Search results

The purpose of this paper is to show how industrial ecology can facilitate the achievement of sustainable development through its incorporation into an engineering curriculum.

A model has been developed for assessing sustainability learning outcomes due to the incorporation of the concept of industrial ecology into undergraduate and postgraduate engineering programs. This model assesses how the Engineering Faculty at Curtin University has included a core engineering unit (Engineering for Sustainable Development) and four postgraduate units (Cleaner Production Tools, Eco‐efficiency, Industrial Ecology and Sustainable Technology) in its undergraduate and postgraduate engineering program, to enable modern engineering education to reflect the benefits of industrial ecology in the implementation of sustainable engineering solutions and decision‐making processes. Using this model, this paper demonstrates how the syllabus, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary assignment tasks, lectures and tutorials have been developed since 2006 in order to develop the concept of industrial ecology in undergraduate and postgraduate engineering education. The paper has also analysed the different teaching methods that have been applied since 2006 to generate increased student satisfaction in these new and challenging subjects.

The university environment can temper the potential outcomes from increasing the sustainability content in engineering education, given the general lack of student maturity in understanding the value of sustainability objectives together with course limitations on sustainability content and the arduous and lengthy processes involved in changing course curricula.

Since the Engineering for Sustainable Development unit has been introduced only recently, it was beyond the scope of the research to interview graduate engineers who completed this unit to investigate how they have applied the concept of industrial ecology to achieve sustainability outcomes in their workplaces.

This research is distinct in that it investigated the implications of the incorporation of industrial ecology into the engineering curriculum.

This article defines the new field of industrial ecology and identifies the fundamental premises which make this approach to the information society a significant improvement over current practices. The article compares the environment as overhead paradigm with the industrial ecology paradigm and uses a conceptual framework to clarify the relationships between industrial ecology, sustainable development and technology. The hypothesis that the information revolution and sustainability are aligned, mutually dependent directions of societal evolution is supported by the analogy of the automotive sector. Over the past 25 years the automobile industry has undergone an almost revolutionary change and the modern automobile is now a profitable product which also offers much improved environmental and social performance and is altogether a more complex system with a far higher information content than its predecessors. However, the limitations of technological evolution in achieving economic, environmental and social sustainability show that simply relying on technology will not avoid the need for difficult and complex political decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to trace the impact that the ecological approach has in international development programs in both the USA and Europe. It discusses the applications of sustainability by international donor agencies among bilateral and multi‐lateral organizations in developing economies. It outlines the influence of sustainability in the US Federal Government agencies to protect and maintain environmentally‐based development programs.

The paper compares industrial ecology and ecological anthropology approaches to sustainability development. It discusses their policy implications for international development assistance programs. It describes how anthropological and sociological approaches to sustainability have impacted the development policies and programs of bilateral and multilateral organizations, as well as those of multi‐national corporations.

There are common sustainability trends among the four competing donor organizations in approaching sustainability development by bilateral and multilateral international development organizations. These organizations – the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the World Bank, the United Nations and its affiliated Organizations, and the US Federal government agencies, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency – have shaped and influenced the policies and programs of sustainability development in business organizations and in developing economies.

Sustainability has been a subject of interest in international development assistance programs in both bilateral and multilateral organizations since the 1970s. Over time, the subject of sustainability received prominence in the developed world. It can be argued that sustainability has its roots in the developing economy and has been adapted/modified to meet the environmental and natural resources conservation and management policies of the developed economies.

Circular economy (CE) has gained the attention of the business community with the promise of several trillions of dollars to be gained from finding productive uses for waste materials, and developing new business models focused on extending and reimagining the useful life of products. Industrial symbiosis (IS) involves the shared management of resources among multiple firms, most often within some geographic proximity. IS is particularly focused on the reuse of secondary materials, such as industrial by-products, for which conventional recycling does not exist. IS and CE represent a radical reconceptualization of business models from individual to collective competitive advantage with private and public benefits. IS has been recognized as a novel strategy for businesses and regions interested in implementing the CE. In this chapter, we explore the conditions and circumstances in which IS could play a pivotal role in increasing circularity and sustainability in diverse supply networks.

To describe a way of teaching industrial ecology (IE) and to show some tools that may help for the IE teaching.

In the paper, the development of lectures, practical lessons and projects on real industrial ecosystems are described. Also the teaching materials used are described.

The presented methodology for teaching IE has been a good means for the understanding of the IE concept. Some of the educational tools presented have helped the students to increase their awareness of the distance between IE and the real industrial field, discover that there are a lot of by‐product exchange possibilities between industries, to develop their creativity, to connect the theory to practice in the industrial systems and have encouraged them to try to put the IE ideas into practice. This methodology has been useful for either small or big groups and for people with either the same or very different backgrounds. And it has been observed that the quality of the work is enhanced when the members of the group have different backgrounds.

The paper shows methodologies and tools that may encourage and help other teachers/professors to use them in their IE lessons. It may also help IE researches to know which real examples and methodologies help students to understand IE concept. This could encourage them to develop projects and research in those directions.

The paper fulfils the need of knowing real experiences in IE teaching and their results. And in special, experiences that have been tested for a long period of time and with a great number of students. All the experiences described in the paper have been created and put into practice by the author.

