ECODESIGN PRACTICES: UNDERSTANDING AND PRIORITIZING ACTIVITIES IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

Transcription

1 ECODESIGN PRACTICES: UNDERSTANDING AND PRIORITIZING ACTIVITIES IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY Miriam Borchardt (UNISINOS) Miguel Afonso Sellitto (UNISINOS) Giancarlo Medeiros Pereira (UNISINOS) Luciana Paulo Gomes (UNISINOS) Leonel Augusto Calliari Poltosi (UNISINOS) This article presents and tests a method for prioritizing constructs in ecodesign practices in the automotive industry. The research objectives were understanding how and why ecodesign emerges in industry and how we can prioritize actions iin implementing it. The research method was the double case study. The objects were a mid-sized manufacturer of electronic parts and a chemical products manufacturer, both suppliers of automobile assemblers and pertaining to automotive supply-chains. For the research, ecodesign was organized in a tree-like structure with seven constructs: materials; product components; product and process characteristics; use of energy; products distribution; packaging and documentation; and waste. From the first case, we concluded that ecodesign emerges mainly for cost reduction and secondly for agents pressures, although companies may have little capacity to manage it, due to market constrains. In the second case, with the aid of AHP, we conclude that, for two different chemical products, the priority in ecodesign implementation is the first construct, employed materials, mainly raw-materials and logistic operations, related to supplying, warehousing and feeding manufacture lines. Palavras-chaves: ecodesign, environmental management, multicriterial analysis, eco-conception, design for environment.

2 1.1 2 Introduction Public, customers and legal pressures have grown related with environmental impact from manufacturing activities. As a consequence of this movement, actions that can reduce environmental impact of such activities have been more discussed in strategic forums concerning manufacture. Key factors contributing to such environmental impact include the resource-intensive style of some activities and the ever-shorter life cycle of products and processes (KAZAZIAN, 2005; MAXWELL et al., 2006). Environmental commentators emphasize the need to weigh the environmental cost of manufactured products against the functional income we gain from them (BORCHARDT et al., 2009a). According to Donaire (1999), manufacture usually reply to such pressures with: (i) end-ofpipe control, installing devices that neutralize the environment impact, without interfering in the process; (ii) on-line control, redesigning products and processes to reduce environmental pressures; or (iii) adding to the company mission a high environmental performance requirement, usually based on a formal managerial structure. Kopicki et al. (1993) had used a slightly different language: (i) reactive actions, when he company limits to remediate existing problems: (ii) proactive actions, when it seeks to attempt valid normatives in the manufacturing process; and (iii) value-seeking actions, when the company usually practice environmentalfriendly activities, regarding design, supply, manufacture, delivers and after-use recovery. According to Weenen (1995), in environmental management, proactive or process-integrated actions are preferable than end-of-pipe or reactive ones. A sound possibility for are the EMS (environmental management systems), which, among other requirements, demand control actions on environment performance and impact assessment of products and processes. Another possibility is the introduction of techniques of ecodesign. Ecodesign seeks environmentally friendly solutions in product design and process development. It normally considers both economic and environmental aspects associated with the entire life cycle of products. Such concepts promote a reviewing of techniques of conceptualization, design and production of goods (BYGGETH et al., 2007) and offer the theoretical basis for implementing new policies on design of products and processes. After Fiksel (1996), ecodesign is a technique of product design in which the usual goals of the project, such as performance, reliability and cost of manufacturing, appear together with environmental objectives, such as reduction of environmental hazards, reducing the use of natural resources, increase of energy efficiency and recycling. It allows linking the functions of the product with sustainability aspects, reducing environmental impacts and increasing the presence of eco-efficient products (KARLSSON and LUTTROPP, 2006; MANZINI and VEZZOLI, 2005). After Vercarlsteren (2001), many companies consider the ecodesign in preserving not only the environment, but also competitiveness and public image related to the business and market environmental requirements. Different requirements for ecodesign are proposed in literature. Many regard materials, components, processes and products characteristics, use of energy, storage and distribution, packaging and waste (WOLFGANG et al., 2005; LUTTROPP and LAGERSTED, 2006; FIKSEL, 1996). We mean prioritizing resources and actions in practices of ecodesign. Supported by Hermann et al. (2007), which speak on measurement of performance on environmental aspects, we find relevant identifying priorities or degree of importance of each 2

