Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Re-considering product design: a practical road-map

for integration of sustainability issues
Sissel A. Waage*
SAW Group, 1260 Chestnut Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA
Received 7 September 2003; accepted 16 November 2005
Available online 19 January 2006

Abstract
The proliferation of sustainability assessment principles, strategies, actions, and tools has created confusion about pathways forward for companies. It is unclear how existing approaches are complementary or distinct. How does a company assess current products and materials? How could
designers create more sustainable products? What criteria, principles, approaches, and tools should be applied? Why? Is there a practical road map
to guide product designers and product development managers in integrating sustainability issues into their decision-making processes?
This article builds on previous frameworks for understanding the interconnections between various assessment principles, strategies, actions,
and tools related to industrial ecology, human and labor rights, and corporate social responsibility [Waage S, Geiser K, Irwin F, Weissman A,
Bertolucci M, Fisk P, et al. Fitting together the building blocks for sustainability: a revised model for integrating ecological, social, and financial
factors into business decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production 2005;13(12):1117e206; Robe`rt K-H, Schmidt-Bleek B, Aloisi de Larderel
J, Basile G, Jansen JL, Kuehr R, et al. Strategic sustainable developmentdselection, design and synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner
Production 2002;10(3):197e214; Robe`rt K-H. Tools and concepts for sustainable development, how do they relate to a framework for sustainable development, and to each other? Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8(3):243e54]. Expanding on past work, this piece suggests a road
map for application by product designers and product development managers. A four-phase process is offered for integrating systems and
sustainability perspectives into product design, manufacturing, and delivery decisions.
2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Sustainability; Products; Design; Assessment; Tools

1. Introduction
Business success is traditionally defined as delivering products that customers value in a timely and efficient manner such
that continual profitable growth occurs. What happens, however,
when sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR)
becomes part of a companys definition of business success?
What actions should be taken when managers recognize
a shifting regulatory landscape (such as European product
take-back requirements), a challenging context in which to
source materials (particularly ones linked to the endangerment
of habitat or species), activist pressures, and/or consumer

* Tel.: 1 415 318 8170; fax: 1 415 974 0474.

E-mail address: [email protected]
0959-6526/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.026

requests for products that are healthy or environmentally

and socially responsible?
The wide range of details and decisions that mangers and
designers must address if they are to integrate sustainability
and CSR into product decision-making is immense. The questions that immediately arise include:
 What does sustainability and CSR mean? And what does it
mean for our business?
 What are the ways in which we can make the products and
services we offer consistent with sustainability and CSR
principles? How do we design products more sustainably?
 What tools are available to help make decisions? How do
we decide which tools to use?
 Are organizational changes needed? If so, what are the
changes? When are they needed?

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

 How do we know that we are making progress?

 Is there a road map available to guide the process of integrating sustainability and CSR conceptsdincluding ecological, social and financial factorsdinto product decisions
and product design processes?
This article begins to answer these questions. It builds on preexisting work that has (1) proposed a framework for understanding the interrelations between a range of sustainability
principles, strategies, actions, and tools, and (2) suggested criteria for considering products in terms of sustainability and CSR
principles that draw on a systems-based1 and life cycle-oriented
approach [1e3]. This past work is embedded within a road
map for integrating sustainability into product design decisions.
The article was developed following a two-day dialogued
with invited specialists from academia, businesses, government, and research organizations2dwho are focused on the
principles, strategies, approaches and tools for integrating
environmental and social factors into product assessments.
Participants discussed current work on sustainability, material
and product issues along with criteria, characteristics, and
actions for business managers and product designers seeking
to incorporate sustainability into decision-making processes.
Both the workshop discussion and the resulting collaborative work recognized that describing a product as sustainable is problematic due to issues around volume and scale
of production as well as varying impacts depending on the
context(s) in which a specific product is made, used, and reused or disposed. In addition, many challenges exist with current efforts to assess products and materials due to insufficient
data, lack of agreement on criteria, and difficulty in considering cumulative impacts. This data issue is compounded by
a common lack of communication on gathering and transmitting information (as well as explaining how to use it)dacross
departments in companies, throughout supply and distribution
chains, within and across regions and ecosystems, within
industry associations, and within communities, civil society,
as well as among consumers.
While acknowledging these challenges, there remains
a need for clarity on how people working within businesses
1
A systems perspective is premised on the dynamics of, and interconnections between, ecological, social, and economic systems. A systems approach
seeks to understand cascading effects, unintended consequences, and the dynamics among sets of relationships.
2
The full participant list included representatives from: the Forest Stewardship Council; Scientific Certification Systems; the Chemical Strategies Partnership; the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems; the Clean
Production Network; the Center for Resource Solutions; Rocky Mountain Institute; the Alliance for Environmental Innovation; the Center for Clean Products and Clean Technology at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville; the
Lowell Center for Sustainable Production at the University of Massachusetts,
Lowell; the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis; the World
Resources Institute; the Environment and Society Group, Battelle Seattle Research Center; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Ecotrust; Green
Seal; and the Natural Step. Business attendees included Ben & Jerrys, Cargill
Dow, Hewlett Packard, Interface Carpets, IDEO, LL Bean, and Seigel & Strain
Architects along with consulting firms CH2M Hill and Michael S. Brown and
Associates.

