challenges of global environmental issues on ecosystem management in msia

8/7/2019 challenges of global environmental issues on ecosystem management in Msia

1/16

Challenges of global environmental issues on ecosystemmanagement in Malaysia

Mohd Nasir Hassan, Muhamad Awang, and Abu Bakar JaafarCentre for Environmental Technology and Natural Resource Management (CETNaRM), Department of Environmenta

Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM-Serdang, Selangor

Environmental problems and their management, particularly when related to urban ecosystems, are becom

increasingly challenging. The end-of-pipe method which has been practiced in the past, and is manifested in laws and regulations, has gradually changed towards a more pro-active approach. Industries now recognize

environmental management and pollution control are no longer liabilities, but rather opportunities to incretheir competitiveness. The general public is increasingly aware of the fact that they have to pay more

management of the environment that is based on the end-of-pipe approach. International agencies and industworld-wide are responding positively with a new paradigm shift towards proactive environmental managem

through voluntary initiatives. The most challenging task in Malaysia however, is to convince the small amedium scale enterprises to shift from the old to the new management system. While local government agenc

remain the key players in the management of urban ecosystems, they still lack human resources and the capato handle new challenges. This paper discusses new initiatives towards achieving sustainable urban ecosys

management. It highlights the tools and approaches that are being used as alternatives to the existing end-of-papproaches. These tools include, eco-management, wastes minimization, ISO 14000 standardization, design

environment, eco-labeling, life cycle assessment and industrial ecology.

Keywords: environmental management, end-of-pipe, paradigm shift, pollution control, green consumeris

Introduction

Global environmental impacts have been viewed

to occur in two waves. The first occurred in the late1960s and early 1970s, and was evident mainly in na-tional and regional problems associated with indus-trial pollution in advanced economies. Following thelull brought on by economic disorders between 1973and 1982 such as double digit inflation, recession inindustrial countries and two world oil price shocks,there was a second wave of global impacts. This newwave was much more intense and widespread; ozone

depletion and global warming have emerged as mjor pollution issues, and issues in which personal vues play an important role, such as species divers

are also increasingly becoming the subject of intertional debate and a source of friction between cotries. This internationalization results from the factmany of the new issues have transborder features;volving either the physical spillover of pollutantwhat might be called psychological spillovers, as incase of concern over species extinction (Anderson Blackhurst, 1992). Today, concerns about the envirment have given rise to new realities. Environme

269


2/16

270 Hassan et al. / Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 9 (2006) 269283

Figure 1. Human impacts on natural systems: a conceptual model.

ssues have been increasingly integrated into interna-ional trade, and markets and consumers worldwide

are increasingly demanding environmentally friendlyproducts. This new reality requires businesses to placeequal footing both on the environment, and on theirbusiness objectives. There is increasing evidence thatenvironmental improvement is good business (Porterand Van der Linde, 1995). Thus, most business enter-prises worldwide are undergoing rapid rearrangementfor the better. Lovins reports, in The Harvard Busi-ness Review on Business and Environment (2000), thatbusinesses are embarking on a journey toward naturalcapitalism i.e., economic reforms that would embrace

environmentalism, and sustainability. Truly a journeyhat would comprise major shifts in business practices.

Are we in Malaysia prepared to take on the chal-enges posed by thesedevelopments?Perhaps the great-

est challenge that we face is to understand what sus-ainable practices are and how they can be actualizednto all socio-economic sectors in Malaysia. It is noonger acceptable to argue that the more goods and ser-

vices produced, the higher the quality of life will be. Its not so much the amount of goods and services per sehat produce quality of life, but the right type. The chal-

enge for the new millennium is to develop an indus-rial system that has minimal socio-ecological impacts,

ith t i i lit f lif (H t hi d

Causes for concern

Very few environmental problems (Figure 1) canbe accounted for on a simple cause-and-effect basis.Problems usually stem from a multitude of causes, witha single course of action having multiple effects. Amultitude of living, interdependent organisms can beaffected in a chain reaction by a single human activity.Some damage may be irreversible, but some potentiallyreversible. Someconsequences may be remedial, othersnot. Further, major environmental problems are relatedto resource depletion as well as to depletion of naturalassets. This approach, only one of many schools of

thought, is summarized in Figure 1.The major environmental problems facing

Malaysia, and having global consequences are descri-bed below.

