MIT’s SourceMap: The Future of Supply Chain Transparency and Accountability?

Sustainable product design – which emphasizes the importance of designing responsibly using eco-friendly materials and minimizing environmental impact – is enough of a challenge for many product designers. It requires a new way of thinking about design – and a new way of measuring a product’s success beyond conventional price/performance metrics.

At the same time, sustainable product design also requires manufacturers to be ever watchful of what may wind up in a product, from a supplier located millions of miles away. Indeed, understanding and addressing the challenges of managing sustainability across the supply chain, as well as across the product lifecycle, is no small feat.

But thanks to MIT’s Leonard Bonanni, the creator of SourceMap, the task of tracking, measuring and, in general, comprehending the environmental impact of a product across its supply chain, is getting easier. Originally conceived as a PhD project, SourceMap offers a user-generated visualization of a product’s supply chain and resultant carbon footprint.

It’s a compelling concept – one that, as a recent article describes it, “represents the future of environmentally friendly consumption, one based on transparency and accountability.” Based on its ability to provide a visual map of a product's supply chain, SourceMap just may accomplish this goal, and provide a guide for companies and consumers that are seeking more sustainable solutions.

As noted in an excerpt from the article, Bonnani’s original mission was to help consumers who wanted to be able to do so, make more sustainable choices:

“Basically,” explained Bonanni, “the idea came from the fact that people want to make sustainable choices, but there’s no place for them to go if they want to investigate products and services.” The site (www.sourcemap.org), then, acts as a “public good mission to teach sustainability and understand supply chains.”

To get the project off the ground, Bonanni and his advisers at MIT’s Center for Future Civic Media, Hiroshi Ishii and Chris Csikszentmihalyi, first focused on breaking down select commodities’ trade routes, which can often be quite convoluted. Electronics, for example, can contain components from over ten countries. Thus, Bonanni and his team started by reverse engineering products to track their origins, often by simply calling companies to find a certain item’s origins. Then, with a trail mapped out, says Bonanni, “I needed to break the problem into environmental impact,” like how much carbon shipping and packing sends in the atmosphere.

Of course Bonanni knew we live in a digital world, and wanted to create a visual guide for an easily distracted public. To that end, he reached out to graphic designer David Zorg, who drew maps laying out a product’s trade route and emissions. Now customers can look at the guide for a Giant TCR ‘04 bicycle, and see its 21 components result in a carbon footprint of 82.01 kg, or Apple’s iPod, which has seven assembly spots, and emits 9.84 kg of carbon along the way.

Three years later, SourceMap, a forthcoming 501(c)3 still funded by MIT grants, has evolved into more than just a research product aimed at consumers. It’s a resource for companies, as well.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

See also:

Mapping Carbon Emissions, SourceMap Paves Eco-Conscious Markets

Is Sustainability Fundamentally a Materials Problem?

New product design expert, Steven Eppinger would argue that it is. Eppinger, coauthor of the popular textbook, Product Design and Development and a professor of management science and innovation at the MIT Sloan School of Management, takes the view that “the secret [to sustainability] is to focus on materials.”

Why? While manufacturers often tend to focus on the sustainability goals and objectives that they can achieve at the operations level – energy efficiency, waste reduction, water conservation, etc. – there are real opportunities to cut costs, reduce environmental impact, and drive innovation – during the product design phase, according to Eppinger.

As noted in a recent article on the subject, Eppinger offers the following view:

“The way to think of environmental sustainability when it comes to design and product innovation is by framing it as a materials problem. It’s about the materials that we use in the products and the materials that are used to run the processes that make the products. The reason that product design has a big impact is that’s where the materials decisions are made.

If you want to have a product that uses only materials that can be recycled, you’ve got to rethink the product. You’ve got to change the design, which means new specifications and perhaps some difficult technical trade offs to deal with. If you want to use materials that are recycled in the first place instead of always using virgin materials, you’ve got to design the product differently so that can happen. If you want to reduce the use of packaging materials in operations, you’ve got to design the product differently so that it needs less packaging or no packaging; if you want to reduce the use of coatings and finishes, you’ve got to design the product so that it works properly and looks great without coatings and finishes. If you want to sell a product that your consumer can recycle, you’ve got to design the product to be easily disassembled and separated into available recycling streams.”

Ok. So it’s important to make smart design decisions with respect to materials during the product design phase in order to drive innovation and achieve sustainability goals – the question is, how can this be accomplished most easily? Are there capabilities built-in to today’s product design tools to help facilitate smart design decisions with respect to materials? Are there new tools on the horizon?

