Material substitution and weight reduction as steps towards a sustainable disposable diaper

Increasing market demands for 'sustainable products' has in the development of disposable diapers resulted in a focus on material substitution and weight reduction. In this study we have compared the strategic potential of these two approaches for development of the absorbing core of the product. The study indicates that regardless what strategy a company selects for reducing a products socio-ecological impact, both society and environment would benefit from a stronger focus on the long term goal of a sustainably product, instead of the milestones.http://www.lcm2011.org/papers.htm

A Strategic Approach to Social Sustainability -Part 1 : Exploring the Social System

The vast and growing array of concepts, methods and tools in the sustainability field imply a need for a structuring and coordinating framework, including a unifying and operational definition of sustainability. One attempt at such framework began over 25 years ago and is now widely known as the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. However, as with the larger sustainability field, the social dimension of this framework has been found to not be sufficiently science-based and operational and thus in need of further development. In this two-part series an attempt at a science-based, operational definition of social sustainability is presented. In this paper (part one), a systems-based approach to the social system is presented, as a basis for presenting a zero-hypothesis of principles for social sustainability in part two. Extensive literature studies as well as conceptual modeling sessions were performed and the social system was examined from various angles – complex adaptive system studies, human needs theory and other social sciences, and insights from these fields were woven together. The whole work was structured and guided by the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. The focus of the study was on the essential aspects of the social system that need to be sustained (that cannot be systematically degraded) for it to be possible for people to meet their needs. These essential aspects were found to be trust, common meaning, diversity, capacity for learning and capacity for self-organization. Trust seems to be generally acknowledged to be the overriding aspect of a vital social system. A sense of common meaning is also stated by several authors as an important part of social capital and something that helps to keep a group or society together. Diversity is acknowledged as essential for resilience; in the human social system this can be interpreted as, e.g., diversity of personalities, ages, gender, skills. Capacity for learning and self-organization are also motivated from a resilience point of view by several authors. These results form a basis for the hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability presented in paper 2, which in turn is a step towards creating an enhanced support for strategic planning and innovation for sustainability.Financial support was provided by the FUTURA foundation and is hereby gratefully acknowledged. FUTURA was not involved in the study design, the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication.</p

A Systems Perspective on ISO 26000

Since its publication in 2010, ISO 26000 has become the de-facto standard of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). While not a certifiable standard in ISO terms, but rather a guidance document, it has become the document many corporations use as their basis for CSR work. ISO 26000 claims that the objective of social responsibility is to contribute to sustainable development, using the Brundtland definition – development, which meets the needs the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs – as the basis for sustainable development. However, the Brundtland definition, while commonly referred to, is not sufficiently concrete to give guidance for strategic planning and action in businesses, municipalities and society at large. Therefore it is helpful to supplement the Brundtland definition with a framework that allows for this concrete and strategic planning, e.g. the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD). The FSSD is based on a principled definition of sustainability, defining social and ecological sustainability in more operational terms, and includes guidelines for how to contribute systematically and strategically to fulfillment of this definition. It is a transdisciplinary framework built on insights from systems thinking and has been continuously developed as well as used and improved in organizations all over the world for the last two decades. A particular recent development focus has been the social dimension of sustainability, with new insights based on the application of systems thinking to social systems having been recently presented. In this paper, these new insights are used to analyze and evaluate ISO 26000´s contribution to sustainability, highlighting both benefits and shortcomings of ISO 26000 from a social systems and strategic sustainable development perspective. Main points include that, while ISO 26000 is comprehensive in it´s scope and provides a vast achievement in terms of international consensus building around the essential issues in CSR, it is not based on a scientific understanding of social and ecological systems and is therefore a document highlighting current societal expectations rather than a document allowing organizations to innovate, plan, act and monitor long-term for sustainability. The paper further points out examples of aspects of sustainability that are likely to become issues in the future, but that are currently not covered by the ISO guidance. Finally, the paper points at research needed to explore more in detail in which ways ISO 26000 can support strategic working towards sustainability, and in which areas other tools are necessary

