CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

HELEN LEWIS, JOHN GERTSAKIS, NICHOLAS JOHNS AND TIM GRANT

RMIT University

SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN:

THE EVOLUTION OF

describes recent initiatives in Australia and New Zealand, with a particular focus on research work undertaken by the Centre for Design at RMIT with manufacturing companies in the region. INTRODUCTION
Design for Environment (DFE) is the process of considering environmental impacts of a product or building at the design stage. The aim is to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts at every stage of the product lifecycle, from the mining or harvesting of raw materials through to disposal or recycling at the end of the product or buildings lifecycle. Although DFE activities in Australia and New Zealand may not appear to be progressing as fast as parts of Europe and North America, there is ample evidence to suggest that some key sectors of industry and influential segments of the design community are adopting DFE as a vital strategic tool. An emerging challenge in the early years of the twentyfirst century is the need to move beyond DFE towards a more ambitious and integrated sustainable design approach. This means aiming for more substantial reductions in environmental impact through dematerialization of production and consumption systems, and meeting the need to address the social and ethical impacts of design in a more holistic approach. Research by the Centre for Design at RMIT is starting to address this challenge. This paper focuses on DFE from the perspective of product design. There is also an emerging field of practice and writing in other design fields in Australia, particularly in architecture, which is described elsewhere (see for example Johnston 2001; Langston and Ding 2001; BDP Environment Design Guide series, 1995).

his paper outlines the development of environmental product design, and recent moves to incorporate a triple bottom line approach to sustainability. Within this context, the paper

DEFINING SUSTAINABILITY
There is a large and growing field of literature on sustainability, which is much too broad to be covered in detail here. The original (and most widely quoted) definition of sustainable development is from the World Commission on Sustainable Development, which defined it as development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs (1987, p.43). A more recent Australian definition is that sustainability is the goal of types of economic and social development that protect and enhance the natural environment and social equity (Diesendorf, 2000, p.23). Many writers in recent years have highlighted the fact that true sustainability will require significant increases in

P A G E

2 3

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

the efficiency of resource use (often called eco-efficiency). Von Weizsacker, Lovins and Lovins (1997) present compelling evidence that a factor four reduction in resource use is both necessary and achievable with technology that already exists. The Dutch Governments programme for Sustainable Technology Development estimated that at least a factor 20 improvement in eco-efficiency would be required to achieve sustainability. It also demonstrated that this was possible using future visions to derive the research and development (R&D) agenda of today (Vollenbroek, 2002, p.216). Hall (2002, p.195) argues that while the introduction of innovation is never straightforward, sustainable development innovation is even more complex because it faces resistance from a broad range of stakeholders. It involves consideration of not only technological and environmental considerations, but also the dynamics of social change. Another recent trend is the integration of environmental, social and economic factors in what is called a triple bottom line (TBL) approach to sustainability. While earlier debates about sustainability have addressed the complexities of issues such as inter-generational equity and distribution of wealth (for example The World Commission on Environment and Development 1987), the new terminology is clearly aimed at changing business priorities. The TBL terminology was originally coined by John Elkington (1998), but is now entering common usage. Elkington highlighted the increasing pressure on companies to go beyond the conventional practice of only focusing on the financial bottom line. He argued that companies are increasingly expected to manage and report on their triple bottom line, which includes economic prosperity, social justice and environmental quality. Companies are starting to prepare TBL reports for public dissemination, and reporting guidelines are currently being finalized by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI, 2002).

