3.2 Potentials in Relation to Life Cycle Management
Taken together, the studies differ in both the objects of analysis and the scope and
boundaries in which the results are valid. Moreover, methods used derive from
different research traditions and method approaches such as the analytical, the
system and the social approaches described in Arbor and Bjerke [16] and Wolf [17].
Due to different research traditions and method approaches and their fundamental
discrepancies, and the related amount of work and efforts made, it might be
questionable to relate answers from these perspectives in the same assessment, as is
the case in the example above. Yet we argue that for Life Cycle Management,
assessing multiple perspectives and transdiciplinary approaches is a valuable way of
working. Life Cycle Management is about decreasing the negative impact of
physical flows in society, by approaching the acts and practices of actors in the
system. In this respect, there is a need to understand the premises for success in
everything from technological possibilities in lab scale to the amount of materials
available in a region, and the norms, values and intentions of actors needed to
develop the system. Thus, combined systems studies should, with careful respect to
the differences in goal and scope, be seen as complementary studies to guide
technology innovation. Insights form these multiple perspectives can be of value for
any actor aiming to manage these systems for the advances of less environmental
impact from a life cycle perspective. Further research on evaluating various actors
might give some insights on of how useful the various systems studies were in the
collaboration, and toward decision making. To this end, the above perspectives are
seen as complementary, yet not exhaustive. An important perspective not included
in the above is an assessment of the economic feasibility of SA from MFW. Also
combining SA with other products in a bio-refinery has not been evalutated, to give
some examples.
4 Conclusion
Combined-systems approaches and multiple methods contribute with a useful
holistic perspective to evaluate and guide technology innovation from a life cycle
perspective. Results from a case study on bio-based SA does not provide a unanimous answer on whether the prospects for transforming MFW into bio-based
chemicals are favorable or not, but gives a nuanced evaluation that offers a more
firm foundation for decision and further development than one perspective or
method in isolation. The transdisciplinary approach can inform an arena of research
and industrial partners with different perspectives to facilitate discussion and more
well-informed decisions. Despite time and efforts, the case thus illustrates the
benefits of applying a transdisciplinary approach with multiple perspectives when
assessing and evaluating potential routes to a more bio-based economy, and when
seeking to manage the progress of sustainable value chains.
The Value of Transdisciplinary …
333
Taken together, the studies differ in both the objects of analysis and the scope and
boundaries in which the results are valid. Moreover, methods used derive from
different research traditions and method approaches such as the analytical, the
system and the social approaches described in Arbor and Bjerke [16] and Wolf [17].
Due to different research traditions and method approaches and their fundamental
discrepancies, and the related amount of work and efforts made, it might be
questionable to relate answers from these perspectives in the same assessment, as is
the case in the example above. Yet we argue that for Life Cycle Management,
assessing multiple perspectives and transdiciplinary approaches is a valuable way of
working. Life Cycle Management is about decreasing the negative impact of
physical flows in society, by approaching the acts and practices of actors in the
system. In this respect, there is a need to understand the premises for success in
everything from technological possibilities in lab scale to the amount of materials
available in a region, and the norms, values and intentions of actors needed to
develop the system. Thus, combined systems studies should, with careful respect to
the differences in goal and scope, be seen as complementary studies to guide
technology innovation. Insights form these multiple perspectives can be of value for
any actor aiming to manage these systems for the advances of less environmental
impact from a life cycle perspective. Further research on evaluating various actors
might give some insights on of how useful the various systems studies were in the
collaboration, and toward decision making. To this end, the above perspectives are
seen as complementary, yet not exhaustive. An important perspective not included
in the above is an assessment of the economic feasibility of SA from MFW. Also
combining SA with other products in a bio-refinery has not been evalutated, to give
some examples.
4 Conclusion
Combined-systems approaches and multiple methods contribute with a useful
holistic perspective to evaluate and guide technology innovation from a life cycle
perspective. Results from a case study on bio-based SA does not provide a unanimous answer on whether the prospects for transforming MFW into bio-based
chemicals are favorable or not, but gives a nuanced evaluation that offers a more
firm foundation for decision and further development than one perspective or
method in isolation. The transdisciplinary approach can inform an arena of research
and industrial partners with different perspectives to facilitate discussion and more
well-informed decisions. Despite time and efforts, the case thus illustrates the
benefits of applying a transdisciplinary approach with multiple perspectives when
assessing and evaluating potential routes to a more bio-based economy, and when
seeking to manage the progress of sustainable value chains.
The Value of Transdisciplinary …
333