Design for environment as a tool for the development of a sustainable supply chain

In this work, design for environment (DfE) methodologies have been used as a tool for the development of a more sustainable supply chain. In particular by combining life‐cycle assessment (LCA) techniques and by using the quality function deployment (QFD) multi‐criteria matrices, an ‘environmental compromise’ can be reached. In this work, the QFD matrices have been developed in a new way using an iterative process that involves the whole supply chain starting from the product life‐cycle, taking into consideration the machines that make the product and their components. This methodology is compatible with the requirements of the various stakeholders, suppliers, manufacturers and clients, involved in the supply chain. To assess the validity of the proposed approach a specific supply chain was studied concerning packaging systems for liquid food substances (beverage cartons). Firstly all the stages which are most critical from the environmental point of view in the supply chain of packaging systems were identified and assessed. The starting point for the analysis of environmental aspects and impacts which characterise the supply chain was LCA, which proved to be useful for the identification and the environmental assessment of the various stages in a packaging system. Through the use of ‘iterative QFD’ it is possible to arrive at a definition of the engineering characteristics of all the machinery which is involved in the supply chain. In particular in this work the authors have tried to identify the critical points in the design of those machines which either make the beverage cartons or are involved in the filling process.

[1]  A. Nee,et al.  A proposed tool to integrate environmental and economical assessments of products , 2003 .

[2]  Olaf A.M. Fisscher,et al.  Organizing product-oriented environmental management from a firm's perspective , 2002 .

[3]  A. Ansari,et al.  Quality Function Deployment: The Role of Suppliers , 1994 .

[4]  D. de Cogan S7 (history of technology) meeting report - Tesla and the AC motor , 1999 .

[5]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[6]  Hwong-Wen Ma,et al.  A multidimensional environmental evaluation of packaging materials. , 2004, The Science of the total environment.

[7]  Anders Allander,et al.  Successful Certification of an Environmental Product Declaration for an ABB Product , 2001 .

[8]  D. Shangguan,et al.  LCI for automotive electronic systems: substitution assessment of Ag-Sn for Pb-Sn solder at Ford Motor Company , 1996, Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. ISEE-1996.

[9]  I. Hendry The Delphi method: Techniques and applications Edited by H. A. Linstone and M. Turoff. Pp. xx + 620. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Advanced Book Program, Reading, Massachusetts. 1975. US $29.50; US $16.50 paper , 1976 .

[10]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Integration of environmental aspects in product development: a stepwise procedure based on quantitative life cycle assessment , 2002 .

[11]  Tahir Husain,et al.  GreenPro-I: a risk-based life cycle assessment and decision-making methodology for process plant design , 2002, Environ. Model. Softw..

[12]  Y. Zhang,et al.  Green QFD-II: A life cycle approach for environmentally conscious manufacturing by integrating LCA and LCC into QFD matrices , 1999 .

[13]  Brian Veitch,et al.  Life cycle iNdeX (LInX): a new indexing procedure for process and product design and decision-making , 2004 .

[14]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[15]  S.D. Hochman,et al.  Quality function deployment: using the customer to outperform the competition on environmental design , 1993, Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment.

[16]  L H Lovins,et al.  A road map for natural capitalism. , 1999, Harvard business review.

[17]  Otto Rentz,et al.  Using quality function deployment for technique selection for optimum environmental performance improvement , 2001 .

[18]  Adisa Azapagic,et al.  Life cycle Assessment and its Application to Process Selection, Design and Optimisation , 1999 .

[19]  Kwang-Jae Kim,et al.  Determination of an Optimal Set of Design Requirements Using House of Quality , 1998 .

[20]  Donald H. Liles,et al.  A soft-systems methodology approach for product and process innovation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[21]  G. Zsidisin,et al.  Environmental purchasing: a framework for theory development , 2001 .

[22]  G. Hagelaar,et al.  Environmental Supply Chain Management: using Life Cycle Assessment to structure supply chains , 2001 .

[23]  Yoji Akao,et al.  Quality Function Deployment : Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design , 1990 .

[24]  A. Dubreuil Factual errors in the eco-indicator 95 — final report , 2001 .

[25]  Raul Carlson,et al.  System for Integrated Business Environmental Information Management , 2001 .

[26]  P. Sheng,et al.  Design for environment , 2000 .

[27]  K. G. Snowdon,et al.  The life cycle assessment of a telecommunications semiconductor laser , 1995 .