3 ecodesign construct for companies in a particular industry and the extent to which each company meets every requirement on each construct. We also find relevant understanding how and why emerges in a company the need for involvement of people from product or process design in dealing with environmental issues. Such kind of involvement may be related with the mission of the company or with pressures originated by customers and legal agents. So, the research main objective was to understand and prioritize relevant aspects in ecodesign practices in a specific industry, the automotive industry. Specific objective were: (i) to classify the various aspects concerning ecodesign in objective classes of factors, named constructs; (ii) to highlight some of the key factors influencing the adoption and implementation of ecodesign practices at manufacturing companies; and (iii) to find numerical priorities for the constructs. The research question was: how can be understood and how to prioritize the various aspects embedded in ecodesign practices in manufacture companies of the automotive industry? The main research method was the case study. First, we gathered information from literature and, in focus group sessions with experts, organized it in a tree-like structure that appraise and organize aspects of ecodesign in constructs. Second, we chose a mid-sized automotive electronics supplier for electronic parts. By interviewing managers, we investigated how and why ecodesign is being incorporated into the design of its manufactured products. Finally, we used this structure in a chemical components supplier for automotive industry for prioritize constructs in two products and respective processes. The numerical assessment was made by company s managers, mediated by researcher in focus group sessions, supported by the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The AHP method is cited, among others, by Chen and Tong (2008) and by Berander (2007) as the method of decision support most applied to problems of priority in development of products. The theoretical foundation of the AHP is found, among others, in Forman and Selly (2001) and Saaty (1980). In this research, the criterion for the acceptance of an assessment was adopted from Saaty (1980): a consistency ratio of less than 0.10 (CR <0.10). Consistency ratio is the probability that the numerical structure representing managers preference about an issue came from a random, not rational process. In the other hand, if CR is sufficiently low, we can accept that the decision was taken in rational basis, not random. The main contribution of this article is to provide a method for prioritize ecodesign actions in a specific company. The method was developed assuming that the application in other industries is feasible. The remaining of this article begins with some background on ecodesign, encompassing the benefits it offers and the barriers to its implementation; research methodology and findings; discussion and contribution; and conclusions and suggestions for continuity. Limitations of the research are those related with the method: a single industry; and exclusive use of judgement, not physical measurement of field variates in prioritization. 3 Theoretical background: ecodesign The concept of ecodesign, green design or life cycle design refers to the design of new products and services by applying environmental concerns aiming at prevention of waste, emissions and other forms of environmental impacts along the entire life-cycle of the product. In ecodesign, environmental considerations are integrated into product and process design procedures. (WEENEN, 1995). Ecodesign has been defined as a concept that integrates multifaceted aspects of design and environmental considerations into product development in order to create sustainable solutions that satisfy human needs and desires. Ecodesign formally introduces environmental concerns in the new products development process of a company 3

4 (KARLSSON and LUTTROPP, 2006). Ecodesign can also be defined as a proactive approach of environmental management that aims to reduce the total environmental impact of products and services along their entire life-cycle (PIGOSSO et al., 2010). The factors that motivate adoption of ecodesign are not limited to environmental benefits, but can include saving costs, gaining competitive advantage and improving corporate image (VERCALSTEREN, 2001). Some components, systems or sub-systems can easily be recycled, reused or remanufactured, which is an effective way to reduce both environmental impacts and costs of the manufacturing processes (PIGOSSO et al., 2010). Kazazian (2005) tells us about eco-conception, an approach that considers, in conception stage, environment concern as important as factors such as technical feasibility, cost control, and market demand. Boks (2006) stresses the importance of product designers, emphasizing their unique position and ability to influence environmental strategies. Designers can have a key impact when they enlarge the focus of their efforts, giving the environment a prominent position in defining the parameters of product development. However, ecodesign tools can present difficulties for companies. Using then can require a high degree of expertise. To make ecodesign tools more useful and accessible, we need to help designers link them to more conventional product development tools (LE POCHAT et al., 2007; RAO, 2004; LOFTHOUSE, 2006). Despite the amount of tools available, ecodesign is not always readily adopted by manufacturing companies. Authors note that industry designers often find the tools difficult to use (LOFTHOUSE, 2006; LE POCHAT et al., 2007; LUTTROPP and LAGERSTEDT, 2006; BYGGETH and HOCHSCHORNER, 2006; BYGGETH et al., 2007). According to Lofthouse (2006), tools often fail to be adopted because they do not focus on design, but instead are aimed at strategic management or retrospective analysis of existing products. The author notes that what designers actually need is specific information on areas such as materials and construction techniques. The environmental information associated with ecodesign tools is often very general. In most instances, the tools do not provide the detailed and specific information that designers find necessary when working on design projects. Regarding the potential of a company for the application of ecodesign, the organization must assess factors regarding: the company (internal), the environment (external) and the product itself. As internal factors we mention: (i) motivation of management; (ii) position in the industry, which tell us about the company's capacity to influence the specifications of the product; (iii) competitiveness, since the leader is more likely to redesign products; and (iv) the industry dynamics, which can provide learning and benchmarking for well-succeeded initiatives. Regarding to external factors, we mean: (i) legal regulation; (ii) pressure from customers and market; and (iii) suppliers and partners, since in automotive industry, they are essential in manufacturing strategy (VERCALSTEREN, 2001). Regarding to the product, we mention that it must be conceived in such a fashion that it can easily be redesigned or, at least, disassembled after primary use (BORCHARDT et al., 2009b). Fiksel (1996) proposed a set of practices related to ecodesign: (i) to choose low impact rawmaterials, preventing from those that can not be recycled or reused; (ii) to focus on simplicity, using simpler forms and less quantity of material, with replaceable parts and easy repair; (iii) to ensure acceptable amount of hazardous substances; (iv) to reduce the use of energy in all the product life-cycle; (v) to use renewable energy; (vi) to develop multifunctional products with sequential functions (after a prior usage, the product still is usable in a second way); (vii) to extend lifetime; (viii) to recover packaging or use refilling; and (ix) to reduce risks and works in disassembling tasks. Wolfgang et al. (2005) proposed, for manufactured products, 4

