Search

Copyright of Matériaux et Techniques is the property of EDP Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: Most common eco-design methods for SMEs often provide guidelines and suggestions too general, if not contradictories, to be considered as a real design practice. This paper presents a method, named “iTree”, based on a set of eco-design guidelines specifically conceived to support designers in developing new greener products in accordance with the output of a product Life Cycle Assessment-LCA. The “iTree” guidelines are particularly suitable for SME – Small and Medium Enterprises, because they do not specifically require eco-design or problem solving experts. They have been conceived to provide clear and detailed suggestions on where and how to intervene and are based on problem solving methods, such as TRIZ, design for disassembly, and other computer aided tools, adapted for eco-design purposes and simplified for non-expert users. “iTree” method provides the user with an easy and graphical way to visualize the life cycle inventory and critical areas of intervention. For each area, it suggests only the pertinent set of guidelines, customized to the specific situation. In this way, there is a direct link between the visual outcomes of the Eco-assessment phase and the Eco-improvement phase. The experimentation of the proposed method and guidelines is described with an explanatory example. Furthermore, the method has been tested within the European project, named Remake, which aimed at testing new methods of eco-improvement for SMEs in Europe. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The EU Directive on Waste Electrical and Electrical Equipment (WEEE) (2002/96/EC), to be implemented in stages from August 2004, attempts to tackle the growing quantity WEEE by making producers responsible for the costs of the collection and recycling of their products at the end of usable life. This is considered to give producers a financial incentive to reduce waste at source through eco-design. This link is, however, under-researched and little is known generally about the effectiveness of extended producer responsibility (EPR) and policies to promote it. This paper presents the findings of an exploratory study to address these important gaps in knowledge. Literature review was used to develop an analytical framework to explain the relationships between the drivers for eco-design and the role of policies to promote EPR. This was applied to eight case studies of firms from the European lighting sector. While quantitative data to confirm the link between EPR and eco-design were difficult to obtain, the case studies showed that EPR has had little effect on product development so far. Within the sector studied, most producers have been able to pass on incremental costs associated with EPR to customers with negligible effects on sales. This reflects perceptions in the lighting sector that, because demand for products is relatively price inelastic and the regulation affects all producers equally, EPR is unlikely to drive eco-design at least in the short run. The cases also showed that choice between individual and centrally provided waste recovery schemes rested on perceptions of relative costs and practicability. It was evident that other drivers, such as bans on hazardous substances, product declarations and supply chain pressures, were often more effective promoters of eco-design. Thus it seems a mix of policy measures is required rather than reliance on economic instruments alone. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]