The short answer is a qualified, “yes.” The tools aren’t quite there yet, but they’re coming. Users can also expect to see a greater emphasis on not only sustainable materials selection but sustainable materials management in next-generation design tools. In fact, Autodesk's recently announced partnership with Granta Design, a organization which offers expertise in materials software, materials data, and materials databases, promises to take product design and development one step closer to this goal.

So, let’s review. As Eppinger summarizes it:

How can environmental concerns drive product design and innovation?

• Frame design and product innovation for environmental sustainability as a materials problem.
• How much material is used is less important than what material is used.
• Don’t try to eliminate environmental impacts all at once. Try to get a little better each time you design a product.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

See also:

How Sustainability Fuels Design Innovation

Do You Have What It Takes to Design Sustainable Products?

Eco-design Gets a Boost from Autodesk, Granta Partnership

Nike Offers a FREE Gift to Product Designers

No, it’s not free merchandise – but for product designers with an interest in designing with sustainability in mind – it just might be the perfect gift. What is it? A design tool created to help designers make better-informed decisions during the earliest stages of product design – when it matters most.

More specifically, the Environmental Apparel Design Tool reportedly gives each design an overall score, and then allows designers to tweak specific aspects of their work to improve the score, according to Nike. Built over the course of seven years, and at a cost of $6 million, it’s hard to believe that the company is making a version of the tool available for public use – but it is.

And, it’s available here: www.nikebiz.com/responsibility/nikeenvironmentaldesigntool.

Designers can also register for upcoming webinars on the Environmental Apparel Design Tool at: www.nikebiz.com/responsibility/nikeenvironmentaldesigntool.

How does it work? According to a recent article on the subject, designers simply “plug in what materials they're using, how much recycled or organic content they have, any treatments being done, how much waste will be left over from cutting the design out, and some other details, and the tool gives the design a score, which can fall into one of the following categories:  'needs improvement,'  'good,'  'better,'  or  'best.'"  Sounds almost too easy. Then, again, perhaps a great deal of effort was put into the tool in order to make it easy to use. Keep in mind, that by testing the tool out, and providing your feedback, you can make it even easier to use, and more useful.

But it gets even better. In addition to the Environmental Apparel Design Tool, Nike will also be releasing its Footwear Design Tool, Material Assessment Tool and Water Assessment Tool in 2011.

Now, really – what more could you ask for? These tools are free, good for the environment, and developed to help designers create better, more environmentally-friendly products. So, if you’re involved in designing footwear or apparel, go ahead – treat yourself! The Environmental Apparel Design Tool just might be one of the best presents you get this year. It can help you design more sustainable products and help make the world a better place!

Do you have what it takes to design sustainable products? Or wish you did? Tell us more. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

See also:

Nike Shares Environmental Scoring Tool For Product Design

Nike’s Six Million Environmental Design Tool. Now Yours. For Free.

Do You Have What it Takes to Design Sustainable Products?

Is it difficult to design sustainable products? (And by the way - what qualifies as a sustainable product anyway?) Does it require special tools? Does it involve special training? Will it change the way I design, or require additional steps in the design process? Can I still work with my existing suppliers or will I have to find new ones? And what about the materials or processes that I’m using to manufacture my products – are these sustainable? If not, what are my alternatives? And what’s all this talk about managing our environmental impact by measuring our carbon and water footprint? Or using an LCA (life cycle assessment) to help guide my product design efforts? How does all this impact my work?

If these questions sound familiar, you’re not alone… Today, product designers from across all industry sectors – from footwear and apparel to high tech/electronics and transportation – wrestle with these and other questions in their quest to support sustainability initiatives within their companies. And, right alongside these individuals are corporate sustainability officers, quality, environmental health & safety, compliance, and procurement professionals – who are also being held accountable for certain sustainability goals and objectives. It’s a challenging environment, to say the least.

But what we’d really like to know is - what’s happening in your organization? Is sustainability important? In particular, is it important at the product-level? If so – how is sustainable product design currently being tackled by your product development teams?

Tell us. By taking this short survey, you’ll be helping to shed light on this very important – and often highly debated – topic. Whether you’re a sustainability expert or just beginning your journey – your feedback is invaluable.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in our upcoming research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.”

See also:

Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing: Are We There Yet? (survey)

NOTE: This research study is being conducted by Four Winds Research, an independent market research and analysis firm dedicated to sustainable product design and manufacturing. Our research is focused on identifying the key issues and challenges facing designers and engineers today as they attempt to create sustainable products; understanding how organizations can effectively apply sustainability principles in product design and development both internally and across the supply chain; and the critical role that sustainability metrics, tools, and technologies promise to play in product design and manufacturing in the coming decade.  To learn more, visit our website.