639

can consider products in relation to sustainability factors and

move strategically to design more sustainable materials, products, and enterprises. This article suggests one way forward. It
begins with an overview of the common product development
and design process within corporate contexts. The second
section describes the current state of the sustainability
decision-making and assessment field and recent work that
could inform the product design and product development processes. Section three merges the product design process with
the sustainability decision-making field through a road
map that infuses the standard design process with clear pathways for considering ecological, social, and financial issues
throughout the design process. Section four illustrates how
this road map would shift the design process. Section five
concludes with challenges and next steps for building upon
this work.
2. Corporate product design processes
At present, few companies publicly proclaim that their
product design processes integrate either environmental or social aspects of sustainability thinking or take into account
a systems-based view of sustainability. Yet, the design stage
is a key point at which to introduce sustainability considerations because decisions at this stage determine more than
70% of the costs of product development, manufacture, and
use and have a significant impact on end-of-life management
for a product [4]. For example, designing a product that is
easily disassembled and does not contain any toxic materials
reduces recycling costs. A design that minimizes energy
consumption during its use results in limiting the need for
customers to make changes after a purchase, such as buyers
of hot water heaters had to do with insulation blankets.
Today, the typical design process is informed and constrained by three factors. The first are the specifications for
the product, service, or need that the design process will address. The second set includes cost, schedule, available materials and processes, aesthetics, and market considerations.
Third is the knowledge and experience of the designers who
shape the process and the range of options. Within the bounds
of these constraints is the space for innovation. Arguably, by
bounding the problem, innovation becomes possible.
A model product design process involves successive phases:
 UnderstanddWhat is the problem/need/desire?
Tools include:
B Customer/User observation and interaction
B Kano technique
 ExploredWhat are the possible solutions?
Tools include:
B Brainstorming
B Rough prototyping
 Define and RefinedWhat is the best solution?
Tools include:
B Concept development

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

640
B
B
B

Engineering
Prototyping
Testing

3. State of the sustainability decision-making and

assessment field

 ImplementdHow will we make it?

Tools include:
B Sourcing
B Tooling
B Scaling-up
In practice, the design team often moves through some
phases in parallel and occasionally both forward and backward. The team may share responsibilities across traditional
lines of expertise [5]. Tradeoffs in function, goals, and costs,
are continually weighed against one another, options considered, and decisions made. The process is complex, multifaceted, and less linear than idealized.
Even when the design team includes broad representation
across an organization, it still interacts with the larger organizational structure, such as marketing, engineering, manufacturing, sales, finance, and/or quality assurance teams. And
though the designers may monitor progress from design to
product launch, at some point design teams disband, leaving
the product to fend for itself [6]. This overall process is
summarized in Fig. 1.
Within this process sustainability parameters can be
thought of as another set of constraints that bound the design
space. The problem, however, is that designers have been unclear about what sustainability principles, strategies, approaches, and tools to use at what points in time. How can
a designer understand the state of the sustainability assessment
field? How can she/he choose what path to follow and what
principles, strategies, actions, and tools to use?

A considerable amount of work has emerged on eco-efficiency, sustainable design, and sustainability and materials
in recent years (for example see [6e12]). However, this proliferation of work presents a challenge for the designer and/or
business manager to sort through and understand how to identify the clear, immediate, and actionable pathways forward.
Further complicating matters, the designer and business
manager faces an array of high-level sustainability principles,
ranging from the United Nations Declaration on Human
Rights to The Natural Step System Conditions. They also encounter an array of strategies, including cleaner production
and natural capitalism, as well as guidance on specific issues
spanning from Forest Stewardship Council certification of forest products through green energy certification and dozens
of eco-labels for other attributes and products. How do you
pick between these elements?
The lack of clarity is a factor limiting the integration of sustainability into business, product, and design contexts. While
these various principles, strategies, approaches and tools
may be complementary and conceptually related, the problem
is that linkages, where they exist, are not readily apparent.
To address this issue, an international group of researchers
has offered one approach to highlighting the relationships between various principles, strategies, issues, tools through a hierarchical map of the field [2]. The framework is premised
on the argument that sustainability efforts require evaluating
decisions in terms of consistency with broad, systems-based
principles and the use of specific strategies and tools all of
which are related hierarchically (Table 1). For example,
cleaner production is a strategy for addressing issues in

Customer
input
Marketing
Dept.
Requirements

Product
Function
Requirements

Feasibility Study,
New Alternatives
Design and
Engineering Plans
(Iterative Process)
Preliminary
Functional Specs

Manufacturing
Impacts
and Requirements

Customer Service
Impacts
and Requirements

Sales
Impacts
and Requirements

Business Plan
(including monitoring
as determined)
Source: Ferrone (1997)

Fig. 1. Common product development process.

Design and
Engineering
input

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

641

Table 1
Strategic sustainability decision-making approach
Focal scale

Questions answered

Definition and examplesa

Level 1

Defining the system

 How is the system itself constituted?

 What are the relevant principles for
the constitution of the system, including
both ecological and social principles?

Understanding function of the ecosphereb and

constitutional principles of the functioning
of this system (e.g., thermodynamics,
biogeochemical cycles,
ecological interdependencies of species,
societal exchange with, and dependency
on the ecosphere) ([1], p. 198)

Level 2

Identifying outcomes
and success

 How can sustainability be defined?

