Designing Support for Manufacturing SMEs Approaching Ecodesign ...

Designing Support for Manufacturing SMEs Approaching Ecodesign and Cleaner Production - Learning from UK Survey Results Tim Woolman1, Alireza Veshagh1 1 Warwick Manufacturing Group, University of Warwick, UK Abstract Proponents of ecodesign and cleaner production have had mixed success in penetrating small and medium sized manufacturing companies in the UK. Existing schemes, such as Envirowise and EnviroINNOVATE in the West Midlands, typically rely on external funding and leave a gap in provision for deeper intervention in smaller companies. Design criteria for effective support of these smaller manufacturers are presented based on an understanding of drivers, barriers and enablers for cleaner manufacturing from four surveys of UK SMEs. This contributes to strategies for enhancing eco-product innovation and cleaner production in SMEs; part of an ongoing project at Warwick Manufacturing Group. Keywords Manufacturing, SME, Survey, Environmental, Ecodesign, Cleaner Production, Drivers, Barriers

(1) What drivers and barriers are currently faced by UK manufacturing SMEs in moving towards environmentally conscious design and cleaner production? (2) What support for SMEs do current schemes offer? (3) How can support be designed to be most effective?

1 INTRODUCTION Since the last decade an increasing proportion of companies have recognised their responsibility to build environmental performance into their products and processes [1]. In general, larger companies are exposed to more drivers for environmental improvement through the interests of external stakeholders, regulators and the media. Since small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) make up more than 99% of business in the UK (around 90% across Europe) their collective contribution is significant [2]. Just under 9% of UK SMEs are in the manufacturing sector [3]. According to NetRegs, UK SMEs engaged in industrial activities together contribute approximately 60% of commercial waste and 80% of pollution incidents [4]. The push to design and spread support for SMEs in improving their environmental performance beyond environmental management for legislative compliance is rarely matched by internal resources, while drivers such as customer or employee pressure remain relatively weak. Barriers to action in manufacturing SMEs are detailed by Gerstenfeld and Roberts [5] in relation to environmental management, including; lack of training, awareness and relevant information; lack of sector/industry-specific support and solutions; and expense. Initiatives supporting step-changes in SMEs’ environmental performance therefore need to understand both the drivers and these barriers in order to succeed. Studies focussing on SMEs have examined the experiences of implementing environmental management to the operation of sites and production facilities [Hillary, 2000]. Evidence is more recently becoming available to learn which drivers act on SMEs to green their products through environmentally conscious design and to clean up their manufacturing processes. Survey data shows which business benefits are recognised, which barriers are cited and which actions SMEs have pursued, or intend to implement in future. Large scale survey data is discussed here in relation to a more detailed empirical study by Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) conducted in 2005-2006. This paper seeks to inform the design of effective support for those manufacturing SMEs who are in a position to adopt environmentally conscious design and cleaner production, through addressing the following questions.

2 RESEARCH CONTEXT In 2003 a project started at WMG to investigate how small and medium-sized manufacturers in the UK West Midlands could be effectively supported in adopting ecoproduct innovation and clean manufacturing technologies. The aim is to understand how environmentally conscious product design and cleaner production practices can be introduced effectively to stimulate step changes in SMEs’ environmental performance, sufficient to justify each manufacturer’s own investment in external support. A primary objective of the project was to gain a good understanding of the drivers and barriers for environmentally conscious product design and cleaner production in a group of manufacturing SMEs and their responses in terms of implementation, plans and ambitions. Hence literature and reports of survey results were reviewed, with information on the current SME support schemes. A more detailed survey was conducted to develop a greater understanding of these factors, directly and currently applicable to SMEs in the West Midlands. This is informing the design of support for manufacturing SMEs to address a gap in existing provision through deeper engagement with the practice and benefits from eco-product innovation and cleaner manufacturing. 3

ECO-PRODUCT INNOVATION AND CLEANER MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES More environmentally sustainable industrial practices are available for manufacturing SMEs to apply, although uptake depends on their recognising and realising their contribution to current business objectives. Existing schemes designed to support SMEs such as the UK-wide Envirowise scheme and EnviroINNOVATE in the West Midlands vary in their approach, but seek to enable SMEs to adopt environmentally conscious design or ‘ecodesign’ and cleaner production practices such as those outlined below. Taken together, ecodesign and cleaner production may be termed cleaner manufacturing.

