It is widely acknowledged that the furniture production and consumption system have a significant environmental impact and is one of the key sectors for improving sustainability. However, there is a lack of comprehensive, scientifically based, furniture-specific knowledge base and know-how, including a theoretical framework, approaches, guidelines, methods, and tools to guide the furniture industry toward sustainability. A growing international scientific community is working to fill the gap. This Ph.D. research is framed into this research area, focusing on product eco-design (or better Life Cycle Design (LCD)) and Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD). The LeNS network, which connects nearly 150 design Universities distributed worldwide, is the primary scientific community for reference. The research aims to develop a furniture-specific knowledge base and know-how to support the diffusion of Sustainable Furniture System Design (SFSD). Introduction Sustainable development refers to systemic conditions where, on a planetary and regional level, both social and productive development takes place (i) respecting the limits of environmental resilience, i.e., within its capacity to absorb the effects of human impact without causing any irreversible degradation; (ii) without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, i.e., preserving resources, or natural capital, which will be passed on to future generations; (iii) on the grounds of equal redistribution of resources following the principle that everyone has the same rights to environmental space, i.e. the same access to global natural resources (Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development announced 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a shared blueprint for sustainability in three dimensions- economic prosperity, social equity and inclusion, and environmental protection (United Nations, 2015). However, much evidence indicates that our current growth is incompatible with these SDGs considering the environmental aspects. Overproduction and overconsumption on the system level, as well as the heavy environmental impacts of a single piece of furniture on the product level, are among the environmental challenges for the furniture sector. According to the estimation of Centre for Industrial Study (CSIL), On a global scale, the furniture industry has doubled its volume from 2000 to 2021, reaching a worldwide volume of about $500 billion, which is seeing an increase in the next year (CSIL, 2021), resulting in significant resource consumption, harmful emissions, and waste generation. For example, each year, 10.5 million tons of furniture are produced, and 10 million tons of furniture waste are generated, accounting for more than 4% of municipal solid waste in the European Union (Forrest et al., 2017). These impacts, among others, could also be seen throughout the furniture's life cycle, during pre-production, production, distribution, use, and disposal (González-García et al., 2019). As a result, furniture has recently been identified as one of the key sectors that should be addressed and improved to achieve more sustainable development (European Commission, 2020). The design was recognized as a significant area in the transition to more responsible and sustainable production and consumption models (Bhamra & Hernandez, 2021). To be specific, more than 80% of a product’s environmental impact is determined at the design stage (Design Council, 2022; European Commission, 2020), it is necessary to change the way we think about products, processes, or services from the earliest stages of design (Barbero & Ferrulli, 2023). Actually, The focus of Design for Sustainability has expanded the level of innovation from low-impact material and energy selection to product design, to Product-Service System design, to Spatio-Social innovation, and more recently to socio-technical systems innovation (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2019a). On the other hand, DfS has expanded its scope from the environmental dimension of sustainability to the economic one to the socio-ethical one (L. I. Chaves, 2018; Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). Referring to the Design for Sustainability (DfS) framework, this research places its emphasis on the environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability. It addresses these dimensions at two crucial levels: the furniture product level, which includes aspects such as Life Cycle Design (LCD) (or eco-design), and the innovation level involving furniture Product-Service Systems (Sustainable Product-Service System, S.PSS). It is important to note that both levels exhibit a noticeable knowledge gap that calls for comprehensive and scientifically grounded insights to enrich the design context. LCD approaches innovate at the product level, using a Life cycle approach and a functional approach (Hemel, 1997; Giudice et al., 2006; Keoleian & Menerey, 1993; Pigosso et al., 2015; Tischner, 2001; Vezzoli, 2018a). Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD) approaches innovate at the system level regarding the offering/business model, which is frequently modeled after the satisfaction system, stakeholder configuration, and system sustainability approaches (UNEP & Delft University of Technology, 2017; Van Halen et al., 2006; Vezzoli et al., 2015). According to findings from the literature review, the furniture industry is currently focusing on single-indicator innovation, such as reducing material content (Ika Rinawati et al., 2018) and selecting resources with lower environmental impacts (Iritani et al., 2015), which are insufficient. Although some furniture product LCD strategies have been proposed (Krystofik et al., 2018), there is a lack of comprehensive furniture-specific approaches, strategies, and guidelines. Furthermore, little research provides solutions to the trade-offs among different LCD strategies, i.e., furniture-specific LCD strategy priorities. Regarding furniture S.PSSD, a limited number of studies focus on either environmental sustainability or economic prosperity, with no considerations for win-win economic and environmental benefits (Park et al., 2016). Knowledge base and know-how are required to generate sustainable win-win furniture S.PSS solutions. In conclusion, the critical importance of design and the emphasis on complementary products and Product-Service system innovation are duly recognized. Nevertheless, the established knowledge base and practical know-how of Design for Sustainability (DfS) as applied to the furniture sector remain relatively limited at this time. On the other side, furniture refers to a broad set of products used daily in both domestic and non-domestic spaces for functions such as storage, hanging, supporting, lying, sitting, working, and eating (Cordella & Hidalgo, 2016). The scope of this research focuses on office and household furniture because they account for more than 60% of furniture production (Renda et al., 2014), and they are the primary focus of interdisciplinary fields such as furniture and environmental science, as well as furniture and design for sustainability. Furthermore, the study has evidenced (through a series of Life Cycle Assessment studies, chapter 5.1) that these two subcategories of furniture have similar life cycle environmental performance. Thus, similar approaches to improve sustainability could be used. Second, the boundary between office and household furniture is vanishing in use contexts as modern organizations increasingly rely on engaging work environments that blur the lines between home and office to boost employees’ motivation and productivity (Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, 2021). As a result, the application contexts for these two types of furniture are becoming and have been evaluated as more comparable. Research questions According to the former considerations, the main research questions for this research are: RQ1: What are the framework and characteristics of environmentally Sustainable Furniture Systems? RQ1.1 What are the innovation requirements and characteristics of environmentally sustainable furniture products (product level)? RQ1.2 What are the characteristics of environmentally and economically sustainable win-win furniture Product-Service Systems (PSS level)? RQ2: What new knowledge is needed to design environmentally Sustainable Furniture Systems? RQ2.1 What new competencies, skills, methods, and tools are needed for environmentally sustainable furniture Life Cycle Design (product level)? RQ2.2 What new competencies, skills, methods, and tools are needed for environmentally Sustainable furniture Product-Service System Design (PSS level)? Methods This research aligns with the constructivism paradigm, which posits the existence of a tangible reality encompassing sustainable furniture systems, comprising both furniture products and Product-Service Systems. The researcher actively collaborated with other experts from the sustainable furniture community to collectively construct a deeper understanding of the nature of sustainable furniture systems. This collaborative effort aimed to facilitate the practical application of these insights within the furniture sector. The interactions between researchers, designers, and the furniture system itself play a pivotal role in this constructive process. It's important to note that the LeNS Network serves as the primary scientific community