Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Policy Frameworks to Stimulate Environmental Technology in the Computer and Electronics Sector
EPA Grant Number: R824752Title: Policy Frameworks to Stimulate Environmental Technology in the Computer and Electronics Sector
Investigators: Ditz, Daryl , Irwin, Frances
Institution: World Resources Institute
EPA Project Officer: Chung, Serena
Project Period: October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1997
Project Amount: $240,000
RFA: Incentives and Impediments to Pollution Prevention (1995) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Sustainable and Healthy Communities , Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development
Objective:
The project examined how a sector approach to environmental policy can stimulate cleaner technology in the computer and electronics sector. Using the lens of this sector provides an opportunity to look at policies to address the likely environmental problems of the next century and spur the use of innovative technology in solving them.Project approach and tasks
The project combined analysis by the principal investigators with discussion and comments by an Electronics Working Group that included members from companies, government, academia, and an environmental group. The tasks included 1) reviewing earlier approaches to environmental technology and environmental policy for sectors and defining use of these terms for the project; 2) identifying the key characteristics of the computer and electronics sector that underlie its relationship to the environment; 3) developing a case study on disk drives to provide grist for discussing policy directions; 4) co-organizing a session on "ecotransformation" of the electronics sector for the Sixth International Conference of the Greening of Industry Network; 5) drafting the policy framework; and 6) serving as an incubator for another project on electronic innovation for climate protection and a limited exploration of material flows. The principal investigators also drew on their participation in the work of the Common Sense Initiative?s Subcommittee on the Computer and Electronics Sector.
Policy Frameworks to Stimulate Environmental Technology in the Computer and Electronics SectorDefining the terms
While the term environmental technology at one point was used primarily to describe pollution abatement equipment, the project chose to define this term and its siblings "cleaner production" and "cleaner technology" to mean technology that offers solutions to social and environmental problems; includes systems and services, software and hardware, products and processes; and is designed to use less material and energy, avoid toxic materials, and reduce risk across media. The project assumed that policies will be most effective if they influence decisions about what technology to develop and how to develop it--the point at which both environmental problems and opportunities can be most effectively addressed with the fewest resources.
The project assumed that a sector policy approach means focusing environmental policies on economic sectors and developing these policies with the participation of the key actors. It assumed three strengths of this approach: 1) It can address the root causes of environmental issues in the decisions that determine the extraction, use, and release of materials. 2) It offers one way to move from a fragmented to a systematic approach to environmental problems at a time when environmental issues are recognized as embedded in all of society?s activities. 3) It provides a focus for organizing and implementing policy with broad participation from stakeholders.
At the same time, the project recognized the limits and challenges of a sector approach to environmental policy for the computer and electronics sector: The limits include: 1) The sector approach is only one way of focusing policy; it needs to be combined with others, particularly a focus on places; 2) Policies for different sectors are likely to differ in detail and application rather than in basic approach; 3) Ideas for policy and technological innovation will often be developed in interaction with other sectors;. 4) Sectors are difficult to bound. Electronics products are used in almost every other sector of the economy from transport to energy supply. In making them, electronics companies rely on other sectors such as chemicals. 5) Groups affected by policy focused on the sector are not organized to participate effectively in the policymaking process.
Characteristics that underlie the sector?s relationship to the environment
To develop sector-based environmental policies requires an understanding of the industry. This is specially true for the fast-changing computer and electronics sector that provides components hidden in cars, appliances, and thousands of other products. One poll of the public found that three-fifths of the respondents had no opinion on whether the sector harmed or helped the environment. To provide a foundation for considering policy options, the project examined four characteristics of the computer and electronics sector that influence its relationship to environmental policy:
- The sector develops and markets new products--intellectual property--in contrast to sectors such as chemicals, petroleum, and pulp and paper that start with natural resources and turn them into products.
- The sector is a leader in the economy and in changing the ways in which business is organized.
- The sector is a complex mix of sources of both environmental degradation and environmental solutions.
- Participation in environmental policymaking is now limited mainly to a few sub-sectors which face environmental challenges at the production stage with some attention to design for environment and managing electronic products no longer in use.
Three approaches to policy frameworks
With the members of the Electronics Working Group, the WRI selected three areas that present opportunities for developing policy frameworks for environmental technology in the computer and electronics sector: 1) design for the environment in new product development, 2) business opportunities in environmental technology, and 3)global product chains.
To gain a more detailed understanding of current practices for incorporating the environmental factor into new product development along a product chain, the WRI project team commissioned a case study of the disk drive chain. This study was carried out by Robert L. Ferrone, a former design engineer with 30 years of experience in the industry. Disk drives were chosen because the manufacture of drives presents opportunities for changes that reduce environmental impacts that can provide a company a competitive edge. At the same time; the short life cycle of drives makes decision points easier to identify. Finally, the disk drive illustrates common characteristics of the electronics sector such as an international scope and the fact that products are built from components developed along a horizontal supply chain. Ferrone interviewed staff at two component makers, a disk drive manufacturer, and a computer maker along the chain.
