Such types of initiatives include: sustainable energy, sustainable waste management, ..... RMFM gets implemented in the form of Master Regional Plans,.
Industrial Symbiosis under the Material Flow Management perspective: EIP planning for sustainable development? Angel Avadí, July 2009 Institute for Applied Material Flow Management (IfaS)
Abstract Sustainable development is becoming a compulsory way for societies to improve their economic, social and environmental performances. Sustainability is associated to the fundamental dogma of decoupling economic growth from resource depletion and environmental pollution, a fact inherent to conventional development. The construction of sustainable societies is thus a long, difficult process, because it implies balancing the interest of a wide group of stakeholders, and shift away from deeply rooted paradigms. Prosustainability initiatives arise from the company level, industrial collaboration schemes, regional, national, international and global levels; some of which are discussed in this paper. Then the paper analyses two approaches to regional development: the Material Flow Management philosophy and the industrial collaboration approach of Industrial Symbiosis, often under the form of Eco-Industrial Parks. Finally, fundamental issues of Industrial Symbiosis are discussed, including the possibility of planning initiatives as strategic regional planning endeavours. Those issues are analysed under the Material Flow Management perspective as to conciliate the perspectives and increase the success possibilities for Industrial Symbiosis/Eco-Industrial Parks to contribute to sustainable development. Some enabling policy suggestions are proposed.
Contents Sustainable development: transition towards more sustainable societies .............................. 2 Scopes of contributions to sustainability and related tools ...................................................... 4 Industrial collaboration ......................................................................................................... 4 Regional approaches ............................................................................................................. 7 Industrial Symbiosis through the lens of MFM: EIP planning?................................................ 11 Policy requirements............................................................................................................. 16 Conclusions.............................................................................................................................. 19 Internet references.............................................................................................................. 23
Sustainable development: transition towards more sustainable societies Sustainability as a concept is en vogue mostly since the publication of the Brundtland Report (Our Common Future) in 1987, by the United Nation (UN) World Commission on Environment and Development. The report addressed in combination social, economic, cultural and environmental issues and global solutions, and introduced the term “sustainable development” as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [IR 1]. This definition is the most widely used. Nowadays, societies had generally acknowledged the need for decoupling economic growth from resource depletion and environmental pollution. Related needs are to decouple energy generation from carbon emissions and to engage in decarbonisation (emissions reduction) of society by means of technological development and better management approaches [IUCN, 2008]. Another fundamental need is to conciliate the profit-maximisation philosophy of the private sector with the improvement of social conditions of the community: quality of life, social inclusion, cultural aspects, etc [Mirata, 2005]. Sustainable development is thus the ultimate development paradigm, in which the economic, social and environmental aspects of society are considered as interconnected and interdependent, and thus should be taken care as a system. The transition from the current “throughput” society to a sustainable society should also be addressed as a system change process, where all individual initiatives contribute to the ultimate aim and are inter-related. Such types of initiatives include: sustainable energy, sustainable waste management, sustainable agriculture, sustainable consumption and production, sustainable waste and water management, sustainable procurement, sustainable technologies, sustainable transportation, etc. Contributions to sustainability are made at different levels or scopes, namely: at the industry/firm level, at the inter-company level, at local and regional levels, and at higher levels of aggregation: national, international (e.g. economic bloc) and global. Main global and regional initiatives are often initiated by international organisations such as UN bodies (e.g. the Kyoto Protocol), but at the company and inter-company level, it has been observed that initiatives frequently arise from the private sector itself (e.g. corporate social responsibility initiatives; Kalundborg by-product exchange initiatives; etc). This paper stresses the view of the construction of sustainability expressed by the German concept of Material Flow Management (MFM), which is applied at all the abovementioned levels or scopes of sustainability. MFM is rooted in and pragmatically extends Agenda 21, the strategic plan towards formalisation of sustainability within global politics produced by the UN Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro (aka Earth Summit). MFM was defined by the Enquête Commission “Protection of Humankind and Environment” of the Lower House of Germany as ” Targeted, responsible, integrated and efficient influence on material
system whereas the target accrued from environmental and economical fields under consideration of social aspects”. MFM is an interdisciplinary approach, goal-oriented toolset for implementing sustainable strategies related to energy and materials; waste, water and wastewater management; sustainable job creation; etc. A main feature of MFM is the development of communication and collaboration networks1, and participatory approaches for decision-making [Helling, 2005]. The following concepts (non-exhaustive listing) are related to MFM, IS, strategies for environmental compliance and other approaches to environmental/ sustainable industrial dynamics:
1
2
•
Eco-efficiency: a concept aligned with the growing environmental concerns of the economic players, as well as with the Capitalist nature of businesses (to generate profits), has been defined as a “management philosophy that encourages business to search for environmental improvements that yield parallel economic benefits”. It basically focuses on environmentally conscious initiatives from a business perspective, that is to say it perceives environmental compliance needs as business opportunities. Eco-efficiency constitutes one of the main contributions of the business sector to sustainability building [WBCSD, 2006]. Energy efficiency constitutes the main theme in eco-efficiency as an economy-wide phenomenon [Nilsson, 2009].
•
Cleaner production (CP/PIUS2): generally defined as “the continuous application of an integrated preventive environmental strategy to processes, products and services to increase eco-efficiency and reduce risks to humans and the environment”; that is to say a management approach to industrial dynamics oriented to improve environmental and economic performance. It includes resource use optimization, input substitution, on-site recycling, technology and process modifications (designing or re-designing production systems), etc. The CP/PIUS approach contrasts with end-of-pipe solutions to industrial pollution. CP/PIUS is related with other environmental management and preventive approaches like waste minimization, pollution prevention, reduction and prevention of toxic substances use, etc [Van Berkel, 2002] [VDI, 2005].