Atmospheric pollution

Atmospheric pollution has long been associatedwith the burning of fossil fuels, the resulting sulphurdioxide being a major atmospheric pollutant. Combus-tion of motor fuels causes an added influx of volatile or-

ganic compounds, coupled with carbon dioxide (CO2)and Nox, nitrous oxides. In Malaysia, local and trans-b d i i l i t t l i d


3/16


4/16


Table 2. Malaysian beaches affected by tar ball. Source: Department of Environment.

State Station Sampling Date Tar Ball (g m1 trip)

Johor Desaru Beach (15429140) 09.02.98 365Desaru Beach (1542914) 13.04.98 86Sri Pantai Beach (2339960) 27.02.98 187Sri Pantai Beach (2339960) 14.04.98 135Telok Gorek Beach (2538958) 24.02.98 316Telok Gorek Beach (2538958) 14.02.98 117Air Papan Beach (2538959) 24.02.98 608Air Papan Beach (2538959) 14.04.98 210Tanjung Sepata Beach (1341961) 16.03.98 185

Langkawi Chenang Beach 9 (P.Langkawi) 22.07.98 35Perak Puteri Dewi Beach (P. Pangkor) 17.07.98 5

Pulau Pangkor Laut Beach 17.07.98 250Pulau Sembilan Beach 17.07.98 175Melaka Pulau Besar Beach 15.07.98 20

from effluents discharged inland and carried by riverso the sea. In 1998 a total of 836 samples were collected

from 231 marine monitoring stations, compared to 794samples from 226 monitoring stations in 1997. As inprevious years, the main contaminants of coastal watern all states were oil and grease (OG), total suspended

solids (TSS), Escherichia coli (E. coli) and heavy met-als. From these samples 94.5 percent of samples ex-ceeded the proposed Marine Interim Standards for oiland grease, 73.7 percent for total suspended solids and29.7 percent forE. coli. The results show that marinewater quality in 1998 had deteriorated slightly com-pared to the previous year (Jamaluddin, 2000). Almostall Malaysian beaches monitored in 1998 were foundo be free from oil pollution in the forms of tar balls,

except for some beaches in Johore (Table 2) where tarballs werespotted on those beaches betweenthemonths

of February and April, 1998. The island marine wa-er quality monitoring activities in July 1998 showedhat tar balls were also spotted on the beach of Pulau

Besar (Malacca), Pulau Pagar Laut and Pulau Sembi-an (Perak) and Pulau Langkawi (Kedah). The oil spillncident at the Malacca PETRONAS refinery on 19

September 1998 also caused serious pollution, leadingo a 240 g m1 strip.

Noise pollution

Noise pollution is another environmental issue inMalaysia The increasing number of motor vehicles

1998, the Department of Environment conducteda traf-fic noise level test in selected urban areas and found it tobe in the range of 76.4 dB(A) to 83.3 dB(A) (Figure 2)(Department of Environment, 1999). Compared to the1992 values (75.4 dB (A) to 83 dB(A)), the noise lev-els recorded in 1998 showed a significant increase in

all urban centres monitored.

Solid and hazardous wastes

Theproblem of solid waste management is nota newissue. Growing affluence and increasing concentrationof population in urban areas have increased the gen-eration and types of solid waste produced. Presently,solid waste management is one of the most impor-tant issues of local authorities; where much moneyis spent in the collection and disposal of solid waste

(Jamaluddin, 1998). According to a survey, the esti-mation of solid waste generation in local authoritiesin Malaysia is summarized in Table 3. The amount ofsolid waste collected is 70 percent (Hassan, 2000). Theremaining 30 percent not collected ends up in illegaldumping sites, or is diverted at source or during col-lection for recycling purposes. Toxic and hazardouswastes are also one of the minor issues to be discussed.

According to DOE in 1983 and 1984, 52 percentof toxic and hazardous waste were generated by elec-tronic industries, 14 percent by metal and electroplat-

ing industries and the rest were from chemical, rubber,plastics, printing, packaging, tannery and pharmaceu-tical industries A survey in 1985 showed that 22 000


5/16

Hassan et al. / Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 9 (2006) 269283

Figure 2. Traffic level noise in selected urban areas in 1992 and 1998. Source: Seventh Malaysian Plan, 19962000.

