Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: life cycle assessment
- Genre: Academic theses
- Creators: Dooley, Kevin
- Member of: ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Description
This study investigates how well prominent behavioral theories from social psychology explain green purchasing behavior (GPB). I assess three prominent theories in terms of their suitability for GPB research, their attractiveness to GPB empiricists, and the strength of their empirical evidence when applied to GPB. First, a qualitative assessment of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), Norm Activation Theory (NAT), and Value-Belief-Norm Theory (VBN) is conducted to evaluate a) how well the phenomenon and concepts in each theory match the characteristics of pro-environmental behavior and b) how well the assumptions made in each theory match common assumptions made in purchasing theory. Second, a quantitative assessment of these three theories is conducted in which r2 values and methodological parameters (e.g., sample size) are collected from a sample of 21 empirical studies on GPB to evaluate the accuracy and generalize-ability of empirical evidence. In the qualitative assessment, the results show each theory has its advantages and disadvantages. The results also provide a theoretically-grounded roadmap for modifying each theory to be more suitable for GPB research. In the quantitative assessment, the TPB outperforms the other two theories in every aspect taken into consideration. It proves to 1) create the most accurate models 2) be supported by the most generalize-able empirical evidence and 3) be the most attractive theory to empiricists. Although the TPB establishes itself as the best foundational theory for an empiricist to start from, it's clear that a more comprehensive model is needed to achieve consistent results and improve our understanding of GPB. NAT and the Theory of Interpersonal Behavior (TIB) offer pathways to extend the TPB. The TIB seems particularly apt for this endeavor, while VBN does not appear to have much to offer. Overall, the TPB has already proven to hold a relatively high predictive value. But with the state of ecosystem services continuing to decline on a global scale, it's important for models of GPB to become more accurate and reliable. Better models have the capacity to help marketing professionals, product developers, and policy makers develop strategies for encouraging consumers to buy green products.
ContributorsRedd, Thomas Christopher (Author) / Dooley, Kevin (Thesis advisor) / Basile, George (Committee member) / Darnall, Nicole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
Industrial activities have damaged the natural environment at an unprecedented scale. A number of approaches to environmentally responsible design and sustainability have been developed that are aimed at minimizing negative impacts derived from products on the environment. Environmental assessment methods exist as well to measure these impacts. Major environmentally responsible approaches to design and sustainability were analyzed using content analysis techniques. The results show several recommendations to minimize product impacts through design, and dimensions to which they belong. Two products made by a manufacturing firm with exceptional commitment to environmental responsibility were studied to understand how design approaches and assessment methods were used in their development. The results showed that the company used several strategies for environmentally responsible design as well as assessment methods in product and process machine design, both of which resulted in reduced environmental impacts of their products. Factors that contributed positively to reduce impacts are the use of measurement systems alongside environmentally responsible design, as well as inspiring innovations by observing how natural systems work. From a managerial perspective, positive influencing factors included a commitment to environmental responsibility from the executive level of the company and a clear vision about sustainability that has been instilled from the top through every level of employees. Additionally, a high degree of collaboration between the company and its suppliers and customers was instrumental in making the success possible.
ContributorsHuerta Gajardo, Oscar André (Author) / Giard, Jacques (Thesis advisor) / White, Philip (Committee member) / Dooley, Kevin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
An eco-industrial park (EIP) is an industrial ecosystem in which a group of co-located firms are involved in collective resource optimization with each other and with the local community through physical exchanges of energy, water, materials, byproducts and services - referenced in the industrial ecology literature as "industrial symbiosis". EIPs, when compared with standard industrial resource sharing networks, prove to be of greater public advantage as they offer improved environmental and economic benefits, and higher operational efficiencies both upstream and downstream in their supply chain.
Although there have been many attempts to adapt EIP methodology to existing industrial sharing networks, most of them have failed for various factors: geographic restrictions by governmental organizations on use of technology, cost of technology, the inability of industries to effectively communicate their upstream and downstream resource usage, and to diminishing natural resources such as water, land and non-renewable energy (NRE) sources for energy production.
This paper presents a feasibility study conducted to evaluate the comparative environmental, economic, and geographic impacts arising from the use of renewable energy (RE) and NRE to power EIPs. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, which is used in a variety of sectors to evaluate the environmental merits and demerits of different kinds of products and processes, was employed for comparison between these two energy production methods based on factors such as greenhouse gas emission, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, human toxicity potential, fresh water usage and land usage. To complement the environmental LCA analysis, levelized cost of electricity was used to evaluate the economic impact. This model was analyzed for two different geographic locations; United States and Europe, for 12 different energy production technologies.
The outcome of this study points out the environmental, economic and geographic superiority of one energy source over the other, including the total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, which can then be related to the total number of carbon credits that can be earned or used to mitigate the overall carbon emission and move closer towards a net zero carbon footprint goal thus making the EIPs truly sustainable.
Although there have been many attempts to adapt EIP methodology to existing industrial sharing networks, most of them have failed for various factors: geographic restrictions by governmental organizations on use of technology, cost of technology, the inability of industries to effectively communicate their upstream and downstream resource usage, and to diminishing natural resources such as water, land and non-renewable energy (NRE) sources for energy production.
This paper presents a feasibility study conducted to evaluate the comparative environmental, economic, and geographic impacts arising from the use of renewable energy (RE) and NRE to power EIPs. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology, which is used in a variety of sectors to evaluate the environmental merits and demerits of different kinds of products and processes, was employed for comparison between these two energy production methods based on factors such as greenhouse gas emission, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, human toxicity potential, fresh water usage and land usage. To complement the environmental LCA analysis, levelized cost of electricity was used to evaluate the economic impact. This model was analyzed for two different geographic locations; United States and Europe, for 12 different energy production technologies.
The outcome of this study points out the environmental, economic and geographic superiority of one energy source over the other, including the total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, which can then be related to the total number of carbon credits that can be earned or used to mitigate the overall carbon emission and move closer towards a net zero carbon footprint goal thus making the EIPs truly sustainable.
ContributorsGupta, Vaibhav (Author) / Calhoun, Ronald J (Thesis advisor) / Dooley, Kevin (Committee member) / Phelan, Patrick (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Ecolabels are the main driving force of consumer knowledge in the realm of sustainable product purchasing. While ecolabels strive to improve consumer's purchasing decisions, they have overwhelmed the market, leaving consumers confused and distrustful of what each label means. This study attempts to validate and understand environmental concerns commonly found in ecolabel criteria and the implications they have within the life cycle of a product. A life cycle assessment (LCA) case study of cosmetic products is used in comparison with current ecolabel program criteria to assess whether or not ecolabels are effectively driving environmental improvements in high impact areas throughout the life cycle of a product. Focus is placed on determining the general issues addressed by ecolabelling criteria and how these issues relate to hotspots derived through a practiced scientific methodology. Through this analysis, it was determined that a majority the top performing supply chain environmental impacts are covered, in some fashion, within ecolabelling criteria, but some, such as agricultural land occupation, are covered to a lesser extent or not at all. Additional criteria are suggested to fill the gaps found in ecolabelling programs and better address the environmental impacts most pertinent to the supply chain. Ecolabels have also been found to have a broader coverage then what can currently be addressed using LCA. The results of this analysis have led to a set of recommendations for furthering the integration between ecolabels and life cycle tools.
ContributorsBernardo, Melissa (Author) / Dooley, Kevin (Thesis advisor) / Chester, Mikhail (Thesis advisor) / Fox, Peter (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
ABSTRACT
Historically, Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) guided companies to make better decisions to improve the environmental impacts of their products. However, as new Circular Economy (CE) tools emerge, the usefulness of LCA in assessing linear products grow more and more obsolete. Research Question: How do LCA-based tools account for reuse/multiple life cycles of products verses CE-based tools?
The Kaiteki Innovation Framework (KIF) was used to address the question of circularity of two packaging materials using an Environmental LCA to populate its 12 CE dimensions. Any gaps were evaluated with 2 LCA- based and 2 CE-based tools to see which could address the leftover CE dimensions.
Results showed that to complete the KIF template, LCA data required one of the LCA-based tools: Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and both CE-based tools: Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) and Material Circularity Indicator (MCI) to supplement gaps in the KIF. The LCA addressed 5 of the KIF dimensions: Innovation Category Name, Description, GHG Impact, Other Environmental Impacts, and Value Chain Position. 3 analytical tools addressed 5 more:: Effect on Circularity, Social Impacts, Enabling Technologies, Tier 2 and 3 Requirements, and Value Chain Synergies. None of the tools could address the KIF Dimensions: State of Development or Scale Requirements. All in all, the KIF required both LCA-based and CE-based tools to cover social and socio-economic impacts from a cradle-to-cradle perspective with multiple circular loops in mind. These results can help in the research and development of innovative, circular products that can lead to a more environmentally preferred future.
Historically, Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) guided companies to make better decisions to improve the environmental impacts of their products. However, as new Circular Economy (CE) tools emerge, the usefulness of LCA in assessing linear products grow more and more obsolete. Research Question: How do LCA-based tools account for reuse/multiple life cycles of products verses CE-based tools?
The Kaiteki Innovation Framework (KIF) was used to address the question of circularity of two packaging materials using an Environmental LCA to populate its 12 CE dimensions. Any gaps were evaluated with 2 LCA- based and 2 CE-based tools to see which could address the leftover CE dimensions.
Results showed that to complete the KIF template, LCA data required one of the LCA-based tools: Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and both CE-based tools: Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) and Material Circularity Indicator (MCI) to supplement gaps in the KIF. The LCA addressed 5 of the KIF dimensions: Innovation Category Name, Description, GHG Impact, Other Environmental Impacts, and Value Chain Position. 3 analytical tools addressed 5 more:: Effect on Circularity, Social Impacts, Enabling Technologies, Tier 2 and 3 Requirements, and Value Chain Synergies. None of the tools could address the KIF Dimensions: State of Development or Scale Requirements. All in all, the KIF required both LCA-based and CE-based tools to cover social and socio-economic impacts from a cradle-to-cradle perspective with multiple circular loops in mind. These results can help in the research and development of innovative, circular products that can lead to a more environmentally preferred future.
ContributorsDe Los Santos, Andrew John (Author) / Seager, Thomas (Thesis advisor) / Dooley, Kevin (Committee member) / Buch, Rajesh (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020