Lessons from the field:A first evaluation of working with the elaborated social dimension of the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development

Arguably, sustainability is the most complex challenge humanity has faced to date. Not only are the impacts of our behavior resulting in more and more sever repercussions, but we are also realizing that the causes of unsustainability are deeply embedded in the design of many of the systems we rely on. This means, of course, also, that solutions to the problem cannot be one-off ideas, but that strategic and systematic transformation of many of our systems is needed. Because of the necessity of the re-design of our economic and other man-made systems, it has been suggested that sustainability science should be considered a “science of design” (Miller 2011). Perhaps it can be considered one of the most “wicked” cases of design, as it needs to aim both for significant impact and a participatory approach to solve the challenge.   One framework that approaches the sustainability challenge from a design angle is the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD). Specifically, it is based on the idea of strategically and step-wise designing sustainability out of the systems we currently rely on. The FSSD is a trans-disciplinary framework built on insights from systems thinking and has been continuously developed for the last two decades. Its core is built on backcasting from principles of re-design for sustainability, which allows for wide-spread agreement on what sustainability means and allows for creativity within these constraints, so that each group or organization can create their own path towards sustainability within these constraints. The FSSD has been used in organizations all over the world to create real transformation towards sustainability.   A particular recent development focus has been the social dimension of sustainability. Following the idea of sustainability as a design science, the development was based on a design research methodology (e.g Blessing and Chakrabarti 2009), which included a suggested new ‘prototype’ for the approach to social sustainability within the FSSD. Based on a systems approach to the social system, five new principles of social sustainability have been proposed (Missimer 2013, Missimer et al. 2013a, 2013b). This paper aims to contribute to the evaluation stage of the prototype and presents preliminary results of an evaluation based on field-work with the new social sustainability principles. Overall, a clearer definition of social sustainability is not just for theoretical purposes, but because without a clear theoretical concept, it is hard to strategically work towards social sustainability in practice. The data for evaluation comes from workshops that were run with sustainability professionals (also called practitioners) who use the FSSD in their work. In three workshops, the authors, as well as groups of sustainability professionals, used the new social sustainability principles to assess projects on their contribution to social sustainability. The workshops were followed by reflections by and interviews with the professionals assessing the usability of the new principles.   Preliminary results indicate that it is indeed possible to use the newly proposed social sustainability principles in the manner intended and that the approach yields results that are valuable to the professional and the potential clients of these professionals. Integration with existing tools commonly used by the practitioners was possible, although further refinement of the designed tool prototypes will be needed.   Practitioners reflected that the earlier approach to social sustainability lacked in clarity and the ability to structure other tools and concepts in the field. They reported that most practitioners designed their own way of working with social sustainability, which lead to confusion and undermined a common approach. They appreciated the more thorough and scientific approach to the social aspects presented in the new approach, which allowed for a common language and a more thorough assessment of contributions to un-sustainability. The practitioners also reported new insights regarding the use and connection to other tools and concepts in the field of social sustainability.   However, challenges were expressed as regards the somewhat more difficult nature of the science behind the new approach and how this impacted the ease of working with the framework for practitioners. The paper ends with some reflections by the authors. In further research this preliminary evaluation will be expanded and built upon to facilitate continuous improvement and applicability of the FSSD

An approach to involve municipal leaders into strategic decision-making for sustainability—A case study

