IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i8p2361-d224539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of Sustainability Benchmarking Tool in the Context of Value-Added Wood Products Manufacturing Activities

Author

Listed:
  • Cagatay Tasdemir

    (Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA)

  • Rado Gazo

    (Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA)

Abstract

The primary objective of this study was to validate the sustainability benchmarking tool (SBT) framework proposed by the authors in a previous study. The SBT framework is focused on benchmarking triple bottom line (TBL) sustainability through exhaustive use of lean, six-sigma, and life cycle assessment (LCA). During the validation, sustainability performance of a value-added wood products’ production line was assessed and improved through deployment of the SBT framework. Strengths and weaknesses of the system were identified within the scope of the bronze frontier maturity level of the framework and tackled through a six-step analytical and quantitative reasoning methodology. The secondary objective of the study was to document how value-added wood products industries can take advantage of natural properties of wood to become frontiers of sustainability innovation. In the end, true sustainability performance of the target facility was improved by 2.37 base points, while economic and environmental performance was increased from being a system weakness to achieving an acceptable index score benchmark of 8.41 and system strength level of 9.31, respectively. The social sustainability score increased by 2.02 base points as a function of a better gender bias ratio. The financial performance of the system improved from a 33% loss to 46.23% profit in the post-improvement state. Reductions in CO 2 emissions (55.16%), energy consumption (50.31%), solid waste generation (72.03%), non-value-added-time (89.30%), and cost performance (64.77%) were other significant achievements of the study. In the end, the SBT framework was successfully validated at the facility level, and the target facility evolved into a leaner, cleaner, and more responsible version of itself. This study empirically documents how synergies between lean, sustainability, six-sigma and life cycle assessment concepts outweigh their divergences and demonstrates the viability of the SBT framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Cagatay Tasdemir & Rado Gazo, 2019. "Validation of Sustainability Benchmarking Tool in the Context of Value-Added Wood Products Manufacturing Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-48, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2361-:d:224539
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2361/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2361/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    2. Jane C. Bare, 2002. "Traci: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 6(3‐4), pages 49-78, July.
    3. Cagatay Tasdemir & Rado Gazo, 2018. "A Systematic Literature Review for Better Understanding of Lean Driven Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-54, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Amna Farrukh & Sanjay Mathrani & Nazim Taskin, 2020. "Investigating the Theoretical Constructs of a Green Lean Six Sigma Approach towards Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-29, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vicent Penadés-Plà & David Martínez-Muñoz & Tatiana García-Segura & Ignacio J. Navarro & Víctor Yepes, 2020. "Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of Optimized Post-Tensioned Concrete Road Bridges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Cagatay Tasdemir & Rado Gazo & Henry J. Quesada, 2020. "Sustainability benchmarking tool (SBT): theoretical and conceptual model proposition of a composite framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6755-6797, October.
    3. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    4. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    5. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    6. Jim Butcher, 2006. "The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: a critical analysis of development implications," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 6(2), pages 146-156, April.
    7. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    8. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    9. Megan Devonald & Nicola Jones & Sally Youssef, 2022. "‘We Have No Hope for Anything’: Exploring Interconnected Economic, Social and Environmental Risks to Adolescents in Lebanon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    11. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein, 1999. "Soil Erosion and Smallholders' Conservation Decisions in the Highlands of Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 739-752, April.
    13. Ibrahim Ari & Muammer Koc, 2018. "Sustainable Financing for Sustainable Development: Understanding the Interrelations between Public Investment and Sovereign Debt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-25, October.
    14. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    15. Pengji Wang & Adrian T. H. Kuah & Qinye Lu & Caroline Wong & K. Thirumaran & Emmanuel Adegbite & Wesley Kendall, 2021. "The impact of value perceptions on purchase intention of sustainable luxury brands in China and the UK," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 28(3), pages 325-346, May.
    16. Mai Mostafa Awad & Abd‘Elazez Hashem & Hend Mohamed Naguib, 2022. "The Impact of Lean Management Practices on Economic Sustainability in Services Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-27, July.
    17. Christoph M. Schmidt & Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Wie geht es uns? Die W3-Indikatoren für eine neue Wohlstandsmessung," RWI Positionen, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, pages 16, 03.
    18. Katundu Imasiku & Valerie M. Thomas & Etienne Ntagwirumugara, 2020. "Unpacking Ecological Stress from Economic Activities for Sustainability and Resource Optimization in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-12, April.
    19. Chin-Shan Lu & Kuo-Chung Shang & Chi-Chang Lin, 2016. "Examining sustainability performance at ports: port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 909-927, November.
    20. Kebede, Yohannes, 1993. "The Limits to Common Resource Management: The Bypassed Commons or Commons without Tragedy," MPRA Paper 662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 May 1993.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2361-:d:224539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.