5 essential requirements that greatly emphasize on eliminating losses in production processes. Luttropp and Lagersted (2006) suggested two operational aspects: surface treatment against dust and corrosion, increasing lifetime; and easy assembly and disassembly, using fixation by screws or plugs, avoiding welding connections. Regarding the factors that can influence implementation of ecodesign practices, Boks (2006) states that the main success factors are related to business aspects, such as customization, organization, and communication about the project. After the author, the most serious obstacles are associated with social and institutional issues, such as differences in vision between managers, organizational complexity, and lack of internal cooperation. Bahmed et al. (2005) state that important success factors are: group and management motivation; use of work teams and a standard mechanism for product design; providing training; and having the assistance of experts in eco-conception. The authors also point out risks factors: lack of specific knowledge; lack of understanding regarding the impact of ecodesign on areas such as regulation, cost reduction, competitive advantage, and organizational image improvement; lack of consensus about how to evaluate products in environmental terms; lack of relevant standards; and the belief that environmental goals are necessarily at odds with economic objectives. Boks (2006) notes some factors that can accelerate decision-making on ecodesign: (i) pressure from external sources, including legal requirements; (ii) economic issues, like partners in the value chain; (iii) consumer perceptions; and (iv) relevant new technologies. Regulation can play an important role in promoting ecodesign. Much of the relevant literature we reviewed concentrated on regulation in the European Union (EU), which has implemented some important environmental regulatory directives affecting the automotive and electronics industries. These include the end-of-life vehicles (ELV) directive, the waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) directive, and the restriction of hazardous substances (RoHS) directive. In addition, the EU has finalized a framework directive for reducing the environmental impacts of energy-using products through ecodesign (PARK and TAHARA, 2008; LE POCHAT et al., 2007). 4 Assessing Ecodesign: a multicriterial problem Ecodesign practices is intrinsically a complex abstract object, which can be described as a complex hierarchical system. We proposed a method for modeling such complex abstract objects. We have structured hierarchically components in a triple-level structure in order to describe the object. Table 1 shows a number of ecodesign principles and practices that are applicable in manufacturing, in a tree-like structure format, suitable for further modeling. Table 1 Tree-like structure for ecodesign First level (top term) Ecodesign Second level (constructs) Materials: choice and use Product components: selection and choice Third level (items) (i) ability to use raw material closer to their natural state, (ii) ability to avoid mixtures of non-compatible materials, (iii) ability to eliminate the use of toxic, hazardous and carcinogenic substances, (iv) ability to not use raw materials that generate hazardous waste (Class I); (v) ability to use recycled and / or renewable materials, and (vi) ability to reduce atmospheric emissions caused by the use of volatile organic compounds. (i) ability to recover components or to use components recovered, (ii) ability to facilitate access to components, (iii) ability to identify materials and components, and (iv) ability to determine the degree of recycling of each material and component. 5

