The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
It is now apparent that this first, naive view of the interaction of the global economy with natural environmental systems is simplistic and inadequate. It must be replaced with a more systems-based approach that goes beyond localized phenomena and integrates environment and technology throughout all human economic activity. This nascent, multidisciplinary field is known as industrial ecology and is being implemented in private firms in the manufacturing sector through methodologies and tools developed using design-for-environment (DFE) approaches (Allenby, 1992, 1994a; American Electronics Association, 1993). DFE programs may, in turn, be divided into two categories: generic DFE, which includes things such as ''green" accounting systems (Todd, 1994) to improve the environmental performance of the firm as a whole, and specific DFE, which focuses on tools applied to the design of individual manufacturing processes and products (Allenby, 1994b; Glantschnig, 1992).
The relationship between past approaches for evaluating the environmental impacts of human activities and industrial ecology is captured in Table 1. Note the shift in emphasis from specific wastes and materials to products as they are actually used in commerce, and from a geographically and temporally localized view of environmental insults to a regional and global view. This shift recognizes that local insults must be remedied but that the environmental perturbations of real concern relate to the broader issues of human population growth, loss of biodiversity, global climate change, ozone depletion, and depletion of water and arable soil.
It is worth emphasizing that the past (remediation) and present (compliance) approaches are closely linked and generally require similar competencies. Industrial ecology is far broader in its economic and environmental implications and requires very different competencies (e.g., strategic planning). It is different in kind, not just degree, from the mindset behind both the remediation and the compliance approaches to environmental perturbations.
What is the implication of this new philosophy for facilities? For one, industrial ecology requires that facilities of all types be subject to the same scope of evaluation as product or process design. Facilities must be evaluated in terms of the materials with which they are constructed, how they are used (analogous to process technology issues), and how they are refurbished and reused (analogous to product-life extension). As with other DFE efforts, the goal is to design, purchase, or adapt facilities in an environmentally responsible manner that contributes to their competitive advantage. This matrix tool, therefore, should be regarded as only one component of the full DFE set that must be developed as firms begin implementing the principles of industrial ecology.
The Environmentally Responsible Facility
Two aspects of industrial ecology/DFE are critical for the environmentally responsible facility (ERF). The first is the emphasis in any DFE analysis on a