of reference in this endeavor. This Ph.D. research primarily adopted a qualitative research approach, employing a flexible design strategy and an inductive approach. It's worth noting that a small portion of this research utilized a mixed strategy. Given the complexity of the research and the variety of strategies, approaches, and planned activities, a Design-Based Research (DBR) methodology framework was chosen to guide the entire process. DBR consists of four primary stages (Barab & Squire, 2004; Brown, 1992; Collins, 1992; F. Wang & Hannafin, 2005): (1) Analysis of practical problems, (2) development of solutions informed by existing design principles, (3) iterative cycles of testing and refinement of solutions in practice, and (4) reflection to produce design principles and enhance solution implementation (Herrington et al., 2007; Reeves et al., 2005). It's worth mentioning that some researchers followed a three-stage research process involving preliminary research, prototyping and assessment, and reflection (Ceschin, 2012; Diehl, 2010). These two research processes essentially align, with the latter combining the steps of prototyping and assessment while the former keeps them separate. Research stage I: Analysis of practical problems_preliminary research The initial phase of the design-based research process encompasses fundamental tasks such as problem identification, conducting a comprehensive literature survey, and defining the research problem (Bannan-Ritland, 2003). In this research, the initial stage entailed a comprehensive exploration surrounding design for sustainable furniture systems. This exploration encompassed various aspects, including an examination of the environmental issues stemming from the furniture system (from furniture products and Product-Service Systems) and the general knowledge base and know-how related to design for sustainability. Building on the foundational understanding acquired, the research proceeded to identify specific research problems, gaps in existing knowledge, and overarching research goals. In the second step of the research process, further investigation was conducted to address Research Question 1: a qualitative research strategy was employed, complemented by one research activity utilizing a quantitative strategy. This stage embraced an inductive approach. The activities undertaken to address RQ 1 were as follows. Exploring aspects including the innovations and characteristics of environmentally sustainable furniture products (addressing Research Question 1.1): Reviewing the literature on furniture life cycle activities and other researcher’s Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on furniture, assessing the environmental impact of 25 pieces of furniture through a comprehensive LCA in the study, analyzing best practices, conducting semi-structured interviews, all with the goal of constructing a furniture life cycle profile and identifying sustainability-oriented interventions and characteristics. The design insights gained in this phase were employed in the subsequent stage to formulate furniture-specific Life Cycle Design (LCD) guidelines (Chapter 7.1). The detailed life cycle data served to establish priorities for furniture LCD strategies (Chapter 7.1) and as a comprehensive database for furniture designers. Furthermore, the investigation delved into the attributes of economically viable and environmentally sustainable furniture Product-Service Systems (addressing Research Question 1.2). This involved a comprehensive review of literature, analysis of best practices, and conducting semi-structured interviews with the objective of identifying characteristics of furniture S.PSS (classification, definition, key elements, and features). This process resulted in the creation of a furniture system profile and the development of an archetypal furniture S.PSS map. Subsequently, these furniture S.PSS characteristics were utilized in the subsequent stage to formulate furniture-specific S.PSSD guidelines in Chapter 7.2. Concluding this stage, the conceptual framework for the Sustainable Furniture System was developed, taking into consideration the characteristics of S.PSS furniture offerings. Additionally, the framework acknowledges the mutually beneficial economic and environmental advantages of Furniture S.PSS in facilitating furniture Life Cycle Design (LCD). Research stage II: Development of solutions informed by existing principles _prototyping The second phase of design-based research involved developing solutions to the problems identified in the first research stage. Theory plays a crucial role in informing practical design guidelines. Design-based research advocates for a pragmatic philosophical foundation, where the value of a theory is measured by its capacity to bring about changes in the real world (Barab & Squire, 2004). In this stage, the new role of design in shaping environmentally sustainable furniture systems at both the product and Sustainable Product-service System (S.PSS) levels was defined. The framework developed in the first phase has served as a guide for conducting the second stage of the research, aimed at addressing Research Question 2 (RQ 2). To answer RQ 2, a qualitative strategy was employed, adopting a mixed inductive approach. To address Research Question 2, building upon the design insights and sustainable characteristics identified in Research Question 1, preliminary guidelines for sustainable furniture system design were developed. This process involved integrating experts' knowledge in furniture design and design for sustainability through two workshops, employing a consolidated method (see Figure 8). Subsequently, these guidelines were evaluated by experts for comprehensibility and practical utility. This iterative process facilitated the creation of comprehensive sustainable furniture-specific design guidelines at both the product and Product-Service System (PSS) levels, encompassing three levels of detail: strategy, sub-strategy, and guideline. At the same time, drawing on these design guidelines, a series of furniture-specific sustainable design tools were created and evaluated through workshops, focus groups, interviews, and questionnaires, employing a deductive-inductive approach. The evaluation process is detailed in the next paragraph. Research stage III: Iterative cycles of testing and refinement of solutions in practice _assessing This research stage was dedicated to iterative processes of empirically applying, evaluating, updating, and redesigning/improving the furniture-specific design method and tools. The primary goal of this stage was to validate the developed knowledge base and know-how for their comprehensibility, usability, and effectiveness (success). The main methods employed during this stage include a workshop, a focus group, interviews, and questionnaires. Three strategies were employed to validate the sustainable furniture system design tools: The first strategy involved the implementation and evaluation of these tools in real projects. These tools underwent validation within the GIOTTO project, with peer feedback providing valuable insights. The second strategy included the implementation and assessment of the approach in a design workshop, a focus group, and interviews with (young) furniture designers and/or experts in design for sustainability. The sustainable furniture system design tools were applied and evaluated by 30 master's students (young designers) in furniture design during a workshop. The third strategy was centered on engaging furniture designers, experts, and practitioners in the fields of design for sustainability and furniture design to assess the potential of these tools. This involved interviews with a total of 19 furniture designers, experts, and professors with a background in furniture design for sustainability from the LeNS Network. Lastly, a questionnaire was distributed to 21 LeNS Network members for the final evaluation of these tools. After each evaluation activity, these tools were refined or improved. Participants were selected based on specific criteria: 1) their involvement in sustainable furniture-related projects; 2) their affiliation with furniture design institutions/studios or their experience in furniture design or other product design; 3) their association with the LeNS network and focus on design for sustainability and/or furniture design. The continuous application and evaluation of these tools resulted in continual improvement. Research stage IV: reflection to produce design principles and enhance solution implementation The objective of this research stage was to conduct a retrospective analysis of the entire study, with a particular focus on the research outcomes and the research methodology employed. This stage led to the following outcomes: • Specification of the primary contributions made to both theory and practice. • Identification and discussion of research limitations. • Reflection on the potential generalizability of the results. • Formulation of recommendations for future research and practice. Leveraging the knowledge base and know-how developed within this research, I am currently in the process of creating an open-access course (comprising videos, slides, and textual content) and an open-access book to disseminate this valuable knowledge base and know-how. The overall aim is to share the knowledge base and know-how on Sustainable Furniture System design with an open-access approach.
