7
A lively community of methodology developers and practitioners emerged, and
LCA benefi ted from database development, standards setting, and creation of software.
However, some potential users (especially in industry) found the methodology too
complex and contested to be workable on a routine basis. This led many to work with
the LCA consulting industry that sprang up to respond to a demonstrated need and the
increasing availability of LCA software. An alternative approach was to “streamline”
LCA (e.g., Graedel et al. 1995 ; Weitz et al. 1995 ; Hoffman 1997 ; Christiansen 1997 ),
and streamlined LCA (SLCA) has since been used in various forms throughout industry. As a consequence of these initiatives, LCA and SLCA activities in industry are
much more signifi cant than might be inferred by an outside observer.
In 2002, a new LCA guide addressed in detail many of the issues that had caused
concern in the past (Guinée 2002 ). However, unresolved problems remained, as
pointed out by Reap et al. ( 2008a , b ). LCA remains today in the interesting position
of being viewed as still in development as an academic tool but widely employed in
industry. It will doubtlessly continue to undergo further development, as it continues to provide important perspectives on industrial product and process design
activities.
3.2 Design for Environment
The recovery and reuse of a variety of “industrial resources” was rather common
early in the twentieth century (Desrochers 2000 ) but became more challenging as
materials, components, and products became increasingly complex and as resources
appeared abundant. However, in the late 1980s, a number of corporations began to
rethink their product design processes, especially as those processes related to recycling or resource loss (Henstock 1988 ). The result was methods that looked beyond
product performance, appearance, and price to attributes such as effi cient manufacturing, fewer parts suppliers, and less inventory (Watson et al. 1990 ). From that
perspective, it was an easy step to consider environmental factors such as minimizing energy requirements, decreasing discards from manufacturing, choosing more
sustainable materials, and the like (e.g., Hamilton and Michael 1992 ; Kirby and
Pitts 1994 ; Azar et al. 1995 ; Sheng et al. 1995 ). Among several related books, the
1996 volume Design for Environment (Graedel and Allenby 1996 ) stimulated interest among industrial design groups throughout the world (e.g., Klausner et al. 1998 ;
Stevels 2001 ). Aspects of disassembly, remanufacture, and recycling, widely discussed in the 1990s, have continued to be emphasized (Cândido et al. 2011 ; Go
et al. 2011 ; Hatcher et al. 2011 ; Ryan 2014 ).
Design for environment is becoming increasingly embedded in both the educational and industrial aspects of product design. Perhaps the best evidence for this is
the broad acceptance of the 2009 book Materials and the Environment: EcoInformed Materials Choice , by Cambridge University engineering professor
Michael Ashby (Ashby 2009 ) . This volume is widely used in undergraduate
education and in the industrial design sector, an achievement that is perhaps one of
1 Industrial Ecology’s First Decade
A lively community of methodology developers and practitioners emerged, and
LCA benefi ted from database development, standards setting, and creation of software.
However, some potential users (especially in industry) found the methodology too
complex and contested to be workable on a routine basis. This led many to work with
the LCA consulting industry that sprang up to respond to a demonstrated need and the
increasing availability of LCA software. An alternative approach was to “streamline”
LCA (e.g., Graedel et al. 1995 ; Weitz et al. 1995 ; Hoffman 1997 ; Christiansen 1997 ),
and streamlined LCA (SLCA) has since been used in various forms throughout industry. As a consequence of these initiatives, LCA and SLCA activities in industry are
much more signifi cant than might be inferred by an outside observer.
In 2002, a new LCA guide addressed in detail many of the issues that had caused
concern in the past (Guinée 2002 ). However, unresolved problems remained, as
pointed out by Reap et al. ( 2008a , b ). LCA remains today in the interesting position
of being viewed as still in development as an academic tool but widely employed in
industry. It will doubtlessly continue to undergo further development, as it continues to provide important perspectives on industrial product and process design
activities.
3.2 Design for Environment
The recovery and reuse of a variety of “industrial resources” was rather common
early in the twentieth century (Desrochers 2000 ) but became more challenging as
materials, components, and products became increasingly complex and as resources
appeared abundant. However, in the late 1980s, a number of corporations began to
rethink their product design processes, especially as those processes related to recycling or resource loss (Henstock 1988 ). The result was methods that looked beyond
product performance, appearance, and price to attributes such as effi cient manufacturing, fewer parts suppliers, and less inventory (Watson et al. 1990 ). From that
perspective, it was an easy step to consider environmental factors such as minimizing energy requirements, decreasing discards from manufacturing, choosing more
sustainable materials, and the like (e.g., Hamilton and Michael 1992 ; Kirby and
Pitts 1994 ; Azar et al. 1995 ; Sheng et al. 1995 ). Among several related books, the
1996 volume Design for Environment (Graedel and Allenby 1996 ) stimulated interest among industrial design groups throughout the world (e.g., Klausner et al. 1998 ;
Stevels 2001 ). Aspects of disassembly, remanufacture, and recycling, widely discussed in the 1990s, have continued to be emphasized (Cândido et al. 2011 ; Go
et al. 2011 ; Hatcher et al. 2011 ; Ryan 2014 ).
Design for environment is becoming increasingly embedded in both the educational and industrial aspects of product design. Perhaps the best evidence for this is
the broad acceptance of the 2009 book Materials and the Environment: EcoInformed Materials Choice , by Cambridge University engineering professor
Michael Ashby (Ashby 2009 ) . This volume is widely used in undergraduate
education and in the industrial design sector, an achievement that is perhaps one of
1 Industrial Ecology’s First Decade