 What are the basic mechanisms by
which humanity can destroy the system?
 What are the principles for sustainability
(i.e., a successful outcome)?

Specifying the Brundtland Commission

definitionc through the Natural Steps
System Conditionsd

Level 3

Articulating strategies for

forward movement

 What are the basic strategic principles and

guidelines for sustainable development by
which specific actions can be fostered in
a strategic way to move purposefully
towards success?

Level 4

Determining actions

 What concrete actions should be undertaken

in order to reach success?

Turning to renewable energy, recycling, and more

resource-efficient engines, insofar as they comply
with all system conditions ([1], p. 204)

Level 5

Listing available
assessment tools

What tools would help us to:

 manage and monitor our actions so that they
comply with our plan,
 build our capacity to carry out effective actions
in support of the strategy, and
 measure directly whether progress had the intended
effect in the system?

For example:
Life Cycle Assessments (LCA), Ecological
Rucksack (or Material Input per Service Unit
(MIPS)), Total Material Flow (TMF),
Ecological Management Systems (EMS)

 Principles for strategic investments in

society at large as well as in individual
organizations (utilize backcasting;
seek flexible platforms; ensure good
return on investment; follow the
precautionary principle)
 Principles for socially aware/responsive
investments (ensure dialogue and transparency)
 Political means for forwarding Issues (Seek
sustainability-focused the differential taxes;
Address subsidies (for non-sustainable actions);
Remove traditional privileges, Address
current norms and standards, consider
international agreements, etc.)

Source: Adapted from Robe`rt et al. [2].

a
For specific information, please see, pre-dialogue paper appendices at http://www.naturalstep.org/learn/docs/working_papers/altmats_preeventappendice.pdf.
b
The ecosphere occupies the full space above the lithospheredthe earths crustdto the outer limits of the atmosphere.
c
The Brundtland Commission (1987) defines sustainability as to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs.
d
The Natural Steps System Conditions for ecological sustainability are derived from the three basic mechanisms by which natural life sustaining systems can
be destroyed, followed by inserting a not to create the converse of these mechanisms. The system condition for social sustainability is simply stated as the requirement to meet human needs (within the frame set by the three System Conditions for ecological sustainability) [which leads to]: In a sustainable society, nature
is not subject to systematically increasing . (1) concentrations of substances extracted from the earths crust, (2) concentrations of substances produced by society,
(3) degradation by physical means, (4) and in that society human needs are met worldwide.

the industrial ecology system. Moving up one level, an industrial ecology system is a systematic method of describing the
relationship of ecology and the economy. The next level addresses the management of the global system. Understanding
these relationships is the key rationale for the hierarchy.
The set of questions at each of the levels are complementary
and enable a design teamdas well as decision-makers within
the larger business organizationdto be thorough in addressing
product decisions and long-term sustainability goals. The model
embeds decision tools, such as LCAs and material flow analysis,
within a context that considers broader ecological, economic
and socially sustainable systems. The approach urges

decision-makers to consider consistency of decisions with

a full systems perspective.
The resulting strategic sustainable development approach [2] relates specific actions to the broader system. The
authors assert that there are two essential elements for ensuring
that specific actions do not exchange one set of non-sustainable
actions for another set, which are (1) a sustainability vision,
and (2) appropriate strategies and tools. Without a sustainability
vision and the use of appropriate strategies and tools, businesses may pursue measures that provide short-term ecological, social or economic benefits without the possibility of
achieving the long-term sustainability of systems.

642

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

The co-authors of this article did not intend to present a

final product. Rather, they were proposing an approach to
clarify the ways in which principles, strategies, and tools
could complement each other. This approach is open to
adaptation and expansion, through incorporating additional
principles, new methods, and emerging analytical support
systems.
The next generation of the framework has already been developed by a group comprised of a cross-section of researchers
within business, non-profit organizations, and academic institutions. In their co-authored article, the group recommends expanding the strategic sustainable development model by:
(1) devising sustainability factors for product criteria and characteristics, (2) considering explicitly social aspects of sustainability, and (3) drawing out geographically specific factors,
impacts, and cumulative effects [1]. Specifically, with regard
to criteria and characteristics of sustainable products, the authors assert these factors should be based on both a synthesis
and aggregation of existing analytical work, including consideration of the broader system dynamics (e.g., sustaining ecological, social and economic systems, as highlighted by The
Natural Step System Conditions) and environmental and socially screened characteristics. For example, the authors suggest that sustainable product criteria and characteristics
could include:
 Decreased (systematically) flows and volumes of materials and products in relation to key sustainability factors
(e.g., human exposures, resource availability for specific
communities, waste assimilation, etc.).
 Used materials and inputs that are:
(a) non-toxic, non-persistent, non-bioaccumulative, nonfossil fuel-based, non-endocrine disrupters, non-ozone
depleting, and
(b) harvested and/or produced by using (more) sustainable
practices (as defined within specific sub-fields, e.g.,
Forest Stewardship Council),
 Relied on efficient, renewable and sustainable sources of
energy.
 Enforced human rights policies (for both company and
suppliers), linked to UDHR and ILO principles, such as:
- Safe and healthy working conditions
- Freedom of association
- Non-discrimination in personnel practices
- Prohibition of forced or child labor
 Established programs to:
- dialogue with stakeholders,
- integrate stakeholder input into decision-making
processes,
- enable broad-based access to, and use of, a range of
benefits (health, financial) and resources (natural, financial, educational, information, etc.),
- support realization of rights to basic health, education,
and housing.
 Created functioning mechanisms for (re)investment in social, natural, and infrastructural capital of localities affected
by operations.

