Influencing Design to Improve Product End-of-Life Stage

Abstract. The main objective of this research is to develop a structured methodology to formulate end-of-life strategies, while still encouraging creative thinking. Current practices encourage general rules for a wide variety of products. This research identifies key characteristics that influence appropriate end-of-life strategies, in contrast to the "one-size-fits-all" approach. The research results are divided into two core sections. First, the methodology determines what end-of-life strategy is possible according to the products' technical characteristics. Second, the classification of end-of-life strategies is compared with current industry practice, in order to evaluate and validate the method. The software developed, called the End-of-Life Design Advisor (ELDA), guides product developers to specify appropriate end-of-life strategies. The ability to classify end-of-life strategies enables designers to redesign products that move to end-of-life strategies with lower environmental impact. This paper presents recommendations for designers and product managers for specific end-of-life strategies. By understanding better the end-of-life strategy appropriate for the product, the research results can help designers develop appropriate (and profitable) end-of-life strategies for their unique position, systematically. Putting ELDA results into perspective establishes that improvements in end-of-life are either through design innovation or value chain improvement.

[1]  Askiner Gungor,et al.  Issues in environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery: a survey , 1999 .

[2]  M. Klausner,et al.  Sensor-based data recording of use conditions for product takeback , 1998, Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. ISEE - 1998 (Cat. No.98CH36145).

[3]  K. Masui,et al.  How product characteristics determine end-of-life strategies , 1998, Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. ISEE - 1998 (Cat. No.98CH36145).

[4]  Edward J. Grenchus,et al.  Composition and value of returned consumer and industrial information technology equipment , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment (Cat. No.00CH37082).

[5]  Kosuke Ishii,et al.  Design for product retirement and material life-cycle , 1994 .

[6]  C. M. Rose,et al.  A new approach to end-of-life design advisor (ELDA) , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment (Cat. No.00CH37082).

[7]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[8]  J. M. Cramer,et al.  Strategic environmental product planning within Philips sound & vision , 1997 .

[9]  Kosuke Ishii,et al.  PRODUCT END-OF-LIFE STRATEGY CATEGORIZATION DESIGN TOOL , 1999 .

[10]  R. H. Lucacher.  Competitive advantage and the environment; building a framework for achieving environmental advantage , 1996, Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. ISEE-1996.

[11]  David J. Williams,et al.  The strategic and competitive implications of recycling and design for disassembly in the electronics industry , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and The Environment.

[12]  Ab Stevels,et al.  Metrics for end-of-life strategies (ELSEIM) , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. 2001 IEEE ISEE (Cat. No.01CH37190).

[13]  A. J. Jansen.  the EPAss method, a systematic approach in environmental product assessment. , 1998 .