Sustainable Product Design Tools and Technology – Free Webinar

Recently, I had the opportunity to participate as a panelist on a webinar focused on tools for sustainable product design and development. Other panelists included: Lise Laurin, founder, EarthShift; Terry Swack, founder & CEO, Sustainable Minds; and Jørgen Vos, product management director, Life Cycle Analytics, PTC InSight Product Analytics.

Hosted by Cadalyst magazine as part of its new On the Edge webinar series, “The Truth About Environmental Performance Software” attempted to address such questions as:

• Is sustainable design just a passing fad?
• Do the tools available today effectively support the kind of lifecycle thinking required to create innovative, profitable, earth-friendly products?
• To what extent do LCA (life cycle analysis), PLM (product lifecycle management), and environmental compliance tools and technology play a part in supporting sustainable product design and development today?

What was perhaps most compelling to me is that we all agreed that sustainable product development is here to stay - the real question is, what will it take for it to be embraced more widely? As a scientist and true practitioner of life cycle analysis, Earthshift’s Lise Laurin offered valuable insight regarding the evolution of LCA-based thinking, while Sustainable Minds’ Terry Swack emphasized the value of LCA as a diagnostic tool, useful for assisting product designers early in the design process. PTC’s Jørgen Vos offered a unique perspective, as the overseer of both the company’s new lifecycle analytics tool, as well as its more widely known InSight environmental compliance software.

Mostly, however, the discussion centered around what it would take, ultimately, to make sustainable product design more of a standard practice among manufacturers. And, here – the message is clear. In addition to education, communication between such diverse groups as engineering and design, quality, environmental health and safety, and corporate sustainability is key. How that will be accomplished – as well as the tools, technology, and best practices that can be employed to facilitate communication and achieve sustainability objectives – is part of the ongoing debate among practitioners in this area.

Some suggest that sustainability is destined to take much the same path as the quality movement did years ago; some suggest that taking even small steps towards meeting your company’s sustainable product design and development objectives, is what is required. In either case, tools and methodologies like PLM, LCA and environmental compliance are an important part of the solution, but only a part. Overall, a new way of viewing and supporting product design and development is what is truly necessary – one that takes into account both economic objectives and environmental/social impacts.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

On the Edge with Cadalyst #3: “The Truth About Environmental Performance Software” (Replay)

Sustainability: It’s About Having a Beneficial Footprint -- Not Necessarily a Smaller One

In a recent interview, chemist and co-author of the book Cradle-to-Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things, Dr. Michael Braungart offers the view that sustainable design isn’t about minimizing or reducing environmental impact but rather, designing a product that ultimately has a positive environmental footprint.  As noted in the following excerpt:

 “Our traditional thinking is cradle-to-grave—the way many of our current industries still operate. It’s a design paradigm that destroys the planet. With Cradle-to-Cradle thinking, products should be made with quality and beauty. We need to focus on a positive agenda. What is the positive footprint of a product or a service? Look at nature - it’s not just about reducing, avoiding, minimizing - it’s about abundance using the right materials. Nature doesn’t know waste as everything is reused. It is all about reusing and recycling nutrients. This is true both for biological cycles and industrial cycles.” - Dr. Michael Braungart

More conventional views take the stand that sustainability is about reducing environmental impact, using fewer resources, emitting fewer GHG emissions, etc. But is that really the right metric for defining a successful sustainability effort? Braungart would no doubt argue that it isn’t. Why? Because by thinking about polluting less, or being less “bad”, or reducing the degree of damage to the environment or society, the problem is that less damage is still damage. Instead, organizations need to look at the entire product lifecycle and ask, “How can products be designed in such a way as to maximize the environmental, societal, and financial benefits - rather than simply minimize negative impacts?” There’s a big difference.

Currently, companies are primarily focused on such sustainability metrics as: energy efficiency, minimizing carbon and water footprint, and reducing GHG emissions. Instead, what if companies were rated on their ability to design products that were durable, yet easily recycled once no longer in use? Not just made with safety in mind, but with environmentally-beneficial features in mind? What if sustainability was based on the ability to achieve some kind of positive environmental impact – and to achieve the equivalent of some kind of top-line environmental improvement - rather than simply a bottom-line resource reduction/savings?

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

Exclusive Interview with Dr. Michael Braungart

Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: Reporting on “Scope 3” Emissions at the Product-level and Across the Supply Chain

The recently released Carbon Disclosure Project’s 2010 Global 500 Report (pdf), which provides an annual summary of climate reporting by the world's 500 largest companies, offers some important insights on corporations' reporting about climate change and their supply chains according to BSR, a global business network and consultancy focused on sustainability.