 Maintain the resilience, the structure, and function of landscape-level ecological processes [1]
Whether it is these criteria or others, the results will have to
be validated through a broad-based discussion. That is, core
sets of criteria will have to be agreed upon through some process that has yet to be determined, such as through both stakeholder dialogue and academic review. The discussion, and
ultimate agreement on, criteria and characteristics of more
sustainable products will be essential to the establishment of
common reporting mechanisms by which companies can measure their progress (such as a GRI-type effort focused on products). In the interim, the authors assert that they are merely
beginning the process by suggesting a few potential criteria
that are common.
Yet, prior to this review step being established, companies
must make decisions today. Therefore, what is important is establishing a clear and transparent process of criteria selection
and open articulation of the reasons for designing and assessing products with guidance from particular sustainability factors. Once such a set of sustainable criteria and characteristics
are clearly articulated, then decision-makersdincluding
designersdcan begin to consider pathways forward in terms
of a road map for action.
4. Pathways forward for product designers and business
decision-makers
One possible road map for implementation is built
around four core phases:
Phase
Phase
Phase
Phase

1:
2:
3:
4:

Establish sustainability context

Define sustainability issues
Assess
Act and receive feedback

These phases can be clearly linked to the design process

described earlier with a one-to-one mapping, as is shown in
Fig. 2.
4.1. Phase 1: Understand and establish sustainability
context
What is the problem, need or desire?
What is sustainability?
What is our vision of a sustainable product, material, or
enterprise?
A designer begins by asking what is the problem, need, or
desire? A sustainability-focused design effort would begin
a step back and first ask what is sustainability? Based on
existing definitions of ecological and social sustainability, decision-makers within a company can ask: What is our vision
of a sustainable product, material, or enterprise?
While defining the broader context is not the design teams
responsibility, but the obligation of the organization, it is
essential for clearly placing the problem (or need or desire) within

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

Design Process

643

Sustainability Process for Designers

1. Understand
need or product

A. Establish Sustainability Context

sustainability issues in relation to client and product

2. Explore
potential solutions

B. Define Sustainability Issues

through mapping and sustainability analysis

3. Define / Refine
design options

C. Assess
Consider potential pathways forward in relation to a vision of
a sustainable solution

4. Implement

D. Act / Receive Feedback

- Create and roll-out sustainability-oriented product / service
- Evaluate and (re)assess in terms of sustainability definition
and context

B
DESIGN

DESIGN

SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

PATHWAY

QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS

PATHWAY

Understand

What is the

What is our vision of a

Establish

sustainable product,

Sustainability Context

problem/need/desire?

material, or enterprise?
Explore

What are potential

What are the

Define

solutions?

ecological, social, and

Sustainability Issues

economic implications
of the various
solutions?
Define / Refine

What is the best

What is the most

solution?

sustainable solution?

Assess

(According to a set of
ecological and social
parameters?)

Implement

How will we make it?

How can

Receive Feedback

manufacturing,
distribution, use re-use
or end of life occur
sustainably?
How will the products
sustainability attributes
be assessed over time?

Fig. 2. (A) Product design and sustainability process overlay. (B) Product design and sustainability pathways and questions.

a broader set of objectives, as well as issues/problems (e.g.,

ecological and social issues as well as a users set of needs). In
this sense, defining sustainability sets the context for the
design work (and/or business decisions).
However, even without a broader organizational vision of
a sustainable company, designers can articulate what

a sustainability-focused product would meandat least at an

overarching level of adhering principles of sustainability
(e.g., The Natural Step), following sustainable strategies
(e.g., Natural Capitalism), or by using other parameters.
For either corporate executive teams or design teams, this
process would begin by identifying a framework that

644

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

provides a common way to understand and discuss sustainability concepts.

To explore the implications of a selected definition in terms
of current materials, products, and/or operations within a particular firm, the chosen framework could be applied in
a quick and dirty exercise that offers a rough overview of
a companys throughput and sustainability impacts. This
high-level assessment of a company or productdin terms of
the definition of sustainabilitydenables decision-makers to
understand why sustainability measures are important. It also
offers a consistent basis from which to begin discussions about
how all decisions can focus on contributing to a sustainability
vision or goal.3
As one example of applying this step within a business
product design context, imagine employees who are informed
by the senior management team that they must integrate sustainability into all product development and design decisions.
After selecting a sustainability framework to inform understanding of core issues and dynamicsdsuch as The Natural
Stepda very basic diagram of unsustainable activities could
be developed in order to apply these concepts to a particular
product or to the whole company. Based on this understanding
of sustainability-related activities, a vision is developed as
a high-level, aspirational goal, such as: (1) for the entire
companydto supply sustainable products and services, or
(2) for a product line focused on attaching documents (e.g.,
staplers or paper clips)dto provide more sustainable document management serves. In this second case, designers could
focus on creating services that may or may not relate to staplers in the future. That is, designers could design ways to supply clients with an increasing number of paperless options that
render staplers obsolete, or they may find a sustainable
innovation that attaches documents better than staples. This
initial step opens up a wide range of options for the company
in considering integration of sustainability into decisionmaking.
Therefore, for employees throughout a company, including
designers, actions within this first step include:
 identify a sustainability framework for guiding decision
processes and for discussing sustainability dynamics within a team,
 review past assessments of environmental and social problems associated with the product, in order to understand
impacts that have been identified in the past and consider
areas to flag in assessment,
 develop a high-level, overarching sustainability impact diagram (quick and dirty or coarse grain analysis), that
depicts a full systems approach (e.g., cradle to grave/reuse analyses and consideration throughout the entire
3
This approach is bolstered by the ISO14040 Standard, which underscores
that comparisons made between LCA studies can only be done if both the assumptions and context of the various studies were the same. Identifying
a framework for understanding sustainability, and core principles, provides
a context and a set of assumptions for considering a wide range of specific issues and decisions.