281

3.1 Ecodesign Environmentally conscious design, or eco-design attempts to maintain all other aspects of performance while reducing the environmental impacts of a product at each stage of its life-cycle. Ecodesign typically reduces ecological & human hazards, and improves eco-efficiency; minimising resource inputs required for a given level of service. From a study of 77 Dutch SMEs, Van Hemel and Cramer suggest the four most successful ecodesign principles are recycling of materials, high durability, use of recycled materials and low energy consumption. Other principles identified as successful by at least a quarter of the participants included weight and packaging reduction and the use of ‘clean’ materials [6]. 3.2 Cleaner Production The UNEP definition of Cleaner Production is, “a combination of conserving raw materials, water and energy; eliminating toxic and dangerous raw materials; and reducing the quantity and toxicity of all emissions and wastes at source during the production process.” [7] Cleaner production practice in the context of manufacturing in SMEs therefore combines reducing pollution and environmental impact by source and waste reduction, with eco-efficiency; reducing the use of materials and energy. The study by Van Hemel and Cramer [6] also showed that at least a third of the 77 participating SMEs attributed success to cleaner production practices such as remanufacturing and reduced production waste. 4

SURVEY RESULTS EXPOSING DRIVERS AND BARRIERS FOR SMES’ ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE The first question to identify the drivers and barriers currently faced by UK manufacturing SMEs in moving towards environmentally conscious design and cleaner production is addressed by elements of several surveys. Two recent surveys provide large scale data across the UK on how SMEs respond in general to drivers and barriers to reducing their environmental impact. A smaller survey of 200 UK manufacturing companies’ attitudes towards Design for Sustainability (DfS), extends the understanding of drivers applicable to environmentally conscious product design. 4.1 Small Business Service Survey Within the UK Department of Trade and Industry, the Small Business Service (SBS) prepares a statistical overview of the nature and characteristics of ‘small’ (incorporating medium-sized) businesses. Their Annual Small Business Survey for 2004/05 therefore covers the whole of the UK. Given “there was little evidence of consistent variations that might have suggested that business conditions in the different regions… were markedly different” [3], these UK-wide results are likely to be indicative of SMEs in the West Midlands. Of the 7505 small businesses who responded, those that were experiencing sustained growth (taking on employees in the preceding and following year) were also more likely to plan to widen markets and product/service portfolios, train staff & managers and show some environmental sensitivity by reducing energy, water and waste costs. This survey indicated potential to incorporate new and environmentally conscious practices. Among respondents; a quarter predicted growth from promoting the company as environmentally friendly. 35% had introduced a new product or service in the preceding year and 25% had introduced a new processes or way of working.

282

The majority of SMEs had acted or would act to reduce the cost to the business of energy, water or waste disposal. Over three-quarters said that there was no obstacle to taking such action, although 9% said it was not cost efficient. 4.2 SME-nvironment Survey NetRegs is a government sponsored web service guiding UK SMEs through their environmental obligations. The SME-nvironment survey carried out for NetRegs comprised telephone interviews with 5,554 SMEs across the UK in 2005 [5]. 15 business sectors were represented including manufacturing sub-sectors such as; electrical equipment and machinery manufacture; fabricated metal products; and machinery manufacture. Awareness of the potential environmental impacts from operations has grown since a similar survey in 2003. 41% agreed that they carried out at least one activity potentially harmful to the environment, typically storing chemicals/fuels/oils and waste. At least 70% in the manufacturing sub-sectors had implemented at least one practical measure to reduce their impact, commonly a form of recycling. The drivers were typically a general concern for the environment (64%) and legislation (22%). Cost reduction (16%) and customer pressure (9%) were less significant. However, when considering the benefits of addressing environmental issues, both reducing the risk of prosecution (80%) and developing good customer relations (74%) were benefits that respondents agreed with. 62% suggested the case made for cost reduction was clear. Fewer were convinced of the case for improved competitiveness, winning orders and increasing sales & profitability, reflecting a general lack of ‘green’ demand in the lower tiers of the industrial supply chain. 4.3 Design Council European Survey Results Telephone interviews with 600 manufacturing companies of sizes including 200+ employees, across 5 European countries, were carried out in 2001 for the UK Design Council; 200 were from the UK [8]. Activities approaching design for sustainability (DfS) increased with company size. Important drivers for a quarter to a third of companies in each country were meeting customer demand and gaining environmental benefit. Regulatory compliance is quite important in the UK (30%), while competitiveness less so (18%). Lack of customer demand was seen as the main barrier by 46% of the UK respondents, prohibitive cost (16%) and lack of concern (12%) as lesser factors. 89% of the UK companies agreed that designing for sustainability had explicitly or implicitly influenced their current business strategy. Indeed 50% suggested they had used the principles in their product development. 55% saw it as an opportunity, mainly in terms of the responding to the market, to competition and to customer demand. 41% in the UK saw it as an investment, rather than a cost. 61% looked forward to a positive effect on profits; a third expecting a 5+% increase and profit returns within a year. Of those adopting design for sustainability in the UK, the majority had been influenced by business clients (83%), industry or trade bodies (56%), national government (53%) and the EC/EU (54%) with some also influenced by the end customer (44%). 94% expected to increase inhouse knowledge, although awareness of sources to provide ideas/practices across all companies showed only a fifth would actually go to the most popular; Trade Associations and government/regulatory authorities.