6 Product and process characteristics Use of energy Products distribution Packaging and documentation Waste (i) ability to develop products with simpler forms and that reduce the use or consumption of raw materials, (ii) the ability to design products with longer lifetime (iii) capacity to design multifunctional products, (iv) capacity to perform upgrades to the product, and (v) ability to develop a product with a "design" that complies with the world trends (i) ability to use energy from renewable resources, (ii) ability to use devices for reduction of power consumption during use of the product, (iii) ability to reduce power consumption during the production of the product, and (iv) ability to reduce power consumption during product storage. (i) ability to plan the logistics of distribution, (ii) ability to favor suppliers / distributors located closer, (iii) ability to minimize inventory in all the stages of the product lifetime, and (iv) ability to use modes of transport more energy efficient. (i) ability to reduce weight and complexity of packaging, (ii) ability to use electronic documentation, (iii) ability to use packaging that can be reused, (iv) ability to use packages produced from reused materials, and (v) ability to use refillable products. (i) ability to minimize waste generated in the production process, (ii) ability to minimize waste generated during the use of the product, (iii) ability to reuse the waste generated, (iv) ability to ensure acceptable limits of emissions, and (v) ability to eliminate hazardous waste (Class I). The top term, the theoretical object, is explained by latent constructs, based on concepts explained by indicators, performing a tree-like structure in a hierarchical fashion of levels. The structure was built in previous research (BORCHARDT et al., 2009b) and was built in group sessions with scholars and praticants in environmental management and product development, mediated by researchers. The leading edge was the works of Fiksel (1996), Venzke (2002), Luttropp and Lagersted (2006) and Wolfgang et al. (2005). The list is not exhaustive nor definitive, since ecodesign is a dynamic field that is constantly evolving as knowledge and technology develop and circumstances change. As the list suggests, the scope of ecodesign is broad and multicriterial, embracing product design, impact of raw-material extraction, energy consumption, industrial waste generation and disposal and the full range of environmental impacts created throughout the entire life cycle of products. Such multicriteriality suggests using methods like AHP. The AHP (analytic hierarchic process) is well suited to prioritize constructs of a complex object, like ecodesign practices. Wind and Saaty (1980) proposed that the AHP represents an efficient method of dealing with complexity, identifying and prioritizing the major components in which we can structure a complex problem. The AHP describes a complex problem in a hierarchy, in which each element of a level is further deconstructed into subelements and so on, until at the lowest representative level. Once the hierarchy is defined, its elements are pair-wised compared, by the scale: [equal importance = 1; a little bit more important = 3; more important = 5; much more important =7; dominant = 9]. Intermediate values can be used in intermediate graduations. Pair-wise comparison produces a preference matrix A, in which a ij is the relative importance of the i-th factor with respect to the j-th factor. For n factors, we need n(n-1)/2 judgments, all above the diagonal. Below, we assigned the reciprocals values like in (1) (SAATY, 1980). 1 a12 a1 n 1/ a12 1 a2n A [ a ] ij (1) 1/ a1 n 1/ a2n 1 6

7 We calculate priorities by finding autovectors with maximum autovalues of matrix A. Let A be the comparison matrix (1). We must find the priorities vector w that satisfies (2). Components of w are the priorities of the factors (SAATY, 1980). A.w = max.w (2) By (3), we calculate CR, the consistency ratio, the probability that the matrix had been originated by random, not rational judgement. RI is the average random index, obtained by computer simulation experimentation and given in Table 2. CR = [ max n]/[ RI.(n-1)] (3) 7