DFE AND SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN

A parallel shift is occurring in the design literature, with increasing emphasis being placed on dematerialization and TBL methodologies. The origins of DFE can be found in early critiques of consumerism, industrial pollution, poor architecture and life-threatening products (see e.g. Nader, 1965; Neutra, 1954; Packard, 1956; Packard, 1961; Toffler, 1970). One of the most respected authors on this subject, Victor Papanek (1971, 1995), argued that designers focus too much on the aesthetics of design rather than considering the whole product its function, utility, reparability, affordability, and its environmental and social consequences. This work has continued, with some writers concerned primarily with social impacts of design (e.g. Whiteley, 1993) and others with environmental impacts (e.g. Mackenzie, 1997; Gertsakis et al, 1997; Lewis et al, 2001). In an attempt to integrate social as well as environmental criteria, Datschefski (2001) has developed five design requirements for sustainable product development, called the cyclic-solar-safe principles: Cyclic: The product should either be made from organic materials and be recyclable or compostable or it should be made from minerals that are continuously cycled in a closed loop Solar: The product should use solar energy or other forms of renewable energy that are cyclic and safe, both during use and manufacture Safe: The product should be non-toxic in use and disposal, and its manufacture should not involve toxic releases or the disruption of ecosystems Efficient: The product, in manufacture and in use, should require 90 per cent less material, energy and water compared to products providing equivalent utility manufactured in 1990 Social: The products manufacture and use should not impinge on basic human rights or natural justice.

P A G E

2 4

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

Tischner and Charter (2001, p.121) note that sustainable product design is more than ecodesign. They define ecodesign and DFE as terms for strategies that aim to integrate environmental considerations into product design and development, while sustainable product design (SPD) integrates social and ethical aspects of the products lifecycle alongside environmental and economic considerations aiming for the so called triple bottom line . The authors have also started to develop tools for SPD, including a list of typical SPD concerns (Table 1). These tools will be tested through a new research project being developed by the Centre for Design at RMIT, which is described towards the end of this article. The following sections describe recent initiatives in DFE and sustainable design in New Zealand and Australia.

The majority of New Zealanders take considerable pride in the natural environment. This was confirmed by a study undertaken by the Auckland Regional Council (ARC) at the end of 2000 to gauge the opinions of residents regarding environmental values. The survey found high levels of environmental awareness, with 72 per cent of people rating environmental protection and economic development as equally important (Forsyte Research 2001, p.i). Government policies have recently been introduced to reduce the environmental impacts of consumption. In February 2002, the Government introduced the Energy Efficiency (Energy Using Products) Regulations. All products covered by the regulations and sold in New Zealand have to meet Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS). They must also have labelling that states their power consumption

DESIGN FOR ENVIRONMENT IN NEW ZEALAND

DFE is still in its infancy in New Zealand, due to both a lack of clear direction from the government and a limited manufacturing base. There are, however, some innovative DFE initiatives being taken by local companies such as Fisher and Paykel, and Formway. Economic Issues Technological feasibility Financial feasibility Short-and long-term profitability Adequate pricing

rate. Products that need to meet such requirements are commercial refrigerators and freezers, dishwashers, clothes dryers, clothes washers, household-sized and packaged air conditioners, three-phase cage induction motors, and fluorescent tubes. MEPS for domestic electric storage heaters and fluorescent lighting ballasts take effect from Social/ethical issues Fair trade Equitable policies Good employment Conditions of work Investment in communities Support for regional economy Cruelty-free Satisfaction of real needs More customer value Better systems Participation Equality (gender)

Environmental Issues Waste minimization Cleaner manufacturing Cleaner materials Eco-efficiency Less materials Renewable resources Renewable energy Recycling

Table 1: Sustainable design issues (Tischner and Charter, 2001, p.128).

P A G E

2 5

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

1st February 2003 (Energy Efficiency Conservation Authority, undated). The New Zealand Waste Strategy was also launched in March 2002, aiming to achieve zero waste and a sustainable New Zealand (Ministry for the Environment undated [a]). The Strategy sets out a number of voluntary targets for local authorities and industry to meet, covering waste minimization, organic wastes, special wastes, construction and demolition wastes, hazardous wastes, contaminated sites, organochlorines, trade wastes and waste disposal. The targets are voluntary. Targets for materials classified as special wastes have direct relevance to sustainable design. Materials and products within this category include used oil, end-of-life vehicles, batteries and electronic goods. The policy aims to have businesses within eight different sectors employing extended producer responsibility (EPR) programmes for the collection and reuse or recycling of at least eight categories of special wastes (Ministry for the Environment, undated [b]) by December 2005. There are very few companies in the manufacturing sector in New Zealand already employing DFE. This can partly be attributed to the lack of any local manufacturers mass-producing consumer products, such as electrical and electronic equipment, which are generally imported. New Zealands manufacturing sector is dominated by the production of food and related products, reflecting the interdependence of the manufacturing and primary industries. However, there a number of progressive New Zealand owned and operated companies that are producing innovative products as well as ensuring the environmental impacts of their products or services are kept to a minimum. These include Fischer and Paykel, Designline, The Warehouse and Formway. Fisher and Paykel is briefly discussed next and Formway in a later section. A national DFE research and demonstration programme is also being initiated in 2002 through Manaki Whenua Landcare Research (www.

landcareresearch.co.nz). Their website states that they are New Zealand's foremost environmental research organization.