To systematically address the sustainability challenge, local and regional government leaders are key actors to facilitate action-oriented dialogues between practitioners from different sectors and disciplines. However, to address sustainability in collaboration is a complex challenge and leaders as well as practitioners need methodological support. This study is an off shot of an Action Research project that tested and developed an implementation model for cross-sector strategic transitions towards sustainability. While the implementation model as such gained appreciation for the scientifically robust overarching approach, our learnings from four years of action research with ten Swedish municipalities and regions point to needs of additional support regarding application guidelines for the methodology to be autonomously viable after introductions and moderated sessions facilitated by the research team. Example needs include support for capacity building for strategic sustainable development (SSD), advise for how to recruit leaders into the process upfront and support for valuing and aligning previous and on-going work for sustainability. This paper presents such support. It is based on a combination of conceptual SSD analyses and dialogue with initiated people within local or regional governments. In the dialogue, participants were supported to identify gaps in terms of capacity for an SSD approach to improve cross-sector strategies towards the full scope of social and ecological sustainability, and to better align existing methods, processes, and routines into cohesive actions. The procedure was designed, tested, and refined through interaction within one municipality. The feedback was that through applying the support, government leaders can better prepare for and prioritize their strategic actions for sustainability and search for good examples and best practices with enhanced precision. Forthcoming research will test and further refine the support.Open accessThis research was funded by The National Association of Swedish Eco-municipalities and the municipalities of Hudiksvall, Karlskrona, and Lerum.</p

Material substitution and weight reduction as steps towards a sustainable disposable diaper

Increasing market demands for &apos;sustainable products&apos; has in the development of disposable diapers resulted in a focus on material substitution and weight reduction. In this study we have compared the strategic potential of these two approaches for development of the absorbing core of the product. The study indicates that regardless what strategy a company selects for reducing a products socio-ecological impact, both society and environment would benefit from a stronger focus on the long term goal of a sustainably product, instead of the milestones.http://www.lcm2011.org/papers.htm

Att planera för social hållbarhet på ett systematiskt sätt

Detta är en översiktlig beskrivning av ett nytt forskningsmässigt angreppssätt för att göra begreppet Social Hållbarhet mer operationellt. Det är en bearbetad text från en föreläsning som Karl-Henrik Robèrt höll i samband med en konferens om Medkänsla och social hållbarhet på KI hösten 2012. Hållbar utveckling = att aktivt designa ”icke-hållbarhet” ut ur de sociala och ekologiska systemen, och se till att icke-hållbarhet behålls utanför systemet

A Strategic Approach to Social Sustainability - Part 2 : A Principle-based Definition

The vast and growing array of concepts, methods and tools in the sustainability field imply a need for a structuring and coordinating framework, including a unifying and operational definition of sustainability. One attempt at such framework began over 25 years ago and is now widely known as the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. However, as with the larger sustainability field, the social dimension of this framework has been found to not be sufficiently science-based and operational and thus in need of further development. In this two-part series an attempt at a science-based, operational definition of social sustainability is presented. In part 1 a systems-based approach to the social system was presented, based on extensive literature studies as well as conceptual modelling sessions using the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development as the guiding structure. The focus of that study was on the essential aspects of the social system that need to be sustained, namely trust, common meaning, diversity, capacity for learning and capacity for self-organization. The aim of this second paper is to identify and present overriding mechanisms by which these aspects of the social system can be degraded, thereby finding exclusion criteria for re-design for sustainability. Further literature studies, conceptual modelling sessions and initial testing of this prototype with partners in academia, business and NGOs were performed. Based on the understanding of the essential aspects of the social system and the identified overriding mechanisms of degradation of these, a hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability by basic principles is presented. The proposed principles are that in a socially sustainable society, people are not subject to structural obstacles to: (1) health, (2) influence, (3) competence, (4) impartiality and (5) meaning-making. Overall, the two papers aim to provide a hypothesis for a definition of social sustainability, which is general enough to be applied irrespective of spatial and temporal constraints, but concrete enough to guide decision-making and monitoring. It is also a further development of the social dimension of the FSSD, which practitioners and researchers have requested for some time and can act as a support towards better integration of social sustainability in many other fields, e.g., sustainable product innovation, sustainable supply chain management, sustainable transport system development, and others.Financial support was provided by the FUTURA foundation and is hereby gratefully acknowledged. FUTURA was not involved in the study design, the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication.</p

Analyzing the concept of planetary boundaries from a strategic sustainability perspective: How does humanity avoid tipping the planet?

Recently, an approach for global sustainability, the planetary-boundary approach (PBA), has been proposed, which combines the concept of tipping points with global-scale sustainability indicators. The PBA could represent a significant step forward in monitoring and managing known and suspected global sustainability criteria. However, as the authors of the PBA describe, the approach faces numerous and fundamental challenges that must be addressed, including successful identification of key global sustainability metrics and their tipping points, as well as the coordination of systemic individual and institutional actions that are required to address the sustainability challenges highlighted. We apply a previously published framework for systematic and strategic development toward a robust basic definition of sustainability, i.e., the framework for strategic sustainable development (FSSD), to improve and inform the PBA. The FSSD includes basic principles for sustainability, and logical guidelines for how to approach their fulfillment. It is aimed at preventing unsustainable behavior at both the micro, e.g., individual firm, and macro, i.e., global, levels, even when specific global sustainability symptoms and metrics are not yet well understood or even known. Whereas the PBA seeks to estimate how far the biosphere can be driven away from a "normal" or "natural" state before tipping points are reached, because of ongoing violations of basic sustainability principles, the FSSD allows for individual planners to move systematically toward sustainability before all impacts from not doing so, or their respective tipping points, are known. Critical weaknesses in the PBA can, thus, be overcome by a combined approach, significantly increasing both the applicability and efficacy of the PBA, as well as informing strategies developed in line with the FSSD, e.g., by providing a "global warning system" to help prioritize strategic actions highlighted by the FSSD. Thus, although ongoing monitoring of known and suspected global sustainability metrics and their possible tipping points is a critical part of the evolving sustainability landscape, effective and timely utilization of planetary-boundary information on multiple scales requires coupling to a strategic approach that makes the underlying sustainability principles explicit and includes strategic guidelines to approach them. Outside of such a rigorous and systems-based context, the PBA, even given its global scale, risks leading individual organizations or planners to (i) focus on "shares" of, e.g., pollution within the PBs and negotiations to get as high proportion of such as possible, and/or (ii) awaiting data on PBs when such do not yet exist before they act, and/or (iii) find it difficult to manage uncertainties of the data once such have arrived. If global sustainability problems are to be solved, it is important that each actor recognizes the benefits, not the least self-benefits, of designing and executing strategies toward a principled and scientifically robust definition of sustainability. This claim is not only based on theoretical reasoning. A growing number of sectors, businesses, and municipalities/cities around the world are already doing it, i.e., not estimating "allowed" shares of, say fossil CO2 emissions, but gradually moving away from unsustainable use of fossil fuels and other unsustainable practices altogether

An overarching model for cross-sector strategic transitions towards sustainability in municipalities and regions

Municipal and regional governments can play a key role in global society's transition towards sustainability. However, municipal leaders often lack a sufficient overview of sustainability and thereby the capacity to coordinate efforts across sectors. Several municipal planning frameworks are available but vary greatly in terms of definitions, scope, and hands-on advice on processes. To complement and unify approaches, the framework for strategic sustainable development (FSSD) has been developed. It utilizes backcasting from operational boundary conditions for the full scope of social and ecological sustainability. This study aims to evaluate a recently developed model for long-term implementation of FSSD across sectors for more cohesive cooperation towards sustainability. This is done through participatory action research (PAR) in ten Swedish municipalities and regions. The evaluation is done to examine if the implementation model (i) lives up to its purpose to help sectors cooperate effectively by using the FSSD as a shared mental model, (ii) aid the handling of previously identified barriers to strategic sustainable development in municipalities and regions, (iii) may contain barriers of its own for appropriate use and (iv) has room for improvement. We used observations, dialogues, and surveys to capture the strengths, weaknesses, enablers, and barriers of the preliminary implementation model. While the compliance of the model varied, our findings show a general appreciation and identified the needs for the approach. From experiencing barriers for the application of the model, practitioners provided several ideas for additional support, such as assessment and alignment support of on-going work and further developed guiding material. In a second phase of the PAR project, application of the implementation model will continue, and such additional support will be developed and evaluated. © 2020 by the authors.open access</p