One of the most compelling findings for 2010? As noted by BSR in a recent article on the subject, the number of companies reporting on GHG emmissions from their supply chains continues to steadily grow.

As Ryan Schuchard, manager of research and innovation at BSR, observes “Two years ago, only about a quarter of the world's top 500 companies reported on "Scope 3" greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Last year, the reporting share climbed to 42 percent, and this year it grew to nearly half.

“That's a steep change compared to reporting overall, which rose only a few percentage points this year to 82 percent,” notes Schuchard.

But what exactly are “Scope 3” emissions? As BSR describes it, “Scope 3” emissions result from activities that companies have influence over, but are beyond direct ownership or control, such as in supply chains.

More specifically, BSR offers the following “primer” on scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions:

Greenhouse gas emissions are typically divided into three "Scopes" for the purpose of organizational and project management.

The first, Scope 1 emissions, refers to combustion (e.g. from fuels, chemicals, or other materials) that leads to GHG emissions on a company's site or other operations under ownership or control. Scope 2 emissions refer to purchased electricity at a company's site or other operations under ownership or control. Together, Scope 1 and 2 usually can be called "internal" or "operational" emissions.

"Scope 3 emissions" refers to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that a company has influence over, yet which are outside its direct control. Supply chain emissions are one component of this, and there are several others, as described below.

These definitions have been popularized by the GHG Protocol, which is the standard for the business management of GHG emissions. The GHG Protocol is currently revamping its original definition to provide more comprehensive guidance. The results are due in early 2011.

Currently, a good working definition is CDP's, which now has 17 categories of Scope 3 emissions:

2010 – "Scope 3" emissions -- proposed categories (17 categories)

1. S1: purchased goods and services – direct/tier 1 supplier emissions
2. AS: Purchased goods and services – emissions of all upstream suppliers – tier 1 and beyond
3. USP: Use of sold goods and services
4. DSP Disposal of sold products at the end of their life
5. Wa: Waste generated in operations
6. Tr: Business travel
7. EC: Employee commuting and teleworking
8. TSP: Transportation and distribution of sold products including warehousing and retail
9. Oth: Other
10. Eq: Capital Equipment
11. Fr: Frachises (scope 1 emissions of the franchisor)
12. Lr: Leased assets (scope 1 emissions of the lessor)
13. In: Investment (scope 1 emissions of the company receiving investment)
14. Fe: Franchises (scope 1 emissions of the franchisee)
15. Le: Leased assets (scope 1 emissions of the lessee)
16. EA: Energy-related activities not included in scope 2
17. TI: Transportation and distribution of inputs (goods and services) and waste generated in own operations

What’s perhaps most worth noting here is that in addition to more detailed scope 3 emissions reporting guidelines for suppliers, proposed definitions for scope 3 emissions reporting relate to a number of product-specific categories, as well – including: emissions occurring during the product use phase, emissions resulting from disposal of products at end of life, and emissions occurring during transportation and distribution of sold products.

Related to this, the WRI/WBCSD (World Resources Institute/World Business Council on Sustainable Development) GHG Protocol Initiative is currently engaged in developing two new standards that relate specifically to scope 3 emissions and emissions associated with individual products, both due for release in early 2011, as noted above:

• Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard
• Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standards

According to GHG Protocol organizers, these new standards are intended to provide a standardized method to inventory the emissions associated with individual products across their full life cycles and of corporate value chains, taking into account impacts both upstream and downstream of the company’s operations. By taking a comprehensive approach to GHG measurement and management, it is hoped that businesses and policymakers can focus attention on the greatest opportunities to reduce emissions within the full value chain, leading to more sustainable decisions about the products we buy, sell, and produce.

On November 2, 2010, WRI and WBCSD released the second drafts of these two new GHG Protocol standards for public comment. WRI and WBCSD welcome feedback from all interested organizations on these draft standards. To be considered, feedback forms must be completed by Friday, December 3. To learn more, see The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative – Product and Supply Chain Standard.

It’s all part of next-generation product design, a topic that is explored in greater detail in the related research study, “Sustainability and the Product Lifecycle: A Report on the Opportunities, Challenges and Best Practices for Sustainable Product Design and Manufacturing.” So, stay tuned. We’ll be providing updates and an opportunity to participate in the research in the weeks and months ahead.

See also:

The Latest CDP Results Reveal a Rise in Scope 3 Reporting

Carbon Disclosure Project 2010 Global 500 Report (pdf)
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative – Product and Supply Chain Standard