A review on Ecological Engineering based Engineering Management

Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Omega journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/omega

Review

A review on Ecological Engineering based Engineering Management Jiuping Xu a,b,, Zongmin Li b a b

State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and Mountain River Engineering, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, PR China Uncertainty Decision-Making Laboratory, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 2 February 2010 Accepted 21 June 2011 This manuscript was processed by Associate Editor Chang Available online 3 July 2011

Engineering achievements have improved the quality of human life, provided creature comforts, and expanded the human domain to unprecedented levels. When enjoying all these achievements, human beings are coming to realize that the more invasion of the nature, the more environmental problems. Under the context of sustainable development, it is certain that effective Engineering Management calls for an ecological concept. The basic claim of this paper is that Engineering Management should be based on Ecological Engineering, which is an essential requirement of effective Engineering Management. At the same time, Ecological Engineering shall serve as the base of Engineering Management, which is commanded by the characteristics of Ecological Engineering. To date, there are only scattered studies focused on Engineering Management using the ecological concept. Moreover, there is no systematic concept of Ecological Engineering based Engineering Management (EMEE). In this paper, a thorough review of EMEE is presented. Our goals are to clarify this concept, promote this promising thought, summarize past research, and identify issues for future research to create impacts on the practice of Engineering Management. & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Management Management of science/technology Engineering Management Environmental studies

Contents 1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368 1.1. Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 1.2. Motivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 The foundation of EMEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 2.1. Engineering Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 2.2. Ecological Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 Literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372 3.1. Search strategy and selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372 3.2. Findings and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373 3.2.1. Content Type I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 3.2.2. Content Type II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 3.2.3. Content Type III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375 3.2.4. Content Type IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375 3.2.5. Content Type V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376 Comments and future research of EMEE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377

1. Introduction

 Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 86 28 85418191; fax: þ86 28 85415143.

E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Xu). 0305-0483/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2011.06.004

What will make Engineering Management more effective? This is a question often asked by scholars and engineers. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to understand how to measure the effectiveness of Engineering Management.

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

One of the crucial elements in measuring the effectiveness of Engineering Management is ‘‘desired results’’. Without desired results, there is no need for management. The desired results provide one of the basic measurements for management in general [1]. Engineering achievements improve the quality of human life, provide creature comforts, and expand the human domain to unprecedented levels. However, the depletion of natural resources, the resultant pollution as well as the extinctions of species and so on definitely are not the desired results to be produced by an effective Engineering Management. Since environmental problems have been so severe in these years, there is no doubt that engineers have to integrate the ecological concept into research and practice of Engineering Management. Another crucial element for measuring the effectiveness of Engineering Management is related to the factor of ‘‘depend on the situation’’. The original concept for best management, initiated by Taylor’s scientific theory of management and later replaced by a contingency theory, states ‘‘the best form of management depends on the situation’’. Engineering Management represents a subset within the general management, in which there are many situations that will ‘‘depend on the situation [2]’’. One of the most pressing situations today is the shortage of resources and energy. Water, land, and petroleum are in such short supply that they constantly attract world-wide attention. Moreover, ‘‘depends on the situation’’ needs to be considered in every Engineering Management project from the beginning to its end. In other words, rather than basing on the thought of ‘‘Pollution First, Treatment Later’’, engineers should keep in mind that the concept of ‘‘integrating the natural system with the system being built’’ throughout the whole process of an Engineering Management project. Taking into account these two measurements (i.e., ‘‘desired results’’ and ‘‘depends on the situation’’), there is no doubt that effective Engineering Management will require an ecological concept. Ecological Engineering is a field with a holistic vision of the biosphere, and thus it requires problem-solving skills of engineering that can be used in management and design with a focus on the impacts of humankind on nature, and the self-engineering impacts of nature on human existence. Because Ecological Engineering is based on biological systems, it has a greater probability of ending the ‘‘shell game’’ with our pollutants or at least minimizing the transfers from one media to another [3]. More and more engineering managers are using the theory and method of Ecological Engineering to deal with the problems of Engineering Management. Ecological Engineering based Engineering Management (EMEE) has proven to be a valid root to seek effective Engineering Management. However, there are only scattered studies and there is no systematic concept of EMEE. The context and motivations of our research in EMEE are stated as follows. 1.1. Context ‘‘Sustainable development’’ has become a key concept in modern environmental, ecological economics and environmental policy analysis. Sustainable development was most popularly developed by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in Our Common Future in 1987 [4]. A direct quotation from WCED reads: ‘‘Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’’ [4]. Since ‘‘sustainable development’’ was adopted as an overarching goal of economic and social development by Agenda 21, many countries, governments, and even private enterprises, it has generated a huge body of research [5,6]. On 11 December 1997, the Kyoto Protocol aimed at fighting global warming was initially adopted. In July 2010, 191 countries

369

have signed and ratified the Protocol [7]. Feroz et al. [8] found that the nations that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol are more likely to be environmentally production efficient as compared to those that have not ratified the Protocol. After the Copenhagen United Nations Climate Change Conference, attention. It is Climate Change garnered unprecedented predictable that sustainable development will continue to be a global concern—both in academia and in application. 1.2. Motivations Given the above context, there are three main motivations of EMEE study. First, although a large body of literature has evolved around the concept of sustainable development, many contributions are in a general and descriptive manner and lack of theoretical and operational analysis. One possible reason may be that elaborating on the concept requires complicated and interdisciplinary approach [9,10]. Sachs and Reid [11] highlighted the importance of interdisciplinary strategy in sustainable development. They pointed out that the world scientific community needs to chart an interdisciplinary strategy for sustainable development research, backed by increased funding. Among potential interdisciplines, Ecological Engineering combines basic and applied sciences from engineering, ecology, economics, and natural sciences for the restoration and construction of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Investment in Ecological Engineering should be adopted as an important aspect in interdisciplinary strategies in the future. Second, the human-dominated ecosystem, unlike wild biological communities, is dominated by technological and social behavior, sustained by natural life support systems and vitalized by ecological processes. This ecosystem was named the social– economic–natural complex ecosystem by Ma [12], who concluded that sustainable development is not a fixed state but a balanced, adaptive process of change in a multi-dimensional complex integrated system [9]. During the 20th century, engineering achievements expanded the human domain to unprecedented levels. Such dominance of humans in our current ecosystem necessitates a philosophical and practical shift in the relationship between nature and society [13]. In other words, it is important to realize that sustainable development calls for potentially drastic changes in our current modes of production, consumption, decision-making, and of course, Engineering Management. EMEE could be a beneficial attempt to make an effective change. Third, all kinds of environmental problems (e.g., the depletion of resources, the extinction of species, deforestation, ozone layer depletion, etc.) are very important indeed, but they reflect only the external aspects of the environmental crisis [14]. To tackle these problems effectively and to reach the ultimate goal of sustainable development, the internal aspects of the environmental crisis have to be carefully examined. Inefficient Engineering Management is an important item. This fact is an indirect motivation for research into EMEE. This paper presents a thorough review of EMEE, for the purpose of making this concept clearer, encouraging this promising thought, summarizing past research content and approach, and finally shedding some light and creating impacts on future research and practice in Engineering Management. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the foundations of EMEE, i.e., Engineering Management and Ecological Engineering, defines EMEE, and answers two key questions: ‘‘Why Ecological Engineering could be the base of Engineering Management compared with other environmental theories?’’ and ‘‘What is the position of EMEE in Engineering Management?’’ Literature review is presented in Section 3, in

370

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

which a search strategy and selection criteria are defined along with a summary of the literature from a macro perspective. In specific, our review scrutinizes the literature to find out the specific research contents and approaches that are related to EMEE. Section 4 makes a prediction of future research trends into EMEE. Finally, Section 5 concludes the study with a summary.

[15,16], and will be endowed with new concepts as the discipline develops. In addition, there are different definitions of ‘‘Engineering Management’’ in different areas of world [17]. Some representative definitions are as follows:

 Lannes [18] defined Engineering Management as the knowl-

2. The foundation of EMEE As can be self-explained by the name ‘‘Ecological Engineering based Engineering Management’’, it is clear that EMEE is rooted in two main academic disciplines: Engineering Management and Ecological Engineering.



2.1. Engineering Management It is impossible to give Engineering Management a perfectly accurate definition, because it is still undergoing adjustment



edge and skills required to be successful when an engineer reaches the supervisor/manager level, and these skills are primarily integrative skills rather than the reductionist skills required in pure engineering. Shaw [19] defined Engineering Management as the process of envisioning, designing, developing, and supporting new products and services to a set of requirements, within budget, and to a schedule with acceptable levels of risk to support the strategic objectives of an organization, and Engineering Management is primarily used to develop products and services using system engineering in project organizations. Kocaoglu [20] defined Engineering Management as the discipline that addresses making and implementing decisions for

Table 1 Some representative definitions of Ecological Engineering. Name Odum

Year

Definitions

Comments

1963

Ecological Engineering is environmental manipulations by man using small amounts of supplementary energy to control systems in which the main energy drives are still coming from natural sources [23]. Ecological Engineering is the study and practice of fitting environmental technology with ecosystems self-design for maximum performance [25].

It emphasizes natural energy sources as the predominant input to manipulate and control environmental systems

2003 Ma

1988

It emphasizes that self-organizational properties are a central feature to Ecological Engineering

Ecological Engineering is a specially designed system of production process It emphasizes that Ecological Engineering is a specially designed system and the ecological system is a social–economic–natural in which the principles of the species symbiosis and the cycling and complex ecosystem regeneration of substances in an ecological system are applied [26].

1989, Mitsch 1993, and Jørgensen 1996

Ecological Engineering is designing societal services such that they benefit It first provides principles of Ecological Engineering. It emphasizes society and nature and the five key concepts are: it is based on the self- that the design should be systems based, sustainable, and integrated into society with its natural environment designing capacity of eco-systems; it can be a field test of ecological theory; it relies on integrated system approaches; it conserves nonrenewable energy; and it supports biological conservation [27,28].

Barrett

1999

Ecological Engineering is the design, construction, operation and management (that is, engineering) of landscape, aquatic structures and associated plant and animal communities (that is, ecosystems) to benefit humanity and, often, nature [29].

Dakers et al.

2001

Ecological Engineering is the application of our knowledge of ecosystems, It emphasizes that Ecological Engineering is a kind of application of and our skills of technical and engineering problem solving and design, to our knowledge and skills achieve integration of human endeavor and creativity with the natural world, thereby achieving ongoing well-being for all the interdependent components of the ecosystem [30].

Bergen et al.

2001

Ecological Engineering is utilizing ecological science and theory, applying It puts forward that Ecological Engineering can be applied in all types them to all types of ecosystems, adapting engineering design methods, and of ecosystems and can acknowledge a guiding value system. acknowledging a guiding value system [31].

It is a more literal definition of the term, and it emphasizes that Ecological Engineering is oftentimes beneficial to nature

Fig. 1. Window of Ecological Engineering in an energy systems diagram in which units are displayed left to right in order of turnover time, territory and transformity [24].

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378



strategic and operational leadership in current and emerging technologies and their impact on interrelated systems. Mavor [21] defined Engineering Management as an activity devoted to the timely deployment of resources needed to satisfy the operational requirement of an enterprise within an organizational framework, which subsequently leads to the delivery of its mission.

Although there are different definitions of Engineering Management, all are involved with the social–economic–natural complex ecosystem [12], which has a systematic and ecological context. It is oriented to mono-objective, open loops of material flow, and rigid products and technological processes [33]. Only when Engineering Management is placed in the background of an ecosystem and focused on the mutually beneficial coexistence of nature and society, can the effective Engineering Management be achieved and the goal of sustainable development be reached. 2.2. Ecological Engineering Prof. Odum first put forward the term of Ecological Engineering in 1963 [22,23], and scaled it [24]. After that, the definition of

371

Ecological Engineering has taken several decades to refine. Its implementation is still undergoing adjustment. Table 1 shows some representative definitions of Ecological Engineering. Fig. 1 depicts the window of Ecological Engineering in an energy systems diagram in which units are displayed left to right in order of turnover time, territory, and transformity. As shown in Fig. 1, it is very clear that Ecological Engineering is the bridge between ‘‘Society, Economics’’ and ‘‘Biology’’. There are some unique characteristics and advantages for the theory and methods of Ecological Engineering that are being used in Engineering Management. A brief description is given below. (1) Engineering disciplinary background. Ecological Engineering has its roots in both engineering and ecology. In engineering’s aspect, Ecological Engineering is different from other engineering fields as it embodies: (a) self-design (self-organization) as a cornerstone; (b) the field involves biological systems; and (c) sustainable ecosystems are its goal [32]; while from the ecological aspect, Ecological Engineering has often been limited to monitoring and assessing the environmental impact or managing natural resources [27,32]. Fig. 2 shows that both engineering and ecology provide the fundamentals of Ecological Engineering but do not define it completely. Ecological Engineering, in turn,

Engineering

Ecology

Theoretical ecology

Applied ecology

Planning Designing Feedback I

Construction Management

Resource management Impact assessment Environment monitoring Ecotoxicology Risk assessment

Ecological Engineering

Evolutionary Feedback II

Population Community Ecosystems Landscape ecology

Ecological economics

Design, restoration, and creation of ecosystems Fig. 2. The disciplinary foundation of Ecological Engineering and its feedback effect.

Five concepts key to Ecological Engineering

Two measurements of effective Engineering Management

It is based on the self-designing capacity of ecosystems It will be the ultimate test of many ecological theories

Desired results

It relies on integrated system approaches It conserves non-renewable energy

Depends on the situation

It supports biological conservation Fig. 3. The correspondence of Ecological Engineering’s concepts and effective Engineering Management.

372

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

feeds back to the ecological theory, engineering theory, and management practice. It is worth noting that the feedback I in Fig. 2 embodies the feedback effect from Ecological Engineering to Engineering Management, so that it is natural to link Ecological Engineering with Engineering Management. The five concepts key to Ecological Engineering [3] correspond to the two measurements of effective Engineering Management as shown in Fig. 3. (2) The theoretical advantage. Ecological technology is superior in many ways to other kinds of technology which involve the relationship between a man and his environment, which are summarized in Table 2. Among the various ecological technologies, Ecological Engineering holds a special position and could be the ultimate test of many ecological theories [34], because it holds a totally functioning technology (TFT) characteristic that is characterized by the comprehensive technology, the ecologically adaptive technology, and the economically efficient technology [33]. TFT can be measured by the efficiency of material, energy and manpower utilization, the sensitivity of information dissemination, product diversity and flexibility, long term and large scale ecological impacts, and service functions to markets and ecosystems [35]. Therefore, the TFT characteristic of EMEE does match with the measurement of effective Engineering Management. In this paper, EMEE is defined as Engineering Management which aims at sustainable development that benefits both humans and the nature, instead of short-term, one-sided benefits that damage the ecological environment or future developments. EMEE takes the social–economic–natural complex ecosystem as the background, holds a holistic view as well as a self-organization consideration, and frequently uses Ecological Engineering technologies and methods to settle specific matters of the relationship between humans and the environment.

3. Literature review In this section, this paper will look into the past achievements of EMEE literature. First, this paper will set up a search strategy and selection criteria, and then summarize the literature from a macro perspective. Finally, this paper will scrutinize typical EMEE literature to find out the specific research contents and approaches. 3.1. Search strategy and selection criteria Literature search was conducted in December, 2010 using EI Compendex (1969–2010) and Web of Science databases (WOS) (1986–2010). Because EI Compendex is the most comprehensive bibliographic database of scientific and technical engineering research available, and it covers all engineering disciplines and includes millions of bibliographic citations and abstracts from thousands of engineering journals and conference proceedings. Also, WOS consists of seven databases containing information gathered from thousands of scholarly journals, books, book series, reports, conferences, and among others. Since Engineering Management is very broad in its scope, it is extremely difficult to gather all studies of EMEE. Fortunately, EI Compendex and WOS did provide us with sufficient references and thus, this paper is written using these two electronic database resources. Literature search was done by focusing on the contents of two fields: Engineering Management and Ecological Engineering. In each search, two keywords are used together with the logical operator ‘‘and’’. One of the two keywords is from the Engineering Management part, and the other is from the Ecological Engineering part. The keywords selected from the field of Engineering

Table 2 A comparison between environmental technology, cleaner technology and ecological technology [33]. Evaluation indicators

Environmental technology

Cleaner technology

Ecological technology

Goal Basic unit Orientation Strategy Regulation instrument Main process Human involvement Costs Energy basis History Recycling Symbiosis Design principle Depend on Zero emission possibility

Pollutants reduction Point of emission Environmental impacts Repair Technical Physical From outside High Fossil fuel based 30 Years Acceptable Little Artificial restoration Large input Hard to treat all pollution

Pollution minimizing Technological chain Technological process Prevention Technological and institutional Man machine Friendly participation Tolerable Fossil and solar Decades Desirable Recommended Partly simulating nature Moderate input Hard to realize within one process

Optimum function Ecological system Ecological function Capacity building Tech institutional Man nature Intensively involved Reasonable Solar based 3000 years Absolutely required Strong recommended Design with nature Local resource Possible within an ecosystem

Table 3 Keywords used in the literature selection criteria. Terms for Engineering Management or Ocean engineering or Civil engineering or Agricultural engineering or Hydropower or Forestry Engineering or Construction engineering or

and

Terms for Ecological Engineering or Ecotechnology or Ecosystem restoration or Artificial ecology or Bio-manipulation or Ecosystem rehabilitation or ‘‘Nature engineering’’n or Hydroecology or Bioengineering

Noten: There two words have to be used as a phrase ‘‘nature engineering’’ since when search seprately results are wide different.

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

Management are: ‘‘Civil engineering’’, ‘‘Agricultural engineering’’, ‘‘Hydropower’’, ‘‘Forestry Engineering’’, ‘‘Construction engineering’’, and ‘‘Ocean engineering’’ because these keywords have most significant effects on the environment and thus have high demand in EMEE. In contrast, Ecological Engineering is now being practiced by many professions under a great variety of names, including ecotechnology, ecosystem restoration, artificial ecology, bio-manipulation, ecosystem rehabilitation, nature engineering (in Holland), hydroecology (in eastern Europe), and bioengineering (originated in Germany) [3]. To ensure completeness, altogether 63 keywords are identified to conduct our literature search. Keywords are summarized in Table 3. The total number of articles retrieved by using EI Compendex and WOS databases is 7678. Apparently, there are a large number of redundant items. To assure the accuracy, the following exclusion criteria were used.

 Repetitive articles. There are some repetitive publications, as some journals belong to more than one database.

 Proceedings report. Some international conferences focus on   

topics related to EMEE, but proceedings reports are not research papers. Documents about indirect issues of Engineering Management issues, some of them are pure technical research; and some others focus on educational theory or practical research. Documents address Engineering Management issues without any relevance to Ecological Engineering. Documents focus on a pure Ecological Engineering issue.

Using the document management software ‘‘NoteExpress’’, it was very easy for us to eliminate repetitive articles and proceedings reports. Using a checklist, data from included documents were extracted and recorded independently by both authors. Completed checklists were then compared, and discordances were resolved by discussion. After elimination the literature was reduced to 4321 articles, which became our initial document database. For all articles in the database, abstracts are scrutinized with order by the number of citations—from the most to the least. Literature with ambiguous content was reviewed in full. Some literature was further eliminated after a careful review because of

373

its indirect relationship to EMEE. For example, research paper [36] is Engineering Management based on normal environmental technology, and another paper [37] is just problem descriptions. In this way the literature is scrutinized until 430 EMEE documents were finally selected, 10% of our initial documents database. They made up our final document database.

3.2. Findings and discussion After further classification of our final identified document database, statistical results are calculated using document management software. As shown in Table 4, there is a growing body of literature published as either conference proceedings papers or journal articles with a focus on EMEE. Although there were only 3.49% of documents from 1970 to 1980 and 4.19% from 1981 to 1990, literature has grown rapidly from 1991 to 2000. Entering the 21st century, EMEE has caught wide spread attention from Engineering Management. The distribution of scholars is scattered. The outlets of EMEE include a large range of academic journals from management to environmental science and many other specialties. Among them, the most important outlets are the Journal of Ecological Engineering and the Journal of Environmental Management. Planning and decision support, designing, optimization, resource allocation and comprehensive evaluation are the main research content. As seen from Tables 4 and 5, in all the applied fields, exploitation or management of the coast, oceans, islands, rivers, lakes and wetlands are the most important, followed by flood-prevention projects, construction and management of reservoirs and dams, hydropower, water and soil resources management. This may be due to ‘‘constructed wetlands and aquacultures’’ and ‘‘the protection, restoration, and creation of water resources’’ are the most important issues in Ecological Engineering and essential for the sustainable support of nature and human culture alike [44]. It is worth noting that the data in Tables 4 and 5 are statistics derived from our final document database with 430 documents, so the results may be different from practical situations. However, the classification as well as the percentages can indeed reflect the current research situation of EMEE.

Table 4 The overall findings from final document database. Theme

Results

Article type

98 Conference proceedings (22.79%); 332 Journal articles (77.21%)

Researchers

Scholar distribution is scattered Authors who published three papers include: Marques [38–40], Herrmann [41–43]

Year of study

15 (3.49%) documents from 1970 to 1980; 18 (4.19%) documents from 1981 to 1990; 82 (19.07%) documents from 1991 to 2000; 315 (73.25%) documents from 2001 to 2010

Journals

Some important EMEE outlets includeEcological Engineering (15), Environmental Management (12), Water Science and Technology (8), Resources Conservation and Recycling (6), Ecological Modelling (6)

Type of research content

I. Planning and decision support, designing, optimization and resource allocation 158 (36.74%); II. Comprehensive evaluation 137 (31.86%); III. Whole process or general principle of Engineering Management 78 (18.14%); IV. Pollution abatement, the response to disasters and the energy crisis 42 (9.77%); V. Process control 15 (3.49%)

Applied fields in case study

A. Exploitation or management of coastal areas, oceans, islands, rivers, lakes and wetlands 124 (28.84%) B. Flood-prevention projects, construction and management of reservoirs and dams, hydropower, water and soil resources management 72 (16.74%) C. Manufacturing industry, product management 49 (11.40%) D. Urban planning and construction, including building, road, infrastructure, and landscape 45 (10.47%) E. Management of agriculture, forestry, the mining industry, and animal husbandry 40 (9.30%) F. Healthcare & Medical and Chemistry Engineering 12 (2.79%) G. Mechanical engineering 6 (1.40%) H. No specific case and others 82 (19.05%)

374

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

Table 5 Research content summary of final document database. Applied fields

A B C D E F G H

Research content I

Research content II

Research content III

Research content IV

Research content V

Number

Ratio (%)

Number

Ratio (%)

Number

Ratio (%)

Number

Ratio (%)

Number

Ratio (%)

50 32 16 10 6 2 5 37

31.64 20.25 10.13 6.33 3.80 1.27 3.16 23.42

38 30 16 19 12 4 0 18

27.73 21.90 11.68 13.87 8.76 2.91 0 13.15

22 8 10 2 17 0 0 19

28.21 10.26 12.82 2.56 21.79 0 0 24.36

12 1 3 12 4 6 0 4

28.57 3.38 7.14 28.57 9.52 14.29 0 9.52

2 1 4 2 1 0 1 4

13.33 6.67 26.67 13.33 6.67 0 6.67 26.67

3.2.1. Content Type I The prominent characteristics of planning, decision support, design, optimization, and resource allocation of EMEE research are on a self-designed basis or, a self-organization capacity of dynamic ecosystem consideration. The approach used recognizes the complexity of the natural system by including both aspects of emergence and resilience in the design. The plan and design usually include overall planning, recycling design, and system optimization. Resource allocation focuses on the conservation of nonrenewable energy and resources. Planners and managers can utilize the information through the monitoring programs in an effective way to assure that project goals are met or administrators are informed such that objective decisions are made to meet both ecological and societal needs. The most often used approach is the system approach, adaptive management which has three main components [45]: (1) a clear goal statement, (2) a conceptual model, and (3) a decision framework. The specific research approaches in the planning and designing of EMEE are often combined with a professional knowledge of hydrology, dynamics, architecture, and the integration of geomorphology and sedimentology. For example, Zalewski [46] introduced the International Hydrological Programme where the conceptual background and principles of the surficial processes of ecohydrology were defined: (1) by the integration and quantification of biological and hydrological processes at the basin scale; (2) by the enhancement of the basin ecosystem’s absorption capacity against human impact; and (3) by using ecosystem properties as a management tool. These three aspects reflected well Engineering Management based on holistic thought and the selfadaption concept of Ecological Engineering. In the management of water and land resources, Alsharif et al. [47] demonstrated that data envelopment analysis (DEA) may be a useful tool to assess the relative efficiencies of water supply systems and to establish benchmarks with which to measure progress in the management of water resources. Andre´ et al. [48] provided a modified DEA procedure to calculate preference weights and efficiency measures, then applied to an agricultural economics case study in Spain. Gomes et al. [49] applied multicriteria decision making to waste recycling and presented two cases where the decision makers had different preferences. Liu et al. [50] pointed out that an effective ecological land layout could benefit ecology, the economy and society. They introduced a new simple osculating method that may be used to provide the basis for land layout. Min et al. [51] pointed out that Ecological Engineering for water use in settlements is crucial for designing and constructing a sustainable community. They discussed Ecological Engineering measures and technology case studies in China for the systematic regulation of the multiple functions of water in a sustainable community. Methods include reusing all sources of water (i.e., rainwater, wastewater and surface water), separating water that has been used for different purposes,

promoting nutrient cycling, and improving the self-purification of water by controlling pollutant loads. Moreover, the construction and removal of dams are controversial issues in global efforts to alleviate poverty, improve human health, and strengthen regional economies. A lot of studies in designing, decision-making, and planning have looked into these issues. Richter and Thomas [52] discussed the potential benefits of dam ‘‘re-operation’’ commercially and recreationally. Winter and Crain [53] studied the decision to remove the Elwha and Glines Canyon dams by identifying existing water quality within the reservoirs and river, fish populations and habitat availability, fish passage mortality through the dams and reservoirs, the effects of the hydropower projects on wildlife habitat, and economics. Among Type I studies, Agriculture Engineering is one of the most important aspects. This is not only decided by the special position of agriculture, but also based on the cultivation of annual crops that are eligible for subsidy payments. The subsidy payments are frequently associated with environmental problems, including degradation of water quality with sediment, nutrients, and pesticides, hydrologic modifications contributing to flooding and groundwater depletion, disruption of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitats, emission of greenhouse gases, the degradation of air quality with odors, pesticides, and particulates [54]. Hengsdijk et al. [55] have presented the ‘‘agro-ecological engineering approaches’’ aiming at the design and exploration of alternative land use systems at various scales that may support the identification of appropriate land use options. Engineering approaches are based on mathematical representations of wellfounded agro-ecological principles while take into account available resources and prevailing land-related objectives. Another best design embodying the conception of EMEE is ‘‘multifunctional’’ agriculture. Agricultural multifunctionality is defined as the joint production of standard commodities (e.g., food or fiber) and ‘‘ecological services’’. An assessment of the potential economic, social, and environmental performance of multifunctional systems is provided by a simulation study conducted for two representative agricultural watersheds in the upper Midwest United States [56]. Jordan et al. [57] put forward some proposals to promote working landscapes by capitalizing on the potential of ‘‘multifunctional’’ agriculture. They proposed the creation of a network of research and demonstration projects to establish and evaluate economic enterprises based on multifunctional production systems.

3.2.2. Content Type II As seen from Tables 4 and 5, 31.86% of EMEE literature is focused on comprehensive evaluation. Evaluation is important to feasibility studies, decision making and project evaluation. One of the prominent characteristics of EMEE evaluation research is a

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

comprehensive evaluation or a global assessment. It is usually from a holistic view that evaluates both the natural environment and economic social aspects; both the hard and the soft environments; both the direct immediate influences and the indirect, progressive influences. Specific approaches used include DEA model, life cycle assessment, group decision analytic hierarchy process (G-AHP) model, and so on, nearly all of the comprehensive evaluation methods. Morais and Camanho [59] explored the possibilities presented by DEA to assess quality of life and evaluate the performance of city managers in what concerns the promotion of urban quality of life. Hua et al. [60] proposed a non-radial output-oriented DEA model to estimate the ecological efficiency of paper mills along the Huai River in China through analyzing the impact of non-discretionary input on decision-making units’ desirable and undesirable outputs. The main characteristics of the ecological efficiency evaluation problem they considered simultaneously are an undesirable output of biochemical oxygen demand and a non-discretionary input. Ramanathan and Yunfeng [61] also used the DEA model to evaluate incorporating cost and environmental factors of quality function deployment that has been an important tool available to organizations for efficient product design and development. Ayer and Tyedmers [62] employed a life cycle assessment to quantify and compare the potential environmental impact of culturing salmonids in a conventional marine net-pen system. Results of their study indicate that while using these closed-containment systems may reduce the local ecological impact typically associated with net-pen salmon farming, the increase in material and energy demands associated with their use may result in significantly increased contributions to several environmental impacts of global concern, including global warming, non-renewable resource depletion, and acidification. Goralczyk [65] and Binder et al. [66] also applied the life-cycle assessment. The former was conducted from the perspective of the renewable energy sector while the latter considered ecological, technical, and economic aspects from a life cycle perspective during the design process. Zhang [67] set up a group decision analytic hierarchy process (G-AHP) model to appraise the effectiveness of expressway construction project management in China, and the project considers cost, quality, and the environment impacts. In addition, unconventional evaluation approaches were also used. For example, Bloemhof-Ruwaard et al. [58] used an approach that combines materials accounting methods and optimization techniques to evaluate the environmental impact of paper recycling to find the best policy to optimize the life cycle of the pulp and paper sector. Renofalt et al. [63] researched the evaluation of hydropower projects by measuring hydropower production, the disruption dispersal of riverine organisms and sediment dynamics, alteration riverine biodiversity composition and abundance as well as the economic impact. Beynon and Wells [64] assessed the lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking with consideration of the subsequent uncertainty (sensitivity) analysis. Ecological risk is an important respect of EMEE evaluation research. Some scholars researched the evaluation of the ecological risk of transgenic plant which is based on the self-design of plant, food chain, and ecosystems reflecting the core concept of Ecological Engineering [68,69]. Peterson and Shama [70] comparatively assessed the potential environmental risks (i.e., human health, ecological, and livestock risks) associated with genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems. In addition, there are some studies on the comprehensive evaluation of EMEE with a focus on evaluation indicators and index systems, such as [71–73].

375

3.2.3. Content Type III There is 18.14% literature of final document database focuses on the whole process or general principle of Engineering Management. Among them, 28.21% literature applied in exploitation or management of coastal areas, oceans, islands, rivers, lakes as well as wetlands, 21.76% literature applied in management of agriculture, forestry, the mining industry, and animal husbandry. The remaining literature is wide dispersive. Essentially, Type III studies are devoted to finding the general principle or form of effective Engineering Management for the purpose of dealing with the complexity of interaction between human society and nature, emphasizing interdisciplinary. In these studies, interdisciplinary approach and systems thinking method are advocated. For example, Patten [74] advocated conceptual modeling workshops as the basis for a new type of institution elaborating management scenarios and political decision alternatives on the level of geographic landscape units. In the study, interdisciplinary approach is used as the basis for organizing such institutions to provide an interface between science and government to achieve a more integrative science of holism. Chen and Zheng [75] provided the conception of specialty niche in Engineering Management, and analyzed the niche of specialty in Engineering Management. Because specialty construction of Engineering Management has an ecological relationship with environment and education resource. Gorman [76] described a framework for collaboration on environmental thinking and management, including three types of multi-disciplinary trading zones and three types of shared expertise. Earth Systems Engineering Management (ESEM) was discussed in this paper. ESEM represents a novel and interdisciplinary approach to working with complex integrated human/natural systems that call for ‘‘systems thinking’’. The ‘‘systems thinking’’ emphasizes the interaction between parts of system and avoids problems such as optimizing one part of a system at the expense of the whole. ESEM happens to reflect the thought of EMEE. To ensure its success, ESEM will have to offer more than a framework for thinking about complex human/natural systems, and thus it has to adapt or evolve a set of tools that facilitate collaborative monitoring and management.

3.2.4. Content Type IV There is 9.77% of EMEE research focuses on pollution abatement, the response to disasters and the energy crisis. In this type of research, most studies are applied in exploitation or management of coastal areas, oceans, rivers and wetlands (28.57%), and urban construction (28.57%). These studies are devoted to finding solutions to pollution abatement that are both economically and ecologically effective and rational responses to disasters and the energy crisis. Specific approaches used include various optimization models, analysis of zero emission possibility, etc. For example, Maringanti et al. [77] developed an optimization methodology to select and place ‘‘best management practices’’ in a watershed to provide solutions that are both economically and ecologically effective. Singh and Singh [78] researched on potential of renewable energy resources and their conversion system with an emphasis on the development of zero pollution engine for vehicles that may lead to sustainable future. From the perspective of EMEE, an adaptive cycle of ecological urban design synthesizes the insights from the watershed and boundary frameworks using new data with the conservation concerns of agencies and local communities. Cadenasso et al. [79] presented two urban revitalization projects as examples with an aim at reducing nitrate pollution to stormwater, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay. Kuosmanen and Matin [80] argued that the axiom of weak disposability is frequently imposed in DEA models involving undesirable outputs such as pollution. Their study

376

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

results shed new light on the economic interpretation of weak disposability by developing dual formulations of the weakly disposable DEA technology. 3.2.5. Content Type V Content Type V deals with ‘‘process control’’, which is not a hot topic of EMEE. There is only 3.49% of literature touched this theme. Moreover, the most applied field is manufacturing industry and product management. The studies of this type are most focused on the design of ecological interface in process control and respond to several types of process events. For example, Jamieson [81] created a new second ecological interface using results exclusively from the traditional work-domain-based analysis. Because of abnormal events occurred during the process plants cost the petrochemical industry billions of dollars annually. To a certain extent, these events are difficult to be dealt with because contemporary interfaces do not adequately inform operators about the state of the process. Amelkin et al. [82] worked out an approach for the development of software and the choice of hardware structures when designing subsystems for automatic control of technological processes realized in living objects containing limited space (micro- environment). The subsystems for automatic control of the micro-environment under development use the devices for air prophylactic treatment, aeroionization, and purification as execution units for increasing the level of safety and quality of agricultural raw material and foodstuffs for reducing the losses of agricultural produce during storage and cultivation as well as for intensifying the processes of activation of agricultural produce and industrial microorganisms. Ramazanov and Ul’shin [83] studied ecological-economic control of the coal drying process under fuzzy information. They suggested a structure of a hybrid intelligence system of control and making of ecological-economic and technological decisions, including the determination of main technological-ecological-economic parameters and criteria by taking into account of a fragment of the fuzzy data base for control and decision-making in a real operation regime. Koenig [84] presented theoretical concepts and principles for characterizing economic systems as networks of physical and biological material transformation processes with

multilevel human cybernetic controlling mechanisms. Transformation processes are represented mathematically by addressing technic-specific physical energy and skill-specific human time with known technologies as model parameters. System boundaries can be defined and partitioned functionally for various analytical purposes: economic, engineering, managerial, or ecological. Interrelated opportunity sets for the exchange of resources, products, means of production, physical energy, and human time between enterprises are defined. Enterprises (individuals and groups of individuals) engage in four interrelated control activities. Social/political processes may use three generic control mechanisms. The proposed structure provides a framework for investigating economic systems and their supporting natural systems as well as the roles of technological and control innovation. 4. Comments and future research of EMEE There is a significant repository of literature that touches on the theme of EMEE, however there still exist rooms for further study: (1) Many contributions dealing with EMEE are still in a general and descriptive manner and lacked theoretical and operational analysis. (2) As Ecological Engineering is premised on interdisciplinary paradigms, ecological engineers have to use scientific knowledge, soft science knowledge, engineering knowledge, and systems knowledge in the practice of Ecological Engineering. Engineering Management is wide in scope and EMEE is a more integrative concept with an inter-disciplinary background. It not only requires knowledge of Ecological Engineering, but also requires the scientific management that is the core of Engineering Management. In addition, a background knowledge of biology, history and so on are prerequisite. The knowledge system of EMEE is shown in Fig. 4. A ‘‘true’’ EMEE always uses integrated technology and approaches to settle problems. However, some contributions have not embodied the integrative concept successfully in the methodology and knowledge used, especially those contributions from single discipline background authors.

Back Ground Knowledge common sense

biology

Hard Science Knowledge physics

philosophy

......

geography

history

Soft Science Knowledge business

economics

politics

law

chemistry biology

geoscience

social science maths

operational research

Management Knowledge

Systems Knowledge

Engineering Knowledge

general

materials

design

human

hard

mechanics

processes

natural

built

Fig. 4. The knowledge system of EMEE.

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

(3) A lot of contributions take an ecological concept in Engineering Management. However, the Ecological Engineering basis is not always obvious, and the superiorities of Ecological Engineering over environmental technology, cleaner technology, and other normal ecological technology are not distinct. They are more apt to compromise between environmental and human needs. Therefore, they are not thorough EMEE research. There is a general trend indicating that the range of EMEE will be expanded. With in-depth research of Engineering Management and a great concern over environmental problems, more and more fields of Engineering Management will be permeated with the concept of Ecological Engineering. The EMEE applications will continue to widen and deepen. The ideal condition is that a typical civil (or construction/ chemistry, etc.) engineering project is implemented together with a typical ecological engineering project at the same time. It can be predicted that international environmental problems will become hot issues in future EMEE research. For example, climate change has an enormous scale and urgency, which are often under appreciated despite the recent surge of worldwide attention [85]. The Copenhagen United Nations Climate Change Conference is opened on the 7th December 2009. Although the final document’s broad outlines do not constitute a treaty, it is yet unclear whether it should technically be called a global agreement. Nevertheless, it is the first time that all of the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters have signed up a framework for cooperation on the biggest challenge of our time. Albeit there exist shortcomings, this international accord is an important step forwards. As addressed in the Copenhagen Accord, ‘‘To achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, we shall, recognizing the scientific view that the increase in the global temperature should be below 21, on the basis of equity and in the context of sustainable development, enhance our long-term cooperative action to combat climate change’’ [86,87]. In the future for a period of time, low carbon modes [88] will probably be a main focus in many areas both in research and application. Low carbon Engineering Management will also probably be a hot spot in the future EMEE research. It will further be a trend that ecological engineering managers with different knowledge backgrounds from different countries will be more likely to work in a team to research or to settle specific problems. It is more productive that the EMEE team collectively have these attributes and that the members will be able to communicate effectively and work together to apply their skills and knowledge to the problems they are faced with.

5. Conclusions In conclusion, Engineering Management should be based on Ecological Engineering, which is an essential requirement of effective Engineering Management. At the same time, Ecological Engineering shall serve as the base of Engineering Management, which is commanded by the characteristics of Ecological Engineering. In order to achieve global sustainability, people must hold a concept of EMEE that goes beyond the conventional disciplines of Engineering Management and Ecological Engineering to a truly integrative synthesis. Only in this way, can there be a way to achieve effective Engineering Management and further realize sustainable development. While there is a large body of literature touching the theme of EMEE, many studies have failed to do a theoretical and operational analysis, and the methodology and knowledge used are not synthetical and innovative. Theoretical thought, methods, and techniques are still needed for further development. With continuing in-depth research into Engineering Management, great concerns over

377

environmental problems will continuously come forth as international environmental issues. It is expected that increasing fields of Engineering Management will be permeated with the concept of Ecological Engineering, which subsequently will widen the range of EMEE research. World’s academia seek a sustainable future, and Engineering Management research is no exception. The ecological aspect of Engineering Management has always been a weak point in research. EMEE will be a way to explore the mutually beneficial coexistence of the nature and engineering activities that will have a great development in the future. Acknowledgment Authors are very thankful to the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions. This research was supported by the Key Program of NSFC (Grant no. 70831005). References [1] Grebe Jr JC. Effective engineering management in the next decade. In: Change management and the new industrial revolution, 2001. IEMC ’01 proceedings. Albany, NY, USA: IEEE xplore; 2001. p. 88–93. [2] Balachandra R, Friar JH. Factors for success in R&D projects and new product innovation: a contextual framework. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 1997;44(3):276–87. [3] Mitsch W, Jørgensen S. Ecological engineering: a field whose time has come. Ecological Engineering 2003;20:363–77. [4] Members of the Commission. Our common future. In: World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Oxford University Press; Oxford: 1987. [5] Hopwood B, Mellor M, O’Brien G. Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. Sustainable Development 2005;13(1):38–52. [6] Pati RK, Vrat P, Kumar P. A goal programming model for paper recycling system. Omega 2008;36(3):405–17. [7] Kyoto Protocol: status of ratification. United Nations framework convention on climate change. Retrieved 2010-11-06. [8] Feroz EH, Raab RL, Ulleberg GT, Alsharif K. Global warming and environmental production efficiency ranking of the Kyoto Protocol nations. Journal of Environmental Management 2009;90(2):1178–83. [9] Van den Bergh JCJM. Ecological economics and sustainable development: theory, methods, and applications. Edward Elgar Pub; 1996. [10] Paucar-Caceres A. Mapping the changes in management science: a review of ‘soft’ OR/MS articles published in Omega (1973–2008). Omega 2010;38(1–2):46–56. [11] Sachs JD, Reid WV. Investments toward sustainable development. Science (Washington) 2006;312(5776):1002. [12] Ma SJ, Wang RS. Social–economic–natural complex ecosystem. Acta Ecologica Sinica 1984;4(1):1–9. [13] Gattie DK, McCutcheon SC, Smith MC. Ecological engineering: the state-ofthe-field. Ecological Engineering 2003;20(5):327–30. [14] Faber M, Manstetten R. Ecological economics concept and methods. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited; 1996. [15] Lannes W. What is engineering management? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 2001;1:107–15. [16] Chang CM. Engineering management in developing economies: the emide strategies to meet the new challenges. In: PICMET 2008 proceedings, 27–31 July, Cape Town, South Africa; 2008. [17] Dow BL. Engineering management practices in the United States, Europe, and China. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on management of innovation and technology (ICMIT); 2010. p. 687–90. [18] Lannes III WJ. What is engineering management? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 2002;48(1):107–15. [19] Shaw WH. Engineering management in our modern age. In: 2002 IEEE international engineering management conference, 2002. IEMC’02, vol. 2; 2002. p. 504–49. [20] Kocaoglu DF. Research and educational characteristics of the engineering management discipline. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 2002;37(3):172–6. [21] Mavor J. The evolution of engineering management. IEE colloquium on management and engineering (Digest no. 1997/007); 1997. [22] Odum HT. Man in the ecosystem. In: Proceedings of Lockwood conference on the suburban forest and ecology, vol. 652, Bulletin of the Connecticut Agricultural Station; 1962. p. 57–75. [23] Odum HT. Experiments with engineering of marine ecosystems. In: Publication of the Institute of Marine Science of the University of Texas, Texas; 1963. p. 374–403. [24] Odum HT. Scales of ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering 1996;6(1–3): 7–19. [25] Odum HT, Odum B. Concepts and methods of ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering 2003;20:339–61.

378

J. Xu, Z. Li / Omega 40 (2012) 368–378

[26] Ma SJ. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on agro-ecological engineering. Ecological Society of China; Beijing: 1988. p. 1–13. [27] Mitsch W. Ecological engineering—a cooperative role with the planetary life support systems. Environmental Science & Technology 1993;27(3):438–45. [28] Mitsch W. Ecological Engineering: a new paradigm for engineers and ecologists. In: Schulze PC, editor. Engineering within ecological constraints. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1996. p. 114–32. [29] Barrett K. Ecological engineering in water resources: the benefits of collaborating with nature. Journal of the International Water Resources Association 1999;24:182–8. [30] Banks peninsula workshop report ecological engineering conference. New Zealand: Lincoln University. November 2001. [31] Bergen SD, Bolton SM, Fridley JL. Design principles for ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering 2001;18:201–10. [32] Mitsch WJ. Ecological engineering—the 7-year itch. Ecological Engineering 1998;10(2):119–30. [33] Wang R, Yan J. Integrating hardware, software and mindware for sustainable ecosystem development: principles and methods of ecological engineering in China. Ecological Engineering 1998;11:277–89. [34] Mitsch W. Ecological engineering a cooperative role with the planetary lifesupport system. Environmental Science & Technology 1993;27(3):438–45. [35] Yan SJ, Ma JS. The function of ecological engineering in environmental conservation with some case studies from China. Bokskogen; 1991. [36] Kondolf GM, Angermeier PL, Cummins K, et al. Projecting cumulative benefits of multiple river restoration projects: an example from the Sacramento–San Joaquin river system in California. Environmental Management 2008;42(6):933–45. [37] Lee YG, An K, Ha PT, et al. Decadal and seasonal scale changes of an artificial lake environment after blocking tidal flows in the Yeongsan Estuary region, Korea. Science of the Total Environment 2009;407(23):6063–72. [38] Marques JC, Nielsen SN, Pardal MA, Jorgensen SE. Impact of eutrophication and river management within a framework of ecosystem theories. Ecological Modelling 2003;166(1–2):147–68. [39] Lillebo AI, Neto JM, Martins I, Verdelhos T, et al. Management of a shallow temperate estuary to control eutrophication: the effect of hydrodynamics on the system’s nutrient loading. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 2005;65(4):697–707. [40] Marques JC, Basset A, Brey T, Elliott M. The ecological sustainability trigon—a proposed conceptual framework for creating and testing management scenarios. Marine Pollution Bulletin 2009;58(12):1773–9. [41] Herrmann C, Eyerer P, Gediga J. Economic and ecological material index for end of life and design of electronic products. IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging Manufacturing 2004;27(1):2–8. [42] Herrmann C, Held M. Environmental design of energy-using products. Elektronik Praxis 2007;26(8):86–9. [43] Ohlendorf M, Herrmann C, Hesselbach J. Simulation-based disassembly systems design. Proceedings of the SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering 2003;5262(1):94–102. [44] Kadlec R. Overview: surface flow constructed wetlands. Water Science and Technology 1995;32:1–12. [45] Ronald MT. Adaptive management of coastal ecosystem restoration projects. Ecological Engineering 2000;15:365–72. [46] Zalewski M. Ecohydrology—the use of ecological and hydrological processes for sustainable management of water resources. Hydrological Sciences Journal 2002;47(5):823–32. [47] Alsharif K, Feroz EH, Klemer A, Raab R. Governance of water supply systems in the Palestinian Territories: a data envelopment analysis approach to the management of water resources. Journal of Environmental Management 2008;87(1):80–94. [48] Andre´ FJ, Herrero I, Riesgo L. A modified DEA model to estimate the importance of objectives with an application to agricultural economics. Omega 2010;38(5):371–82. [49] Gomes CFS, Nunes KRA, Helena Xavier L, Cardoso R, Valle R. Multicriteria decision making applied to waste recycling in Brazil. Omega 2008;36(3): 395–404. [50] Liu Y, Cao J, Wu R, et al. The land ecological layout planning research based on geography information system and osculating method—a case study of Houjie town. In: 6th international symposium on multispectral image processing and pattern recognition, MIPPR 2009—remote sensing and GIS data processing and other applications; October 30–November 1, 2009. [51] Min W, Jingsong Y, Rusong W. Ecological engineering for water in sustainable settlements construction. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2007;14(6):556–64. [52] Richter BD, Thomas GA. Restoring environmental flows by modifying dam operations. Ecology and Society 2007;12(1):12. [53] Winter BD, Crain P. Making the case for ecosystem restoration by dam removal in the Elwha River, Washington. Northwest Science 2008;82:13–28. [54] Lubowski RN, Bucholtz S, Claassen R, et al. Environmental effects of agricultural land-use change. Economic Research Report 2006;25. [55] Hengsdijk H, Van Ittersum MK. Formalizing agro-ecological engineering for future-oriented land use studies. European Journal of Agronomy 2003;19(4): 549–62. [56] Boody G, Vondracek B, Andow DA, et al. Multifunctional agriculture in the United States. BioScience 2005;55(1):27–38. [57] Jordan N, Boody G, Broussard W, et al. Sustainable development of the agricultural bio-economy. Science 2007;316(5831):1570.