Fisher and Paykel: leading the way

The jewel in the crown of New Zealand companies employing DFE is Fisher and Paykel. New Zealand owned and based, Fisher and Paykel manufacture high quality white goods and healthcare products for both the domestic and international markets. They produce innovative products that reduce environmental impacts through increased material and energy efficiency. Integrating sophisticated electronic platforms across their range enables them to manufacture energy efficient products by optimizing the use of resources such as energy, water and detergents. As an example, the ECO Smart washing machine uses just 298 kw/hours per year of energy compared to the previous generation washer, Smart Drive, which consumed 925 kw/hours of energy p.a. (Fisher and Paykel, 2002a). Fischer and Paykel is also committed to Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which addresses environmental issues at end-of-life. The company aims to change the issue of unwanted white goods from a possible environmental nightmare into cost recovery mode (Fisher and Paykel, 2002b). The company has implemented a takeback programme for whitegoods in the North Island of New Zealand (both their own and those of competitors), with the aim of diverting products from landfill. With a recycling facility located in East Tamaki, Auckland, the company recycles materials from 25,000 old appliances annually (Fisher and Paykel, 2002b). In 2000 it was estimated 1,600 tonnes of separated materials including aluminium, stainless steel, copper, steel, plastics, packaging, electric cable and compressors were recovered (Fisher and Paykel, 2002b).

DESIGN FOR ENVIRONMENT IN AUSTRALIA

Like New Zealand, Australia has a relatively small

P A G E

2 6

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

population (19 million people) and an economy dominated by agriculture and resource industries. Environmental awareness in the community is generally fairly high. In 1999, 9 per cent of adult Australians ranked environmental problems as the most important social issue, while another 69 per cent of people who didnt nominate the environment as their primary concern did express a concern for the environment (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2002), compared to 72 per cent of residents of Auckland, New Zealand. In another parallel, Government policies relating to the environmental impacts of products have tended to rely on voluntary approaches to waste minimization and product stewardship. The only significant product policy is the National Packaging Covenant, which is based on a voluntary agreement between companies in the packaging chain (packaging companies, materials suppliers, product manufacturers and retailers) and all levels of government, to reduce packaging waste. Signatories to the Covenant are required to produce an annual Action Plan, which outlines how they intend to reduce the lifecycle impacts of their products, and to report on progress. While based on voluntary commitments, government regulations have been introduced at a State Government level to regulate non-signatories. (For more information see the Packaging Council of Australias website at www.packcoun.com.au) Voluntary product stewardship programmes are also being introduced for electrical and electronic products, although these are unlikely to be supported by legislation at this stage (for more information see Environment Australias website at http://www.erin.gov.au/industry/waste/ieu). While Australia still dawdles on DFE, significant pockets of cutting edge research and design are moving ahead with international recognition. DFE of the 1990s, however, was a very different proposition from environmentally responsible design of previous decades.