È ampiamente riconosciuto che il sistema di produzione e consumo dei mobili ha un impatto ambientale significativo ed è uno dei settori chiave per migliorare la sostenibilità. Tuttavia, mancano una base di conoscenze e un know-how completi, scientificamente fondati e specifici per il settore del mobile, tra cui un quadro teorico, approcci, linee guida, metodi e strumenti per guidare l'industria del mobile verso la sostenibilità. Una comunità scientifica internazionale in crescita sta lavorando per colmare questa lacuna. Questo dottorato di ricerca si inserisce in quest'area di ricerca, concentrandosi sull'eco-design del prodotto (o meglio sul Life Cycle Design (LCD)) e sul Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD). La rete LeNS, che collega quasi 150 università di design distribuite in tutto il mondo, è la principale comunità scientifica di riferimento. La ricerca mira a sviluppare una base di conoscenze e un know-how specifici per l'arredamento per sostenere la diffusione del Sustainable Furniture System Design (SFSD). Introduzione Lo sviluppo sostenibile si riferisce a condizioni sistemiche in cui, a livello planetario e regionale, lo sviluppo sociale e produttivo avviene (i) rispettando i limiti di resilienza dell'ambiente, cioè entro la sua capacità di assorbire gli effetti dell'impatto umano senza causare alcun degrado irreversibile; (ii) senza compromettere la capacità delle generazioni future di soddisfare i propri bisogni, cioè, preservare le risorse, o capitale naturale, che saranno trasmesse alle generazioni future; (iii) sulla base di un'equa ridistribuzione delle risorse secondo il principio che tutti hanno gli stessi diritti allo spazio ambientale, cioè lo stesso accesso alle risorse naturali globali (Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). L'Agenda 2030 per lo sviluppo sostenibile ha annunciato 17 Obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile (SDGs) come progetto condiviso per la sostenibilità in tre dimensioni: prosperità economica, equità e inclusione sociale e protezione ambientale (Nazioni Unite, 2015). Tuttavia, molte prove indicano che la nostra attuale crescita è incompatibile con questi SDGs, considerando gli aspetti ambientali. La sovrapproduzione e il consumo eccessivo a livello di sistema, così come il pesante impatto ambientale di un singolo mobile a livello di prodotto, sono tra le sfide ambientali per il settore del mobile. Secondo le stime del Centre for Industrial Study (CSIL), su scala globale, l'industria del mobile ha raddoppiato il suo volume dal 2000 al 2021, raggiungendo un volume mondiale di circa 500 miliardi di dollari, in aumento nel prossimo anno (CSIL, 2021), con un conseguente significativo consumo di risorse, emissioni nocive e produzione di rifiuti. Ad esempio, ogni anno vengono prodotti 10,5 milioni di tonnellate di mobili e 10 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti di mobili, che rappresentano oltre il 4% dei rifiuti solidi urbani dell'Unione Europea (Forrest et al., 2017). Questi impatti, tra l'altro, possono essere osservati anche durante il ciclo di vita dei mobili, nella fase di pre-produzione, produzione, distribuzione, utilizzo e smaltimento (González-García et al., 2019). Di conseguenza, i mobili sono stati recentemente identificati come uno dei settori chiave che dovrebbero essere affrontati e migliorati per raggiungere uno sviluppo più sostenibile (Commissione Europea, 2020). Il design è stato riconosciuto come un'area significativa nella transizione verso modelli di produzione e consumo più responsabili e sostenibili (Bhamra & Hernandez, 2021). Per essere precisi, più dell'80% dell'impatto ambientale di un prodotto è determinato nella fase di progettazione (Design Council, 2022; Commissione Europea, 2020), è necessario cambiare il modo di pensare ai prodotti, ai processi o ai servizi fin dalle prime fasi della progettazione (Barbero & Ferrulli, 2023). In realtà, l'attenzione del Design for Sustainability ha ampliato il livello di innovazione dalla selezione di materiali ed energia a basso impatto alla progettazione del prodotto, alla progettazione del sistema prodotto-servizio, all'innovazione spazio-sociale e, più recentemente, all'innovazione dei sistemi socio-tecnici (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2019a). D'altra parte, il DfS ha ampliato il suo campo di applicazione dalla dimensione ambientale della sostenibilità a quella economica e a quella socio-etica (L. I. Chaves, 2018; Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). Facendo riferimento al quadro del Design for Sustainability (DfS), questa ricerca pone l'accento sulle dimensioni ambientale ed economica della sostenibilità. Affronta queste dimensioni a due livelli cruciali: il livello del prodotto d'arredo, che include aspetti come il Life Cycle Design (LCD) (o eco-design), e il livello dell'innovazione che coinvolge i sistemi prodotto-servizio d'arredo (Sustainable Product-Service System, S.PSS). È importante notare che entrambi i livelli presentano una notevole lacuna di conoscenze che richiede approfondimenti completi e scientificamente fondati per arricchire il contesto progettuale. Gli approcci LCD innovano a livello di prodotto, utilizzando un approccio al ciclo di vita e un approccio funzionale (Hemel, 1997; Giudice et al., 2006; Keoleian & Menerey, 1993; Pigosso et al., 2015; Tischner, 2001; Vezzoli, 2018a). Gli approcci di Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD) innovano a livello di sistema per quanto riguarda il modello di offerta/business, che viene spesso modellato sulla base del sistema di soddisfazione, della configurazione degli stakeholder e degli approcci di sostenibilità del sistema (UNEP & Delft University of Technology, 2017; Van Halen et al., 2006; Vezzoli et al., 2015). Secondo i risultati della revisione della letteratura, l'industria del mobile si sta attualmente concentrando sull'innovazione di un singolo indicatore, come la riduzione del contenuto di materiali (Ika Rinawati et al., 2018) e la selezione di risorse con un minore impatto ambientale (Iritani et al., 2015), che sono insufficienti. Sebbene siano state proposte alcune strategie LCD per i prodotti di arredamento (Krystofik et al., 2018), mancano approcci, strategie e linee guida complete specifiche per i mobili. Inoltre, poche ricerche forniscono soluzioni ai compromessi tra le diverse strategie LCD, ovvero alle priorità delle strategie LCD specifiche per i mobili. Per quanto riguarda la S.PSSD del mobile, un numero limitato di studi si concentra sulla sostenibilità ambientale o sulla prosperità economica, senza considerare i vantaggi economici e ambientali che ne derivano (Park et al., 2016). Sono necessarie conoscenze di base e know-how per generare soluzioni