8 Table 2: Average random consistency (RI) as a function of the size of the matrix (SAATY, 1980). n RI If CR < 10%, the judgments can be considered satisfactory, otherwise should be reviewed and improved. For instance, if someone judges a 1 one and a half times more important than a 2 and a 2 two times more important than a 3, than he or she must consider a 1 three times more important than a 3. If the judgment differs, there is some inconsistency appraised by CR (SAATY, 1980). Anyway, Hogart (1988) advise that we must count on some inconsistency in mental models of deciders, which must be reflected by the CR. 5 Research The research question was: how can be understood and how to prioritize the various aspects embedded in ecodesign practices in manufacture companies of the automotive industry? The answer must improve, refute or correct the test hypotheses, the presented method. The main objective of research was to test a method for prioritizing constructs in ecodesign practices in an industry, for the sake of reformulate strategic plans, reinforcing practices judged more important and eventually removing resources from those of less importance. Secondary objectives were: (i) understand the emergence and practical implications of ecodesign constructs in the industry; and (ii) to distribute the relative weights (100 percentage points) among the constructs. A third objective is left for continuity: (iii) to assess categorically the actual situation of the constructs, compare with priority and propose plans for those who have biggest gaps between priority and performance. The main contribution of the research is the specific description of the case, that added to others, in growing depth and diversity, may expose regularities about the method and refine it. For questions containing the word how, Yin (2009) indicates the case study method. Case studies can contribute exposing regularities that might be useful in formulating a theory about the object (ECKSTEIN, 1975). Repeated cases with similarities can contribute to the building of a grounded theory (EISENHARDT, 1989). Case studies in operations management are acknowledged as a valid method for exploratory research, like this (VOSS et al., 2002). The method aligns with the design research logic, as stated by Hevner et al. (2004) and Manson (2006). According to this logic, a method like we proposed can be thought of as a result of a design process, like producing a software package or a physical or logical artifact. After a mental or theoretical phase, arises an idea that must be checked for viability and refined for reliability in field cases (MARCH and SMITH, 2005) like those here presented. The authors stress: in the design research logic, there are two important moments in the research, the mental or logical construction of the artifact and its refinement by field cases. 5.1 Previous case: understanding ecodesign in the automotive industry The case took place in a mid-sized manufacturer, with consolidated tradition in environmental management and certified by both ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001:2004 normalization. The company produces on-board electronic components for vehicles. The main research technique was direct observation as well as interviewing the body of managers. They began telling about ecodesign in the industry as a hole and then about particularities of the company. 8

9 The automotive industry operates in a highly competitive market, with worldwide sale and distribution. The tolerance for product flaws is low, especially in the case of vehicle safety. These factors can operate as constraints on the adoption of ecodesign practices by companies in the industry. Regarding natural resources, the environmental balance for vehicles is negative. Production requires in raw material about ten times the weight of the car and uses large amounts of water. About forty thousand liters of water are required to manufacture a car. Vehicles consume fuel and lubricating oils, most often from non-renewable fossil-based resources, sometimes returning as contaminants. In addition, cars use tires, barely recycled. Moreover, vehicles emit significant quantities of air pollutants, including carbon dioxide (a major greenhouse gas) and sulfur dioxide (which contributes to acid rain). Vehicles can also be difficult to recycle at the end of their useful life. They typically contain a variety of different materials (including plastics and metals, as well as electrical and electronic components) that may be costly and challenging to separate. These impacts reinforce the perception that vehicles are not designed with an emphasis on preserving the environment and promoting sustainability. Partly in response to these concerns, the industry has developed high-performance and hybrid engines running on renewable biofuels and using high-durability synthetic lubricating oils, as well as has began using more parts manufactured with recycled composite materials. The industry is also seeking to restrict the use of hazardous substances and to increase the quantity of returnable packaging and materials. These issues are particularly relevant in the European Union. The EU s RoHS directive had banned the use of certain hazardous materials as constituents in specified parts. Regarding the company, as its products involve special safety and security features, it is not allowed to reuse parts that could compromise reliability. However, raw materials, such as plastics and metals, can be recycled. The company has developed a complex business-tobusiness relationship with its customers. The company must meet applicable regulatory requirements and also depends on customers approval in order to make changes to its products. When automotive assemblers qualify suppliers, they primarily evaluate characteristics such as reliability of deliver and products performance. Suppliers also must meet all relevant environmental requirements, such as those related to restrictions on the use of hazardous substances. However, exceeding minimal requirements does not constitute a preferential or does not construct a competitive advantage factor for a given supplier. So, the company has little autonomy in decisions involving introducing ecodesign practices in the products and has little external compensation in doing so. Prices politics are not influenced by ecodesign practices in the automotive market, at least until now. In spite of this, the company addressed key issues regarding the environmental management policy, including energy and materials consumption and waste handling and treatment. The main drivers for ecodesign adoption was cost reduction due to dematerializing directives (using the smallest possible amount of raw material) and to lowering expenditures related to the treatment of waste. The company formed a multidisciplinary group to handle the study, planning, and strategic deployment of ecodesign techniques. Top management organized a working group that included people with expertise in relevant areas, such as development, trade, quality, logistics, and industrialization. The group focused on activities related to the development of products and processes, implementing guidelines that included checklists for design activities and product life-cycle assessment. A huge difficulty was the shortage of technical information available on environmental impacts of materials. Using of standardized databases is an alternative that the company now studies. 9