•
Sustainable consumption and production (SCP), as a goal of eco-efficiency, cleaner production, environmental management systems, etc; is oriented at environmental, economic and social benefits derived from addressing resource and material flows that are related to environmental degradation and economic drawbacks (e.g. costs of raw materials). SCP is stimulated mainly through policy instruments, aiming to decouple economic growth from resource and material use [CSCP, 2006].
For instance, KNUT, the Competence Network Environmental Technology of the RhinelandPalatinate state, in Germany [IR 4]. KNUT was founded by IfaS, the Institute for Applied Material Flow Management (http://ifas.umwelt-campus.de), on the initiative of the Ministry of Economics, Transportation, Agriculture and Viticulture Rhineland-Palatinate in June 2002. KNUT develops and offers a range of services for small and medium enterprises in the environmental technology sector at Rhineland-Palatinate. Referred to as Product Integrated Environmental Protection (PIUS) in Germany.
•
Biocascading: concept related to the improved utilisation of raw materials in a way that more value is extracted of a single source. It encompasses the idea of using to the fullest extent (mainly vegetable) raw materials [IR 5].
•
Environmental strategies such as extended product life (including design-forenvironment and design-for-recycling), extended material life, material selection, reduced material intensity, process management, more efficient distribution, other improved management practices, etc [Garner, 1995].
Scopes of contributions to sustainability and related tools Essentially the construction of sustainable development is a cumulative, multi-stakeholder, multi-layer endeavour. This paper uses a taxonomic approach to sustainable initiatives based on territorial/functional scopes, namely: company level, industrial collaboration schemes, regional initiatives, national initiatives, and international and global initiatives. Industrial collaboration and regional initiatives are discussed.
Industrial collaboration Industrial metabolism is a conception of anthropogenic (especially productive) processes occurring in society (the socio-economic system) as following the same behaviour as natural processes occurring within living organisms: consumption of materials and energy as inputs to produce useful products, while discharging unusable leftovers as waste [Janssen, 1999]. This concept supports efficiency and development approaches such as eco-efficiency and various forms of industrial collaboration. It can also be used for regional material flow modelling3. Industrial Ecology (IE), an approach related to industrial metabolism, is basically a businessoriented reaction to environmental concerns, which promotes eco-efficiency approaches for both environmental and economic gains, but emphasising the search for synergies rather than isolated CP/PIUS solutions. IE promotes industrial ecosystems, concept that implies inter-company interplay [Deutz, 2008]. It has also been described as an approach to the study of ecologically sustainable industrial systems [Cote, 2008]. An interesting contrast between IE and eco-efficiency approaches (CP/PIUS, pollution prevention, etc) is that eco-efficiency mostly stands for waste reduction initiatives, whether IE would even stimulate the generation of a particular type of waste (in the absence of a preferable CP/PIUS alternative) if there is a possibility for that specific waste to become a useful/marketable material [Erkman, 1997]. Industrial collaboration has been regarded from various perspectives as a driver for regional development [Deutz, 2008]. It has historically taken the form of substances exchange (by-
3
For instance, industrial metabolism and Material Flow Analysis have been used in the Canton of Geneva, Swiss, for a comprehensive regional material flow modeling under the 2002 Project Ecosite [Erkman, 2005].
products, wastes), infrastructure and utility sharing, and joint services provision (see Figure 1). All those types are nowadays identified with industrial symbiosis [Chertow, 2007].
Figure 1: Eco- industrial collaboration options Source: [Van Berkel, 2006]
Industrial Symbiosis (IS) is regarded as a subset of IE which “engages traditionally separate entities in a collective approach to competitive advantage involving physical exchange of materials, energy, water, and by-products”, according to one of the most representative authors in the topic [Chertow, 2000]. The concept itself can be generalized as a form of By-Product Exchange (BPX), term defined at latest in the 90’s as “a set of companies seeking to utilize each other’s by-products (energy, water, and materials) rather than disposing of them as waste”. BPX has been practiced under the titles industrial ecosystem, by-product synergy, IS, industrial recycling network, green twinning, zero emissions network, etc [Lowe, 2001]. Currently, IS practice mostly focuses on incremental eco-efficiency imbued gains related to revalorization of wastes/by-products. It has been suggested that such an approach does not challenge the essence of conventional industrial systems towards sustainability, but only produces limited contributions and might even hinder sustainability-oriented system changes [Mirata, 2005] [Chertow, 2000]. Several potentials of IS have been discussed, some transcending the private sector interests and extending regional benefits: •
Could contribute to more sustainable production systems, by bringing together conventionally separate industries for improved competitiveness and efficiency. To achieve such contribution, a focus change would be necessary for IS [Mirata, 2005].
•
By better integrating IS-related industrial activities within the regional resource base and markets, IS principles could contribute to more sustainable, decentralized, distributed industrial systems by improving their technical and economic feasibility.
It also improves the chances to a shift towards more sustainable consumption patterns [Mirata, 2005]. •
Could enhance long term resource security by ensuring the availability of certain flows based upon contractual arrangements (and build trust), including water, energy and by-products turned into raw materials [Chertow, 2007].
