- Email: [email protected]
Decision Support Aids for Eco-reliable Product-service Delivery
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
CENTERIS 2014 - Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN 2014 International Conference on Project MANagement / HCIST 2014 - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies
Decision Support Aids for Eco-Reliable Product-Service Delivery F. Crenna, R.C. Michelini, R.P. Razzoli* University of Genova, Via Opera Pia 15/a, Genova - 16145, Italy
Abstract Ecology is XXI century threat, requiring a new revolution, whether the civilisation continuance is sought. In common construal, the way out is equivocally referred by the overworked ‹sustainable growth› words. The exploration attacks the overall economic, political and social frames, to outline the changeover, finally, identified as the inclusive society solution, and serviceably described supported by suited decision aids merging the new enterprises sustainable frames and obtaining a wide transparency of the supply chain. © © 2014 2014 The The Authors. Authors. Published Published by by Elsevier ElsevierLtd. Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committees of CENTERIS/ProjMAN/HCIST 2014 Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of CENTERIS 2014. Keywords: Collective Order; Social Darwinism; Product-Service; Extended Enterprise; Sustainable Corporation
1. Introduction The industrial revolution obtains ‹wealth› increase from manufacture, transforming raw materials into useful products, by using artificial energy. The ecology is recent warning: it requires the ‹sustainability› of the processes, namely, the control of the depletion and pollution figures, not to exceed suited thresholds, related to the environment safe continuance. As a general rule, we know from physics that the entropy is ceaselessly increasing: the overall imbalance exists. The current manufacture productivity is affected by over-depletion/pollution, compared to the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-010-353-2844; fax: +39-010-353-2844. E-mail address: [email protected]
2212-0173 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of CENTERIS 2014. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.084
200
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
natural recovery pace: the ‹growth sustainability› is truly non-existent. From the remarks, the snags to express concepts such as up-grading or value-added (or growth or progress) become evident, when wealth build-up risks deceitful appraisals of the ‹natural capital›, due to mixing-up ‹capital assets› and ‹in progress revenue›. The fact is linked to haziness in correct specifications, i.e.: explicit bookkeeping, affecting the earth resources’ accounting; clear-cut regulation of virtual wealth ploys, to prevent, e.g., Ponzi-like swindles. The confusion about the wealth real levels (not doped by direct chattels’ expenditures) has to be removed, being preliminary step in the growth sustainability assessments, when entailing ‹natural capital› appraisals [1,2]. The paper reconsiders these facts, using wide-ranging prospects, and suggesting consistent reading of: • the basic political framework, affecting the entire mankind global village • the impending entrepreneurial changes, with tied decision-keeping keys The today lawful ‹right way› is defective. Sustainable growth may last finite limits only: the actual span is, often, set undecided. The side upshots are mostly left to imagination, without precise cues on, notably, lifecycle performance and on reverse logistics results. To avoid the earth overload, the sustainability should merge a suite of actions: idle and toxic wastes are midway steps, followed by restoring and clearing up the surrounds. The recovery jobs can further forecast varying goals, granting litheness in managing the needed refurbishing processes, so that the economy/ecology goals leave respite to the today citizens. Yet, the set of actions remain elusive, unless quantitative targets are enacted expressing positive measures, to balance the negative manufacture effects on the non-renewable sources. The recovery courses, basically, need to include up-grading procedures [3,4], viz., aimed at: • resource productivity step-up: to gain equivalent results, by less consumption/contamination • supply profitability boost: to expand intangible value-added, by the knowledge effectiveness The business project, including lifecycle products-services, is thought consistent with sustainable growth aims, if: re-materialization is considered as an art for the resource manager; de-materialisation at the same time is the main goal for the recovery planner manager. Producer’s tasks are widened adding product end of life management, facing the worsening due to the piling-up of ‹chew› stuffs, as required by compulsory laws, but giving also added value to the product [5,6]. The paper gives a review of the enterprise’s knowledge innovation, the cooperative net concern actions, and the sustainable corporation agility are checked, to outline how ecology will modify the socio-political context of our future life [7,8]. 2. Entrepreneurial Framework The supply chain jobs and practices are expected to face in the short future important changes, to deal with the growth sustainable lifestyle requirements, notably, delineated by the enacted rules of the EU eco-policy. The future to come suggests that competition shall take place, under market regulatory conditions different from the extant ones, to grant trends to environmentally more cautious goals. The manufacturer responsibilities are extended, such that their information needs extending in scope across the supply chain, to embrace service engineering, ecological footprint and end-of-life recovery. The changes aims at granting visibility at the points-of-service, tied to the onduty conformance-to-specification tests and the reclamation (reuse, recycle) rules. The changeovers develop along complementary lines, where competitiveness will depend on entrepreneurship founded on economies of scope, enabled by ‹extended enterprises›, which offer product-service blends. The upturn is crucial, as sustainability concerns, currently firm-external, shall turn internal to the business model [9,10]. In fact, compared to earlier habits, when competitiveness stops at the point-of sale, from now on, the enterprise needs to deal with [11,12,13]: • product assessment for lifelong performance and minimal environment impact • manufacture process robustness, to allocate visibility to the throughput quality and to guarantee a limited resources allocation
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