This paper aims to investigate overlaps, complementarities and divergences between the literature on circular economy (CE) models and related literature in non-linear production models and frameworks, including CE, reverse logistics, closed-loop, industrial symbiosis and industrial ecology.

A systematic literature review was conducted focussing on the benefits of non-linear modes adoption.

The results show a high degree of convergence in findings, gaps and weaknesses of these literatures. Negative environmental, economic and operational impacts are understudied. There is a scarcity of studies identifying practices resulting in empirically tested benefits. The business and society case for non-linear production is still largely built upon conceptual studies, modelling and a few case studies. Despite a normative focus, there is very little use of theory, in particular, management theories.

First, the authors use only one, albeit highly recognized database, Scopus. This database may have omitted some relevant research, journals such as the Journal of Cleaner Production and Resources Conservation & Recycling that are more likely to publish such research and also have a more interdisciplinary approach. This is an important gap and interesting result to claim for more interdisciplinary research. Second, the filtering process used and the focus on Association of Business Schools top journals may have also omitted some relevant research, such as a large stream of literature in specialist journals such as Resources Conservation and Recycling and the Journal of Cleaner Production.

There are contradictions, tensions and epistemological ambiguity that needs to be critically addressed. Such tensions may be associated with the knowledge field that gave rise to these different non-linear production approaches. Many of them appeared at the same time, but from different sciences and disciplines with their own perspectives. Then in doing so, they create confusion in the definitions of CE, assumptions underlying modelling and business choices arising from this complexity. This can be minimized through the critical interpretation of knowledge to elucidate epistemological quandaries to improve the understanding of the economic, social and environmental impacts of practices.

In some way, this result makes sense, as the authors have limited the search to management, business and accounts journals, especially talking about Operations Management journals. This is an important gap and interesting result to claim for more interdisciplinary research.

In addition to gaps previously described, the authors identified areas of tensions where the literature offers inconclusive – often contradictory – findings requiring further exploration. A better understanding of these tensions is required to understand the impacts of non-linear production and develop policy guidelines for industry and policymakers to scale-up CE.

It is not in doubt that pollution prevention and resource efficiency projects can sometimes make good business sense for an individual enterprise. For organizations that have previously done little to address their environmental impacts, some opportunity frequently exists to lessen those impacts while raising production efficiency and keeping their basic approach to business intact. This was the experience of many businesses during the 1980s and the origins of the suggestion that the environment was a “win-win” issue for business (Walley & Whitehead, 1996). Simply updating production equipment can offer a double dividend, which is partly why so many businesses are able to claim they are getting greener while aggregate environmental conditions deteriorate (McDonough & Braungart, 2002). The unresolved issue is whether an ongoing commitment to improve environmental performance is reflected in ongoing gains in business performance. As expressed by one advocate of eco-industrial development, the issue is not about doing the same with less but rather about doing far more with far less (Cohen-Rosenthal, 2003, p. 22).

In the past two decades, manufacturing has witnessed significant transformations alongside ecological challenges. Meanwhile, industrial 4.0 digital technologies have accelerated industrialisation with potentials of innovation in the context of circular economy. However, current concepts and models are fragmented and impractical. This paper aims to develop a holistic view integrating the three bodies of knowledge – industrialisation, ecologicalisation and digitalisation (IED) – in order to achieve sustainable development.

Critical literature review is conducted across three bodies of knowledge. Key themes are summarised with the identification of research gaps. A theoretical framework is synthesised and developed aiming to achieve synergy from IED with the modules, integration architecture, mechanism and dynamic paths.

First, the authors review and develop three conceptual models of ecologicalised industrialisation (IE3), industrial system digitalisation (D1) and digital technology industrialisation (D2) separately. Second, the authors propose a theoretical framework seeking to synthesise the above three conceptual models together to form the IED. Third, the authors design a process orientated abductive approach to improve and validate the IED framework.

This study contributes to the limited literature addressing the linkage of IED by integration different perspectives to develop theory in a novel way. Practically, it provides important tools for organisations to consider resource cascading in combination with digitalisation during the industrial system design.

The paper aims to study the main managerial factors for evaluating the eco‐cluster approach and to promote their implementation within the environmental industry management.

The paper includes the authors' observations about the advantages of eco‐clustering, and their practical consideration. The empirical research shows the tendencies for developing an eco‐cluster policy in one of the most economically dynamic regions in Bulgaria: Varna‐Devnya. The study framework was discussed with managers on the basis of the environmental practices of Solvay Sodi, Devnya Cement, and Agropolihim JSC. The authors outline the possible cycle of waste management and emission exchanges in that industrial zone.

The findings show that the eco‐cluster concept in Bulgaria could be provided on micro‐ and macro‐managerial levels, discussing firm relationships and governmental policy. The principal limitation for generating the findings is the lack of concordance between the governmental interest and the business interests of the TNCs. Three negative factors are important in the implementation of the eco‐clustering concept: lack of information; financial constraints; lack of trust.

Common strategic agreements between TNCs and local authorities provide useful managerial and public implications for eco‐clustering. Second, the analysis outlines essential steps for the managerial behavior for creating eco‐clusters.

The perspectives of the eco‐cluster are studied for the first time in Bulgaria. The investigation gives motivation for a further study of the eco‐clustering approach with the support of the local authorities. The practical steps for managerial and public implications of the eco‐cluster concept as an innovative tool for Bulgarian managers are revealed.