Peninsular Malaysia, of which the greatest amount wasacid waste.

Other environmental concerns

Apart from the issues mentioned above, there arealso other environmental issues especially in relation tothe exploitation of forest and forest products that couldresult in the loss of biological diversity. In fact, the

Table 3. Estimated solid waste generation in local authorities in Malaysia

Estimated Waste Generation Amount CollecState Population (Tonnes Day1) (Tonnes Day

Perlis 77650 62 43Kedah 1581483 1265 885

P. Penang 1290924 1033 723Perak 1618483 1295 906Selangor 1583572 2375 1900Negeri Sembilan 578035 162 323Melaka 611481 489 342Johor 1612650 1290 903Pahang 634660 508 358Terengganu 583907 467 327Kelantan 1041311 833 583Kuala Lumpur 1446803 2257 2023Labuan 66146 46 32

Sarawak 2007528 1405 984Sabah 2115546 1481 1037G d T l 16850179 15268 11369

development process has endangered certain endespecies of trees in the country (Abdul Latiff Moham2000).

International trade

and the environmentEnvironmental problems today have expanded fr

local and regional ones, to global ones (Lee, 200


6/16


It is a well-known fact that the global environmentalcarrying capacity has its limit. Natural resources in-cluding mineral ores and fossil fuels, agricultural pro-ductivity, and the self-purification capacity of the nat-

ural environment all have their own limits. Irrationalresource consumption together with irresponsible en-vironmental pollution resulting from the entire productife cycleraw material acquisition, manufacturing,

useanddisposalare themain reasons this globalenvi-ronmental carrying capacity is being exceeded. This isbecause our industrial structure and consumption pat-ern are not environmentally friendly. Thus, there is a

growing concern that a sustainable society may not beachievable. This public concern is not temporary. Onereason is that even though uncertainties remain, the sci-

entific basis for many of the concerns is more solid nowhen was the case twenty years ago. Another is that the

worlds population has increased by one and a half bil-ion since 1970 (an increase of more than 40 percent),he annual production of goods and services has nearly

doubled, and average per capita income in the world hasncreased about 40 percent (Anderson and Blackhurst,

1992). These increases, which show very few signs ofslowing down, are adding substantially to the demandfor the goods and services provided by the natural en-vironment; these include raw materials for producing

energy and other primary products, human health ser-vices (clean air, potable water, filtered sunlight, naturalfoods and medicines), aesthetic and recreational ser-vices (such as visiting or even just knowing of the exis-ence of unspoiled wilderness areas), and the capacityo absorb wastes.

The implications of trade liberalization

Most countries including Malaysia are adoptingan open economy and according to Anderson and

Blackhurst (1992), this has significant impacts on theenvironment particularly for developing countries inhe following forms:

r Opening up to trade of a product whose productionis relatively pollution-intensive (mostly from smalland medium-scale industries) improves the environ-ment and welfare of a small country if it imports thegood. This is the case of importing a clean goodwhose production in another country causes pollu-tion. Should the good be exported (as is the case of

industries in many developing countries), opening totrade worsens the countrys environment.C l if ti th th d ti

chemical fertilizers and insecticides), the oppositeresult holds: opening to trade improves the environ-ment if that good is exported but (in the absence ofappropriate environmental policy) worsens the envi-

ronment if it is imported.

Market failure

Many environmental problems can be traced to theabsence of markets for most of natures services. Theair we breathe, the ozone layer, the oceans, most lakesand rivers and large tracts of forest are not privatelyowned. Withoutthe assignment andenforcement of pri-vate property rights or some other form of governmentintervention, such resources are vulnerable to degra-

dation in a number of ways. In the case of emissionsand waste disposal, individuals are unlikely to fullytake into account the impact of their use of naturesresources on the rest of the population. Other issues,such as theprotection of endangered species, raise a dif-ferent question about property rights: how to managecertain assets which may be owned (by a nation state)and yet are considered by some people as belonging tothe world at large (as parts of the global commons).

