Publicerad: 2014-06-11
ISBN: 978-91-7519-276-5
ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)
Our perceptions of the environmental impacts that materials have tend to be formed by vernacular knowledge and experience. We are familiar with recycling aluminum cans; so aluminum must be sustainable because it is so recyclable. We bring our own mugs to the coffee shop because we see ceramic mugs as more durable than disposable paper cups. Images of plastic bottles littering our landscapes lead us to believe that polymers are harmful because they don’t degrade. Our perceptions of the sustainability characteristics of these materials – aluminum; ceramic; and polymer – are influenced by our experience with products made from these materials. To date; Kansei engineering studies to assess perceptions of the sustainabilities of materials have been conducted with materials samples. The goal of this study is to see how people perceive the sustainability of a material used to make a specific product. For the study; a series of seven drinking vessels; each made of a different material; was fabricated. Each vessel was designed to have the same environmental impact as its companions; as calculated based on the 2007 Okala single-figure Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This paper examines how people perceived ten unique sustainability attributes of these drinking vessels; and which of these attributes may have a dominant effect on the product’s overall perceived sustainability. Clarifying which attributes of sustainability influence peoples’ understanding of a product’s overall sustainability will help product designers and engineers select materials for products that consumers will accept; understand; and champion for their reduced environmental impacts.
Materials Selection; Sustainability; Product Development; Life Cycle Assessment; Kansei Engineering
Clancy; G.; Fröling; M.; Swanström; M. (2013) Changing from petroleun to wood-based materials; critical review of how product sustainability characteristics can e assessed and compared. Journal of Cleaner Production. 39; 372-385.
Crabbé; A.; Jacobs; R.; Van Hoof; V.; Bergmans; A.; Van Acker; K. (2013) Transition towards sustainable material innovation: evidence and evaluation of the Flemish case. Journal of Cleaner Production. 56; 63-72.
Graedel; T.T.; Allenby; B. R. (1995). Industrial Ecology. Englewood Cliffs; NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hsu; C.; Lee; W.; Chao; W. (2013) Materiality analysis model in sustainabiilty reporting: a case study at Lite-On Technology Corporation. Jornal of Cleaner Production. 57; 142-151.
Karana; E.; Hekkert; P.; Kandachar; P. (2010) A tool for meaning driven mateirals selection. Materials and Design. 31; 2932-2941.
Karana; E. (2012) Characterization of ‘natural’ and ‘high-quality’ materials to improve perceptions of bio-plastics. Jornal of Cleaner Production. 37; 316-325.
Lewis; H.; Gertsakis; J. (2001). Design + Environment: A Global Guide to Designing Greener Goods. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
Muenchinger; K. (2013a) Combining Kansei Engineering and LCA to Convince Clients that Sustainable Polymer Choices Exist. Proceedings of IDSA National Education Conference.
Muenchinger; K. (2013b). Using Kansei-based metrics in conjunction with LCA Impact Factors to Enhance Sustainable Materials selection of Wood; Polymers and Metals. The International Journal of Designed Objects. 7(3); 61-71.
Muenchinger; K. (2012). Using Kansei-based sustainability metrics in conjunction with LCA impact factors for sustainable materials selection. Proceedings of the International Conference on Kasei Engineering and Emotion Research; KEER2012 (pp197-203). Taiwan: College of Planning and Design; National Cheng Kung University.
Tseng; S.; Huang; S.; (2013) A framework identifying the gaps between customers’ expectations and their perceptions in green products. Journal of Cleaner Production. 59; 174-184.
White; P.; Belletire; S.; St. Pierre; L. (2007). Okala: Learning Ecological Design. Phoenix.