• service schedules for conformance-to-use rules, as supply chain included option • end-of-life take-back, with enacted recovery (reuse, recycle) mandatory targets The sustainable growth changes, brought on by regulations, are thought troubles to defer to a future to come, only by short-sighted enterprises. The worldwide competitors have consciousness of the above listed prospects, and arrange supply chains, incorporating [14,15]: • knowledge data-bases, caring for products lifestyle design and management • real-time diagnosis and decision aids, allotted as on-duty service engineering The business widening to product-service, is sought with resort to enhanced product lifecycle managers PLM, which embed suited federated architecture super-model, with unified lifecycle data. The access to each view (facility/function layout, production process, quality certification, maintenance policies, recovery requests, etc.) into the super-model is critical competitive advantage, to upgrade the manufacturing activity. The data-coding abilities require improved understanding of the problem solving capabilities. Focus on value chains requires attention, as lifestyle goals build as concerted frame, allowing designers to work close to suppliers, partners, customers and conformance certifiers, to obtain valuable inputs, each time ranking the achieved issues with factual returns [16,17,18]. Based on products-services, the market evolves towards knowledge-intensive deliveries. The companies’ competition forms at the ideation/development stage, to conceive customers’ tailored offers, yielding high performance, reached via subsequent manufacture, operation and call-back stages. The business success requires twofold knowledge build-up [19,20]: • off-process decision supports, assuring deliveries’ design and implementation • on-process monitoring and management, assuring lifecycle and recovery goals The dual economic-and-political deployments, and the changes in the enterprise organisation are, here, specified to expand the business’ liability, from the point-of-sale to the points-of-service, supporting conformance assessment duties for on-process safety and environment protection, and to the end-of-life, complying with recovery (recycle and reclamation) callings. This means to deal with the provision of products-services, where extensions entail the obligation frames, going together with the (material) supply chains, to warranty the full achievement of functions, at clients’ satisfaction and third people’s eco-protection. The ‹sustainability› builds on the availability of special purpose aids: PLM, product lifecycle management, SE, service engineering, RL, reverse logistics and related aids, to assemble data and to modify burning up and toxic waste end effects, by suited mitigation/removal of the manufacture falloffs. The industrial revolution nuisance removal is necessity, presuming suited diagnoses, the quoted special purpose aids, and, notably, the effective programming of lifelong decision supports, under determined consistency. 3. Lifelong Decision-Supports The outlined scenarios are involved; the innovations require breaks, but the prospected analyses do not seem univocal. The shared views address the ‹global village› conception, overworked term, expressing the fact that ecology is threatening occurrence, world-over affecting all the individuals, going across the social and the administrative bonds, with world-over inclusive operation controls [21,22]. The hunted ways out hypotheses shall include such ecology constraint: it will be guilty not utterly taking into account that local solutions are useless. The restrain disavows the past mankind history, up to now built on ‹closed society› collective orders, which politically distinguish the earth folk or people, at different inner-organisation settings.
201
202
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
The present socio-political organisation has demonstrated inefficiency and unsuitableness in managing earth related global problems, [23,24,25,26,27], with emerging sub-societies leading and governing for own goals even when global issues are involved. In the ‹nation-state› ruling, the priority is allocated to politics: the citizens are subjected to the pertinent laws, enacted to enhance the characterising inner-organisation. The modernism combines the industrial revolution with the dual economic-and-politics deployments of the ‹nation-states› into a region of the world, e.g. the Europe, with outcomes, gradually assigning all-exclusive leadership, along the recent centuries. After two worldwide wars, the power of the European ‹nation-states› is scaled down, with globalisation concerns putting forward the sub-continent range. The politico-economic range, lately, moves the supremacy elsewhere [28,29]. The dual economic-and-political scenario, can be tackled, distinguishing the decision-making of the business’ projects, from the one of the government officialdom. The eco-protection could be a transversal accomplishment, moving across the different ‹nation-states›, once the right targets are fixed at the ‹global village› breadth [30,31,32], because the previously recalled ‹product-service› delivery is promptly enabled via extended/virtual enterprise’s ways. In this case, the firm theory directly manages the environment-enterprise, 2E, undertakings, while aiming at integrated product-process-environment-enterprise, 2P2E, fulfilment. The lifecycle maintenance characterises by data overload (manuals, forms, empirical frames, real-time data, etc.). The designers/field-engineers/operators collaboration faces the mixing of many data-sources, scattered along the supply chain. The networked organisations enter, today, in the every-one life, possibly, with the links restriction that individuals (people or company) have inherent right to accept/forbid. This is just partially true; e.g., most of EU countries laws permit phone recording (automatically, for extensions; under special rules, for speech). Likewise, most of us use car-navigators to find the endpoints, or the mobile-phone to be in touch with co-workers or friends, even if that this means to be tracked (with uncertainty of a few meters). The data might turn effective as antiterrorism measure, on condition, of course, that they are exploited with no swindling. This way, most of the ideas behind the net technologies are already in current practices. Besides, wider scope objectives are here focused, related to trends in the manufacture economy, to look after sustainable growth. The PLM-SE-RL specialisation, in fact, permits easy extended enterprise configuration, directly applying the 2P2E approach, to SMEs, already capable to manage the basic facilities/functions, required by lifecycle service provision. The ‹extension› means to join, to the existing networked organisations, tying aids, aimed at extended enterprise eco-consistency [33,34,35]. 