Life cycle environmental loads

Industry or individual corporations are the singlemost important source of all these environmental prob-lems. This is because human society depends heavily onindustrial products to sustain its living standard. Cor-porations consume resources and emit environmentalemissions because of the products they manufacture.These are, however, not significant quantities comparedto what a product generates during its life cycle. A typi-cal example would include durable goods such as homeappliances and automobiles. Environmental loads fromthe use and disposal stages are much greater than thatfrom the manufacturing stage. For goods like papertowels and aluminum foil, environmental loads fromthe manufacturing stage are relatively high; however,the total load is still greater than that from the man-ufacturing stage. From this discussion, it can be con-cluded that environmental loads occurring throughouta product life cycle are the main cause of todays envi-ronmental problem.

The paradigm shift

The way that humans have mistreated the earth isprimarily due to failure to appreciate the value of the

t R t l l ti bli h d b th j


7/16


ecosystem serviceswater storage, atmosphere regu-lation, climate control and so on, at $33 trillion USD ayear.

Environmental management has undergone signif-

icant changes in the past 20 years. After realizing theimportance of the services provided by nature, muchprogress has taken place in terms of the developmentof advanced technologies and environmental manage-ment principles. Traditionally, environmental laws andregulations have aimed at commanding and controllingthe environmental load occurring during the manufac-turing stage of a product. Sincere efforts have been ex-erted in implementing the command and control prac-tices in most of the developed nations although they areburdensome to most corporations. However, the global

environment problems have not been mitigated: rather,they tend to have been aggravated.

Since 1990, environmental policy makers in theNetherlands and Germany recognized that packagingwastes may be reduced in quantity by imposing finan-cial burden on the producer, not on the consumer. Thisis the basis of the concept of the extended producerresponsibility (OECD, 1996). It was a norm that man-ufacturers were responsible for the product only dur-ing its manufacturing stages (e.g., product function,production cost and environmental pollution control,

etc.). They were not responsible for the environmentalproblems caused by the waste product discarded afteruse. Collection, treatment and disposal of the waste

products were the responsibility of the governmentlocal authorities. However, under EPR, the cost assoated with the waste products collection, treatment disposal should be borne by the manufacturer. Typ

regulations based on the EPR concept include the paaging waste order in Germany, the packaging covenin the Netherlands, andvoluntaryagreement on thecbearing of waste automobile treatment among Germauto-makers (Lee, 2000).

In response to the apparent failure of the command control policies, the emerging EPR policy growing pressure from the public, industries decito take the initiative in overcoming the environmenproblems. The initiative was the introduction of a vuntary program called environmental management

the corporations management.Industries and other polluters have shifted from j

the end-of-pipe control treatment of waste, to potion prevention and ultimately proper manufacturdesigns for the benefit of the environment (FigureA holistic approach is required if total degradationthe environment is to be avoided over the long term

Greening of world tradenatural capitalis

There is definitely still much room for improvem

in terms of the proliferation of these new technogies and principles that will create a better global enronment in the future. Forward-looking businesses


8/16


embarking on a journey toward natural capitalism,a journey that comprises of four major shifts in busi-ness practices. The approach puts forth strategies notonly for protecting the biosphere but also for improving

profits and competitiveness. It rests on the idea of verysimple but profound changes in the way businesses arerun, built on advance techniques for making resourcesmore productive.

r The first stage involves dramatically increasing theproductivity of natural resources.

r In the second stage, companies adopt closed loopproduction systems that yield no waste or toxicity.

r The third stage needs a basic change of businessmodelfrom one of selling products to one of de-

livering services.r The last stage involves reinvesting in natural capital

to restore, sustain, and expand the planets ecosys-tem.

The greening of world trade issues has been an in-evitable consequence of not having well-developed andenforceable environmental property rights. The pres-sure on the environment from increasing population,output and incomes, the improved understanding ofhe nature and extent of environmental degradation (in-

cluding the global commons) caused by mankind activ-ties, and the ever-greater interdependence between the

worlds national economies, has also served to furtherhis cause.

Eco-management

By now, firms should accept responsibility for envi-ronmental impacts which were once regarded as inci-dental externalities. Thus, they have to move from anenvironmental management paradigm that focuses on

clean up and control to one that embraces avoidance ofenvironmental harm. Treading this path requires pri-marily information on how to increase efficiency inerms of energy and materials use with the objective

of improving environmental performance. Both tech-nical (e.g. materials substitution, zero emission tech-nologies, clean energy) and institutional (e.g. financial,regulatory, legal, geographical strategies) informationon how to implement and measure progress of environ-mental management practices are also needed. Many ofhe striking advancements in improving environmental

performance come from using nature as a guide.Huang and Hunkeler (1997) pointed out that indus-

i d i t d

lizing technologies to manufacture environmentallyfriendly products. Research and experience haveshown that industry cannot continue merely to treatthe symptoms of environmental problems. Instead, a

more comprehensive means to reduce pollution is be-lieved by many to be through prevention, by attackingthe source of pollution at every stage of the productlife cycle that include raw material extraction, trans-portation, manufacturing, product use, recycling anddisposal. Corporate environmental strategies have alsoevolved to include decision-making tools such as theconventional approaches such as environmental impactassessment (EIA) and waste minimization or the morerecent initiatives such as eco-efficiency, eco-auditing,supply chain management and green marketing, and

eco-labels. The more comprehensive approaches arethe life-cycle assessment (LCA) and design for envi-ronment (DFE).

Environmental impact assessments (EIAs)

EIAs are undertaken when a new project, or modi-fications of an existing project, is to be developed. TheEIA assesses all significant direct and indirect envi-ronmental effects on the surrounding environment, aswell as any possible socio-economic impacts that mayaccrue.

An EIA is a systematic gathering of all relevantquantitative and qualitative information by experts inconsultationwith informed parties in order to enable in-formed decision-making. The process includes a wide-ranging consultation process with statutory and non-statutory institutions in order to understand all im-plications of expansions or purchase, and to assessthe benefits or drawbacks of any mitigating measuresproposed.

Monitoring programmes with suitable indicatorsand contingency plans are also nowadays consideredimportant follow-ups to EIAs, in order to assess theeffectiveness of the process.

Waste minimization or cleaner production

Waste minimization has been subject to a whole hostof international interest in terms of legislationand regu-lations since themid-1980s. There aretwo central wastestrategies that companies can adopt in their pursuit of

waste minimization.The first is to deal with the waste after it has

b t d d t iti t it ff t th


9/16


waste generated in the first place, thereby reducing theamount of mitigation required at the end of the process.

Even when financial returnsarenot immediate, mostwaste minimization exercises are as cost-effective as

treatment or disposal. The dividends of a preventionstrategy as opposed to an end-of-pipe approach to wastemanagement are summarized as follows:

Reduced:

r Production costs.r On-site waste monitoring and treatment costs.r Raw material costs.r Energy and water costs consumption.r Long-term environmental liability and insurance

costs.r

Risk of spills and accidents.

Improved:

r Operational safety.r Income through the sale of reusable waste.r Company image in the eyes of shareholdersandother

stakeholders.

Eco-efficiency

In its report to the June 1992 Earth Summit (UnitedNations Conference on Environment and Develop-ment: UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, and in subsequentworkshops, the Business Council for Sustainable De-velopment (BSCD, now the WBCSD) promoted theconcept of eco-efficiency. It defined eco-efficiency interms of the delivery of competitively priced goods andservices designed to satisfy human need and enhancequality of life while progressively reducing environ-mental impacts and resource intensity throughout theentire life cycle. A life-cycle and system approach isregarded as necessary to bring human economic activ-ity in line with the earths estimated carrying capacity(Awang et al., 1998). The BCSD advocated progress to-wards eco-efficiency through seven key routes (Hassanet al., 1999):

r Minimization of the material intensity of goods andservices.

r Minimization of energy intensity of goods andservices.

r Elimination of toxic dispersion.r Enhancement of material recyclability.r

Maximization of sustainable use of renewable re-sources.E t i f d t d bilit

Eco-auditing

The environmental audit has evolved from regutory and customer pressure to quantify, analyse, m

sure and disclose a companys environmental permance. It provides an in-depth procedural analyof performance measurements and targets, offera management approach to deal strategically wenvironmental issues primarily as a means to meet islative requirements. Environmental auditing is evaluation of a site, plant, or production and procsystem in relation to the laws, regulations, policies good practices that directly or indirectly affect the vironment. It is used to compile and report all pertininformation related to the environment, as well as

cupational health and safety where appropriate.Eco-audit attempts to consider environmental p

formance from a holistic angle. Rather than viewgreen issues as purely a risk management issue, elogical auditing measures and analyses all aspectcompany policy and operations with respect to thenvironmental impact and consequences.