P ROCEEDINGS OF LCE2006

4.4 Discussion of Survey Results Although only a quarter of SMEs see environmental friendliness as a driver according to the SBS survey, the majority are prepared to take action on issues with clear environmental and cost benefits. Given new products or processes appear important to growing companies, a significant minority of SMEs may be able to incorporate environmental criteria into new designs and production processes where simultaneous savings are apparent. Considering the SME-nvironment results, a link could be made between a general concern for the environment, recognition that many business activities are potentially harmful to the environment and seeking good customer relations through environmental improvements. In common with the SBS survey results, such improvements need to be justified in terms of cost reduction. Compliance to reduce the risk of prosecution is recognised as a benefit, more readily than realising any market value. The Design Council Survey sample, including a proportion of larger companies indicated that a majority of UK companies were open to design for sustainability (DfS) as part of their strategy, particularly seeking profitability. However, awareness of DfS ideas and practices is limited, with business clients offering the greatest influence. Between these three surveys, the following areas of interest have been addressed: •

Recognition of the environment as a business issue.

•

Drivers / benefits in addressing environmental issues.

•

Barriers to addressing environmental issues.

•

Recognised sources and bodies influencing SMEs.

•

Actions to address environmental issues.

However, there are gaps, such as: 1. Eliciting an expectation of potential future demand for greener products or production. This is important given SMEs tend to see good customer relations as a benefit. 2. Assessing the likely current barriers to cleaner production and/or environmentally conscious design. 3. Examining the status of action addressing significant environmental aspects of production processes. 4. Capturing typical business ambitions, particularly any potential solutions in terms of product designs/technologies or production processes. 5. Testing which enablers are favoured e.g. training, environmental performance measurement and guides. Also, opinions on what forms might suit their delivery. Hence a survey was conducted through the Warwick Manufacturing Group project to provide more detailed evidence covering the above areas.

5

WMG SURVEY OF WEST MIDLANDS MANUFACTURING SMES An empirical study by Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) was conducted in 2005-2006 to investigate how an SME support service could enable greater action, responding to drivers and barriers more effectively. A survey was carried out specifically to provide evidence supplementing the wider survey results in section 4 and to cover the five aspects identified as gaps above for manufacturing SMEs. The survey was limited to SMEs in the West Midlands of the UK as a precursor to pursuing action in this region. It was circulated to 540 companies matching all manufacturing SIC codes and SME criteria in the FAME database. The questionnaire was completed at the end of 2005, or early in 2006, by senior management in 41 SMEs; half with 10 to 49 employees. The majority were plastic or metal based manufacturers serving automotive or general engineering customers, probably low in the supply chain. Suppliers to aerospace, medical, construction and six other smaller market sectors were also represented. 5.1 WMG Survey Results While almost all respondents agreed significant customer demands are a major issue facing the business, half also chose environmental issues, just less than those choosing competition or (non-environmental) legislation. Energy costs were suggested by a few as a particular concern. Just over half were experiencing current demand for products or production with greater environmental performance. Around 80% expected such demand was likely or possible in future. However, the sample of SMEs responding to the survey is likely to contain a disproportionate number with an interest in responding to this and the other drivers for improving environmental performance shown in Figure 1. A range of potential barriers or constraints to adopting cleaner production processes and/or environmentally conscious product design were offered as prompts in the survey. The majority of SMEs indicated a difficulty in making a case for the perceived high cost of investing in such changes, through lack of capital or long payback, particularly given a lack of customer demand (Figure 2). Respondents from around a third of the companies in this survey said that they were limited by a lack of in-house expertise or a conflict with other technical requirements (Figure 2). There is a similar level of uncertainty about environmental regulations; the main current driver for cleaner production processes and to some extent environmentally conscious product design. Despite this, action has typically already been taken to identify the significant environmental aspects of production.