The early 1990s represented a critical watershed in the ongoing development of DFE, and an important shift from previous perspectives dominated by low-tech solutions and the often unsophisticated approaches of the 1960s and 1970s, available chiefly to alternative life-stylers and hobby farmers. The early 1990s witnessed an extremely significant deviation. The 1991 EcoDesign 1 Conference hosted by the Centre for Design at RMIT in Melbourne was undoubtedly an important event in the ongoing formation of a culturally relevant, innovative and more environmentally robust approach to DFE. The conference was a vital prerequisite in setting the foundations for real work, i.e. real green products created by practising designers for real consumers. The new DFE became an approach concerned with delivering meaningful environmental benefits, possible only through mainstreaming green design and its products, rather than preserving it as an academic hobby or limited professional interest isolated to small segments of the community. Design also partnered with a cradle-to-grave ethic resulting in a lifecycle design approach. The aim, in addition to fulfilling all the usual production, functional and aesthetic requirements, was to minimize environmental impacts at every stage of a products life - from materials choice, processing and production, through to distribution, use and reuse, recycling and disposal. It is this lifecycle perspective that has formed the cornerstone of DFE and won the support and acknowledgement of progressive governments and manufacturers, the global environment movement and an ever-growing list of influential designers. Several organizations have been actively promoting DFE and sustainable design in Australia, including the Society for Responsible Design (SRD), Eco Design Foundation (EDF) and the Centre for Design at RMIT. Both the SRD and EDF are non-profit organizations that aim to promote sustainability

P A G E

2 7

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

through environmentally and socially responsible design practices. The Centre for Design undertakes collaborative, applied research with companies to develop tools and methodologies for DFE and sustainable design. The Centres EcoReDesign demonstration programme has won national and international recognition for its work with manufacturers.

with eight companies resulting in the successful commercialization of several products. These projects have been extensively publicized (e.g. Gertsakis et al, 1997; Sweatman and Gertsakis, 1997; Gertsakis, 2001). A summary of company projects is provided in Table 2. In addition to the design and manufacture of products, a comprehensive How To EcoReDesign Information Kit was produced (Gertsakis et al, 1997). Comprising a detailed

EcoReDesign 1
Following a global review of demonstration DFE activity in 1993, the Centre for Design at RMIT moved beyond the rhetoric and initiated the EcoReDesign Program. Developed as a collaborative industry assistance programme, EcoReDesign was a national demonstration initiative aimed at improving the environmental performance of manufactured products through design and innovation. Participating manufacturers agreed to commit their own resources to a major redesign of an existing product to reduce its total lifecycle environmental impact. The total investment for product development and production by the participating companies exceeded $20 million. From 1994 to 1997 the Centre for Design worked Company Kambrook NIDA Southcorp Appliances (now Electrolux) Email (now Electrolux) Caroma Imaging Technologies Large appliances Bathroom products Office consumables Sector Small appliances Refrigeration Large appliances

112-page manual and information video, the Kit reflected a process distilled from the practical work conducted with the participating companies. The EcoReDesign process described in the manual included product and market analysis, Lifecycle Assessment and a creative ideas workshop (see Table 4 for more detail). Despite the productive outcomes of EcoReDesign, it was observed during the company recruiting stages that numerous smaller companies expressed interest in joining the programme, but were unable to commit to a large project that required them to follow the process through to completion and either prototype or commercialize a product. In working with the companies in the first programme it was noted that some of the most significant gains from the Product Kettle Drinks vending machine Dishwasher Research outcomes Axis kettle commercialized Prototype developed Dishlex Global range of dishwashers commercialized Washing machine Low flow shower head Reverse vending machine Design concepts developed Prototype developed Product commercialized for one major customer

Blackmores

Personal care and health care Cosmetics packaging products

Design concepts developed

Schiavello Office Interiors

Commercial office furniture

Office furniture system

HotDesk prototype developed

Table 2: Companies assisted through EcoReDesign 1.

P A G E

2 8

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

aspects related to the product. A workshop was generally then held with company staff and relevant specialists to flesh out the possibilities for the product. In most cases a profile of the major impact areas for the product was developed to determine the most appropriate strategies for product improvement or marketing. In some cases qualitative information was used based on expert knowledge of consultants and the company, however, in most instances it included a quantitative, streamlined lifecycle assessment. Figure 1: The Swap Shop vending machine for office consumables, developed by Imaging Technologies through the EcoReDesign 1 Program. EcoReDesign process occurred in the early stages of the programme through: The introduction of lifecycle concepts The dialogue between different sections of the company and with suppliers, consultants and researchers working on the project, and The generation of DFE directions and concepts. With further research, a strategy was then presented to the company on possible design directions and relevant resources for pursuing those directions. The company was then free to pursue the recommendations of the reports as they wished. An overview of the projects is provided in Table 3.

