A new method for evaluating the best product end-of-life strategy during the early design phase

Journal of Engineering Design

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 419-441

  Remery, Marie ^a   Mascle, Christian ^a   Agard, Bruno ^b  

^a ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b INTERUNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTRE ON ENTERPRISE NETWORKS   (Canada)

Author keywords

design for end of life; design for environment; ecodesign; fuzzy sets; multi criteria analysis

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING PROCESS; DESIGN FOR ENVIRONMENT; EARLY DESIGN PHASE; ECODESIGN; END-OF-LIFE; ENVIRONMENTAL WASTES; FUZZY TECHNIQUES; MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS; MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSIS; MULTICRITERIA DECISION; PRODUCT END-OF-LIFE; SCENARIO EVALUATION; VEHICLE ENGINE;

FUZZY SETS; INDUSTRIAL WASTES; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT;

PRODUCT DESIGN;

EID: 84859650490     PISSN: 09544828     EISSN: 14661837     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09544828.2011.605061     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Arthur's machine clipart [online]. 2009. Available from: http://www.arthursclipart.org/machines/machines/page_01.htm [Accessed 6 August 2010]
2. Brezet, H. and Hemel, C. V. 1998. EcoDesign: A promising approach to sustainable production and consumption, [online]. Available from: http://www.ivt.ntnu.no/ipm/und/fag/TMM4145/ecodesign/theory/step2/step2.htm [Accessed 15 May 2010]
3. Brissaud, D. and Zwolinski, P. 2004. End-of-life-based negotiation throughout the design process. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 53(1): 155-158.
4. Chan, J. and Tong, T. 2007. Multi-criteria material selections and end-of-life product strategy: Grey relational analysis approach. Materials & Design, 28(5): 1539-1546.
5. Chen, C. 2000. Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1): 1-9.
6. Cheng, S., Chang, C. W. and Huang, G. H. 2003. An integrated multi-criteria decision analysis and inexact mixed integer linear programming approach for solid waste management. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 16(5-6): 543-554.
7. Choi, J. K., Nies, L. F. and Ramani, K. 2008. A framework for the integration of environmental and business aspects toward sustainable product development. Journal of Engineering Design, 19(5): 431-446.
8. Dong, W. and Shah, H. 1987. Vertex method for computing functions of fuzzy variables. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 24(1): 65-78.
9. Ferrao, P. and Amaral, J. 2006. Design for recycling in the automobile industry: New approaches and new tools. Journal of Engineering Design, 17(5): 447-462.
10. Gehin, A., Zwolinski, P. and Brissaud, D. Towards the use of LCA during the early phase to define EOL Scenarios. Proceedings of the CIRP Conference on life cycle engineering-Advances in Life Cycle Engineering for Sustainable Manufacturing Businesses. June11-132007, Tokyo, Japan.
11. Gumus, A. 2009. Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2): 4067-4074.
12. Hammond, R., Amezquita, T. and Bras, B. 1998. Issues in the automotive parts remanufacturing industry: A discussion of results from surveys performed among remanufacturers. Engineering Design and Automation, 4: 27-46.
13. Herrera, F. and Herrera-Viedma, E. 2000. Linguistic decision analysis: Steps for solving decision problems under linguistic information. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 115(1): 67-82.
14. Hokkanen, J. and Salminen, P. 1997. Choosing a solid waste management system using multicriteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 98(1): 19-36.
15. Hula, A. 2003. Multi-criteria decision-making for optimization of product disassembly under multiple situations. Environmental Science and Technology, 37(23): 5303-5313.
16. Institute of Hazardous Materials Management. 2010. What are hazardous materials?, [online]. Available from: http://www.ihmm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61&Itemid=79 [Accessed 3 December 2010]
17. Johnson, M. and Wang, M. 1998. Economical evaluation of disassembly operations for recycling, remanufacturing and reuse. International Journal of Production Research, 36(12): 3227-3252.
18. Keeney, R. and Gregory, R. 2005. Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Operations Research, 53(1): 1-11.
19. Kiritsis, D., Bufardi, A. and Xirouchakis, P. Multi-criteria decision aid for product end of life options selection. Conference record. 2003 IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environment. May19-222003, Boston, MA. pp.48-53. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
20. Knemeyer, A., Ponzurick, T. G. and Logar, C. M. 2002. A qualitative examination of factors affecting reverse logistics systems for end-of-life computers. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 32(6): 455-479.
21. Kumar, V. 2007. Value flow characterization during product lifestyle to assist in product decision. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18-18): 4555-4572.