di S.PSS sostenibili e vantaggiose per l'ambiente. In conclusione, l'importanza critica del design e l'enfasi sui prodotti complementari e sull'innovazione dei sistemi prodotto-servizio sono debitamente riconosciute. Tuttavia, la base di conoscenze consolidate e il know-how pratico del Design for Sustainability (DfS) applicato al settore dell'arredamento rimangono al momento relativamente limitati. D'altra parte, i mobili si riferiscono a un ampio insieme di prodotti utilizzati quotidianamente in spazi domestici e non domestici per funzioni quali riporre, appendere, sostenere, sdraiarsi, sedersi, lavorare e mangiare (Cordella & Hidalgo, 2016). L'ambito di questa ricerca si concentra sui mobili per ufficio e per la casa perché rappresentano oltre il 60% della produzione di mobili (Renda et al., 2014) e sono l'obiettivo principale di campi interdisciplinari come l'arredamento e le scienze ambientali, nonché l'arredamento e il design per la sostenibilità. Inoltre, lo studio ha evidenziato (attraverso una serie di studi di Life Cycle Assessment, capitolo 5.1) che queste due sottocategorie di mobili hanno prestazioni ambientali simili nel ciclo di vita. Pertanto, si potrebbero utilizzare approcci simili per migliorare la sostenibilità. In secondo luogo, il confine tra mobili per ufficio e mobili per la casa sta scomparendo nei contesti d'uso, poiché le organizzazioni moderne si affidano sempre più ad ambienti di lavoro coinvolgenti che sfumano i confini tra casa e ufficio per aumentare la motivazione e la produttività dei dipendenti (Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, 2021). Di conseguenza, i contesti di applicazione di questi due tipi di mobili stanno diventando e sono stati valutati come più comparabili. Domande di ricerca In base alle considerazioni precedenti, le principali domande di ricerca per questa ricerca sono: RQ1: Quali sono il quadro e le caratteristiche dei sistemi di arredamento ecologicamente sostenibili? RQ1.1 Quali sono i requisiti di innovazione e le caratteristiche dei prodotti di arredamento ecosostenibili (livello di prodotto)? RQ1.2 Quali sono le caratteristiche dei sistemi di prodotti-servizi per l'arredamento sostenibili dal punto di vista ambientale ed economico (livello PSS)? RQ2: Quali nuove conoscenze sono necessarie per progettare sistemi di arredamento ambientalmente sostenibili? RQ2.1 Quali nuove competenze, abilità, metodi e strumenti sono necessari per la progettazione del ciclo di vita dei mobili ambientalmente sostenibili (livello prodotto)? RQ2.2 Quali nuove competenze, abilità, metodi e strumenti sono necessari per la progettazione di sistemi di prodotto-servizio per mobili ambientalmente sostenibili (livello PSS)? Metodi Questa ricerca si allinea al paradigma del costruttivismo, che presuppone l'esistenza di una realtà tangibile che comprende i sistemi di arredamento sostenibili, comprendendo sia i prodotti di arredamento che i sistemi prodotto-servizio. Il ricercatore ha collaborato attivamente con altri esperti della comunità del mobile sostenibile per costruire collettivamente una comprensione più profonda della natura dei sistemi di mobili sostenibili. Questo sforzo collaborativo mirava a facilitare l'applicazione pratica di queste intuizioni nel settore dell'arredamento. Le interazioni tra ricercatori, progettisti e lo stesso sistema del mobile giocano un ruolo fondamentale in questo processo costruttivo. È importante notare che la Rete LeNS funge da comunità scientifica di riferimento in questo sforzo. Questa ricerca di dottorato ha adottato principalmente un approccio di ricerca qualitativa, impiegando una strategia di progettazione flessibile e un approccio induttivo. Vale la pena notare che una piccola parte di questa ricerca ha utilizzato una strategia mista. Data la complessità della ricerca e la varietà di strategie, approcci e attività pianificate, per guidare l'intero processo è stato scelto un quadro metodologico di Design-Based Research (DBR). La DBR consiste in quattro fasi principali (Barab & Squire, 2004; Brown, 1992; Collins, 1992; F. Wang & Hannafin, 2005): (1) analisi dei problemi pratici, (2) sviluppo di soluzioni informate dai principi di progettazione esistenti, (3) cicli iterativi di test e perfezionamento delle soluzioni nella pratica e (4) riflessione per produrre principi di progettazione e migliorare l'implementazione delle soluzioni (Herrington et al., 2007; Reeves et al., 2005). Vale la pena ricordare che alcuni ricercatori hanno seguito un processo di ricerca in tre fasi che comprende la ricerca preliminare, la prototipazione e la valutazione e la riflessione (Ceschin, 2012; Diehl, 2010). Questi due processi di ricerca sostanzialmente coincidono, con il secondo che combina le fasi di prototipazione e valutazione, mentre il primo le tiene separate. Fase di ricerca I: analisi dei problemi pratici_ricerca preliminare La fase iniziale del processo di ricerca basato sul design comprende compiti fondamentali come l'identificazione del problema, la conduzione di un'indagine completa della letteratura e la definizione del problema di ricerca (Bannan-Ritland, 2003). In questa ricerca, la fase iniziale ha comportato un'esplorazione completa della progettazione di sistemi di arredamento sostenibili. Questa esplorazione ha compreso vari aspetti, tra cui l'esame delle problematiche ambientali derivanti dal sistema di arredamento (dai prodotti di arredamento e dai sistemi prodotto-servizio) e la base di conoscenza generale e il know-how relativi alla progettazione per la sostenibilità. Partendo dalle conoscenze di base acquisite, la ricerca ha proceduto a identificare problemi di ricerca specifici, lacune nelle conoscenze esistenti e obiettivi di ricerca generali. Nella seconda fase del processo di ricerca, sono state condotte ulteriori indagini per rispondere alla domanda 1: è stata utilizzata una strategia di ricerca qualitativa, integrata da un'attività di ricerca che utilizzava una strategia quantitativa. Questa fase ha adottato un approccio induttivo. Le attività intraprese per rispondere alla RQ 1 sono state le seguenti. Esplorazione di aspetti quali le innovazioni e le caratteristiche dei prodotti di arredamento ecosostenibili (per rispondere alla domanda di ricerca 1.1): Revisione della letteratura sulle attività del ciclo di vita dei mobili e della valutazione del ciclo di vita (LCA) di altri ricercatori sui mobili, valutazione dell'impatto ambientale di 25 mobili attraverso una LCA completa nello studio, analisi delle migliori pratiche, conduzione di interviste semi-strutturate, il tutto con l'obiettivo di costruire un profilo del ciclo di vita dei mobili e identificare interventi e caratteristiche orientati alla sostenibilità. Le intuizioni progettuali acquisite in questa fase sono