4. Control/Certification Duties In the dual economic/political settings of the Western Europe democracies, the welfarism, at any rate, aims at combining the many views, privileging social, and, not expropriating personal rights. So, the privacy guard follows a twin course towards ‹big state› hypotheses, (a bit elusively) discriminating: • the personal (ethical, religious, etc.) privileges, protected by formal protocols • the social (civil, economic, etc.) privileges, subdued by sanctioned restrictions The linked protections are dissimilar. The sensible data are processed in view of not interfering with the citizen’s privacy. Yet, scruples stop when the individual behaviour does not lead to neutral effects on the inland revenue (escaping from taxes). We accept that the pertinent data are transparent: the governments will manage every aspect, as their activity depends on the citizens’ outlays. The political primacy is, further, engaged in ‹macroeconomics› measures, using the fiscal leverage, to rule ‹solidarity› aids to inner citizens only. So far, ecology data are mostly lumped as community fee, with little personal stimulation of eco-safe conduct. This worsens the local finances and fosters public and private inclination to run off the needed restraints. These curbs concern yet-to-be (not voting) citizens’ rights. Ecology is, thus, subtle question, without clear-cut links to the extant ‹global village› situation: each ‹nation-state› profits by pushing elsewhere the environmental duties. Yet: the eco-system is global village property; this denies split-sovereignty claims. The ‹ecology› opposes to closed societies, aimed at exclusive inner citizens’ privileges. The change has to look at inclusive societies: the ‹big society› ripens, if the standard administrative tasks are moved out of the governmental
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
sphere, empowering self-ruling ‹settlement councils›. How far the process of scattered civic-mindedness can move is hard bet. In the ‹inclusive society›, the ‹governance› is the result of interactions among self-managed networks, which cross-link the diverse interwoven congresses, communities, leagues, etc., ensuring public interests, by private management, because eco-protection entails more bottom-up (than top-down) measures [36,37]. The idea is the spreading out of clerical functions, splitting jobs between bodies and agencies, fostering crosslinked concerns: the mutual interests are automatically safeguarded by balancing the public interests. If this matching is reached, the executive functions are not anymore lumped in ‹nation-state› organisations, because transnational safeguard establishes on bottom-up rules. The individual ‹self-governance› ensues, as ‹inclusive society› legality paradigms, ruling the entire mankind, as a global village sole partnership. The all is puzzling query, not obvious at all, once the authenticity of the law is built on the uniform eco-safeguard [38,39]. The ‹inclusive society› looks at transforming extended/virtual enterprises, in ‹sustainable corporations›, transferring the legality requisites at the level of business accomplishment, directly entailing the spheres of private producer-to-purchaser’s agreements. The citizens’ obligations might (possibly) interface to the local ‹nation-states›; the actual compulsions, however, are predetermined on worldwide targets, to preserve the planned eco-consistency, expecting the civic standardisation of rights and duties [40,41]. The new dual economic/political settings cannot trust in the political primacy, since the split-sovereignty is nonsense, when the compulsory targets out of the local jurisdiction. The ‹inclusive society› definition has to do with questionable facts and vistas; the goal intends to deal with ‹all-comprehensive› analyses, which encompass the mankind future [42,43]: the global warming is central reference, to establish consistent forecasts. The economic primacy, of course, cannot develop: we may consider the business primacy, once the ‹sustainable corporation› settling is obtained, with the related certification through officially notified bodies. Thereafter, the decision keeping mechanism shall develop on a bottom-up three-party scheme: • purveyors, covering the supply chain by virtual/extended enterprising • users, purchasing products-services, under depletion/pollution control • supervisors, third-party notified certification bodies of whole deliveries The certified control duties require revising the ‹closed society› settings, under political primacy, switching to inclusive society paradigms, typically described as ‹altruism› archetypes, since all of us try to avoid the common ruin, refraining from over-depletion/pollution and favouring retrieval/salvage policies. 5. Conclusion The ecology opens scenarios to the human progress in total cut-out from the trends we are accustomed to figure out. We characterise the ‹men› out of the animal reign, because of the ‹relational intelligence›, by which the process towards empathy and rationality permits creating ‹synergy› plus-values, suitably leading to ‹idioms› and ‹trades›. The trends characterise the transformation of ‹folk› with no cross-coherence, into ‹people› with legal settings. The way starts by ‹social breakthrough›, inventing clans, groups and countries. It brings about the ‹nation-state› officialdom, which, in the past, has been proved by the ‹grace of god› or ‹race homogeneity› and it is now acknowledged by ‹constitutional plebiscite›, as the earlier a priori proofs are found questionable. The lawfulness by dual economic-and-political deployments has apodictic foundation on ‹sovereignty›, even if it only enjoys just a posteriori worth, with ‹synergy› plus-value allotted by a given ‹closed society›. The ecology discontinuity has snags with that sort of legality [44,45,46]: the technology innovations can be welcomed; it is much more difficult to deal with the social breakthroughs, when just aimed at political splitting. The civilisation is odd earth occurrence, prearranged on the mentioned ‹social breakthrough›, by which the ‹collective orders› allow establishing synergies, assembling cooperation infrastructures. The end issues build as mainly ‹exclusive societies›, grounded on partnerships of fellows, opposed to aliens. The exclusion of foreigners is almost as important as the collaboration with friends, to bring forth properly motivated ‹collective orders›. The outcome is so evident that, in the past, the social Darwinism reading enjoyed wide appreciation. The ‹open society› building starts being suggested, when considering the global warming and the necessary sharing of damages: the common ruin is nonsense; the shared salvage is the ‹altruism› choice of the global village [47,48].
