

Warhust , A. 2002 . Sustainability indicators and sustainable performance management [online] International Institute for Environmental and Development and World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Available from: http://www.iied.org/mmsd/mmsd_pdfs/sustainability_indicators.pdf [Accessed 10 August 2006]

 Google Scholar

Cramer , J. B. and van Lochem , H. B. 2001 . The practical use of the ‘eco‐efficiency’ concept in industry: the case of Akzo Nobel. . The Journal of Sustainable Product Design , 1 (3) : 171 – 180 .

 Google Scholar

Worrell , E. 1995 . An approach for analysing the potential for material efficiency improvement. . Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 13 (3) : 215 – 232 .

 Google Scholar

Hanssen , O. J. 2003 . National indicators for material efficiency and waste minimization for the Norwegian packaging sector 1995–2001. . Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 38 (2) : 123 – 137 .

 Google Scholar

Reijnders , L. 1998 . The Factor X debate: setting targets for eco‐efficiency. . Journal of Industrial Ecology , 2 (1) : 13 – 21 .

 Google Scholar

Hawkins , R. G. P. and Shaw , H. S. 2004 . The practical guide to waste management law , London : Thomas Telford Publishing .

 Google Scholar

Foxon , T. J. 2000 . Resource efficiency and service provision. . Energy and Environment , 11 (5) : 587 – 595 .

 Google Scholar

Figge , F. and Hahn , T. 2004 . Sustainable value added – measuring corporate contributions to sustainability beyond eco‐efficiency. . Ecological Economics , 48 (2) : 173 – 187 .

 Google Scholar

Huesemann , M. H. 2004 . The failure of eco‐efficiency to guarantee sustainability: future challenges for industrial ecology. . Environmental Progress , 23 (4) : 265 – 270 .

 Google Scholar

Jansen , L. 2003 . The challenge of sustainable development. . Journal of Cleaner Production , 11 (3) : 231 – 245 .

 Google Scholar