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Com pliance with Com petitivenes s Creating good to win orders relations with environm ental cus tom ers regulations , including thos e anticipated

Creating good Internal concern Cos t s avings Opportunities to from greater divers ify into new for s ocial & relations with m arkets efficiency or environm ental others e.g. res pons ibility reducing green em ployees , tax paym ents public

Currently Im portant

Could be im portant in future

Figure 1: Important reasons to invest in cleaner manufacturing.

13th CIRP I NTERNATIONAL C ONFERENCE ON L IFE C YCLE E NGINEERING

283

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Lack of capital for any form of inves tm ent

Lack of cus tom er dem and

Long payback Conflict with Cleaner Belief that Lack of inperiod / high other technical technologies there would be hous e cos t requirem ents are not yet little expertis e proven / poor environm ental availability benefit

Poor external Uncertainty s ources of about inform ation environm ental and advice regulations

Figure 2: Constraints to adopting cleaner production processes and/or environmentally conscious product design. From the WMG survey there appears to be greater scope to help in identifying significant environmental aspects in product design within the three quarters of the SMEs responsible for design. Also, to enable suppliers lower in the supply chain to contribute to improving environmental performance. Resource efficiency in energy use and the use of production consumables to minimise waste has been the main focus of action to date (Figure 3). Resource efficiency and the associated cost benefits also featured when the SMEs were asked about their ambitions to enhance their business’s response to environmental issues and what prompted them. At least a quarter sought to reduce energy usage and reduce waste, prompted by the costs. To support SMEs in realising these ambitions, particularly in overcoming the lack of in-house expertise, enablers such as general or more specific training were welcomed (Figure 4), with most SMEs preferring training using selfstudy manuals to attending workshops. 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Training in general Training in cleaner environmental production or awareness and/or environmentally environmental conscious product management design Workshops

Self-study manuals

Figure 4: Training as an enabler for making progress. A degree of self-study is therefore worth considering as a mechanism for addressing the lack of in-house expertise, with a third of SMEs suggesting guiding information on the internet would offer useful support.

The companies responding to the WMG survey varied in their products, processes and profiles. Therefore the results from this study can only be indicative. Nevertheless such results can help us gain a better understanding of their position and can inform the design of support for manufacturing SMEs in the West Midlands; a design informed also by that of existing schemes. 6 CLEANER MANUFACTURING SUPPORT The two major SME support schemes active in the West Midlands in addressing environmental aspects in products and production are EnviroINNOVATE and Envirowise. 6.1 EnviroINNOVATE EnviroINNOVATE offers support for SMEs to innovate and exploit environmental technology. Lead by part of the University of Central England, this support scheme aims to help SMEs exploit new markets and grow sales by subsidising expert input to projects of between five days and six months from six West Midlands’ universities. Over 130 SMEs have been supported in accelerating new product & process development or technology transfer projects, in areas such as; clean technologies, environmental instrumentation & control, waste management, waste minimisation & recycling, renewable energy, noise & vibration, air pollution & control. [9] 6.2 Envirowise Envirowise is a UK-wide team of independent, qualified and experienced advisors who offer a free, confidential half-day visit for company-specific guidance; (a) to help save money through waste minimisation and resource efficiency (‘FastTrack’); (b) to reduce the environmental impact of a product over its lifecycle. Product and processes changes are reviewed for cost saving, environmental improvement and compliance with legislation e.g. WEEE and ELV Directives (‘DesignTrack’). This is backed up by guidance through; a free helpline; case studies & best practice guides; seminars and exhibitions; and a comprehensive website.

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Identifying s ignificant Addres s ing s ignificant Energy efficiency environm ental as pects environm ental as pects and/or water reduction of production in product des ign m eas ures Im plem ented

Planned in the next 3 years

Minim ization of production cons um ables or m aterial was te

Enabling s uppliers to contribute to environm ental perform ance

Not planned, but m ay be s om e s cope in the future

Figure 3: Cleaner manufacturing actions implemented or planned.

284


6.3 Commercial Support for SMEs Commercial services offered by management consultancies such as Arthur D Little are tackling a wider remit of strategic business and technology issues in the corporate sector where customers or competitors are driving change beyond corporate social responsibility [10]. Environmental consultancies mainly support environmental management, compliance, waste management & pollution control. They facilitate choice of environmental technology, typically to mitigate impacts, but seldom engage in full product or process innovation. Ecodesign and cleaner manufacturing consultancies with product or production engineering competences are rare and likely to choose larger clients with available funds. Hence there is a gap in the provision of deeper support services for environmental innovation in smaller manufacturing SMEs, illustrated in Figure 5. 7

DESIGNING EFFECTIVE SUPPORT FOR CLEANER MANUFACTURING IN SMES For SMEs to realise benefits beyond those achievable through existing schemes, the WMG project is seeking a design of support well aligned to the drivers and ambitions of manufacturing SMEs and addressing the major constraints or barriers indicated from the above survey results. The following criteria for the content and method of delivery have been derived using these survey results. 7.1 Design Criteria for SME Support Content Where full compliance with legislation has not been achieved, then addressing the shortfall will be recognised as a priority for the SME. A first step is to tackle any uncertainty over the stipulations of applicable environmental regulations - the NetRegs internet service is a key, free resource already targeted at such support. Reducing operating costs through changes in products or processes which are primarily designed to improve environmental performance is clearly desirable. It may be even be seen as a pre-requisite to overcome the main barrier perceived by SMEs in not being able to justify investment. Support for investment appraisal is a key element, available through Envirowise, focussed on reducing energy usage, waste and water usage. The extent competitiveness would be enhanced to achieve customer benefit through ecodesign or cleaner manufacturing varies with each company. Consequently specific customer and market signals from both current and potential new markets need to be explored in each

Large Companies

case to the extent that they reveal meaningful sources of value. At the same time, internal concerns about environmental performance should be taken into account. Green customer demand, though typically at a low level in the lower supply chain outside the automotive sector, is expected by many to increase. Any appraisal of benefits vs. costs should include a projection of such rising demand and be updated periodically. Support for such forward looking market appraisal is therefore likely to be of value, as would means to respond to internal ambitions. Support then needs to address the barriers of lack of inhouse expertise, for example by validating and updating any judgement of the poor availability of cleaner technologies, to keep abreast of any emerging options. Support offering expert input to overcome perceived conflicts with other technical requirements is desirable, Complementing SME decision making is likely to require collaboration with an internal champion and expertise found through Trade Associations, peers and suppliers. A lower level barrier for those choosing to respond to the WMG survey is the reported belief that there would be little environmental benefit in making a change. Partly compensating for this is the pull from the survey respondents for training in general environmental awareness and environmental management. This should ideally be tailored to the SME’s sources of environmental concern and reflect the preferred method of delivery. Method of Delivery Gerstenfeld and Roberts [5] suggest that support for SMEs should be flexible, accessible, inexpensive, cooperative, locally based and unique. The preference expressed by WMG survey respondents for building environmental awareness and cleaner manufacturing competence using self-study manuals reflects the desire for flexible access. Manuals can be inexpensive, considering the costs of synchronising access to workshops for key people in a small company. Support through providing information through the internet is also favoured. This can offer wide access at a reduced expense when compared with physical distribution, particularly when updates over a period are included. The Envirowise resources are a key example of this delivery, although they are backed up by regional workshops and visits offering a cooperative approach at a local level. Support solutions also need to take account of who influences SMEs. From the Design Council survey, initial engagement with support may be best enabled through industry or trade bodies and regulatory authorities. This survey also points to the potential value of promoting

In-house services Management consultancy Envirowise Environmental consultancy

Medium Companies

Ecodesign & cleaner manufacturing consultancy

Enviro INNOVATE GAP TO BE ADDRESSED BY WMG - DESIGN OF SME SUPPORT

Small Companies Low

Depth of service in Environmental Innovation

High

Figure 5: Perceived gap in services for environmental innovation.

13th CIRP I NTERNATIONAL C ONFERENCE ON L IFE C YCLE E NGINEERING

285

support through businesses higher in the supply chain. SMEs responding to the WMG survey consider some scope in the future for engaging their suppliers in greening products or production processes. This could assist in minimising material, remanufacturing and reducing waste. 8 CONCLUSION A proportion of small and medium sized manufacturers are prepared and able to take action addressing the their contribution to the significant collective level of environmental impacts from their products and production processes. There is evidence of design to minimise material usage and design for durability, backing up waste management, recycling and pollution prevention. However spreading good practice is typically reliant on subsidised forms of external intervention. Few smaller manufacturers have overcome the barriers to adopting a comprehensive approach to tackling their environmental impact through ecodesign and cleaner production. In the context of the Warwick Manufacturing Group project to investigate how SMEs can be supported in these aspects of cleaner manufacturing, this paper offers criteria for designing effective SME support. The criteria are aligned to the drivers and barriers reported from three large scale surveys in the UK and draw on more detailed indicative results from a smaller sample surveyed by WMG to cover gaps in the three surveys. These results offer a reasonably consistent view of the drivers and barriers currently faced by UK manufacturing SMEs. Once compliant with environmental legislation, the majority of SMEs are prepared to take further action on issues with clear environmental, cost and market benefits, from both a general concern for the environment and when influenced by maintaining good relations with business clients. However, SMEs awareness of appropriate steps towards cleaner manufacturing is limited, except where trade associations or support schemes have been active. Justifying investment in cleaner product design and cleaner production processes also remains a barrier while customer pressure is slow to mount, particularly at lower tiers in the manufacturing supply chain. Two major subsidised schemes are offering eco-design and cleaner production support to manufacturing SMEs in the West Midlands. These are limited in the depth of intervention, mainly through resource constraints, such as those on government subsidy. The most accessible scheme, Envirowise, relies on internet guidance and a concentrated transfer of expertise. EnviroINNOVATE seeks to offer the next level of eco-innovation in SME’s products and processes. A model of deeper support which can spread through commercial viability could potentially go beyond short-term, issue-specific consultancy to cover the apparent gap in provision for the smaller companies. The following design criteria for those who can support manufacturing SMEs are drawn from the survey results. •

Address legislative compliance as a means to introduce a change process which can then go further

•

Seek net cost benefits with an SME-friendly method of investment appraisal.

•

Appraise both current and future customer / market signals to find sources of value in addressing environmental aspects in products or production.

•

Build in consideration of internal concerns and enable people to contribute to solutions through responding to demand for environmental awareness and skills.

286

•

Keep abreast of new solutions emerging in the field of cleaner technology and new channels for supply.

•

Enable cooperation between SME champions and external advisors, also suppliers with key expertise.

•

Offer guiding information through both electronic and physical delivery, backed up by local contact, involving customers, Trade Associations & suppliers. These are interim findings leading to designs for effective and commercially viable support for manufacturing SMEs in the West Midlands. Through the WMG project, designs for such support will be trialled in 2006 to suggest the most effective strategy, methods and tools for implementing wider initiatives from 2007. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We extend our thanks to the EPSRC and to Pro Enviro Ltd for their support of this WMG Engineering Doctorate project. The authors acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Steve Stones in the WMG survey preparation. REFERENCES [1] DeSimone, L.D. and Popoff, F., 2000, Eco-efficiency: The Business Link to Sustainable Development, first edn., Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press. [2] Hillary, R., 2000, Introduction. In: R. Hillary, ed, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and the Environment : Business Imperatives, Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Publishing Ltd, pp. 11-22. [3] Small Business Service, 2005, Annual Small Business Survey 2004, London, UK, Department of Trade and Industry. [4] NetRegs, 2005, SME-nvironment 2005, London, UK, Environment Agency. [5] Gerstenfeld, A., Roberts, H., 2000, Size matters : Barriers and prospects for environmental management in small and medium-sized enterprises. In: R. Hillary, ed, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and the Environment : Business Imperatives, Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Publishing Ltd, pp. 106-127. [6] Van Hemel, C. and Cromer, J., 2002, Barriers and stimuli for ecodesign in SMEs, Journal of Cleaner Production, 10/5:439-453. [7] UNEP, 2001-last update, Cleaner Production - Key Elements, UNEP CP, Available: http://www.uneptie.org/pc/cp/understanding_cp/hom e.htm#definition [8] Curtis, H., Walker, J., 2001, Design Council European survey of manufacturing companies' attitudes towards Design for Sustainability, London, UK, Design Council. [9] Terry, D., 2004-last update, Overview of EnviroINNOVATE project, TIC, Available: http://www.ticonline.com/enviroinnovate/downloads/EnviroINNOV ATELaunchver2.ppt [10] Brown, D., 2004, Sustainable Innovation: State of the Art - Sustainable Innovation 04 conference, Surrey, Centre for Sustainable Design, unpublished. CONTACTS Tim Woolman / Dr. Alireza Veshagh Warwick Manufacturing Group, IMC, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK, [email protected] / [email protected]