LifeCycle Assessment (LCA)

LCA is a valuable tool for DFE and Sustainable Design. LCA has enjoyed moderate growth over the last ten years in Australia, driven by activities in the waste management, building and transport sectors. The most active of these sectors is the built environment (design and construction), where material product suppliers, developers and building clients have all been involved in data collection and LCA tool development. LCA has also been used to support policy development, for example by comparing waste management

Based on these observations and the need to refine and expand the programme to meet the needs of SMEs and those companies with minimal or no in-house research, design and development capabilities, the EcoReDesign 2 programme was conceived.

EcoReDesign 2 Program
With funding from the Energy Research and Development Corporation, the New South Wales EPA and EcoRecycle Victoria, 13 companies were recruited into the programme for a one- to two-month intensive examination of their product(s). The nature of the projects was driven by the needs of the companies involved and particular aspects of the products and services under investigation. The projects began with a general product appraisal, looking at the market, environmental regulations and environmental

options for paper and packaging, and different transport

Figure 2: The Re-Define lounge, a collaboration between MID Commercial Furniture, Wharington International and the Centre for Design under the EcoReDesign program, is designed for recycling and incorporates recycled plastic.

P A G E

2 9

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

options. In product design there have been isolated examples of LCA being used to assist in the design process, marketing or to identify end-of-life impacts. These projects tend to be more streamlined than the larger policy studies, and much of this work is not released into the public arena. A study was recently completed for Fuji Xerox (see the following page). Despite all this activity, there is no coordinated approach to data development in Australia, although the advent of a professional society to promote LCA, the Australian LCA Society (ALCAS), may help to bridge this gap.

digital production publishers, copiers, facsimile products and scanners. Fundamental to their strategic business plan is the preservation of the environment: Xerox is committed to the protection of the environment and the health and safety of its employees, customers, and neighbours (Fuji Xerox Australia, 2000). This commitment is applied to all business practices within the company, with LCA seen as an integral tool in evaluating the environmental impacts of their activities. The Centre for Design at RMIT, in collaboration with the International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics at Lund University in Sweden, were contracted by Fuji Xerox

Fuji Xerox and LCA

Fuji Xerox Australia is a leading-edge manufacturer and supplier of office products and markets electronic printers, Company Woven Image Sector Textiles

to develop a process for the application of LCA within the Fuji Xerox group as a means of verifying and driving improvements in the environmental performance of their products. Product Recycled PET fabric Research outcomes Review of recycled PET fibres and textiles

Southcorp Wines Pty Ltd

Wine

Glass bottle Recycled plastic moulding technology

Streamlined LCA; DFE strategies Streamlined LCA; marketing strategies General Product Analysis; review of internal product stewardship initiatives for carpets

Wharington International Pty Furniture Ltd Wools of New Zealand (representing four carpet manufacturers) The Body Shop Personal care products Textiles

Woollen carpets

Plastic packaging

Improvement strategies for refill and recycling programmes

Paper Converting Company

Paper products

Plastic packaging

Review of biodegradable plastic films

CSM Office Furniture Yalumba Wine Company

Office furniture

Office storage products

Lifecycle review; Market review; DFE strategies

Wine

Cask

Lifecycle review; DFE strategies

The Smith Family Smith & Nephew Pty Ltd

Textiles Cosmetics and pharmaceuticals

Recycled woollen textile Medical packaging

Lifecycle review Streamlined LCA

Table 3: Assistance provided to companies through EcoReDesign 2.

P A G E

3 0

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

In order to achieve this, an LCA approach was applied to a representative Fuji Xerox product - a digital black and white copier - with a focus on the impact of the re-manufacturing process and the products inherent environmental features. The Fuji Xerox eco-manufacturing programme in Australia offers substantial environmental value through the re-manufacture of numerous product components. This process covers electronics, optics and lasers, mechanics, electrostatics, chemistry, material science, electro-magnetics, and signature analysis. By employing re-manufacturing processes, Fuji Xerox have discovered that products and components can be improved simply by learning about why individual parts fail, then developing effective ways to improve upon them during the re-manufacturing process (Fuji Xerox Australia, undated).

Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) on behalf of European companies. Two of the main drivers for Wing Sangs interest in DFE are the perceived rise in environmental awareness among European consumers, and the European Unions Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE). Through the collaborative project with Hong Kong Polytechnic University, the Centre for Design became involved in the design of an environmentally improved electric kettle - the EcoKettle. The project brief required the generation of a number of electric kettle design concepts with an emphasis on improving the environmental performance of the product. The most significant environmental impact during the lifecycle of an electric kettle is the amount of energy consumed during the use phase. Therefore, when designing an EcoKettle, the

INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONS
The Centre for Design is also working with companies and universities overseas on LCA and DFE projects. This has included a project with the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and a local industry association (Hong Kong Electrical Alliances Manufacturers) to promote DFE for electrical and electronic products in Hong Kong. A recent project undertaken through this collaboration was the design of a concept kettle for Wing Sang. The Centre for Design and consultants Product Ecology Pty Ltd have also been working with Formway in New Zealand on an innovative office chair. Both of these projects are briefly discussed next.

conservation of energy during use is paramount. Although power consumption is the most significant environmental impact, Wing Sangs interest in the implications of the WEEE directive resulted in entirely different EcoDesign principles being factored in. The most relevant and encompassing of these principles is DFD. The design challenge became one of integrating power saving features without making the manufacture of the kettle more complicated and expensive, and at the same time ensuring that the product could be efficiently dismantled at end-of-life.

Formway furniture collaboration

The Centre for Design recently collaborated on a DFE project

Wing Sang DFE project

Established in 1960, Wing Sang Bakelite Electrical Mfy Ltd is a Hong Kong-based household appliance manufacturer. While the head office is in Hong Kong itself, all of their manufacturing occurs in mainland China. The companys electric kettles are primarily made for the European market, either under their own brand name or acting as an Original

with Formway Furniture in New Zealand. Known for their attention to innovation and design, Formway committed to effectively blending environment into their new range of task chairs called LIFE. The Centre commenced its DFE partnership with Formway in 1998, and has worked intimately on the LIFE project, providing environmental advice and direction throughout the design process. The

P A G E

3 1

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

approach was underpinned by ensuring that the design brief for LIFE comprehensively addressed environmental factors from the outset. Blending DFE into the early stages was considered critical and demonstrated that Formway was committed to producing a low-impact product from day one. In collaboration with Formway personnel, the Centre developed a detailed DFE brief that would help the design team and others in Formway understand and apply environmental objectives and principles. The design brief covered DFE objectives aimed at eliminating and/or minimizing a range of lifecycle environmental impacts. One of the most rewarding aspects of the RMITFormway collaboration on LIFE has been the continual enthusiasm shown by Formway personnel. Company directors, senior management, toolmakers, marketers, and of course the design team, consistently engaged with the projects environmental objectives as a source of stimulation, innovation and differentiation. The Formway design team in New Zealand designed LIFE, however US-based furniture company Knoll is its North American distribution partner. The culmination of this significant ergonomic, environmental and aesthetic effort across all aspects of the chairs performance has recently been acknowledged by industry peers at NeoCon 2002 furniture expo in Chicago one of the furniture worlds most important annual events. The LIFE chair won the Best of NeoCon Gold Ward for Seating: Desk/Workstation/Task Chairs. Knoll clearly acknowledges the importance of collaboration in realizing LIFE and receiving the Award: During the past several years, weve engaged outstanding talent from around the world to bring unique points of view to products that reflect a level of insight and innovation, and can affirm our commitment to professional design and real value. (Knoll, 2002)