state utilizzate nella fase successiva per formulare linee guida specifiche per il Life Cycle Design (LCD) dei mobili (Capitolo 7.1). I dati dettagliati sul ciclo di vita sono serviti a stabilire le priorità per le strategie di LCD dei mobili (Capitolo 7.1) e come database completo per i progettisti di mobili. Inoltre, l'indagine ha approfondito gli attributi dei sistemi prodotto-servizio per l'arredamento economicamente validi ed ecologicamente sostenibili (rispondendo alla domanda di ricerca 1.2). Ciò ha comportato una revisione completa della letteratura, l'analisi delle migliori pratiche e la conduzione di interviste semi-strutturate con l'obiettivo di identificare le caratteristiche dei S.PSS del mobile (classificazione, definizione, elementi chiave e caratteristiche). Questo processo ha portato alla creazione di un profilo del sistema di arredamento e allo sviluppo di una mappa archetipica dei S.PSS dell'arredamento. Le caratteristiche del S.PSS dell'arredamento sono state poi utilizzate nella fase successiva per formulare le linee guida S.PSSD specifiche per l'arredamento nel capitolo 7.2. A conclusione di questa fase, è stato sviluppato il quadro concettuale del Sistema di Arredo Sostenibile, tenendo conto delle caratteristiche delle offerte di mobili S.PSS. Inoltre, il quadro riconosce i vantaggi economici e ambientali reciprocamente vantaggiosi del S.PSS Mobili nel facilitare il Life Cycle Design (LCD) dei mobili. Fase di ricerca II: sviluppo di soluzioni informate dai principi esistenti _prototipazione La seconda fase della ricerca basata sul design prevede lo sviluppo di soluzioni ai problemi identificati nella prima fase di ricerca. La teoria svolge un ruolo cruciale nell'informare le linee guida pratiche del design. La ricerca basata sul design sostiene una base filosofica pragmatica, in cui il valore di una teoria si misura in base alla sua capacità di produrre cambiamenti nel mondo reale (Barab & Squire, 2004). In questa fase è stato definito il nuovo ruolo del design nel dare forma a sistemi di arredamento ecosostenibili, sia a livello di prodotto che di sistema prodotto-servizio sostenibile (S.PSS). Il quadro sviluppato nella prima fase è servito da guida per la conduzione della seconda fase della ricerca, volta a rispondere alla Research Question 2 (RQ 2). Per rispondere alla RQ 2, è stata utilizzata una strategia qualitativa, adottando un approccio induttivo misto. Per rispondere alla domanda di ricerca 2, partendo dalle intuizioni progettuali e dalle caratteristiche di sostenibilità identificate nella domanda di ricerca 1, sono state sviluppate delle linee guida preliminari per la progettazione di sistemi di arredamento sostenibili. Questo processo ha comportato l'integrazione delle conoscenze degli esperti in materia di design dell'arredamento e di design per la sostenibilità attraverso due workshop, utilizzando un metodo consolidato (cfr. Figura 8). Successivamente, le linee guida sono state valutate dagli esperti per verificarne la comprensibilità e l'utilità pratica. Questo processo iterativo ha facilitato la creazione di linee guida complete per la progettazione di mobili sostenibili sia a livello di prodotto che di sistema prodotto-servizio (PSS), comprendendo tre livelli di dettaglio: strategia, sotto-strategia e linea guida. Allo stesso tempo, sulla base di queste linee guida, sono stati creati una serie di strumenti di progettazione sostenibile specifici per l'arredamento, valutati attraverso workshop, focus group, interviste e questionari, utilizzando un approccio deduttivo-induttivo. Il processo di valutazione è descritto in dettaglio nel paragrafo successivo. Fase III della ricerca: cicli iterativi di test e perfezionamento delle soluzioni nella pratica _valutazione Questa fase della ricerca è stata dedicata ai processi iterativi di applicazione empirica, valutazione, aggiornamento e riprogettazione/miglioramento del metodo e degli strumenti di progettazione specifici per l'arredamento. L'obiettivo principale di questa fase è stato quello di convalidare la base di conoscenze e il know-how sviluppati per la loro comprensibilità, usabilità ed efficacia (successo). I principali metodi impiegati in questa fase comprendono un workshop, un focus group, interviste e questionari. Per convalidare gli strumenti di progettazione del sistema di arredamento sostenibile sono state impiegate tre strategie: La prima strategia prevedeva l'implementazione e la valutazione di questi strumenti in progetti reali. Questi strumenti sono stati convalidati nell'ambito del progetto GIOTTO e il feedback dei colleghi ha fornito preziose indicazioni. La seconda strategia ha previsto l'implementazione e la valutazione dell'approccio in un workshop di progettazione, un focus group e interviste con (giovani) designer di mobili e/o esperti di design per la sostenibilità. Gli strumenti di progettazione del sistema di mobili sostenibili sono stati applicati e valutati da 30 studenti di master (giovani designer) in design di mobili durante un workshop. La terza strategia è stata incentrata sul coinvolgimento di designer di mobili, esperti e professionisti nel campo del design per la sostenibilità e del design di mobili per valutare il potenziale di questi strumenti. Si è trattato di interviste a un totale di 19 designer di mobili, esperti e professori con un background nel design del mobile per la sostenibilità della Rete LeNS. Infine, è stato distribuito un questionario a 21 membri della Rete LeNS per la valutazione finale di questi strumenti. Dopo ogni attività di valutazione, questi strumenti sono stati perfezionati o migliorati. I partecipanti sono stati selezionati in base a criteri specifici: 1) il loro coinvolgimento in progetti legati all'arredamento sostenibile; 2) la loro affiliazione a istituzioni/studi di design del mobile o la loro esperienza nel design del mobile o di altri prodotti; 3) la loro associazione alla rete LeNS e l'attenzione al design per la sostenibilità e/o al design del mobile. La continua applicazione e valutazione di questi strumenti ha portato a un miglioramento continuo. Fase di ricerca IV: riflessione per produrre principi di design e migliorare l'implementazione delle soluzioni L'obiettivo di questa fase della ricerca è stato quello di condurre un'analisi retrospettiva dell'intero studio, con particolare attenzione ai risultati della ricerca e alla metodologia impiegata. Questa fase ha portato ai seguenti risultati: - Specificazione dei principali contributi apportati sia alla teoria che alla pratica. - Identificazione e discussione dei limiti della ricerca. - Riflessione sulla potenziale generalizzabilità dei risultati. - Formulazione di raccomandazioni per la ricerca e la pratica future. Sfruttando la base di conoscenze e il know-how sviluppati nell'ambito di questa ricerca, sono attualmente in procinto di creare un corso ad accesso libero (comprendente video, diapositive e contenuti testuali) e un libro ad accesso libero per diffondere questa preziosa base di conoscenze e know-how. L'obiettivo generale è quello di condividere la base di conoscenze e il know-how sulla progettazione di sistemi di arredamento sostenibili con un approccio ad accesso libero.