supply chain)4 to understanding the current product in relation to ecological, social, and financial flows, impacts,
and opportunities, and
 create a vision of a sustainability-oriented service/product/
firm, that eliminates (or designs out) the impacts and issues identified in the diagramming process.
This process places current products and broad resource
flows within the context of ecological, social, and economic
factors relevant to sustainability-aware product decisionmaking. Once a companys decision-makers understand the
broader environmental and social contextdand ideally begin
to reconsider long-term business strategy and product offerings in light of sustainability factorsdthen more focused product assessment processes can begin.
For designers beginning the design process, there are
specific additional questions that can be integrated within the
understand phase of the process, as described in Fig. 3A.
The result of this phasedundertaken either by the design
team or the corporate leadershipdis clear identification of
both opportunities and desired outcomes, relating to level 1
(defining the systems) and level 2 (identifying outcomes and
success) of the strategic sustainable development approach.
The costs for this first step depends complexity of product, demands on internal staff time, and/or advising from sustainability strategy and assessment specialists.
4.2. Phase 2: Explore and define sustainability issues
What are potential solutions?
What are the ecological, social, and economic implications
of the various solutions?
Prior to selecting a (or several) assessment tool(s), it is important to brainstorm potential ways to address the desired
product function according to sustainability parameters (as defined in phase 1). For example, is an object needed or could a
service be developed, as a longer-term goal? Is the packaging
4

First, an approach that takes a full life cycle view-considering products

from cradle to grave or even cradle to cradle-is essential to understanding products in terms of sustainability factors. For any item-ranging from
clothing to housing-the production or harvesting of inputs represent one issue.
The uses of the product are another key issue area. The re-use and/or end of
life of product is also essential in assessing the sustainability of products. In
addition, a range of additional questions emerge when considering the sustainability of products, including: (i) What energy sources were used on-site, during harvesting, production, and in the store as well as in the transportation of
the goods, from the site of extraction through production and to delivery? (ii)
What materials were used in constructing the buildings in which the products
were produced, warehoused, and sold? (iii) Were the materials used to make
the product toxic, persistent, or bioaccumulative? (iv) How were the products
made, in terms of resource inputs and outputs, as well as the social aspects of
manufacturing practices? (v) How were the products used, maintained,
re-used, and/or disposed of? (vi) What is the volume of production, both in absolute terms and relative to available natural resource inputs? (vii) What is the
cost of alternative (more sustainable) alternatives for each of these tension
points? Overall, materials, production practices, energy needs, transportation
requirements, product use, re-use, re-cycling, and disposal practices are all elements that need to be factored into a broader analytical context.

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

an essential element of the product function? Could product

and/or packaging be altered to decrease impacts?
Once a longer-term perspective is established, and linked
with overarching vision, then a number of actions are recommended in defining product assessment criteria, scope, and analytical tools. Since designers focus on brainstorming within
this phase, the sustainability overlays all include starting
points from which to brainstorm, such as:
 use the sustainability impacts and opportunities as brainstorming springboards to explore solutions that do
not result in adverse effects but rather draw upon
opportunities,
 begin with the (phase 1-generated) vision of the
need being addressed in a sustainable world to develop
ideas and alternatives that realize the desired outcome and

Design
Process
1. Understand

645

 draw upon sustainability strategies (level 3) as bases for

further exploration, specifically including: substitute, dematerialize, and humanize (to address social aspects
of sustainability).
Brainstorming and exploring ecological, social, and financial implications of various solutions should occur at a level
that dovetails with the traditional design brainstorming process, thereby weaving in a sustainability brainstorming
process. Rapid, prolific generation of ideas is useful at this
stage.
For designers working within the explore phase, specific
additional sustainability questions can also be simply interwoven into the traditional process, as described in Fig. 3B.
The result of this phase is to ensure that exploring, and
generating, various product design concepts that considers

1 A . U n d e rs ta n d th e c lie n ts w o rld
B a ck g ro u n d C lie n t R e se a rc h :
A s s e s s c o m p a n ys a n d c o m p e tito rs c o rp o ra te e n v iro n m e n ta l a n d s o c ia l
re s p o n s ib ility p o lic ie s
C o n s id e r re g u la tio n s a n d risk s in te rm s o f s p e c ific p ro d u c ts a n d p ro c e s se s
R e s e a rc h o rg a n iza tio n s cu ltu re a n d p o s itio n fo r c h a n g e

2. Explore

1 B . U n d e rs ta n d th e w o rld in w h ic h th e p ro d u c t w ill b e u s e d , re -u s e d , o r
d is p o s e d o f

3. Define / Refine

H o w d o e s th e p ro d u c t o r s e rv ice d e p e n d o n u n s u s ta in a b le p ra c tice s , w h ic h
im p a c t h u m a n h e a lth a n d e c o s ys te m s h e a lth , b y a s s e s s in g in te rm s o f th e fo u r
s ys te m c o n d itio n s ?