currently undertaking a research project on the relevance of Triple Bottom Line (TBL) sustainability concepts to product design. The research involves: Workshops at RMIT and the University of South Australia to identify key issues involved in sustainable design (similar to work undertaken by Tischner and Charter, 2001 see Table 1) Trial projects with up to four companies to test the relevance of this approach to product design, and to design simple tools to assist in TBL product assessments. The EcoReDesign process will need to be modified to integrate social and ethical concerns. A preliminary outline of the new process is provided in Table 4. One of the key issues appears to be the need to consider links and synergies between environmental, economic and social aspects, and in particular the opportunities that could be identified by examining the positive commercial benefits of taking a responsible approach to both social and environmental issues. The first trial is currently underway at Yalumba Wines in the Barossa Valley, South Australia. Yalumba was involved in the EcoReDesign 2 Programme in 1999, through the redesign of a wine cask to reduce its environmental impacts. Yalumba is already an industry leader in the area of environmental management, with initiatives including implementation of an Environment Management System, collaborative projects to improve environmental performance along its supply chain, and DFE projects. The initial improvements to the wine cask included shifting from virgin to 100 per cent recycled cartonboard, lightweighting, and inclusion of a message to consumers to reduce waste and recycle. The current project will investigate future reductions in environmental impact, and assessment of other impacts using the TBL sustainability

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN PROJECT

Building on all of this experience, the Centre for Design is

framework. The results of this and other sustainable design projects will be available in 2003.

P A G E

3 2

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

Current EcoReDesign Process

TBL Sustainable Design modifications

Include social, economic and environmental drivers

General Product Analysis Market (size, regulations, changing preferences etc) Competing products Company (resources, policies, drivers etc) Pressures for change

Figure 3: The LIFE chair designed by Formway (NZ).

Product information (materials, supply chain, processes etc)

CONCLUSIONS
DFE activities in Australia and New Zealand have lagged behind parts of Europe, but are gathering momentum. The drivers for this include the need to meet local product stewardship policies and regulations, as well as the need to meet tighter regulatory standards in export markets such as Europe and Asia. The Centre for Design has played an important role in developing tools and methodologies for DFE in collaboration with manufacturers in Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong. The latest research initiative is to integrate triple bottom line sustainability criteria economic, environmental and social aspects - into the DFE process.

Environmental analysis Quantitative LCA OR Qualitative LCA Process tree Inventory matrix Impact assessment matrix EcoReDesign workshop Participants from: Production Management Marketing Design Environment Design Design brief

Undertake social, economic and environmental analysis, including identification of links and synergies

Include additional expertise/ input, particularly on social and ethical aspects of business

Develop new tools e.g. revised matrices, guidelines, checklists to integrate TBL issues

REFERENCES
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2002). Environmental Attitudes and Behaviour in Australian Households. http://www.abs.gov.au BDP (Australian Council of Building Design Professionals) (1995). Environment Design Guide (Vol. 1-3). Royal Australian Institute of Architects. Datschefski, E. (2001). The Total Beauty of Sustainable Products. Hove: Rotovision. Diesendorf, M. (2000). Sustainability and Sustainable Development. In D. Dunphy, J. Benveniste, A. Griffiths & P. Sutton (Eds.), Sustainability: The Corporate Challenge of the 21st Century. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. Energy Efficiency Conservation Authority (Undated). MEPS- An Overview. http://www.eeca.govt.nz/default2.asp?Target=Content/ phone.asp (24th May 2002).

Concepts Prototypes Final design Evaluation Lifecycle Assessment Comparison with original product Marketing Labelling Communication strategy Advertising

Evaluation against social, economic and environmental criteria, including tools to link performance on each aspect Address social responsibility and ethical considerations

Table 4: The EcoReDesign process and possible TBL Sustainable Design modifications.

P A G E

3 3

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3

PAPERS

THE EVOLUTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT DESIGN: CASE STUDIES FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND

Fisher & Paykel (2002a). Our Environment. Corporate. http://www.fp.co.nz/ (13th June 2002). Fisher & Paykel (2002b). Recycling Saves Environment, Capture Sales. Welcome to Fisher and Paykel Appliances. http://www.fp.co.nz/ (18th June 2002). Forsyte Research (2001). Environmental Awareness Survey. Technical Report, Auckland Regional Council. Fuji Xerox Australia (2000). Xerox Environmental Health and Safety Corporate Policy. www.fujixerox.com.au/environment/policy_1.jsp (17th June 2002). Fuji Xerox Australia (undated). Eco-Manufacture. www.fujixerox. com.au/environment/eco_manufacture.jsp (17th June 2002). Gertsakis, J. (2001). Maximising Environmental Quality Through EcoDesign. In M. Charter & U. Tischner (Eds.), Sustainable Solutions. Sheffield: Greenleaf. Gertsakis, J., Lewis, H. and Ryan, C. (1997). Good Design, Better Business, Cleaner World: A Guide to EcoReDesign. Centre for Design at RMIT, Melbourne. GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), www.globalreporting.org, website last accessed 24/6/02. Hall, J. (2002). Sustainable Development Innovation: A Research Agenda for the Next 10 Years. Journal of Cleaner Production, 10, 195-196. Johnston, L. (2001), The View From Australia: Green Limits in a Land of Plenty. In B. Edwards (Ed.), Green Architecture Edition, Architectural Design. Wiley-Academy, 71, 4: 52-59. Knoll (2002). Knoll Adds Life to Its Seating Collection. http://www. knoll.com/news/prstory.jsp?story_id=1557 (24th June 2002). Langston, C. & Ding, G. (2001). Sustainable Practices in the Built Environment. Melbourne: Butterworth Heinemann. Lewis, H., Gertsakis, J., Grant, T., Morelli N. & Sweatman A. (2001). Design +Environment. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. Mackenzie, D. (1997). Green Design: Design for the Environment. London: Laurence King. Ministry for the Environment (undated, a). New Zealand Waste Strategy, Vision of the Waste Strategy, Waste Line. http://www.mfe.govt.nz/wasteline/content.php?id=30 (18th June 2002). Ministry for the Environment (undated, b). New Zealand Waste Strategy, Target for Special Wastes, Waste Line. http:// www.mfe.govt.nz/wasteline/content.php?id=30 (18th June 2002). Nader, R. (1965). Unsafe at Any Speed. New York: Grossman. Neutra, R. (1954). Survival Through Design. New York: Oxford University Press. Packard, V. (1956). The Hidden Persuaders. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Packard, V. (1961). The Waste-Makers: A Startling Revelation of Planned Wastefulness and Obsolescence in Industry Today. London: Longman.

Papanek, V. (1971). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. New York: Pantheon Books. Papanek, V. (1995). The Green Imperative: Ecology and Ethics in Design and Architecture. London: Thames & Hudson. Sweatman, A. & Gertsakis, J. (1997). Mainstream Appliance Meets EcoDesign. Journal for Sustainable Product Design, July, 31-37. Tischner, U. & Charter, M. (2001). Sustainable Product Design. In M. Charter & U. Tischner (Eds.), Sustainable Solutions. Sheffield: Greenleaf. Toffler, A. (1970). Future Shock. London: The Bodley Head. Vollenbroek, F. (2002). Sustainable Development and the Challenge of Innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 10, 215-223. Von Weizsacker, E., Lovins, A. B. & Lovins, L.H. (1997). Factor Four: Doubling Wealth Halving Resource Use. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Whiteley, N. (1993). Design for Society. London: Reaktion Books. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BIOGRAPHY
Helen Lewis is Acting Director, Centre for Design, RMIT. Over the past 12 years she has worked on environmental management programmes for the plastics industry, EcoRecycle Victoria and the Centre for Design. John Gertsakis is Director of consulting group Product Ecology Pty Ltd. He was the previous Director of the Centre for Design at RMIT and is author of numerous publications on sustainable design and product stewardship. Tim Grant is Project Manager Lifecycle Assessment, Centre for Design, RMIT. He is currently President of the Australian LCA Society. Nicholas Johns is a Research Officer with the Centre for Design at RMIT. He is an industrial designer and has worked on Centre for Design projects with Fuji Xerox and Wing Sang.

ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE

Helen Lewis, Centre for Design, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476 V , Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia. Email: Helen.lewis@rmit.edu.au John Gertsakis, Product Ecology Ptd Ltd, PO Box 208, Olinda, VIC 3788, Australia. Email: john@productecology.com.au Tim Grant, Centre for Design, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476 V, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia. Email: Tim.grant@rmit.edu.au Nicholas Johns, Centre for Design, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476 V , Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia. Email: Nicholas.johns@rmit.edu.au

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the support and enthusiasm shown by all Formway staff involved with RMIT, especially Katherine Vyver, Mark Pennington, Jon Prince, John Fifield and Oswin DMello.

P A G E

3 4

THE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3