Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://scholarhub.balamand.edu.lb/handle/uob/5674
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFaludi, Jeremyen_US
dc.contributor.authorAli, Omaren_US
dc.contributor.authorSrour, Olaen_US
dc.contributor.authorMecanna, Selimen_US
dc.contributor.authorKamareddine, Ramien_US
dc.contributor.authorChatty, Tejaswinien_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-30T12:29:25Z-
dc.date.available2022-05-30T12:29:25Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.issn22204334-
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarhub.balamand.edu.lb/handle/uob/5674-
dc.description.abstractDo different sustainable design methods generate different sustainable design ideas? Do they also drive different product innovation ideas? This project empirically tested three design methods: The Natural Step, Whole System Mapping, and Biomimicry. Testing involved qualitatively categorizing 1,115 design ideas from 23 workshops for over 30 companies, including consultancies and manufacturers in consumer electronics, furniture, and apparel. The categorized ideas were then counted to determine if the different design methods caused different kinds of ideas. They did. For example, The Natural Step drove more ideas on green material choice, circular end of life, and social impacts, while Biomimicry drove more durability ideas and Whole System Mapping drove more cost reduction ideas, among other differences. Overall, The Natural Step generated the highest percentage of sustainability ideas, Biomimicry generated the most innovation ideas, and Whole System Mapping generated a balance of both. These preliminary results should help designers and engineers choose design methods suited to the types of design solutions they desire.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.subjectCircular economyen_US
dc.subjectSustainabilityen_US
dc.subjectInnovationen_US
dc.subjectCircular economyen_US
dc.titlePreliminary results testing what different design solutions arise from different sustainable design methodsen_US
dc.typeConference Paperen_US
dc.relation.conferenceInternational Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 2019 ( 22nd : 5-8 August, 2019 : Netherlands )en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/dsi.2019.342-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85079741570-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85079741570-
dc.contributor.affiliationFaculty of Engineeringen_US
dc.description.startpage3351en_US
dc.description.endpage3360en_US
dc.date.catalogued2022-05-30-
dc.description.statusPublisheden_US
dc.identifier.ezproxyURLhttp://ezsecureaccess.balamand.edu.lb/login?url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/proceedings-of-the-international-conference-on-engineering-design/article/preliminary-results-testing-what-different-design-solutions-arise-from-different-sustainable-design-methods/250BDAB45C4DC82EEFAEBB8B7E1E95ADen_US
dc.relation.ispartoftextProceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED, Vol. 2019en_US
Appears in Collections:Department of Chemical Engineering
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

6
checked on Nov 16, 2024

Record view(s)

56
checked on Nov 21, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.