There is an ongoing discussion regarding aspects of IS, including whether the main motivations for engaging in symbioses are economic or environmental, and whether successful IS initiatives are emergent or can be planned [6ISRS, 2009] [Chertow, 2007]. Regarding the emergent Vs. planned nature of IS initiatives, it is widely accepted that they should be identified as emergent initiatives, from the very preliminary stages 4 of development, and then nurtured towards planned further development [Chertow, 2007] [Mirata, 2005]. In the last section of this paper, policy and other strategic suggestions will be provided regarding further development of IS initiatives, in the context of the sustainable development approach of MFM. IS and other forms of industrial collaboration are associated to the development of industrial and eco-industrial parks. “Conventional” industrial parks exist since some decades, and were and are motivated by economic advantages of physical site location in a piece of continuous property (estate). Eco-Industrial Parks5 (EIP) represent a pro-sustainability development of conventional industrial parks, where the companies located at the premises operating as “a community of self-interest around environmental, economic, and social issues” [Lowe, 2001]. EIP apply a variety of tools and approaches besides IS, namely: industrial metabolism, supply chain and web management, flexible manufacturing networks, service provision over product, ecological planning, design for environment, environmental management systems, eco-efficiency, etc [Cote, 2008]. Main “themes” for recruiting and cluster-building for EIPs include [Lowe, 2001]: • Agro-Eco-Industrial Parks (e.g. BUHAI Agro-Industrial Estate Project, Philippines) • Resource Recovery Parks (usually based on waste recycling and re-valorisation) • Renewable Energy EIPs (e.g. Morbach Energy Landscape, Germany) • EIPs anchored by a power plant (e.g. Kalundborg EIP, Denmark) • Green Petrochemical Parks (e.g. BASF industrial area in Ludwigshafen, Germany) Ideally, a sustainable product system is embedded within EIP and other industrial collaboration practices. Such a system could be achievable by applying eco-efficiency strategies such as [Lei, 2001]: • Products dematerialisation, by replacing resources by services and techniques.
4
5
Kernels and precursors, or exchange initiatives that can be extended and improved [Chertow, 2007] Also referred to as “eco-industrial clusters”. The terms are often used as synonyms, in the extensive cluster and EIP literature [Deutz, 2008].
• • • •
Products “greening”, for example bio-degradable, recyclable, longer lasting and other environmentally sound products. Process “greening” towards more eco-efficient performance. Feedstocks “greening”, for instance replacing minerals by biomass, reducing use of toxics beyond legal requirements, etc. Waste revalorisation, which is actually the most commonly IS/IE practiced approach.
Additional considerations regarding EIP include the avoidance —when possible— of developing virgin land; and the inclusion of an EIP into a broader regional or community initiative, as a success factor. The MFM philosophy’s approach to industrial efficiency and collaboration for sustainability is known as Industrial Material Flow Management (IMFM). It encompasses industrial visions such as eco-efficiency and a range of technical, management and collaboration tools like Material Flow Analysis (MFA), Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), environmental information systems, CP/PIUS, etc.
Regional approaches Historically, the notion of regional development has been related to industrialization. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a clearly non sustainability-imbued metric, is the standard measure of a country or region’s economic development. GDP measures development in terms of economic outputs, not its distribution; and contemporary regional development models usually follow the same pattern. A number of purely economic approaches have relied on the idea that development depends on resource endowments (e.g. neoclassical growth models such as Solow’s), openness to trade, etc [Dunford, 2006]. With the emergence of environmental and sustainability concerns, starting approximately in the 1960s, the need for new models of regional development also arose. Nowadays, regional development models and approaches increasingly incorporate social and environmental concerns as critical success factors. Now we talk about regional sustainable development. Undoubtedly, the economic activities of a region are main contributors to the region’s development. Its organization under more environmental and socially conscious arrangements, in interplay with other regional stakeholders (government, institutions), as well as the exchanges with other regions; determines the triple bottom-lined socioeconomic dynamics we call regional sustainable development. For instance, EIPs can be organized into Eco-Industrial Networks (EIN), a regional extension of the EIP concept [Lowe, 2001]. Several other forms of contribution to regional purposes by EIPs have been discussed, including the concept of agro-EIP or agro-Eco-Industrial Clusters. Agro-Eco-Industrial Parks/Clusters are based on EIP principles, but relying mostly on produce
and by-products of agricultural activities and aiming to improve the general situation of rural and urban-rural fringe communities6.
Rice is a main staple and commodity in the world. The main outcomes of rice production are rice grains, straw and husk. Rice husk represents a disposal issue in most rice producing countries, and even create undesirable environmental/social drawbacks (e.g. the seasonal "Black Cloud" that pollutes Cairo every year due to rice straw burning). Numerous researches and projects have been undertaken to identify solutions to that issue, and industrial applications/common practices are spreading, especially in Asian rice-producing countries. The most common approaches for handling rice by-products include to open incinerate the husks or to incinerate it in a controlled environment to recover energy (mostly for domestic use, but also at industrial scale). It is acknowledged by research and empiric experience that rice husks possess a high material use potential. A paradigm of sustainable regional development states that indigenous resources shall be developed to its full potential. The experience of Industrial Symbiosis and Eco-Industrial Parks shows that industrial collaboration yields benefits for the players involved and the container region. Thus, he following research question arises: could rice by-products (husk, straw) be used as fuel and especially as material to create more regional added value, ideally in the context of some form of industrial collaboration? An Agro-Eco-Industrial Cluster (A-EIC) would be designed, as a case study, to show the cascading value adding mechanism, and the following further directions would be explored: could such an initiative be a model for a Zero-Emission or Circular Economy Industry? What would be the challenges and barriers? The vision of such an A-EIC would combine concepts and approaches such as Zero Emissions, cluster theory, biocascading, etc; and would attempt to examine the policy conditions of the target region as to determine the required enabling environment (meso-institutions, policy, legislation, etc). A rice-based A-EIC would include industries such as suppliers of equipment, energy, materials and services; food processing and distribution companies; other firms that may extract value from the agricultural by-products (e.g. chemicals, industrial materials, light construction materials); etc. Research idea: Rice-based Agro-Eco-Industrial Clusters
Yet another approach for regional sustainability, especially practiced in Asia (Japan, Korea, China, etc) is known as Urban Symbiosis and refers to industrial-urban interactions. The term specifically refers to “the use of by-products from urban areas as alternative raw materials 6
For instance, as discussed in the international workshop "Eco-industrial Clusters Leading to Sustainable Local Development", organised by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Kansai Research Centre (KRC) and held in Kobe, Japan on 26 October, 2006 [IR 3]. Extensive discussion on agro-eco-industrial clusters in [Visvanathan, 2007].
or energy course for industrial operations”. In a similar fashion that IS, Urban Symbiosis profits on the opportunities for synergies derived from the geographical proximity among urban and industrial areas, via exchange of physical substances [Van Berkel, 2008]. A well known implementation of industrial-urban symbiosis is the Eco-Towns Program in Japan, a government-endorsed and supported (technologically, economically and policy-wise) initiative, which also promotes public-private partnerships [Morikawa, 2000]. In Europe, a broad approach to regional sustainable development is proposed under the MFM philosophy. When MFM is used at the regional level to implement sustainability strategies, it is referred to as Regional MFM (RMFM). A fundamental paradigm of RMFM is regional value-adding sustainable development. Regarding energy, waste and other main flows RMFM advocates decentralized, regionally-bound activities, as well as synergies among productive activities. RMFM gets implemented in the form of Master Regional Plans, addressing the main substances and dynamics occurring in a region in such a way that the region’s dependence on energy and materials imports is reduced and value is created in and remains within the region (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: Regional performance with and without MFM Source: IfaS/IMAT [IR 2]
One of the main activities in RMFM consists in depicting/understanding regions by means of modelling the regional material (and energy) flows. Literature describes several approaches, and practical implementations worldwide had developed a variety of methods 7 for understanding and depicting the flows and physical dynamics of regions. One of the main approaches is input-output modelling, which represents the physical and money flows among the main actors in an economy [Janssen, 1999]. At the regional level, considered as the key level for construction of a sustainable society, several related concepts contribute to build sustainability: Circular Economy (CE), Zero Emission (ZE), value-added regional development, etc. CE refers to the redefinition of a regional economy to the natural ecosystems-based paradigm in which “waste” does not exist, but all outputs from a process feed other
7
Several suitable models are discussed in [Fels, 2001].
processes; and both resource utilisation and load on natural sinks are reduced. A fundamental issue in circular economy is the energy issue, which should be based on renewable sources to the largest extent possible. Reduction of the dependence on energy carriers’ imports is a main feature of a CE. Other constituencies are community building, closed substance loops, optimisation and rationalisation of energy and materials; sustainable creation, utilisation, reutilisation and disposal of products; etc [Heck, 2006]. Figure 3 provides an overview of some of the tools for the construction of a CE, acknowledging the economy as a subsystem of its containing ecosystem.
Figure 3: Tools for Circular Economy Source: [MUFV, 2008, p.7]
CE is more visionary and long-term aimed (including regulatory and policy aspects8) than the concept of ZE, which constitutes a sub-set or pre-requisite of CE. ZE is a vision, a management concept in terms of a continuous improvement process. The fundamental idea is a continuous efficiency upgrading of anthropogenic systems to attain complete closure of material and energy cycles. The goal is to complete the transition from the throughput society into a CE. Under CE and ZE, competitive advantage is related to eco-efficiency, cascading and synergies among systems [IR 2]. RMFM attempts to shift the path of development from a “throughput” society into a CE by identifying and developing business opportunities, that is to say; it contributes to sustainable development by conciliating the economic basis of society dynamics with environmental and social concerns (see Figure 4).
8
Two widely studied cases of policy-backed national efforts towards construction of a Circular Economy, at different levels of maturity and effecSveness, are Germany ―with its extensive environmental-sustainability legislaSon― and China ―with its new Circular Economy Law―.
Figure 4: MFM’s contribution to sustainable development Source: IfaS/IMAT [IR 2]
Industrial Symbiosis through the lens of MFM: EIP planning? IS remains a hard-to-define concept, and its implementations can usually be identified as such a posteriori [6ISRS, 2009]. A clear, all-inclusive, shared definition of IS would be necessary as to “market” the concept. In the other hand, EIP is a more widely understood concept, and despite encompassing a great variety of initiatives, featuring different levels of contribution to sustainability; it can be acknowledged as an important (IS-imbued) model for regional sustainable development. According to the RMFM approach, ZE should be a key challenge and goal for EIPs and industrial/urban collaborations in general. Regarding energy, independence from imports should be prioritised and, in general, it is achievable by a combination of renewables and off-setting projects, taking into account the region’s potentials. The residential Environmental Campus Birkenfeld (ECB), a part of the University of Applied Sciences Trier, is Germany’s first “Zero Emissions Campus”. ECB features several in-house sustainable technologies (photovoltaic and solar-thermal collectors, rain water collection system, heat-exchange based aeration system, daylight guidance systems, etc), and obtains electricity and heat from a small nearby EIP featuring a renewables-based combined heat and power unit.
Environmental Campus Birkenfeld: a Zero Emission Campus Source: IfaS/IMAT [IR 2]
The CE/MFM approach would shift the traditional IS emphasis on waste re-valorisation into the optimisation of all key material flows within a system (e.g. raw materials, biomass, water, waste, energy, etc) [MUFV, 2008]. Such shift would contribute to identify more and more varied opportunities for synergies within and EIP and between an EIP and its surrounding socio-economic system. The previous is particularly important, since it has been observed that EIPs are more likely to succeed as a part of broader community or regional initiatives, for instance [Lowe, 2001]: • Association to housing development for EIP employees • Collaboration with a community strategic plan or regional plan for waste management (residential, commercial, public, and industrial) • Development of a highly effective regional BPX, as to provide markets for revalorisation of currently discarded wastes • Contribution to education in sustainability for the community or region, but also contribution to the meso-environment (enabling institutions for further regional development) • Leading greenhouse gasses emission reductions programmes, for the community or region • Direct involvement of regional stakeholders within the EIP initiative (e.g. via privatepublic partnerships) RMFM also states that regional master plans (produced by consensus-building with a region’s main stakeholders via participatory approaches) are among the region-wide initiatives that can substantially contribute to regional sustainable development by means of
programmes of activities, stimulated from the local government and supported by enabling meso-institutions that may or may not be government-driven [Meyer-Stamer, 2003]. This paper suggests that, by incorporating MFM approaches into IS initiatives (e.g. in EIP context), it would be possible to extend the contributions to sustainability at the regional level of such initiatives, as illustrated below: “Conventional” Vs. MFM-influenced Industrial Symbiosis (in the form of EIP) Comparison criteria Main themes
“Conventional” IS Waste and by-products revalorisation Certain industrial/urban synergies
MFM-IS Optimisation of key material and energy flows: raw materials, biomass, water, waste, energy Search for industrial/urban synergies with emphasis on regional potentials
Main concepts and approaches
Eco-efficiency (CP, environmental management systems)
Circular Economy, Zero Emissions, regional added-value
Clusters
Eco-efficiency Clusters
Common types
By-Product Exchange
Industrial/urban symbioses
Shared infrastructure
Learning/adaptive systems featuring education/replication components
Shared services provision Required/desired policy environment
Basic environmental legislation
Basic environmental legislation
Stimuli for eco-efficiency/IS initiatives
Stimuli for eco-efficiency/IS initiatives Regional master plans for sustainability
Origin of the initiative
Usually emergent, as a private industry initiative (more common in Europe)
National/state/regional/local planning initiative Private industry initiative
Government planned initiative (more common in Asia) Examples
Kalundborg EIP Japanese Eco-Towns (e.g. Kawasaki, the Kitakyushu Initiative, etc) Chinese EIPs (e.g. Shanghai Chemical Industrial Park, Shanghai Caohejing Hitech Park)
European regional initiatives, like the Rhineland-Palatinate Circular Economy programme Japanese Eco-Towns? Korean EIP Initiative? [IR 6] The UK National Symbiosis Programme? Thailand (agro) Industrial Estates?
A fundamental issue surrounding IS, EIPs and industrial/urban collaboration in general is whether is it possible to plan (and thus replicate, export, evolve) such initiatives (as opposed to successful industrial/urban collaboration schemes emerging exclusively as spontaneous initiatives of the private sector). To solve that issue, a number of questions need to be discussed, including: • Which criteria are to be applied to determine what is to be achieved? o e.g. the intended industrial configuration should include x, y and z elements/ dynamics. • What are the key driving factors in the target region/location? o e.g. leadership from the government is a key aspect in Asia, while in North America it is leadership from the private sector. o e.g. the European Union generally considers market instruments as a good way for implementing the polluter-pays principle [Nilsson, 2009]. • What set of indicators is to be used to evaluate performance of EIPs? National indicators? • What policy environment is required, since policy requirements for success may be region-specific? • Where should the initiative come from and how to nurture it? o e.g. the initiative originated by the private sector, central government, local government, the local community, etc. • How flexible the recruiting should be? o e.g. attract pre-defined companies or identify emerging initiatives and nurture them towards further development. • How to attract (targeted or not) companies to join and emerging EIP, and to engage in symbioses. • What proportion of end-of-pipe solutions Vs. clean technology solutions is to be tolerated within an EIP? • Is it possible, and by what means, to solve fundamental sustainability issues (perhaps with national implications) within established EIPs? o e.g. Kalundborg’s Asnæs power plant running on coal rather than a more sustainable energy carrier. There are multiple answers to these issues, for instance: the required policy environment can be generalised from studying successful EIP initiatives, the EIP success criteria can be excerpted from literature or case studies; and some of the other topics are probably very case-specific. Various MFM tools can be used to analyse particular cases (including the region) and engage in strategic planning. Since RMFM is essentially a strategic planning exercise, a RMFM iniSaSve in a region could ―due to its emphasis on regional development― not only provide information for decision-making, but in general ease the complex endeavour of either creating a new EIP, from scratch or from existing structures/initiatives; or turning a regular industrial park or industrial conglomerate into a sustainability-imbued EIP.
A fundamental prerequisite for a RMFM initiative is to count on an interest group with influence and power in the region, requesting the regional assessment or interested in it. The steps to carry out a RMFM could be roughly as follows: 1. Preliminary analysis of the region: historical and development drivers, stakeholders, economic drivers and institutions, pressing problems, urban systems (water, wastewater, energy, waste), materials and energy flows. 2.
Kick-off meeting(s) with pre-defined stakeholders, to understand their opinion on the current status of the region (system) and their development intentions/plans/needs. Stakeholder analysis is to be performed along the whole process, especially during the two first steps. Main goal of the stakeholder analysis is to understand their motivations, needs and threats, in order to recruit them for the RMFM program (to avoid the risk of them becoming constraints or threats). Also settle a MFM board of trustees, with power to make decisions.
3.
Information, motivation, training of decision makers and key actors in the system, towards the ideal (vision) of a Circular Economy.
4.
MFA of the system, previous definition of the system boundaries. MFA should focus on the urban systems, main economic drivers, and explore possibilities for interplay and circular material and energy flows, as well as in the energetic and material utilisation of “wastes”. Main goal: understand and describe the system (especially its real operation costs), for which IT and diagramming tools are to be used (Sankey and block diagrams, modelling tools, etc.) Network analysis should identify the current interplay relations and potentials.
5.
Define concrete optimisation potentials and craft sustainable ideas towards it. Consider financing mechanisms (i.e. carbon trading). Perhaps apply a participatory approach with the MFM board in order to define concrete projects. Depending on the motivations of the political and economically relevant stakeholders, emphasise certain aspects of the project, such as, for instance, contribution to the community’s well-being.
6.
Craft a Master plan, stating the optimisation/development vision for the system and both the strategy (programs) and tactics (concrete projects, featuring financial aspects and project management) to achieve it.
7.
Founding an MFM firm to deal with the projects implementation.
Even though most RMFM opportunities could be approached by means of a standardised approach like the one suggested above, each case should be addressed with special emphasis on the local idiosyncrasy. In developing countries, for instance, political and economic factors are of great interest of the decision makers. Once crafted a regional master plan, a detailed MFA of the region is to be undertaken. The urban systems, material and energy flows and stocks and main economic activities (including all current inter-relations) shall be fully analysed and described by means of diagrams and datasets, in order to identify their
weaknesses and opportunities for improvement and development, their interplay potentials (via network analysis), and, overall, to fully understand the current and future economics of such systems. A priori, possible optimization and collaboration outcomes include, among many others, the following: • Rationalisation of waste management by means of a separation system, towards recycling inorganic fractions (metal, glass, paper) and energy recovery of organic and some inorganic fractions (biogas, RDF). • Complementation of aerobic water treatment systems by means of anaerobic modules and/or constructed wetlands. • Energetic optimization of great consumers (energy and materials intense activities), by means of behaviour change, investment in technology and renewable energy sources. • Foundation for EIPs, by establishing by-products exchange mechanisms among local industries. • Identification of unused biomass resources (manure, other agricultural byproducts, water hyacinth, waste oils, etc), and consequent material or energetic utilisation. • Identification of key energy-intensive sectors and possibilities for 9 synergies/eco-efficiency improvements for energy efficiency . The described approach actually works, as demonstrated by multiple projects by IfaS in municipalities in Germany, Turkey, Latin America, China, etc. See http://imat.umwelt-campus.de. Approach for RMFM initiatives Based on IfaS working approach and [Meyer-Stamer, 2003]
Establishing EIPs or turning other industrial conglomerates into EIPs demands strategic planning, due to the complex community interactions, economic aspects, market competition, and business retention aspects that make sudden change almost impossible. Besides, EIP development implies balancing the interests of a broad group of stakeholders featuring diverse interests (business results, community development, policy impact on the macro level, environmental concerns, etc) [Visvanathan, 2007]. Despite a common approach could be used for regional planning, EIP initiatives should be addressed using case-specific approaches. Given the former, shifting existing industrial structures into EIP or crafting EIPs demands deep knowledge of the region’s dynamics (obtainable via the RMFM initiative) as to steer the cluster/EIP formation.
Policy requirements As suggested earlier, a solid policy and enabling environment would be a pre-requisite for successful EIP development. Conflicting policies can undermine initiatives (e.g. Maniwa 9
For instance, key sectors in Europe include district heating, low-carbon industrial processes for steel and other heavy industries, chemicals industry, sustainable cities, etc [Nilsson, 2009].
wood cluster in Japan), as well as insufficient or non-integrated policies (e.g. An Giang fishery cluster in Vietnam). Other main constraints to EIP development can be social capital (e.g. Hosur sericulture cluster in India), enabling technology (Chachoengsao rice cluster in Thailand), idiosyncratic aspects, business leadership, etc [Visvanathan, 2007] [Anbumozhi, 2008]. Some success factors for industrial collaboration (whose antithesis represent constraints) have been identified during the early years of IE/IS (from specific situations, but can be generalised), including the emergence of a (private) project champion; an initially limited number of participants (foreseeing solid benefits and implementing risk control) as to reduce project complexity; existing or arising markets for new outflows and enabling or at least not hindering legislation [Nisbet, 1998]. The many existing barriers hinder the spontaneous engagement of industries into collaborations, and thus it has been suggested that the market alone cannot create clusters or EIPs [Anbumozhi, 2008]. Here arises the role of governments into strengthening or enabling the emergence and development of industrial collaboration initiatives, by means of several approaches, mainly policy. At least two sets of policy instruments have been identified in relation to IE and thus to IS and EIPs: administrative instruments (information and awareness tools, institutional means, juridical means and technology-organisational means) and economic instruments (taxes, subsidies, emission quotas, etc) [Opoku, 2004]. IE and IS feature interesting policy implications: in the one hand its emergence depends (apparently) on certain policy conditions, in the other hand it can contribute to shape the policy environment regarding environmental and sustainability concerns. In the context of the ongoing world economic crisis, it has been observed that eco-efficiency strategies (and by extension pro-sustainability planning at all levels, e.g. construction of a CE) can contribute to economic recovery, due to its potential for cost rationalisation, job creation, efficiency improvement in general (e.g. via industrial collaboration) and new business models (e.g. featuring industry/urban interactions). Such strategic planning heavily relies on policy co-operation (for more compatible sectoral policies), coordination and integrated policy-making [Nilsson, 2009]. The following (regional, national) policy and management suggestions could help to overcome constraints and attract companies to EIPs (either planned or emergent): • National and regional measures: o Stimulate the adoption of regional CE initiatives (ideally national CE laws). o Develop financial/business incentives supporting IS/EIP/eco-efficiency initiatives. o In case of EIPs being governmental initiatives, filter candidates by including pro-sustainability compliance clauses. o Establish (and support existing) technology transfer programmes. o Ideally, develop integrated waste management, water management and energy management strategies, including consolidation of all applicable legislation.
•
EIP’s management measures: o Demand business plans accompanying each investment decision, as to justify the selection of non-clean technologies in case of occurring. o Prioritise synergy initiatives over eco-efficiency initiatives, in case of being the two types non-compatible. o If EIP-based companies are not interested in deviating from their core business practices, attract companies whose core activity is to invest in sustainable waste, water and energy management; as to provide services to the EIP. o Continuously lobby the region in which the EIP is located, as to develop new and better synergies with the community and off-EIP industry.
Some of the former ideas, plus further policy recommendations, focused on the cluster/EIP contribution to sustainable development have been systematised by Anbumozhi (2008): Policy Stream
Industrial Policy
Environmental Policy
Regional Development Policy
Cluster Focused Intervention
Relevance to Sustainable Development
Support for the common infrastructure needs of a group of small and medium companies
Sound material flow across the cluster
Incentives for insertion of green materials, products and services in local and global value chain
Drives for eco-enterprise development
Collaborative R&D investments to support commercialisation across sectors
Increased community wealth through brand market creation
Umbrella permit for a group of firms operating within a cluster
Improved environmental performance of companies
Assistance targeted at cluster based firms for innovation by technology & knowledge transfer
Decreased regulatory costs
Consensus on cluster-wide environmental agenda and economic priorities by promotion of the idea of cooperation by bottom up approaches
Increased responsiveness of local support institution for environmental actions
Clusters targeted as drivers of competitive regions by increased use of untapped local resources
Optimised use of local resources
Create public-private partnerships to attract investment and employees
Employment generation
Engage the communities, producers and workers for collective action
Increased social capital
Conclusions Steering or “creating” IS/EIP initiatives as to contribute to regional sustainable development is a difficult endeavour. It requires profound understanding on the region’s social, economic, environmental, policy, technologic, etc. dynamics and underlying drivers. Key aspects to be considered are the enabling environment and drivers for the private sector to engage. That knowledge is acquirable by means of regional analysis such as RMFM initiatives. Under such a strategic planning umbrella, it would be possible to actually plan EIPs (from a private sector, local or national government; or local community initiative) given the adequate policy environment, which can itself be region-specific.
References [6ISRS, 2009]
Discussions at the 6th Annual Industrial Symbiosis Research Symposium 2009, held in Kalundborg, Denmark from 18 to 21 June 2009, and organised by Yale University School of Forestr and Environmental Studies and the Kalundborg Industrial Symbiosis Institute
[Anbumozhi, 2008]
Anbumozhi, V. (2008) Eco-industrial clusters: Enhancing regional economic development through environmental linkages, Policy Brief #8 June 2008, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) – Kansai Research Centre, Japan
[Chertow, 2000]
Chertow, M. (2000) Industrial Symbiosis: Literature and Taxonomy, Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, Vol. 25: 313-337, November 2000
[Chertow, 2007]
Chertow, M. (2007) “Uncovering” Industrial Symbiosis, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 11-30, 2007
[Cote, 2008]
Cote, R. (2008) Industrial ecology, industrial symbiosis and ecoindustrial parks, published in Summary and Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific International Workshop on Industrial Ecology, held in Kawasaki, Japan from 8 to 9 December 2008, and organised by International Society for Industrial Ecology, China and National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Japan
[CSCP, 2006]
CSCP (2006), Policy Instruments for Resource Efficiency – Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production, UNEP/Wuppertal Institute Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP)
[Deutz, 2008]
Deutz, P. and Gibbs, D. (2008) Industrial Ecology and Regional Development: Eco-Industrial Development as Cluster Policy, Regional Studies,42:10,1313 — 1328
[Dunford, 2006]
Dunford, M. (est. 2006) Regional development models, unpublished manuscript (http://www.sussex.ac.uk/geography/14-1-6-7.html), School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton
[Erkman, 1997]
Erkman, S. (1997) Industrial ecology: an historical view, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 5, No. 1-2, pp. 1-10, 1997
[Erkman, 2005]
Erkman, S. (2005) Industrial Ecology in Geneva: Initial findings and prospects, Republique et Canton de Geneve, GEDEC
[Fels, 2001]
Fels, T. and Noell, C. (2001) Managing Sustainable Regional Material Flows: A Key Issue of Sustainable Development – Contemporary Concepts and Models, Third European Conference of the European Federation for Information Technology in
Agriculture, Food and the Environment (EFITA), Vol. 1, S. 101-106 [Garner, 1995]
Garner, G. and Keoleian, G. (1995) Industrial Ecology: An Introduction, National Pollution Prevention Center for Higher Education, University of Michigan, November 1995
[Heck, 2006]
Heck, P. (2006) Circular Economy related international practices and policy trends: Current situation and practices on sustainable production and consumption and international Circular Economy development policy summary and analysis, Institute for Applied Material Flow Management – IfaS, Environmental Campus Birkenfeld, February 2006
[Helling, 2005]
Helling, K. et al (2005) An appraisal of virtual networks in the environmental sector, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 327-337
[IUCN, 2008]
Adams, W. M. and Jeanrenaud, S. J. (2008) Transition to Sustainability: Towards a Humane and Diverse World, Gland, Switzerland, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources – IUCN, 108pp.
[Janssen, 1999]
Janssen, M. and van den Bergh, J. (1999) SIMBIOSES: Modelling Industrial Metabolism in a Multi-Regional Economic System, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 99-060/3, Tinbergen Institute
[Lei, 2001]
Lei, S. et al (2001) A Generalized Framework and Methodology for Product Planning in Eco-Industrial Parks, Papers Delivered at International Conference on Cleaner Production, Beijing, China – September 2001 – Paper 15 of 30, http://www.chinacp.org.cn/eng/cpconfer/iccp01/iccp22.html
[Lowe, 2001]
Lowe, E. (2001) Eco-industrial Park Handbook for Asian Developing Countries, Report to Asian Development Bank, October 3, 2001. Indigo Development, USA
[Meyer-Stamer, 2003]
Meyer-Stamer, J. (2003) The PACA Book of Concepts (Version 4.0), PACA: Participatory Appraisal of Competitive Advantage: Launching and Sustaining Local Economic Development Initiatives, Mesopartner
[Mirata, 2005]
Mirata, M. and Ristola, P. (2005) Industrial Symbiosis for more sustainable, localised industrial systems, Progress in Industrial Ecology, An International Journal, Volume 4, Numbers 3-4, 21 September 2007, pp. 184-204
[Morikawa, 2000]
Morikawa, M. (2000) Eco-Industrial Developments in Japan, Indigo Development Working Paper # 11. RPP International, Indigo Development Center, Emeryville, CA
[MUFV, 2008]
MUFV and MWVLW (2008) The Circular Economy State of Rhineland-Palatinate, Ministry of the Environment, Forests and Consumer Protection Rhineland-Palatinate (MUFV), Mainz and Ministry for the Economy, Commerce, Agriculture and Viticulture (MWVLW) Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, January 2008
[Nilsson, 2009]
Nilsson, M. et al (2009) A European Eco-Efficient Economy Governing climate, energy and competitiveness, Report for the 2009 Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, Stockholm Environment Institute
[Nisbet, 1998]
Nisbet, M. et al (1998) Case Studies of Industrial Partnerships in the Sarnia-Lambton Area of Southern Ontario, Environmental Progress (Vo1.17, No.2), Summer 1998
[Opoku, 2004]
Opoku, H. (2004) Policy implications of Industrial Ecology conceptions, Business Strategy and the Environment 13, 320–333 (2004), Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com)
[Pauli, 1998]
Pauli, G. UpSizing. The Road to Zero Emissions: More Jobs, More Income and No Pollution, Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing, 1998
[Van Berkel, 2002]
Van Berkel, R. (2002) Application of Cleaner Production Principles and Tools for Eco-Efficient Minerals Processing, in Rankin, J. et all (eds), Proceedings Green Processing Conference 2002, AusIMM, Clayton, Vic., 57-69, 2002
[Van Berkel, 2006]
Van Berkel, R. (2006) Regional Resource Synergies for Sustainable Development in Heavy Industrial Areas: An Overview of Opportunities and Experiences, Report for Australian Research Council, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia
[Van Berkel, 2008]
Van Berkel, R. (2008), Comparative Assessment of Industrial Symbiosis in Practice in Asia, published in Summary and Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific International Workshop on Industrial Ecology, held in Kawasaki, Japan from 8 to 9 December 2008, and organised by International Society for Industrial Ecology, China and National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Japan
[VDI, 2005]
VDI (2005) Cleaner production (PIUS): Basic principles and area of application, VDI Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (The Association of Engineers), March 2005, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, Germany
[Visvanathan, 2007]
Visvanathan, C. et al (2007) Eco-Industrial Clusters in Urban-Rural Fringe Areas of India, Thailand and Vietnam, Asia Institute of Technology, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) – Kansai Research Centre, Japan
[WBCSD, 2006]
WBCSD (2006) Eco-Efficiency Learning Module, World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), January 2006
Internet references IR 1
IISD’s SD Gateway, Introduction to Sustainable Development, http://sdgateway.net/introsd/definitions.htm#1
IR 2
Master of International Material Flow Management (IMAT), IfaS, MFM philosophy, http://www.imat-master.de/index.php?id=641
IR 3
International workshop "Eco-industrial Clusters Leading to Sustainable Local Development", Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kobe, Japan, 26 October 2006 http://www.iges.or.jp/en/be/activity07.html
IR 4
Competence Network Environmental Technology of Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany http://www.umwelttechnik-rlp.de
IR 5
The Magic of Bio-Cascading, http://www.alchemia-nova.net/english/biocascading.html
IR 6
Korean EIP Initiative, http://www.indigodev.com/korea_eip.html