10 Materials Waste Distribution Packaging Components Characteristics Use of energy ponderation order CR Although the results are not yet those planned, the body of managers recognized some positive achievements: costs reductions from dematerialization; less manufactured products due to multifunctionality, implicating in less items in stock, less test sets in the assembly line, less variety in the sales portfolio and higher lots of raw-materials purchased from a lower number of suppliers; reduction in costs due to waste disposal and transportation of rawmaterials. 5.2 Next case: prioritizing ecodesign in a company The next case was developed in a chemical stuff manufactures, that supply adhesives, paints, greases and various liquid products to the automotive industry. The company has several families of products, manufactured in multiple assembly lines and sites. Design activities are organized in teams with different requirements and practices. Scarcely, a technical development or advance in one family of product can be extended to others, but managerial advances can be exchanged between groups. Anyway, due to the sharp differences between design practices, we chose two lines, A and B, to study. Others can be addressed in the continuity of the research. In focus groups sessions, five experts in design for each family of product, mediated by researcher, distributing relative weights among the constructs of ecodesign. The prioritization was made with the aid of the AHP. In the first rounds, calculated CR were nor proper, so researcher oriented experts to review flaws judgements until preference matrixes based on more rational choices were achieved. Experts produced the judgement matrixes of Tables 3 and 4. For the sake of clarity, although the judgement did not employ this format, we show the preference matrixes with reorganized rows, in decreasing order of importance. As a clue for checking out rationality in the preferences, departing from the diagonal to the right side of the matrix, along the line, one must find only increasing or at least equal numbers in sequence. If we find a decreasing number, that means a flaw or incoherence in judgement. Table 3: Preference matrix for product A Materials 1 1 1/2 2 1/ /2 32% 1 0.9% Waste 2/ / % 2 Distribution 2/5 1/ /2 2 1/2 3 15% 3 Packaging 1/3 2/3 1/ % 4 Components 1/5 1/4 2/5 1/ /2 6% 5 Characteristics 1/5 1/4 2/5 1/ /2 6% 6 Use of energy 1/5 1/5 1/3 1/3 2/3 2/3 1 5% 7 For the product A, the most important construct in ecodesign is materials. In fact, due to its chemical nature, extraction, warehousing and transportation of large quantities of A can greatly affect quarries and its proximity and neighborhood of the manufacturer sites. Using alternate materials should be addressed in further redesign actions, although experts stressed 10

11 Materials Characteristics Use of energy Distribution Packaging Waste Components ponderation order CR they have little flexibility to change or use new materials, due to consolidated technology and assembly lines facilities. For almost the same reasons, the second construct in importance is waste. Due to the fact that half-life of the product is short and customers use little amount at a time, is not unusual that large amounts of the product must be discarded by end of usable life. This particularity turns wasting a problematic construct that must be focused in further actions of redesign. The third and fourth constructs are distribution and packaging, with similar priorities. We stress that the distribution function includes not only the logistic operations of transportation, inspection and warehousing, but also financial operations like assurance of loads and people safety. Packaging has still a significant importance due to the vast amount of cardboard and wrapping plastic required, most of them by no means easy for recycling or reusing. Components, characteristics and energy usage have little priorities (lower than 10%) due to the particularities of the product and the manufacture process. It requires no special sub-systems to be assembled in, the process is quite simple, in little customized quantities and exothermic, what means that a part of the energy spent in it can be recovered and used elsewhere in the site. Regarding to the judgement, it was necessary more than one round, but at the end, experts achieved a preference matrix with a very low inconsistency, less than 1%, meaning a doubtless rational choice. Table 4: Preference matrix for product B Materials 1 2 1/ / % % Characteristics 2/ / / % 2 Use of energy 1/3 2/ / % 3 Distribution 2/7 1/2 2/ / % 4 Packaging 1/4 2/5 1/2 2/ /2 2 8% 5 Waste 1/5 1/3 1/3 1/ /2 6% 6 Components 1/6 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/2 2/3 1 4% 7 For the product B, as well as in A, the most important construct in ecodesign is materials. The production is in bulk, big lots, but it is customized, what means that the material leaves the site with an assigned destination. Exactly as with A, due to chemical nature of the product, dependent of natural resources, extraction, warehousing and transportation can greatly affect quarries and proximity of such installations and neighborhood of the manufacturer sites. In the same way, using alternate materials should be addressed in further redesign actions. Due to similarities between the two products, it can be worthwhile addressing unified actions linking both products, mainly regarding logistic operations. Different from A, the second construct in importance for B is characteristics of product and process. Process is quite complicated and requires electronic equipment and feedback control in closed-loop fashion, which means maintenance efforts, materials consumption and specialized people. The process is endothermic, demanding a large amount of energy, what explains the third construct in 11