4. Implement

1 C . U n d e rs ta n d th e w o rld in w h ic h th e p ro d u c t w ill b e m a d e
H o w d o e s th e m a n u fa c tu rin g a n d d e liv e ry o f th e p ro d u c t o r s e rv ice d e p e n d o n
u n s u s ta in a b le p ra c tice s , w h ich im p a c t h u m a n h e a lth a n d e c o s ys te m s h e a lth
u tilizin g th e fo u r s ys te m c o n d itio n s (in te rm s o f: ra w m a te ria ls p ro d u ce rs ,
m a n u fa c tu re rs , tra n s p o rta tio n p ro v id e rs , e tc .)?

Design
Process
1. Understand

2. Explore how people use current products on the market or analogous

products if what is being designed doesnt exist yet
Broaden the observation space to include consideration of the interfaces between human health,
product/object, and environmental impacts
Consider the product in terms of the broader social and ecological systems in which it is used and its
impacts

2. Explore

Develop a baseline sustainability assessment of the current products, by (1) mapping product systems
and flows and (2) considering all product inputs and processes in terms of sustainability factors (e.g.,
materials, manufacturing, transportation, energy, etc.)

Biosphere
Ecological Impacts
related to production and use

3. Define / Refine

4. Implement

Human Health & Safety Factors

related to production and use

Lithosphere
Fig. 3. (A) Product design and sustainability process overlay (I). (B) Product design and sustainability process overlay (II). (C) Product design and sustainability
process overlay (III). (D) Product design and sustainability process overlay (IV).

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

646

Design
Process

1. Understand

2. Explore

3. Define / Refine

4. Implement

3. Define / Refine what the finished product might look like using scenarios with
composite characters
Consider how the need and/or desire that the product meets can be met in a
way that addresses sustainability, including:
improves human health and fulfills other human needs
enables ecological function and resilience
decreases use of materials from earths crust
decreases production of persistent synthetic compounds
conserves biodiversity and productive ecosystems
Use sustainability principles to guide discussion / brainstorming around:
How would this need or desire be fulfilled in a sustainable world?
Would it be a product or service?
What materials would it be made of in a sustainable world? Why?
What processes would be used to produce and/or create it? (Why?)
Where would it be made?
Where would it be sold?
How would it transported to customers?
Would there be an end of life? If not, how would the company continue its
business? If so, would it be returned at the end of life? To whom? How?

Design
Process

1. Understand

4. Implement and bring to market

2. Explore

Track whether and how products or services perform better and if they are
more durable and sustainable.
3. Define / Refine

Continually improve products, services and methods in terms of addressing

sustainability factors.

4. Implement

Fig. 3 (continued).

adverse sustainability ripple effects, in the form of ecological

and social impacts (from extraction of various materials
through transportation, production, use, and re-use or disposal).
The process focuses on idea generationdof both product or
service solutions as well as sustainability issues and
opportunities. It draws on phase 1 work of identifying the
desired, sustainable outcome(s), relating to level 2 (identifying
outcomes and success), as well as sustainability strategies
(level 3) within the strategic sustainable development
approach.

4.3. Phase 3: Define, refine, and assess

What is the best solution?
What is the most sustainable solution?

By this phase, designers are considering specific solutions.

In these considerations, and refinement of the solution pathway forward, designers can overlay questions about sustainability solutions as described in Fig. 3C.
This approach will help focus on critical sustainability impacts, while including consideration of a range of cascading
systems impacts across a full systems- and life cycle-oriented
perspective on materials and processes in ecological and social
systems (e.g., energy and transport issues and/or social aspects
of decisions). In addition, the process will clarify certain decisions about trade-offs. For example, it will provide designers
with a framework within which to consider the use of materials with persistent compounds versus materials that rely on endangered habitat destruction. In the absence of a broader
sustainability evaluation, the tendency will to explore tradeoffs across the life cycle of these two fundamentally

