Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-30T12:31:52.039Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sustainability criteria for introducing new technologies in low-income contexts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Adam Mattias Mallalieu ,
Amanda Jonasson ,
Sara Petersson ,
Marlene Rosendal ,
Sophie I. Hallstedt ,
Lars Almefelt  and
Ola Isaksson
Adam Mattias Mallalieu*
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden Engineers Without Borders, Sweden
Amanda Jonasson
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden Engineers Without Borders, Sweden
Sara Petersson
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden Engineers Without Borders, Sweden
Marlene Rosendal
Affiliation:
Engineers Without Borders, Sweden
Sophie I. Hallstedt
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden
Lars Almefelt
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
Ola Isaksson
Affiliation:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
*
adammal@chalmers.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introducing new technologies in low-income contexts have potential for positive social impact, and such efforts are made by humanitarian engineering non-govermental organisations (NGOs). The impact can increase if a systemic sustainability perspective is considered in the design process. Sustainability criteria are identified using a literature study combined with an empirical study together with a Swedish NGO. These criteria are synthesized into a simplified Sustainability Fingerprint tool which is evaluated and deemed to be useful when introducing new technologies in low-income contexts.

Keywords

sustainabilitysustainable designdesign methodssocial equitysocial innovation
Type
Design for Sustainability
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 1359 - 1368
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Amadei, B., Sandekian, R., & Thomas, E. (2009). "A model for sustainable humanitarian engineering projects". Sustainability, 1(4), 1087-1105. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1041087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demssie, Y. N., Wesselink, R., Biemans, H. J., & Mulder, M. (2019). "Think outside the European box: Identifying sustainability competencies for a base of the pyramid context". Journal of Cleaner Production, 221, 828-838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallstedt, S. I. (2017). "Sustainability criteria and sustainability compliance index for decision support in product development". Journal of Cleaner production, 140, 251-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallstedt, S. I., Villamil, C., Lövdahl, J., & Nylander, J. W. (2023). "Sustainability fingerprint-guiding companies in anticipating the sustainability direction in early design". Sustainable Production and Consumption, 37, 424-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.03.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S., & Larsson, T. (2018). "Design and Frugal Innovations: Three roles of resource-poor people". In DS 92: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International design conference (pp. 2657-2668). https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonasson, A., & Pettersson, S. (2023). A Feasibility Study Process for Humanitarian Engineering Systematically increasing the Social Impact for a Swedish NGO. [Master's thesis], Industrial & Materials Science, Chalmers University of Technology.Google Scholar
Lucena, J., Schneider, J., & Leydens, J. A. (2022). Engineering and sustainable community development. Springer Nature.Google Scholar
Mutanga, S. S., Simelane, T., & Pophiwa, N. (Eds.). (2013). Africa in a Changing Global Environment: Perspectives of climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies in Africa. Africa Institute of South Africa.Google Scholar
OECD. (2021). Applying evaluation criteria thoughtfully. [Online]. OECD Publishing. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/dac/applying-evaluation-criteria-thoughtfully-543e84ed-en.htm (2023-11-15)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passino. K. M. (2016). Humanitarian Engineering - Advanced Technology for Sustainable Development. Columbus, Ohio: Bede Publishing.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. L. (2002). "The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid", Strategy+ business, 26, 2-14.Google Scholar
Schismenos, S., Stevens, G. J., Emmanouloudis, D., Georgeou, N., Shrestha, S., & Chalaris, M. (2021). "Humanitarian engineering at the sustainability-development nexus: mapping vulnerability and capability factors for communities at risk of water-based disasters". Sustainability science, 16, 1185-1199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00890-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shekar, A., & Drain, A. (2016). "Community engineering: Raising awareness, skills and knowledge to contribute towards sustainable development". International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 44(4), 272-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419016668966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statista. (2023), Africa's share in global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from 2000 to 2021. [online]. Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1287508/africa-share-in-global-co2-emissions/ (2023-11-15)Google Scholar
Trevisan, A. H., Castro, C. G., Gomes, L. A. V., & Mascarenhas, J. (2022). "Unlocking the circular ecosystem concept: Evolution, current research, and future directions". Sustainable Production and Consumption, 29, 286-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.10.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkeley, UC, (2020), Why development engineering. [Online]. Development Engineering UC Berkeley. Available at: https://developmentengineering.berkeley.edu/ about/why-development-engineering/ (2023-11-15).Google Scholar
Unesco, (2021), Local and indigenous knowledge systems. [Online]. Unesco. Available at: https://en.unesco.org/links (2023-11-15)Google Scholar
United Nations, (2022). The sustainable development goals report 2022. New York, NY: United Nations: Department of Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
Watz, M., & Hallstedt, S. I. (2024). "Depth and detail or quick and easy? Benefits and drawbacks of two approaches to define sustainability criteria in product development". In EcoDesign for Sustainable Products, Services and Social Systems I (pp. 413-427). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.Google Scholar
Whitehead, T., Evans, M., and Bingham, G. (2016). "Design Tools for Enhanced New Product Development in Low Income Economies", in Lloyd, P. and Bohemia, E. (eds.), Future Focused Thinking - DRS International Conference 2016, 27 - 30 June, Brighton, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2016.467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wohlin, C. (2014, May). "Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering". In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (pp. 1-10).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, A., & Garff, P. F., & Ward, C. J., & Dahlin, E. C., & Lewis, R. S. (2013), "Social Constraints: A Critical Component of Global Humanitarian-based Projects". Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22457CrossRefGoogle Scholar