22. Lai, Y. J., Liu, T. Y. and Hwang, C. L. 1994. Topsis for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research, 76(3): 486-500.
23. Lee, S. G., Lye, S. W. and Khoo, M. K. 2001. A multi-objective methodology for evaluating product end-of-life options and disassembly. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 18: 148-156.
24. Lee, H. M. The framework of information sharing in end-of-life for sustainable product development. 2006 IEEE international conference on industrial informatics, INDIN'06. August16-182006, Singapore. pp.73-78. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
25. Luttropp, C. and Lagerstedt, J. 2006. EcoDesign and the ten golden rules: Generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(15-16): 1396-1408.
26. Mathieux, F., Froelich, D. and Moszkowicz, P. 2008. ReSICLED: A new recovery-conscious design method for complex products based on a multicriteria assessment of the recoverability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(3): 227-298.
27. Navin Chandra, D. 1994. The recovery problem in product design. Journal of Engineering Design, 5: 65-86.
28. Önüt, S. and Soner, S. 2008. Transshipment site selection using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches under fuzzy environment. Waste Management, 28: 1552-1559.
29. Parlikad, A. K. 2003. The role of product identity in end-of-life decision making. Auto-ID Centre White Paper, [online]. Available from: http://www.autoidlabs.org/uploads/media/CAM-AUTOID-WH017.pdf [Accessed 25 May 2010]
30. Pigosso, D. C.A. 2010. Ecodesign methods focused on remanufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(1): 21-31.
31. Powell, J. 1996. The evaluation of waste management options. Waste Management & Research, 14(6): 515-526.
32. Prudhomme, G., Zwolinski, P. and Brissaud, D. 2003. Integrating into the design process the needs of those involved in the product life-cycle. Journal of Engineering Design, 14(3): 333-353.
33. Rao, R. V. 2007. Decision making in the manufacturing environment: Using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods, London: Springer-Verlag.
34. Rao, R. V. and Padmanabhan, K. K. 2010. Selection of best product end-of-life scenario using digraph and matrix methods. Journal of Engineering Design, 21(4): 455-472.
35. Rose, C. M. 2001. Design for environment: A method for formulating product end-of-life strategies, California, USA: Stanford University. Thesis (PhD) 3000092
36. Rose, C. M., Ishii, K. and Masui, K. How product characteristics determine end-of-life strategies. Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environment, ISEE. 4, 6 May1998. pp.322-327. IL: Oak Brook.
37. Rose, C. M., Stevels, A. and Ishii, K. A new approach to end-of-life design advisor (ELDA). 2000 IEEE international symposium on electronics and the environmen. October8-102000, San Francisco, CA, United States. pp.99-104.
38. Saaty, T. 1990. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48: 9-26.
39. Sen, P. and Yang, J. 1995. Multiple-criteria decision-making in design selection and synthesis. Journal of Engineering Design, 6: 207-230.
40. Shih, H., Shyur, H. J. and Lee, E. S. 2007. An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(7-8): 801-813.
41. Spath, D., Hartel, M. and Tritsch, C. 1996. Recycling-oriented information management: A prerequisite for life cycle engineering. Journal of Engineering Design, 7(3): 251-264.
42. Srivastava, S. 2007. Green supply chain management: A state of the art literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9: 53-80.
43. Sy, M. and Mascle, C. 2011. Product design analysis based on life cycle features. Journal of Engineering Design, 22(6): 387-406.
44. Takeuchi, S. and Saitou, K. Design for optimal end-of-life scenario via product-embedded disassembly. 2006 ASME international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, DETC2006. September10-132006, Philadelphia, PA, USA. New York: ASME Press. DETC2006-99475
45. Thierry, M. 1995. Strategic issues in product recovery management. California Management Review, 37(2): 114-135.
46. Triantaphyllou, E. 1998. Multi-criteria decision making: An operations research approach. Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 15: 175-186.
47. Vego, G., Kucar-Dragicevic, S. and Koprivanac, N. 2008. Application of multi-criteria decision-making on strategic municipal solid waste management in Dalmatia, Croatia. Waste Management, 28(11): 2192-2201.
48. Walls, M., 2006. Extended producer responsibility and product design. Resources for the Future discussion paper: RFF DP 06-08 [online]. Available from: www.rff.org [Accessed 6 August 2010]
49. Willems, B., Dewulf, W. and Duflou, J. 2004. End-of-life strategy selection: A linear programming approach to manage innovations in product design. International Journal of Production Engineering and Computers, 6(7): 45-53.
50. Xing, K., Abhary, K. and Luong, L. 2003. IREDA: An integrated methodology for product recyclability and end-of-life design. The Journal of Sustainable Product Design, 3(3): 149-171.
51. Zanakis, S. 1998. Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3): 507-529.