12 importance, usage of energy. Distribution and packaging have similar particularities, but distribution is a little bit more demanding, due to warehousing and inspections activities required by the nature of the logistic operation. Different from A, waste has little importance, due mainly to the fact that almost always the total amount of the product is consumed in automotive assemblers. Half-life of the product is very long and just-in-time practices required by assemblers do not allow over-production, what assures little problems regarding final disposals of wastings. Regarding to residues, well-succeeded experiments conducted in thermal sites assure an environmental friendly destination, contributing to energy generation for further processes. As well as in A, no special sub-systems are required to be assembled in, so components are by no means a problem for designers. As in the product A, the judgement required more than one round, but at the end, experts achieved a preference matrix with a very low inconsistency, less than 2%, as well as the first case, meaning a doubtless rational choice. Figure 1 presents a graphical comparison between the two products. We remark that materials are the most priority construct in both products. Although the teams were formed to work separately, in this case, due to the importance of the construct and the similarities of the flaws, unified actions could be planned in order to reduce environmental pressures due to the handling of materials, mainly, raw-materials. 40% 30% product A product B 20% 10% 0% Materials Waste Distribution Packaging Components Characteristics Use of energy Figure 1: Graphical comparison between constructs priorities in A and B 6 Final remarks The main purpose of this article was to present a method for prioritizing constructs that explains ecodesign practices in automotive industry. Secondarily, the article aimed at understanding central aspects of ecodesign implementation and practical implications of ecodesign in the industry and to distribute the relative weights (100 percentage points) among the constructs, in order to reach a prioritization structure. A third objective was left for continuity: to assess the situation of the constructs and propose plans for those who have 12

13 biggest gaps between priority and performance. The research method was the case study. First objective was achieved in a mid-sized supplier of electronic parts. The second was achieved in a chemical manufactures, by analyzing two different families of products. Due to the method, the main contribution of the research was the specific description of the cases and a practical application of the prioritization method. We stress that with the achievement of the third objective, a company should address the constructs with bigger gaps (the difference between prioritization and performance), rather than those of higher prioritization. The method combined qualitative research techniques, such as focus groups sessions, with the mathematical calculations used to find the vectors of priorities from the preference matrix. It was a limitation of the article the use of assessment, based in experts judgments, opposite to measurements, based in physic conditions from field variates and mathematic models. When physic measurements are used, further statistic considerations are necessary, once usually the measured variates are random. In the other hand, objectives measurement like those provided by physical variates hold less subjectivity then categorical judgements. As continuity, we propose the use of other multicriterial method, beyond AHP. It is also suggested to test the method in another industry. We also suggest assessment of performance of the product in the constructs, by means of a set of indicators that can explain the construct. So, the reformulated actions would focus not necessarily in the most prioritized constructs, but in the constructs with larger gaps between priority and performance. The method can also be applied in the entire, or at least, a bigger part of the automotive chain. The application along the chain can identify the fragile parts on the ecodesign development and helps to focus efforts in the chain. At last, it is proposed to integrate the method to the cleaner production technologies and reversal logistic models available in literature. It is understood that the method might indicate the ecodesign gaps of a product operation and offer enough support to the implementation and maintenance of cleaner production and reversal logistics programs in manufacture in an on-going improvement basis. Acknowledge The research was partially supported by funds from CNPq Brazil. References BAHMED, L.; BOUKHALFA, A.; DJEBABRA, M. Eco-conception in the industrial firms: methodological proposition. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, v.16, n.5, p , BERANDER, P. Evolving Prioritization for Software Product Management. Doctoral Thesis. Department of Systems and Software Engineering. School of Engineering. Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden, BOKS, C. The soft side of ecodesign. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.14, n.15-16, p , BORCHARDT, M.; POLTOSI, L.; SELLITTO, M.; PEREIRA, G. Adopting ecodesign practices: case study of a midsized automotive supplier. Environmental Quality Management, v.19, p.7-22, 2009a. BORCHARDT, M.; SELLITTO, M.; PEREIRA, G. The assessment of ecodesign application using the analytic hierarchy process: a case study in three furniture companies. Chemical Engineering Transactions, v.18, n.1, p , 2009b. BYGGETH, S.; BROMAN, G.; RÒBERT, K. A method for sustainable product development based on a Modular System of Guiding questions, v.15, n.1, p.1 11, BYGGETH, S.; HOCHSCHORNER, E. Handling trade-offs in ecodesign tools for sustainable product development and procurement. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.14, n.15-16, p , CHEN, H.; TONG, Y. Evaluating and operating NPD mix within Technological and Manufacturing Cluster under uncertainty. International Journal of Product Development, v.6, n.2, p ,