For the second and third policy opportunities--business opportunities and global product chains--the project served as an incubator. After discussion in the Electronics Working Group and WRI?s Climate, Energy, and Pollution Program, the project team narrowed the business opportunities approach to electronics innovation to address climate change. John Horrigan, a consultant who had just completed a PhD in technology policy, prepared a scoping paper that was reviewed by the Electronics Working Group. Under the umbrella of WRI?s Climate Protection Initiative, this paper was further developed with business partners through the Electronic Industries Alliance and the International Cooperative for Environmental Leadership. WRI published in July 1998 as Taking a Byte Out of Carbon: Electronics Innovation for Climate Protection.
The project team briefly explored using the environmental implications of the global product chains as a policy approach. Trade data on components are available and give some indication of financial flows related to electronic products among countries. Data on material flows in the sector are more difficult to locate beyond the waste data for U.S. electronics facilities regulated by EPA. Under another project, WRI is developing indicators for material flows. A next step will be to address indicators at the sector level, which may provide a further pursue this work.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
1. Participants in a session on the ecotransformation of the electronics sector at the Sixth International Conference of the Greening of Industry Network developed the following (unranked) list of drivers and barriers to "ecotransformation" of the electronics sector.
Drivers of Ecotransformation
- internal company leadership
- rapidly changing technologies and organizational structure
- competition for global markets
- pressure points along the supply chain
- corporate customer demand
- costs of resources and liability
- regulations, particularly emerging "take back" policies
Barriers to Ecotransformation
- short attention span for issues peripheral to technology development
- rapid obsolescence of products, production equipment, and people
- environmental issues not addressed at a strategic level
- little awareness of sustainability issues in companies
- a primary focus in companies on reducing costs
- weak internal relationships between environmental and product development groups
- multiple suppliers of components along supply chain
- lack of strong customer relationships
- large energy demands for transport in global supply and distribution chains
- efficiency gains may be offset by growth in production
- lack of clear public environmental goals
- lack of market pull from customers
- missing players in debate--software, transport, services, consumers
2. The prime characteristic of the computer and electronics sector is its focus on developing and delivering new technology to the market rapidly. Policy frameworks to stimulate environmental technology in this sector need to influence decisions about what to make and how to make it and resolve the mismatch between the business product development cycle and the physical life cycle of products.
3. The disk drive case study found:
- As of the mid-nineties, companies in an example disk drive chain were offering training courses in design for environment and company engineers were taking some initial steps to improve the environmental characteristics of products.
- The primary responsibility of company environmental departments was ensuring compliance with environmental regulations.
- Reviewing a product design to identify business opportunities through superior environmental performance was not a primary function of the company design teams.
- Within companies, the communication between marketing and the design and environment teams was quite limited.
- Product designers focus on the unit cost of production, time-to-market, product performance and reliability, and compliance with environmental regulations. They lacked the tools and information to analyze environmental impacts and costs in any depth.
- Customer and supplier companies along the chain communicate by the customer?s providing technical specifications and environmental regulations to the supplier. Suppliers are not brought into discussion of environmental issues at an early stage nor given clear environmental priorities beyond regulations.
Companies need to incorporate the environmental concerns in the concept stage of product development so that environmental issues are considered as materials are selected and the manufacturing process and packaging are developed. Means of recycling or reuse, for example, would be considered at this stage. To enable the necessary trade-offs in design and costs engendered by environmental considerations, the new product development team would be headed by the business manager and include the finance manager. Rather than disbanding the team after the product is launched, it would be reconstituted and continue to function .
4. While it faces environmental challenges, the computer and electronics sector is unique in the potential its technology offers for solving environmental problems. It has enabled information to become a primary environmental policy tool. Its technology can both improve the efficiency of buildings, office equipment, and transport and substitute for material and energy through electronic communication and virtual reality. The scale of these opportunities needs to be better defined.
Conclusions:
The longer-term vision of ecotransformation of the computer and electronics sector is to redefine the sector in terms of delivering value and service over the life cycle of a technology rather than competing on time-to-market with new products. Key elements in a policy framework to move toward that vision include setting ambitious environmental goals, funding research, developing public metrics to track progress, improving tools to leverage the supply chain and stimulate market demand for environmental technology, and building broader participation into both using technology to protect the environment and participating in policymaking for the sector.Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 4 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
RFA, Scientific Discipline, Air, Sustainable Industry/Business, cleaner production/pollution prevention, climate change, Air Pollution Effects, Economics, Atmosphere, corporate decision making, performance based systems, environmental monitoring, cleaner production, environmentally conscious manufacturing, cost benefit, industrial ecology, computers and electronics, source reduction policies, Environmental Technology Initiative, incentives and impediments, outreach and education, pollution prevention, green technologyRelevant Websites:
http://www.WRI.orgProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.