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

unsustainable approaches. By contrast, a longer-term perspective may help resolve difficulties through a focus on innovations that ideally remove the need for trade-offs.5
Actions in this step include:
 conduct a preliminary, high-level, criteria-based assessment of various potential design solutions, in terms of criteria suggested in previous work, such as, criteria in [1], as
an overarching review of the product,
 perform a strategic analysis of various material and design
options, using well-developed toolsdhighlighted in level 5
of the strategic sustainable development modeldthat
rely on either detailed or quick and dirty assessments,
depending on resources available (while still applying
a full systems- and lifecycle-oriented perspective on materials and processes in nature and society),
 draw on a wide range of information sources and tools,6
including both qualitative and quantitative information
and data relevant to sustainability, and
 consider findings within the broader sustainability context
(developed in phases 1 and 2).
For example, this phase could consider a PVC-materialbased approach to document attachment/management versus
one using an aluminum approach versus a particular glue. Appropriate tools, data sets, and specialists would be selected to
consider the ecological, social, and financial ripple effects
of these various options prior to the final definitions and refinements of the design team.
The result of this phase is consideration of not only potential
solutions, but also ecological, social, and financial implications
of these various approaches, as assessed in terms of the desired,
sustainable outcomes, relating to level 2 (identifying outcomes
and success) of the strategic sustainable development approach, and drawing upon strategies outlined in level 3 of the approach and including substitution, dematerialization, and
humanization (to address social aspects of sustainability). In
5
For example, Electrolux in Sweden in 1994, shifted away from the
CFC/HCFC dilemma by identifying butane/pentane refrigerants as a safer
and more sustainable alternative that could be processed by natural cycles
without adverse effects [13].
6
For example, see online information, such as: U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (www.epa.gov/opptintr), Integrated Risk Information System (www.epa.gov/iris/index.html),
Green Chemistry Program (www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenchemistry), ECOTOX
database (www.epa.gov/ecotox), International Program on Chemical Safety
(www.inchem.org), State of New Jersey, Health Department, Right to Know
Program (www.state.nj.us/health/eoh/rtkweb), Environment Defense Scorecard (www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health/Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances
(www.cdc.gov/niosh/rtecs.html), National Institute of Environmental and
Health Sciences (www.niehs.nih.gov), National Toxicology Program
(www.ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/), Environmental Health Information Service
(www.ehis.niehs.nih.gov), Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(www.atsdr.cdc.gov), National Library of Medicine (http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/),
ChemIDPlus (http://chem.sis.nlm.nih.gov/chemidplus/), Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Proposition 65 (www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html), and Norm Thompson Outfitters, Inc. and Michael S. Brown
Sustainability Toolkit and Scorecard (2002).

647

terms of costs and resources required, this phase can be undertaken

at whatever level is feasible given the skills and resources available
to the design team. That is, the assessment, analysis and interpretation of various potential solutions could occur by using LCAs
and hiring specialists. Alternatively, designers could implement
these tasks at a coarser-level of analysis through on-line research
and a few focused calls and brief consultations with sustainability
materials, production, and design specialists in academic institutions and/or nonprofit organizations (including think tanks).
4.4. Phase 4: Implement and receive feedback
How will we make it?
How can manufacturing, distribution, use and re-use/end of
life occur sustainably?
How will we assess the products sustainability attributes/
dimensions over time?
Designers seeking to create more sustainable products
should seek resources to monitor, evaluate, and adapt products
over timedin order to assess whether the products were indeed more sustainable according to specific criteria selected
and parameters chosen. Monitoring can take place at each
step, from direct impacts (positive and negative), to successful
completion of strategic activities, to assessment against sustainability principles and vision. Within this phase, core elements include:
 monitor actual impacts of products,
 identify design decisions that could have been changed,
and
 create organizational learning mechanisms to infuse these
findings into future projects.
Specific actions for designers in the implement phase of
the traditional design process are summarized in Fig. 3D.
Obviously, however, this final phase does not comport with
the traditional approach to product design that tends to disband
teams following the creation of a new product. The financial
implications of maintaining teams and allocating resources
to continue consideration of a project in terms of sustainability
factors would vary depending on team size and thoroughness
of analysis. At a minimum, one point person could be selected
to maintain oversight of the product through use and re-use or
disposal as well as time allocated for the full team to come together for an assessment at some meaningful interval following the completion of the project (e.g., six months or oneyear).
5. Adapting the product development process
The process of applying the approach outlined in this
articledand integrating sustainability into product decisionsdwill cut to the core of the business, raising questions
such as, what product to make, how to design it, how and
where to manufacture and market it for what uses, and how
to recycle it. It will also raise the question of who needs to

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

648

Defining the System & Identifying Outcomes and Success:

Articulation of how the system is constituted and what principles
are used for setting vision and guiding strategy
Establishing a sustainability-focused core strategy
Planning specific actions
(viz dematerialization, substitution, and
humanization/consideration of social aspects)
Customer
input

Product
Function
Requirements

Marketing Dept.
Requirements

Feasibility Study, New

Alternatives

Environmental,
Human rights
and integrated
Sustainability
specialist input

Preliminary Design and

Engineering Plans
Preliminary Functional
Specs

Manufacturing Impacts
and Requirements

Customer Service
Impacts
and Requirements

Design,
Engineering,
Business
Strategy and
Finance
input

Sales Impacts
and Requirements

(including use of
environmental and
sustainability
assessment tools
& criteria)

Business Plan
(including monitoring)

Source: Adapted from Ferrone (1997)

Fig. 4. Sustainability-oriented adaptations on the product development process.

be involved in these decisions from within and outside the

company to address sustainability.
Therefore, this sustainability-oriented decision-making
approach will require changes in the product development process, from the overall business strategy, and product lines,
through operations practices. An illustration of these shifts is
offered in Fig. 4.
Ideally, introducing sustainability and systems-based
thinking throughout the design process occurs when sustainability is part of the organizational ethos. A business that
thinks through how it will integrate sustainability into its
core strategy and processes is a business that can incorporate systems-based thinking into the constraints that define
its product development and design processes. In turn, a design effort that incorporates the potential for extended product stewardship and the reincorporation of used or recycled
materials into manufacturing makes sense when the organization is willing to establish mechanisms for collecting used
products and recovering materials. For companies, this approach also requires the establishment of new financial
methods for analyzing full life cycle cost of products and
materials and thinking in closed loop terms. Within this
context, it is ideal to keep design teams functionally intact
to monitor design effectiveness of the product as it moves
through its full life cycle [6].