14 DONAIRE, D Environmental management in enterprises. S. Paulo: Atlas. ECKSTEIN, H. Case Study and Theory in Political Science. In Greenstein, F. and Polsby, N. (org.) The Handbook of Political Science, V.7. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, EISENHARDT, K. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, v.14, n.4, p , FIKSEL, J. Design for Environment. New York: McGraw Hill, FORMAN, E.; SELLY, M. Decisions by objectives. Expert Choice, Inc Available in acessed in mai HERMANN, B.; KROEZE, C.; JAWJIT, W. Assessing environmental performance by life cycle assessment, multi-criteria analysis and environmental performance indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.15, n.1, p.1 10, HEVNER, A.; MARCH, S.; RAM, S. Design Science in Information Systems Research. Management Information System Quarterly, v.28, n.1, p , HOGART, R. Judgement and choice. Essex: John Wiley and Sons, KARLSSON, R.; LUTTROPP, C. Ecodesign: What s happening? An overview of the subject area of ecodesign and the papers in this Special Issue, v.14, n.6, p , LE POCHAT, S.; BERTOLUCCI, G.; FROELICH, D. Integrating ecodesign by conducting changes in SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.15, n.7, p , LOFTHOUSE, V. Ecodesign tools for designers: Defining the requirements. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.14. n.15-16, p , LUTTROPP, C.; LAGERSTEDT, J. Ecodesign and the ten golden rules: generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.14, n.6, p , MANZINI, E.; VEZZOLI, C. O desenvolvimento de produtos sustentáveis: os requisitos ambientais dos produtos industriais. São Paulo: Ed. USP, (in Portuguese) KAZAZIAN, T. Haverá a idade das coisas leves: design e desenvolvimento sustentável. São Paulo: SENAC, (in Portuguese) KOPICKI, R.; BERG, M.; LEGG, L.; DASAPPA, V.; MAGGIONI, C. Reuse and Recycling: Reverse Logistics Opportunities. Oak Brook, Il.: Council of Logistics Management, MANSON, N. Is Operations Research Really Research? Journal of Operations Research Society of South African, v.22, n.2, p , MARCH, S.; SMITH, G. Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology. Decision Suport System 15, v.3, n.3, p , MAXWELL, D.; SHEATE, W.; VAN DER VORST, R. Functional and systems aspects of the sustainable product and service development approach for industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.14, n.17, p , PARK, P.; TAHARA, K. Quantifying producer and consumer-based eco-efficiencies for the identification of key ecodesign issues. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.16, n.1, p , PIGOSSO, D.; ZANETTE, A.; GUELERE FILHO, A.; OMETTO, A.; ROZENFELD, H. Ecodesign methods focused on remanufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.18, n.1, p.21-31, RAO, P. Greening production: a south-east asian experience. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, v.24, n.3, p , SAATY, T. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill, VENZKE, C. A situação do ecodesign em empresas moveleiras da Região de Bento Gonçalves RS: Análise das posturas e práticas ambientais. Master s Degree Dissertation in Administration. UFRGS, Porto Alegre, (in Portuguese) 14

15 VERCALSTEREN, A. Integrating the ecodesign concept in small and medium-size enterprises: Experiences in the Flemish Region of Belgium. Environmental Management and Health, v.12, n.3, p , WEENEN, J. Towards sustainable product development. Journal of Cleaner Production, v.3, n.1-2, p , WOLFGANG, W.; KUN-MO, L.; IN-TAE, J.; JOHN-HEE, H. Ecodesign in twelve steps. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 05 Melbourne: WIND, Y.; SAATY, T. Making Applications of the Analytic Hierarchic Process, Management Science, v. 26, n.7, p , VOSS, C.; TSIKRIKTSIS, N.; FROHLICH, M. Case Research in Operations Management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, v.22, n.2, p , YIN, R. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA: