Where do professionals find sustainability and innovation value?

Empirical tests of three sustainable design methods

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

Jeremy Faludi (TU Delft - Circular Product Design)

Felix Yiu (University of California)

Alice Agogino (University of California)

Research Group
Circular Product Design
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.17
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Research Group
Circular Product Design
Issue number
e22
Volume number
6
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Recommendations of sustainable design methods are usually based on theory, not empirical industry tests. Furthermore, since professionals often mix components of different design methods, recommending whole methods may not be relevant. It may be better to recommend component activities or mindsets. To provide empirical grounding for recommendations, this study performed 23 workshops on three sustainable design methods involving over 172 professionals from 27 companies, including consultancies and manufacturers in three industries (consumer electronics, furniture and clothing). The design methods tested were The Natural Step, Whole System Mapping and Biomimicry. Participants were surveyed about what components in each design method drove perceived innovation, sustainability or other value, and why. The most valued components only partially supported theoretical predictions. Thus, recommendations should be more empirically based. Results also found unique and complementary value in components of each method, which suggests recommending mixed methods for sustainable design. This may help design professionals find more value in green design practices, and thus integrate sustainability more into their practice.