6. Next steps
The road-map outlined in this article offers designers
and business decision-makers clarity on how to move toward

more sustainability-aware actions. However, there remain

challenges to implementing sustainability within commercial
contexts.
First, data for particular materials and products sustainability attributes are often either unavailable (e.g., proprietary, or
not yet gathered), costly, or unverified. Even with wellresearched toxics, it is difficult to get the information on impacts
so that a company may choose materials based on environmental and social concerns. Most companies are only beginning to develop a process to consider these issues, and, with
a few exceptions, governments still seldom provide information that would help a company think through the impact of
its products. Although, researchers are beginning to develop
analytical tools, ongoing efforts are needed.
There is an enormous potential for a government agency to
address these issues through the creation of public databases
with building block LCA information and maintenance of
these databases over time, by adding new information as
new materials and technologies come into commercial use.
Whatever institution develops this database, it is essential
that all information is transparent and open-source. At
this time, for designers, the response to this challenge is to undertake a quick and dirty assessments to at least begin understanding impacts of materials and products.
Second, a difficulty in considering the sustainability of
one product is that impacts accumulate. A single product
may only be an incremental problem from most materials
and energy use standpoints. Many units of the same product,
however, may be the cause of problems. Considering and addressing these impacts that accumulate across time and space
is key.

S.A. Waage / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 638e649

Government policy is a natural player in this role. And

government regulation and standardsdincluding the requirement to perform a sustainability analysisdcould contribute
to current voluntary approaches. Adding regulation related to
products, as UNEP and other international bodies have recommended, would be an essential step forward. Initial regulations
by the European Union for specific products as well as by the
U.S. offers important case studies for effective pathways forward that address both business and sustainability concerns.
At this point in time, more work is needed to map out complementary voluntary and regulatory approaches to re-considering
product design.
In the interim, however, businesses can play voluntary
roles, such as the one discussed in this article. The
pathway forward for designers at this point is to focus on
dematerialization.
Overall, companies can begin to adopt sustainability-oriented design processes and explore bigger processes as outlined
in this article. Significant challenges and obstacles do remain.
However, immense opportunitiesdin terms of risk reduction
and brand enhancementdlie ahead for the leaders in this
new and emerging field of sustainability, materials, and consumer products.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the participants of The Natural
Steps Sustainable Materials and Products Dialogue, specifically including Michael Brown, Ken Geiser, Frances Irwin,
Arthur Weissman, Michael Bertolucci, George Basile,
Pliny Fisk, Stuart Cowan, Hank Cauley, and Alexandra
McPherson.

649

References
[1] Waage S, Geiser K, Irwin F, Weissman A, Bertolucci M, Fisk P, et al.
Fitting together the building blocks for sustainability: a revised model
for integrating ecological, social, and financial factors into business decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production 2005;13(12):1117e206.
[2] Robe`rt K-H, Schmidt-Bleek B, Aloisi de Larderel J, Basile G, Jansen JL,
Kuehr R, et al. Strategic sustainable developmentdselection, design and
synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 2002;10(3):
197e214.
[3] Robe`rt K-H. Tools and concepts for sustainable development, how do
they relate to a framework for sustainable development, and to each
other? Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8(3):243e54.
[4] National Research Council (NRC). Improving engineering design: designing for competitive advantage. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press; 1991.
[5] Byggeth S, Broman G. Environmental aspects in product development:
an investigation among small and medium-sized enterprises. In: Proceedings of SPIE: Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing, 4193. Boston,
Massachusetts: SPIE; 2000. 261e71.
[6] Ferrone R. Disk drive case study. Prepared for project on frameworks to
stimulate environmental technology in the computer and electronics sectordfinal technical report under U.S.E.P.A. Grant #R824752 (Principal
Investigators: Daryl Ditz and Frances Irwin). Washington, DC: World
Resources Institute; 1997.
[7] Brezet J, Bijima A, Silvester S. Innovative electronics as a opportunity
for eco-efficient services. In: Proceedings of electronics goes green conference. Berlin, Germany (September); 2000. p. 383e9.
[8] Brezet H, van Hemel C. Ecodesign: a promising approach to sustainable
production and consumption. Paris, France: UNEP; 1997.
[9] Geiser K. Materials matter. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001. 339.
[10] Maxwell D, van der Vorst R. Developing sustainable products and services. Journal of Cleaner Production 2003;11(8):883e95.
[11] McDonough W, Braungart M. Cradle to cradle: re-making the way we
make things. New York: North Point Press; 2002.
[12] Mont OK. Clarifying the concept of product-service system. Journal of
Cleaner Production 2002;10(3):237e45.
[13] Vogtlander J, Bijma A, Brezet H. Communicating the eco-efficiency of
products and services by means of the eco-costs/value model. Journal
of Cleaner Production 2002;10(1):57e67.