Designing sustainable furniture systems : the knowledge base and know-how for furniture product and product-service system design for environmental sustainability
Yang, Dongfang
2023/2024
Abstract
It is widely acknowledged that the furniture production and consumption system have a significant environmental impact and is one of the key sectors for improving sustainability. However, there is a lack of comprehensive, scientifically based, furniture-specific knowledge base and know-how, including a theoretical framework, approaches, guidelines, methods, and tools to guide the furniture industry toward sustainability. A growing international scientific community is working to fill the gap. This Ph.D. research is framed into this research area, focusing on product eco-design (or better Life Cycle Design (LCD)) and Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD). The LeNS network, which connects nearly 150 design Universities distributed worldwide, is the primary scientific community for reference. The research aims to develop a furniture-specific knowledge base and know-how to support the diffusion of Sustainable Furniture System Design (SFSD). Introduction Sustainable development refers to systemic conditions where, on a planetary and regional level, both social and productive development takes place (i) respecting the limits of environmental resilience, i.e., within its capacity to absorb the effects of human impact without causing any irreversible degradation; (ii) without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, i.e., preserving resources, or natural capital, which will be passed on to future generations; (iii) on the grounds of equal redistribution of resources following the principle that everyone has the same rights to environmental space, i.e. the same access to global natural resources (Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development announced 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a shared blueprint for sustainability in three dimensions- economic prosperity, social equity and inclusion, and environmental protection (United Nations, 2015). However, much evidence indicates that our current growth is incompatible with these SDGs considering the environmental aspects. Overproduction and overconsumption on the system level, as well as the heavy environmental impacts of a single piece of furniture on the product level, are among the environmental challenges for the furniture sector. According to the estimation of Centre for Industrial Study (CSIL), On a global scale, the furniture industry has doubled its volume from 2000 to 2021, reaching a worldwide volume of about $500 billion, which is seeing an increase in the next year (CSIL, 2021), resulting in significant resource consumption, harmful emissions, and waste generation. For example, each year, 10.5 million tons of furniture are produced, and 10 million tons of furniture waste are generated, accounting for more than 4% of municipal solid waste in the European Union (Forrest et al., 2017). These impacts, among others, could also be seen throughout the furniture's life cycle, during pre-production, production, distribution, use, and disposal (González-García et al., 2019). As a result, furniture has recently been identified as one of the key sectors that should be addressed and improved to achieve more sustainable development (European Commission, 2020). The design was recognized as a significant area in the transition to more responsible and sustainable production and consumption models (Bhamra & Hernandez, 2021). To be specific, more than 80% of a product’s environmental impact is determined at the design stage (Design Council, 2022; European Commission, 2020), it is necessary to change the way we think about products, processes, or services from the earliest stages of design (Barbero & Ferrulli, 2023). Actually, The focus of Design for Sustainability has expanded the level of innovation from low-impact material and energy selection to product design, to Product-Service System design, to Spatio-Social innovation, and more recently to socio-technical systems innovation (Ceschin & Gaziulusoy, 2019a). On the other hand, DfS has expanded its scope from the environmental dimension of sustainability to the economic one to the socio-ethical one (L. I. Chaves, 2018; Vezzoli, Conti, et al., 2022). Referring to the Design for Sustainability (DfS) framework, this research places its emphasis on the environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability. It addresses these dimensions at two crucial levels: the furniture product level, which includes aspects such as Life Cycle Design (LCD) (or eco-design), and the innovation level involving furniture Product-Service Systems (Sustainable Product-Service System, S.PSS). It is important to note that both levels exhibit a noticeable knowledge gap that calls for comprehensive and scientifically grounded insights to enrich the design context. LCD approaches innovate at the product level, using a Life cycle approach and a functional approach (Hemel, 1997; Giudice et al., 2006; Keoleian & Menerey, 1993; Pigosso et al., 2015; Tischner, 2001; Vezzoli, 2018a). Sustainable Product-Service System Design (S.PSSD) approaches innovate at the system level regarding the offering/business model, which is frequently modeled after the satisfaction system, stakeholder configuration, and system sustainability approaches (UNEP & Delft University of Technology, 2017; Van Halen et al., 2006; Vezzoli et al., 2015). According to findings from the literature review, the furniture industry is currently focusing on single-indicator innovation, such as reducing material content (Ika Rinawati et al., 2018) and selecting resources with lower environmental impacts (Iritani et al., 2015), which are insufficient. Although some furniture product LCD strategies have been proposed (Krystofik et al., 2018), there is a lack of comprehensive furniture-specific approaches, strategies, and guidelines. Furthermore, little research provides solutions to the trade-offs among different LCD strategies, i.e., furniture-specific LCD strategy priorities. Regarding furniture S.PSSD, a limited number of studies focus on either environmental sustainability or economic prosperity, with no considerations for win-win economic and environmental benefits (Park et al., 2016). Knowledge base and know-how are required to generate sustainable win-win furniture S.PSS solutions. In conclusion, the critical importance of design and the emphasis on complementary products and Product-Service system innovation are duly recognized. Nevertheless, the established knowledge base and practical know-how of Design for Sustainability (DfS) as applied to the furniture sector remain relatively limited at this time. On the other side, furniture refers to a broad set of products used daily in both domestic and non-domestic spaces for functions such as storage, hanging, supporting, lying, sitting, working, and eating (Cordella & Hidalgo, 2016). The scope of this research focuses on office and household furniture because they account for more than 60% of furniture production (Renda et al., 2014), and they are the primary focus of interdisciplinary fields such as furniture and environmental science, as well as furniture and design for sustainability. Furthermore, the study has evidenced (through a series of Life Cycle Assessment studies, chapter 5.1) that these two subcategories of furniture have similar life cycle environmental performance. Thus, similar approaches to improve sustainability could be used. Second, the boundary between office and household furniture is vanishing in use contexts as modern organizations increasingly rely on engaging work environments that blur the lines between home and office to boost employees’ motivation and productivity (Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, 2021). As a result, the application contexts for these two types of furniture are becoming and have been evaluated as more comparable. Research questions According to the former considerations, the main research questions for this research are: RQ1: What are the framework and characteristics of environmentally Sustainable Furniture Systems? RQ1.1 What are the innovation requirements and characteristics of environmentally sustainable furniture products (product level)? RQ1.2 What are the characteristics of environmentally and economically sustainable win-win furniture Product-Service Systems (PSS level)? RQ2: What new knowledge is needed to design environmentally Sustainable Furniture Systems? RQ2.1 What new competencies, skills, methods, and tools are needed for environmentally sustainable furniture Life Cycle Design (product level)? RQ2.2 What new competencies, skills, methods, and tools are needed for environmentally Sustainable furniture Product-Service System Design (PSS level)? Methods This research aligns with the constructivism paradigm, which posits the existence of a tangible reality encompassing sustainable furniture systems, comprising both furniture products and Product-Service Systems. The researcher actively collaborated with other experts from the sustainable furniture community to collectively construct a deeper understanding of the nature of sustainable furniture systems. This collaborative effort aimed to facilitate the practical application of these insights within the furniture sector. The interactions between researchers, designers, and the furniture system itself play a pivotal role in this constructive process. It's important to note that the LeNS Network serves as the primary scientific community of reference in this endeavor. This Ph.D. research primarily adopted a qualitative research approach, employing a flexible design strategy and an inductive approach. It's worth noting that a small portion of this research utilized a mixed strategy. Given the complexity of the research and the variety of strategies, approaches, and planned activities, a Design-Based Research (DBR) methodology framework was chosen to guide the entire process. DBR consists of four primary stages (Barab & Squire, 2004; Brown, 1992; Collins, 1992; F. Wang & Hannafin, 2005): (1) Analysis of practical problems, (2) development of solutions informed by existing design principles, (3) iterative cycles of testing and refinement of solutions in practice, and (4) reflection to produce design principles and enhance solution implementation (Herrington et al., 2007; Reeves et al., 2005). It's worth mentioning that some researchers followed a three-stage research process involving preliminary research, prototyping and assessment, and reflection (Ceschin, 2012; Diehl, 2010). These two research processes essentially align, with the latter combining the steps of prototyping and assessment while the former keeps them separate. Research stage I: Analysis of practical problems_preliminary research The initial phase of the design-based research process encompasses fundamental tasks such as problem identification, conducting a comprehensive literature survey, and defining the research problem (Bannan-Ritland, 2003). In this research, the initial stage entailed a comprehensive exploration surrounding design for sustainable furniture systems. This exploration encompassed various aspects, including an examination of the environmental issues stemming from the furniture system (from furniture products and Product-Service Systems) and the general knowledge base and know-how related to design for sustainability. Building on the foundational understanding acquired, the research proceeded to identify specific research problems, gaps in existing knowledge, and overarching research goals. In the second step of the research process, further investigation was conducted to address Research Question 1: a qualitative research strategy was employed, complemented by one research activity utilizing a quantitative strategy. This stage embraced an inductive approach. The activities undertaken to address RQ 1 were as follows. Exploring aspects including the innovations and characteristics of environmentally sustainable furniture products (addressing Research Question 1.1): Reviewing the literature on furniture life cycle activities and other researcher’s Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) on furniture, assessing the environmental impact of 25 pieces of furniture through a comprehensive LCA in the study, analyzing best practices, conducting semi-structured interviews, all with the goal of constructing a furniture life cycle profile and identifying sustainability-oriented interventions and characteristics. The design insights gained in this phase were employed in the subsequent stage to formulate furniture-specific Life Cycle Design (LCD) guidelines (Chapter 7.1). The detailed life cycle data served to establish priorities for furniture LCD strategies (Chapter 7.1) and as a comprehensive database for furniture designers. Furthermore, the investigation delved into the attributes of economically viable and environmentally sustainable furniture