203
204
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
The recent construal opposes ‹inclusive societies› to ‹exclusive ones›, looking at empathy as progressive opportunity, to shape rational partnerships. The final implementation looks at: • purveyors, covering the entire supply-chain: materials provision, items manufacture, lifecycle up-keeping, backward recovery; the ecological responsibility is dealt with by clustering several firms within the factual alliance of cooperating multi-sectional interest businesses • users, purchasing extended artefacts (products-services), to profit of the delivered functions with reliability figure close to one; the payments shall include conformance certification at the points of service, after tax collection against tangibles depletion and pollutants release • supervisors, assuring third party duties for the (today and tomorrow) environment and society protection; the certifying bodies report to ‹big society› settlement councils and use objective standards, having access to the products-services lifecycle data-bases The ‹inclusive society› describes by altruism, being this empathy outcome, if we reject the drawbacks of unsafe behaviours [49], whether an ‹exclusive› talent would trail solidarity, supposing that the benefit of fellows could be obtained, with conviction of aliens. The sustainable growth through ‹inclusive society› policies is message outlined by the paper, to provide rational answers to the ecology threats. References [1] [2] [3] [4]
Abele E, Anderl R, Birkofer H. Environmentally-friendly product development: methods and tools. London: Springer; 2005. Michelini RC. Society progress evolution: sustainability and responsiveness. New York: Nova Science Pub; 2012. Michelini RC. Knowledge entrepreneurship and sustainable growth. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2008. Pastorok RA, Bartel SM, Ferson S, Ginzburg LR, Eds. Ecologic modelling in risk assessment: chemical effects on populations and ecosystems. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2001. [5] Charbonneau S. Droit communautaire de l’environnement. Paris: L’Harmattan; 2006. [6] Stadtler H, Kilger C. Supply chain management and advanced planning: concepts, models, software and case studies, Berlin: Springer; 2001. [7] Birolini A. Reliability engineering: theory and practice. Berlin: Springer; 2007. [8] Warren FR. Practice of sustainable community development: a participatory framework for change. Berlin: Springer; 2012. [9] Glazer MP, Ed. New frontiers in environmental research. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [10] Rautenstrauch C, Patig S, Eds. Environmental information systems in industry and public administration. Hershey: Idea Group Pub; 2001. [11] Chan CK, Lee HWJ. Successful strategies in supply chain management. Hershey: IDEA Group; 2005. [12] Ehrenfeld JR. Sustainability by design. New Haven: Yale Uni. Press; 2008. [13] Wohlgemuth V, Page B, Voight K, Eds. Environmental informatics and industrial eco-protection: concepts, methods and tools. Aachen: Shaker; 2009. [14] Krepon M. Better safe than sorrow: the ironies of living with the bomb. Stanford: Stanford Uni. Press; 2009. [15] Ward A.C. Lean product and process development. Cambridge: Lean Enterprise Institute; 2007. [16] Fleischmann M. Quantitative models for reverse logistics. Berlin: Springer; 2001. [17] Reese J, Dyckhoff H, Lackes R. Supply chain management & reverse logistics. London: Springer; 2004. [18] Viana V. Sustainable development in practice: lessons learned from Amazonas. New York: Intl. Inst. for Environment & Development; 2010. [19] Otto KN, Wood KL. Product design techniques in reverse engineering and new product development, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2001 [20] Tischner U, Charter M. Sustainable solutions: developing products-services for the future. Sheffield: Greenleaf Pub; 2001. [21] Grignon C, Kardon C. Sciences de l’homme et sciences de la nature. Paris: Ed. Maison des Sciences de l’Homme; 2010. [22] Pertsova CC, Ed. Ecological economics research trends. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2008. [23] Acemoglu D, Robinson JA. Why nations fall: the origin of power, prosperity and poverty. New York: Crown Pub; 2012. [24] Meijer D, DeJong F, Eds. Environmental regulation, evaluation, compliance and economic impact. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [25] Morris I. Why the West rules, for now: the patterns of history and what they reveal about the future. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux; 2010. [26] Omand D. Securing the state. New York: Columbia Uni. Press; 2010. [27] Palombella G. E possibile una legalità globale: il rule of law e la governance mondiale, Bologna: Il Mulino; 2013. [28] Daniels JD, Ed. Advances in environmental research. Vol. 21. New York: Nova Sci; 2011. [29] Steher N, vonStorch H. Climate & society: climate as resource, climate as risk. London: Imperial College Press; 2009. [30] Chen J, Guo C, Eds. Ecosystem ecology research trends. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [31] Edwards P. A vast machine: computer models, climate change and the politics of global warming. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2010. [32] Latouche S. Petit traité de la décroissance sereine. Paris: Mille et une Nuits; 2007.
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205 [33] Rogers H. Green went wrong: how our economy is undermining the environmental revolution. New York: Simon & Schuster Pub; 2010. [34] Wang JX. Green electronics manufacturing: creating environmental sensible products. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012. [35] Yergin D. The quest: energy, security & the remaking of the modern world. London: Penguin; 2011. [36] Muñoz SI, Ed. Ecology research progress. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [37] Wills B. Green intensions: creating a green value stream to compete and win. Boca Raton: CRC; 2009. [38] Pardue GH, Olvera TK, Eds. Ecological restoration. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [39] Weber MK, Hemmelskamp J. Toward environmental innovation systems. Berlin: Springer; 2004. [40] Quinn ZE, Ed. Responding to impact to climate change on water resources. New York: Nova Sci; 2010. [41] van Leeuven J, Gopalakrishnan K, Brown R.C, Eds. Sustainable bioengineering and bioproducts. Berlin: Springer; 2010. [42] Giddens A. The politics of climate changes. London: Polity Press; 2009. [43] Goodstein D, Intrilligator M. Climate change and the energy problem. London: World Sci. Pub; 2012. [44] Allen RC. The British industrial revolution in global perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni. Press; 2009. [45] Erickson JD, Messner F, Eds. Ecological economics of watershed management. Bingley: Emerald Book; 2007. [46] Michelini RC. Robot age knowledge changeover. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [47] Freedman M, Jaggi B, Eds. Advances in environmental accounting. Bingley: Emerald Book; 2006. [48] Michelini RC, Razzoli RP. Affidabilità e sicurezza del prodotto industriale: progettazione integrata per lo sviluppo sostenibile. Milano: Tecniche Nuove; 2000. [49] Michelini RC. Knowledge society engineering: a sustainable growth pledge. New York: Nova Science Pub.; 2011.
205
ScienceDirect Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
CENTERIS 2014 - Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN 2014 International Conference on Project MANagement / HCIST 2014 - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies
Decision Support Aids for Eco-Reliable Product-Service Delivery F. Crenna, R.C. Michelini, R.P. Razzoli* University of Genova, Via Opera Pia 15/a, Genova - 16145, Italy
Abstract Ecology is XXI century threat, requiring a new revolution, whether the civilisation continuance is sought. In common construal, the way out is equivocally referred by the overworked ‹sustainable growth› words. The exploration attacks the overall economic, political and social frames, to outline the changeover, finally, identified as the inclusive society solution, and serviceably described supported by suited decision aids merging the new enterprises sustainable frames and obtaining a wide transparency of the supply chain. © © 2014 2014 The The Authors. Authors. Published Published by by Elsevier ElsevierLtd. Ltd.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committees of CENTERIS/ProjMAN/HCIST 2014 Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of CENTERIS 2014. Keywords: Collective Order; Social Darwinism; Product-Service; Extended Enterprise; Sustainable Corporation
1. Introduction The industrial revolution obtains ‹wealth› increase from manufacture, transforming raw materials into useful products, by using artificial energy. The ecology is recent warning: it requires the ‹sustainability› of the processes, namely, the control of the depletion and pollution figures, not to exceed suited thresholds, related to the environment safe continuance. As a general rule, we know from physics that the entropy is ceaselessly increasing: the overall imbalance exists. The current manufacture productivity is affected by over-depletion/pollution, compared to the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-010-353-2844; fax: +39-010-353-2844. E-mail address: [email protected]
2212-0173 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of CENTERIS 2014. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.084
200
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
natural recovery pace: the ‹growth sustainability› is truly non-existent. From the remarks, the snags to express concepts such as up-grading or value-added (or growth or progress) become evident, when wealth build-up risks deceitful appraisals of the ‹natural capital›, due to mixing-up ‹capital assets› and ‹in progress revenue›. The fact is linked to haziness in correct specifications, i.e.: explicit bookkeeping, affecting the earth resources’ accounting; clear-cut regulation of virtual wealth ploys, to prevent, e.g., Ponzi-like swindles. The confusion about the wealth real levels (not doped by direct chattels’ expenditures) has to be removed, being preliminary step in the growth sustainability assessments, when entailing ‹natural capital› appraisals [1,2]. The paper reconsiders these facts, using wide-ranging prospects, and suggesting consistent reading of: • the basic political framework, affecting the entire mankind global village • the impending entrepreneurial changes, with tied decision-keeping keys The today lawful ‹right way› is defective. Sustainable growth may last finite limits only: the actual span is, often, set undecided. The side upshots are mostly left to imagination, without precise cues on, notably, lifecycle performance and on reverse logistics results. To avoid the earth overload, the sustainability should merge a suite of actions: idle and toxic wastes are midway steps, followed by restoring and clearing up the surrounds. The recovery jobs can further forecast varying goals, granting litheness in managing the needed refurbishing processes, so that the economy/ecology goals leave respite to the today citizens. Yet, the set of actions remain elusive, unless quantitative targets are enacted expressing positive measures, to balance the negative manufacture effects on the non-renewable sources. The recovery courses, basically, need to include up-grading procedures [3,4], viz., aimed at: • resource productivity step-up: to gain equivalent results, by less consumption/contamination • supply profitability boost: to expand intangible value-added, by the knowledge effectiveness The business project, including lifecycle products-services, is thought consistent with sustainable growth aims, if: re-materialization is considered as an art for the resource manager; de-materialisation at the same time is the main goal for the recovery planner manager. Producer’s tasks are widened adding product end of life management, facing the worsening due to the piling-up of ‹chew› stuffs, as required by compulsory laws, but giving also added value to the product [5,6]. The paper gives a review of the enterprise’s knowledge innovation, the cooperative net concern actions, and the sustainable corporation agility are checked, to outline how ecology will modify the socio-political context of our future life [7,8]. 2. Entrepreneurial Framework The supply chain jobs and practices are expected to face in the short future important changes, to deal with the growth sustainable lifestyle requirements, notably, delineated by the enacted rules of the EU eco-policy. The future to come suggests that competition shall take place, under market regulatory conditions different from the extant ones, to grant trends to environmentally more cautious goals. The manufacturer responsibilities are extended, such that their information needs extending in scope across the supply chain, to embrace service engineering, ecological footprint and end-of-life recovery. The changes aims at granting visibility at the points-of-service, tied to the onduty conformance-to-specification tests and the reclamation (reuse, recycle) rules. The changeovers develop along complementary lines, where competitiveness will depend on entrepreneurship founded on economies of scope, enabled by ‹extended enterprises›, which offer product-service blends. The upturn is crucial, as sustainability concerns, currently firm-external, shall turn internal to the business model [9,10]. In fact, compared to earlier habits, when competitiveness stops at the point-of sale, from now on, the enterprise needs to deal with [11,12,13]: • product assessment for lifelong performance and minimal environment impact • manufacture process robustness, to allocate visibility to the throughput quality and to guarantee a limited resources allocation
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
• service schedules for conformance-to-use rules, as supply chain included option • end-of-life take-back, with enacted recovery (reuse, recycle) mandatory targets The sustainable growth changes, brought on by regulations, are thought troubles to defer to a future to come, only by short-sighted enterprises. The worldwide competitors have consciousness of the above listed prospects, and arrange supply chains, incorporating [14,15]: • knowledge data-bases, caring for products lifestyle design and management • real-time diagnosis and decision aids, allotted as on-duty service engineering The business widening to product-service, is sought with resort to enhanced product lifecycle managers PLM, which embed suited federated architecture super-model, with unified lifecycle data. The access to each view (facility/function layout, production process, quality certification, maintenance policies, recovery requests, etc.) into the super-model is critical competitive advantage, to upgrade the manufacturing activity. The data-coding abilities require improved understanding of the problem solving capabilities. Focus on value chains requires attention, as lifestyle goals build as concerted frame, allowing designers to work close to suppliers, partners, customers and conformance certifiers, to obtain valuable inputs, each time ranking the achieved issues with factual returns [16,17,18]. Based on products-services, the market evolves towards knowledge-intensive deliveries. The companies’ competition forms at the ideation/development stage, to conceive customers’ tailored offers, yielding high performance, reached via subsequent manufacture, operation and call-back stages. The business success requires twofold knowledge build-up [19,20]: • off-process decision supports, assuring deliveries’ design and implementation • on-process monitoring and management, assuring lifecycle and recovery goals The dual economic-and-political deployments, and the changes in the enterprise organisation are, here, specified to expand the business’ liability, from the point-of-sale to the points-of-service, supporting conformance assessment duties for on-process safety and environment protection, and to the end-of-life, complying with recovery (recycle and reclamation) callings. This means to deal with the provision of products-services, where extensions entail the obligation frames, going together with the (material) supply chains, to warranty the full achievement of functions, at clients’ satisfaction and third people’s eco-protection. The ‹sustainability› builds on the availability of special purpose aids: PLM, product lifecycle management, SE, service engineering, RL, reverse logistics and related aids, to assemble data and to modify burning up and toxic waste end effects, by suited mitigation/removal of the manufacture falloffs. The industrial revolution nuisance removal is necessity, presuming suited diagnoses, the quoted special purpose aids, and, notably, the effective programming of lifelong decision supports, under determined consistency. 3. Lifelong Decision-Supports The outlined scenarios are involved; the innovations require breaks, but the prospected analyses do not seem univocal. The shared views address the ‹global village› conception, overworked term, expressing the fact that ecology is threatening occurrence, world-over affecting all the individuals, going across the social and the administrative bonds, with world-over inclusive operation controls [21,22]. The hunted ways out hypotheses shall include such ecology constraint: it will be guilty not utterly taking into account that local solutions are useless. The restrain disavows the past mankind history, up to now built on ‹closed society› collective orders, which politically distinguish the earth folk or people, at different inner-organisation settings.
201
202
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
The present socio-political organisation has demonstrated inefficiency and unsuitableness in managing earth related global problems, [23,24,25,26,27], with emerging sub-societies leading and governing for own goals even when global issues are involved. In the ‹nation-state› ruling, the priority is allocated to politics: the citizens are subjected to the pertinent laws, enacted to enhance the characterising inner-organisation. The modernism combines the industrial revolution with the dual economic-and-politics deployments of the ‹nation-states› into a region of the world, e.g. the Europe, with outcomes, gradually assigning all-exclusive leadership, along the recent centuries. After two worldwide wars, the power of the European ‹nation-states› is scaled down, with globalisation concerns putting forward the sub-continent range. The politico-economic range, lately, moves the supremacy elsewhere [28,29]. The dual economic-and-political scenario, can be tackled, distinguishing the decision-making of the business’ projects, from the one of the government officialdom. The eco-protection could be a transversal accomplishment, moving across the different ‹nation-states›, once the right targets are fixed at the ‹global village› breadth [30,31,32], because the previously recalled ‹product-service› delivery is promptly enabled via extended/virtual enterprise’s ways. In this case, the firm theory directly manages the environment-enterprise, 2E, undertakings, while aiming at integrated product-process-environment-enterprise, 2P2E, fulfilment. The lifecycle maintenance characterises by data overload (manuals, forms, empirical frames, real-time data, etc.). The designers/field-engineers/operators collaboration faces the mixing of many data-sources, scattered along the supply chain. The networked organisations enter, today, in the every-one life, possibly, with the links restriction that individuals (people or company) have inherent right to accept/forbid. This is just partially true; e.g., most of EU countries laws permit phone recording (automatically, for extensions; under special rules, for speech). Likewise, most of us use car-navigators to find the endpoints, or the mobile-phone to be in touch with co-workers or friends, even if that this means to be tracked (with uncertainty of a few meters). The data might turn effective as antiterrorism measure, on condition, of course, that they are exploited with no swindling. This way, most of the ideas behind the net technologies are already in current practices. Besides, wider scope objectives are here focused, related to trends in the manufacture economy, to look after sustainable growth. The PLM-SE-RL specialisation, in fact, permits easy extended enterprise configuration, directly applying the 2P2E approach, to SMEs, already capable to manage the basic facilities/functions, required by lifecycle service provision. The ‹extension› means to join, to the existing networked organisations, tying aids, aimed at extended enterprise eco-consistency [33,34,35]. 4. Control/Certification Duties In the dual economic/political settings of the Western Europe democracies, the welfarism, at any rate, aims at combining the many views, privileging social, and, not expropriating personal rights. So, the privacy guard follows a twin course towards ‹big state› hypotheses, (a bit elusively) discriminating: • the personal (ethical, religious, etc.) privileges, protected by formal protocols • the social (civil, economic, etc.) privileges, subdued by sanctioned restrictions The linked protections are dissimilar. The sensible data are processed in view of not interfering with the citizen’s privacy. Yet, scruples stop when the individual behaviour does not lead to neutral effects on the inland revenue (escaping from taxes). We accept that the pertinent data are transparent: the governments will manage every aspect, as their activity depends on the citizens’ outlays. The political primacy is, further, engaged in ‹macroeconomics› measures, using the fiscal leverage, to rule ‹solidarity› aids to inner citizens only. So far, ecology data are mostly lumped as community fee, with little personal stimulation of eco-safe conduct. This worsens the local finances and fosters public and private inclination to run off the needed restraints. These curbs concern yet-to-be (not voting) citizens’ rights. Ecology is, thus, subtle question, without clear-cut links to the extant ‹global village› situation: each ‹nation-state› profits by pushing elsewhere the environmental duties. Yet: the eco-system is global village property; this denies split-sovereignty claims. The ‹ecology› opposes to closed societies, aimed at exclusive inner citizens’ privileges. The change has to look at inclusive societies: the ‹big society› ripens, if the standard administrative tasks are moved out of the governmental
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
sphere, empowering self-ruling ‹settlement councils›. How far the process of scattered civic-mindedness can move is hard bet. In the ‹inclusive society›, the ‹governance› is the result of interactions among self-managed networks, which cross-link the diverse interwoven congresses, communities, leagues, etc., ensuring public interests, by private management, because eco-protection entails more bottom-up (than top-down) measures [36,37]. The idea is the spreading out of clerical functions, splitting jobs between bodies and agencies, fostering crosslinked concerns: the mutual interests are automatically safeguarded by balancing the public interests. If this matching is reached, the executive functions are not anymore lumped in ‹nation-state› organisations, because transnational safeguard establishes on bottom-up rules. The individual ‹self-governance› ensues, as ‹inclusive society› legality paradigms, ruling the entire mankind, as a global village sole partnership. The all is puzzling query, not obvious at all, once the authenticity of the law is built on the uniform eco-safeguard [38,39]. The ‹inclusive society› looks at transforming extended/virtual enterprises, in ‹sustainable corporations›, transferring the legality requisites at the level of business accomplishment, directly entailing the spheres of private producer-to-purchaser’s agreements. The citizens’ obligations might (possibly) interface to the local ‹nation-states›; the actual compulsions, however, are predetermined on worldwide targets, to preserve the planned eco-consistency, expecting the civic standardisation of rights and duties [40,41]. The new dual economic/political settings cannot trust in the political primacy, since the split-sovereignty is nonsense, when the compulsory targets out of the local jurisdiction. The ‹inclusive society› definition has to do with questionable facts and vistas; the goal intends to deal with ‹all-comprehensive› analyses, which encompass the mankind future [42,43]: the global warming is central reference, to establish consistent forecasts. The economic primacy, of course, cannot develop: we may consider the business primacy, once the ‹sustainable corporation› settling is obtained, with the related certification through officially notified bodies. Thereafter, the decision keeping mechanism shall develop on a bottom-up three-party scheme: • purveyors, covering the supply chain by virtual/extended enterprising • users, purchasing products-services, under depletion/pollution control • supervisors, third-party notified certification bodies of whole deliveries The certified control duties require revising the ‹closed society› settings, under political primacy, switching to inclusive society paradigms, typically described as ‹altruism› archetypes, since all of us try to avoid the common ruin, refraining from over-depletion/pollution and favouring retrieval/salvage policies. 5. Conclusion The ecology opens scenarios to the human progress in total cut-out from the trends we are accustomed to figure out. We characterise the ‹men› out of the animal reign, because of the ‹relational intelligence›, by which the process towards empathy and rationality permits creating ‹synergy› plus-values, suitably leading to ‹idioms› and ‹trades›. The trends characterise the transformation of ‹folk› with no cross-coherence, into ‹people› with legal settings. The way starts by ‹social breakthrough›, inventing clans, groups and countries. It brings about the ‹nation-state› officialdom, which, in the past, has been proved by the ‹grace of god› or ‹race homogeneity› and it is now acknowledged by ‹constitutional plebiscite›, as the earlier a priori proofs are found questionable. The lawfulness by dual economic-and-political deployments has apodictic foundation on ‹sovereignty›, even if it only enjoys just a posteriori worth, with ‹synergy› plus-value allotted by a given ‹closed society›. The ecology discontinuity has snags with that sort of legality [44,45,46]: the technology innovations can be welcomed; it is much more difficult to deal with the social breakthroughs, when just aimed at political splitting. The civilisation is odd earth occurrence, prearranged on the mentioned ‹social breakthrough›, by which the ‹collective orders› allow establishing synergies, assembling cooperation infrastructures. The end issues build as mainly ‹exclusive societies›, grounded on partnerships of fellows, opposed to aliens. The exclusion of foreigners is almost as important as the collaboration with friends, to bring forth properly motivated ‹collective orders›. The outcome is so evident that, in the past, the social Darwinism reading enjoyed wide appreciation. The ‹open society› building starts being suggested, when considering the global warming and the necessary sharing of damages: the common ruin is nonsense; the shared salvage is the ‹altruism› choice of the global village [47,48].
203
204
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205
The recent construal opposes ‹inclusive societies› to ‹exclusive ones›, looking at empathy as progressive opportunity, to shape rational partnerships. The final implementation looks at: • purveyors, covering the entire supply-chain: materials provision, items manufacture, lifecycle up-keeping, backward recovery; the ecological responsibility is dealt with by clustering several firms within the factual alliance of cooperating multi-sectional interest businesses • users, purchasing extended artefacts (products-services), to profit of the delivered functions with reliability figure close to one; the payments shall include conformance certification at the points of service, after tax collection against tangibles depletion and pollutants release • supervisors, assuring third party duties for the (today and tomorrow) environment and society protection; the certifying bodies report to ‹big society› settlement councils and use objective standards, having access to the products-services lifecycle data-bases The ‹inclusive society› describes by altruism, being this empathy outcome, if we reject the drawbacks of unsafe behaviours [49], whether an ‹exclusive› talent would trail solidarity, supposing that the benefit of fellows could be obtained, with conviction of aliens. The sustainable growth through ‹inclusive society› policies is message outlined by the paper, to provide rational answers to the ecology threats. References [1] [2] [3] [4]
Abele E, Anderl R, Birkofer H. Environmentally-friendly product development: methods and tools. London: Springer; 2005. Michelini RC. Society progress evolution: sustainability and responsiveness. New York: Nova Science Pub; 2012. Michelini RC. Knowledge entrepreneurship and sustainable growth. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2008. Pastorok RA, Bartel SM, Ferson S, Ginzburg LR, Eds. Ecologic modelling in risk assessment: chemical effects on populations and ecosystems. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2001. [5] Charbonneau S. Droit communautaire de l’environnement. Paris: L’Harmattan; 2006. [6] Stadtler H, Kilger C. Supply chain management and advanced planning: concepts, models, software and case studies, Berlin: Springer; 2001. [7] Birolini A. Reliability engineering: theory and practice. Berlin: Springer; 2007. [8] Warren FR. Practice of sustainable community development: a participatory framework for change. Berlin: Springer; 2012. [9] Glazer MP, Ed. New frontiers in environmental research. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [10] Rautenstrauch C, Patig S, Eds. Environmental information systems in industry and public administration. Hershey: Idea Group Pub; 2001. [11] Chan CK, Lee HWJ. Successful strategies in supply chain management. Hershey: IDEA Group; 2005. [12] Ehrenfeld JR. Sustainability by design. New Haven: Yale Uni. Press; 2008. [13] Wohlgemuth V, Page B, Voight K, Eds. Environmental informatics and industrial eco-protection: concepts, methods and tools. Aachen: Shaker; 2009. [14] Krepon M. Better safe than sorrow: the ironies of living with the bomb. Stanford: Stanford Uni. Press; 2009. [15] Ward A.C. Lean product and process development. Cambridge: Lean Enterprise Institute; 2007. [16] Fleischmann M. Quantitative models for reverse logistics. Berlin: Springer; 2001. [17] Reese J, Dyckhoff H, Lackes R. Supply chain management & reverse logistics. London: Springer; 2004. [18] Viana V. Sustainable development in practice: lessons learned from Amazonas. New York: Intl. Inst. for Environment & Development; 2010. [19] Otto KN, Wood KL. Product design techniques in reverse engineering and new product development, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2001 [20] Tischner U, Charter M. Sustainable solutions: developing products-services for the future. Sheffield: Greenleaf Pub; 2001. [21] Grignon C, Kardon C. Sciences de l’homme et sciences de la nature. Paris: Ed. Maison des Sciences de l’Homme; 2010. [22] Pertsova CC, Ed. Ecological economics research trends. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2008. [23] Acemoglu D, Robinson JA. Why nations fall: the origin of power, prosperity and poverty. New York: Crown Pub; 2012. [24] Meijer D, DeJong F, Eds. Environmental regulation, evaluation, compliance and economic impact. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [25] Morris I. Why the West rules, for now: the patterns of history and what they reveal about the future. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux; 2010. [26] Omand D. Securing the state. New York: Columbia Uni. Press; 2010. [27] Palombella G. E possibile una legalità globale: il rule of law e la governance mondiale, Bologna: Il Mulino; 2013. [28] Daniels JD, Ed. Advances in environmental research. Vol. 21. New York: Nova Sci; 2011. [29] Steher N, vonStorch H. Climate & society: climate as resource, climate as risk. London: Imperial College Press; 2009. [30] Chen J, Guo C, Eds. Ecosystem ecology research trends. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [31] Edwards P. A vast machine: computer models, climate change and the politics of global warming. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2010. [32] Latouche S. Petit traité de la décroissance sereine. Paris: Mille et une Nuits; 2007.
F. Crenna et al. / Procedia Technology 16 (2014) 199 – 205 [33] Rogers H. Green went wrong: how our economy is undermining the environmental revolution. New York: Simon & Schuster Pub; 2010. [34] Wang JX. Green electronics manufacturing: creating environmental sensible products. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012. [35] Yergin D. The quest: energy, security & the remaking of the modern world. London: Penguin; 2011. [36] Muñoz SI, Ed. Ecology research progress. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [37] Wills B. Green intensions: creating a green value stream to compete and win. Boca Raton: CRC; 2009. [38] Pardue GH, Olvera TK, Eds. Ecological restoration. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [39] Weber MK, Hemmelskamp J. Toward environmental innovation systems. Berlin: Springer; 2004. [40] Quinn ZE, Ed. Responding to impact to climate change on water resources. New York: Nova Sci; 2010. [41] van Leeuven J, Gopalakrishnan K, Brown R.C, Eds. Sustainable bioengineering and bioproducts. Berlin: Springer; 2010. [42] Giddens A. The politics of climate changes. London: Polity Press; 2009. [43] Goodstein D, Intrilligator M. Climate change and the energy problem. London: World Sci. Pub; 2012. [44] Allen RC. The British industrial revolution in global perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni. Press; 2009. [45] Erickson JD, Messner F, Eds. Ecological economics of watershed management. Bingley: Emerald Book; 2007. [46] Michelini RC. Robot age knowledge changeover. New York: Nova Sci. Pub; 2009. [47] Freedman M, Jaggi B, Eds. Advances in environmental accounting. Bingley: Emerald Book; 2006. [48] Michelini RC, Razzoli RP. Affidabilità e sicurezza del prodotto industriale: progettazione integrata per lo sviluppo sostenibile. Milano: Tecniche Nuove; 2000. [49] Michelini RC. Knowledge society engineering: a sustainable growth pledge. New York: Nova Science Pub.; 2011.
205