[58] Bloemhof-Ruwaard JM, Van Wassenhove LN, Gabel HL, Weaver PM. An environmental life cycle optimization model for the European pulp and paper industry. Omega 1996;24(6):615–29. [59] Morais P, Camanho AS. Evaluation of performance of European cities with the aim to promote quality of life improvements. Omega 2011;39:398–409. [60] Hua Z, Bian Y, Liang L. Eco-efficiency analysis of paper mills along the Huai River: an extended DEA approach. Omega 2007;35(5):578–87. [61] Ramanathan R, Yunfeng J. Incorporating cost and environmental factors in quality function deployment using data envelopment analysis. Omega 2009;37(3):711–23. [62] Ayer NW, Tyedmers PH. Assessing alternative aquaculture technologies: life cycle assessment of salmonid culture systems in Canada. Journal of Cleaner Production 2009;17(3):362–73. [63] Renofalt BM, Jansson R, Nilsson C. Effects of hydropower generation and opportunities for environmental flow management in Swedish riverine ecosystems. Freshwater Biology 2010;55(1):49–67. [64] Beynon MJ, Wells P. The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: a PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis. Omega 2008;36(3):384–94. [65] Goralczyk M. Life-cycle assessment in the renewable energy sector. Applied Energy 2003;75(3–4):205–11. [66] Binder M, Florin H, Kreissig J. The use of life cycle engineering/life cycle assessment within the design process of production facilities—a business case: different options of handling overspray. In: Life-cycle analysis tools for ‘‘green’’ materials and process selection. Symposium (Materials research society symposium proceedings), vol. 895; 2006. p. 3–13. [67] Zhang C. Research on the expressway construction project management effectiveness appraising based on G-AHP model. Acta Scientiarum Natralium Universitatis Sunyatseni 2006;45(SUPPL. 2):155–61. [68] Ma J, Gao B, Wan F, et al. Ecological risk of Bt transgenic cotton and its management strategy. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology 2003;14(3):443–6. [69] Kang X, Liu Z, Li S. Potential ecological risks of transgenic trees. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology 2004;15(7):1281–4. [70] Peterson R, Shama LM. A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems. Transgenic Research 2005;14(6):859–75. [71] Kao C. Malmquist productivity index based on common-weights DEA: the case of Taiwan forests after reorganization. Omega 2010;38(6):484–91. [72] Kampichler C, Herna´ndez-Dauma´s S, Ochoa-Gaona S, Geissen V, et al. Indicators of environmentally sound land use in the humid tropics: the potential roles of expert opinion, knowledge engineering and knowledge discovery. Ecological Indicators 2010;10(2):320–9. [73] Chang SJ, Hsiao HC, Huang LH, Chang H. Taiwan quality indicator project and hospital productivity growth. Omega 2011;39:14–22. [74] Patten BC. Ecological systems engineering: toward integrated management of natural and human complexity in the ecosphere. Ecological Modelling 1994;75:653–65. [75] Chen YC, Zheng WY. Study on construction of engineering management specialty based on Niche theory. In: Proceedings of 2009 international conference on education management and engineering; 2009. p. 727–31. [76] Gorman ME. Earth systems engineering management: human behavior, technology and sustainability. Resources Conservation and Recycling 2005;44(3):201–13. [77] Maringanti C, Chaubey I, Popp J. Development of a multiobjective optimization tool for the selection and placement of best management practices for nonpoint source pollution control. Water Resources Research 2009;45(6). [78] Singh BR, Singh O. A study on sustainable energy sources its conversion systems towards development of an efficient zero pollution novel air turbine to use as prime-mover to the light vehicle. In: 2008 ASME international mechanical engineering congress and exposition, IMECE 2008, October 31– November 6, 2008, Boston, MA, United States; 2009. p. 371–8. [79] Cadenasso ML, Pickett S, Groffman PM, et al. Exchanges across land-waterscape boundaries in urban systems—strategies for reducing nitrate pollution. Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology 2008 2008;1134:213–32. [80] Kuosmanen T, Matin RK. Duality of weakly disposable technology. Omega 2011;39:504–12. [81] Jamieson GA. Ecological interface design for petrochemical process control: an empirical assessment. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans 2007;37(6):906–20. [82] Amelkin AA, Blagoveschenskaya MM, Lobanov YV, Amelkin AK. Minimum specific cost control of technological processes realized in a living objectscontaining microenvironment. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2003;101:44–8. [83] Ramazanov SK, Ul’shin VA. Ecological–economic control of the coal drying process under fuzzy information. Problemy Upravleniya I Informatiki (Avtomatika) 1995;2:108–16. [84] Koenig BE. Economic systems as cybernetically controlled networks of physical and biological processes. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics; 1990. Conference proceedings. p. 61–5. [85] Zeng N, Ding Y, Pan J, Wang H, Gregg J. Climate change—the Chinese challenge. Science 2008;319(5864):730–1. [86] Members of the conference. Copenhagen accord. In: United Nations climate change conference 2009 in Copenhagen; 2009. [87] After Copenhagen. Nature 462(24/31);2009:957–8. [88] Kramer GJ, Haigh M. No quick switch to low-carbon energy. Nature 2009;462(7273):568–9.