Product-Service Systems (addressing Research Question 1.2). This involved a comprehensive review of literature, analysis of best practices, and conducting semi-structured interviews with the objective of identifying characteristics of furniture S.PSS (classification, definition, key elements, and features). This process resulted in the creation of a furniture system profile and the development of an archetypal furniture S.PSS map. Subsequently, these furniture S.PSS characteristics were utilized in the subsequent stage to formulate furniture-specific S.PSSD guidelines in Chapter 7.2. Concluding this stage, the conceptual framework for the Sustainable Furniture System was developed, taking into consideration the characteristics of S.PSS furniture offerings. Additionally, the framework acknowledges the mutually beneficial economic and environmental advantages of Furniture S.PSS in facilitating furniture Life Cycle Design (LCD). Research stage II: Development of solutions informed by existing principles _prototyping The second phase of design-based research involved developing solutions to the problems identified in the first research stage. Theory plays a crucial role in informing practical design guidelines. Design-based research advocates for a pragmatic philosophical foundation, where the value of a theory is measured by its capacity to bring about changes in the real world (Barab & Squire, 2004). In this stage, the new role of design in shaping environmentally sustainable furniture systems at both the product and Sustainable Product-service System (S.PSS) levels was defined. The framework developed in the first phase has served as a guide for conducting the second stage of the research, aimed at addressing Research Question 2 (RQ 2). To answer RQ 2, a qualitative strategy was employed, adopting a mixed inductive approach. To address Research Question 2, building upon the design insights and sustainable characteristics identified in Research Question 1, preliminary guidelines for sustainable furniture system design were developed. This process involved integrating experts' knowledge in furniture design and design for sustainability through two workshops, employing a consolidated method (see Figure 8). Subsequently, these guidelines were evaluated by experts for comprehensibility and practical utility. This iterative process facilitated the creation of comprehensive sustainable furniture-specific design guidelines at both the product and Product-Service System (PSS) levels, encompassing three levels of detail: strategy, sub-strategy, and guideline. At the same time, drawing on these design guidelines, a series of furniture-specific sustainable design tools were created and evaluated through workshops, focus groups, interviews, and questionnaires, employing a deductive-inductive approach. The evaluation process is detailed in the next paragraph. Research stage III: Iterative cycles of testing and refinement of solutions in practice _assessing This research stage was dedicated to iterative processes of empirically applying, evaluating, updating, and redesigning/improving the furniture-specific design method and tools. The primary goal of this stage was to validate the developed knowledge base and know-how for their comprehensibility, usability, and effectiveness (success). The main methods employed during this stage include a workshop, a focus group, interviews, and questionnaires. Three strategies were employed to validate the sustainable furniture system design tools: The first strategy involved the implementation and evaluation of these tools in real projects. These tools underwent validation within the GIOTTO project, with peer feedback providing valuable insights. The second strategy included the implementation and assessment of the approach in a design workshop, a focus group, and interviews with (young) furniture designers and/or experts in design for sustainability. The sustainable furniture system design tools were applied and evaluated by 30 master's students (young designers) in furniture design during a workshop. The third strategy was centered on engaging furniture designers, experts, and practitioners in the fields of design for sustainability and furniture design to assess the potential of these tools. This involved interviews with a total of 19 furniture designers, experts, and professors with a background in furniture design for sustainability from the LeNS Network. Lastly, a questionnaire was distributed to 21 LeNS Network members for the final evaluation of these tools. After each evaluation activity, these tools were refined or improved. Participants were selected based on specific criteria: 1) their involvement in sustainable furniture-related projects; 2) their affiliation with furniture design institutions/studios or their experience in furniture design or other product design; 3) their association with the LeNS network and focus on design for sustainability and/or furniture design. The continuous application and evaluation of these tools resulted in continual improvement. Research stage IV: reflection to produce design principles and enhance solution implementation The objective of this research stage was to conduct a retrospective analysis of the entire study, with a particular focus on the research outcomes and the research methodology employed. This stage led to the following outcomes: • Specification of the primary contributions made to both theory and practice. • Identification and discussion of research limitations. • Reflection on the potential generalizability of the results. • Formulation of recommendations for future research and practice. Leveraging the knowledge base and know-how developed within this research, I am currently in the process of creating an open-access course (comprising videos, slides, and textual content) and an open-access book to disseminate this valuable knowledge base and know-how. The overall aim is to share the knowledge base and know-how on Sustainable Furniture System design with an open-access approach.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
2nd_Annex_Designing Sustainable Furniture Systems - The knowledge base and know-how for Furniture Product and Product-Service System Design for Environmental Sustainability.pdf
accessibile in internet per tutti a partire dal 23/02/2025
Descrizione: annex files
Dimensione
18.27 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
18.27 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
1st_thesis_Designing Sustainable Furniture Systems.pdf
accessibile in internet per tutti a partire dal 23/02/2025
Descrizione: thesis text
Dimensione
18.4 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
18.4 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/217152