Supply chain management

and green marketingDuring the 1980s and 1990s, the global market w

flooded by claims of differing validity. Spurious claand false or misleading statements have been madecompanies keen to cash in on the new green consumseeking to achieve mere marketing advantage. Copany images were whitewashed in an attempt to ceive the public about their environmental credentiLogos were greened, but practices continued, buness as usual.

Despite growing consumer suspicion of these gr

marketing claims, there are important reasons for csidering green marketing. If a company is to invsignificant amounts of capital and time to improveenvironmental performance, it should clearly commnicate these improvements to all stakeholders, encoaging others to do the same and informing stakehoers of the priority of ethical management in the nmillennium.

Charter (1992) considers seven aspects of grmarketing: price, product, promotions, place, peoprocess and physical evidence. Full-costs account

packaging,advertising and claims, eco-labelling, traport, personnel, and employee commitment, awaren

d t i i ti l l t i i


10/16


If a green marketing strategy is to be successful itneeds to be backed up by concrete evidence. This iscontrolled through proper eco-labelling practices.

Eco-labelling

Essentially the eco-labelling program was startedas a process that would advise consumers as to whichproducts constituted an environmental choice. How-ever, eco-labeling practice does influence exports andmports in that it is being used to unfairly discrimi-

nate against certain products through the adoption ofocal and regional environmental labels. These emerg-ng environmental labels have been interpreted differ-

ently by various consumers, and the issue of lack of

uniformity has been raised among trade proponents.Subsequently it was recommended that an ad hoc advi-sory group encourage the International Organization ofStandard (ISO) to develop standards in the field of en-vironmental labeling. The objectives are to ensure thateco-labeling is accurate, verifiable and not misleading;hat it reduce marketplace confusion, restrictions, and

barriers to international trade, and most importantly,hat it increase the potential to stimulate environmentalmprovement in product delivery. Such standardized la-

bels would better enable purchasers to make informed

choices when buying goods and services.By definition (Husseini, 2006), environmental la-

beling is any environmental declaration that describesor implies, by whatever means, the effects of the life cy-cle of a product or service on the environment. It mightbe in the form of statements, symbols or graphics onproducts or packaging, literature or technical bulletins,advertising or any form of publicity.

Three types of labeling have been established. TypeI, is a third-party certified eco-label. Such certifica-

Figure 4. Example of a variety of logosfor eco-labels. TheEco Mark of theJapanEnvironment Association marks products usefulfor environ-

mental protection (http://www.ecomark.jp/english/index.html). The Swan is the official Nordic eco-label, introduced by the Nordic Council

of Ministers to that a product is a good environmental choice (http://www.svanen.nu/Eng/default.asp). The Government of Canadas EcoLogos a multi-attribute environmental certification mark that helps buyers find sustainable products (http://www.environmentalchoice.com). From

he U.S.A., the Green Seal is an independent, non-profit organization that strives to achieve a cleaner environment by identifying products

d i h l i ll i d d h bi d i i i l b l i d d l i

tion is granted by the practitioner seal program which issponsored by a government or operated privately. Theseal programs require manufacturers to meet a mini-mum standard or a threshold in order to receive the

seal of the program. Type II, is a self-declared environ-mental claim, without independent third party certifi-cation, with the condition that the manufacturers mayplace the labels, provided they follow specific require-ments set forth in the ISO 14021 standard. Type III,conveys quantitative information of a products envi-ronmental performance that is derived from life cycleinventory data or life cycle assessment.

The concept of eco-labelling originated in the Ger-man Blue Angel Scheme in 1978. By the early 1990s,80 percent of households in Germany were aware of

the scheme and its implications and the idea had spreadthroughout the developed world. Eventually, the eco-labelling scheme was established to all members ofthe European Union in 1991. The aim of the EU eco-labellingscheme wasto ameliorate the growingnumberof corporate environmental claims and to protect con-sumer interests. Designed to inform consumers aboutthe environmental excellence of a product and to amal-gamate the increasing number of individual countryenvironmental labels, the EU label was intended to of-ferconsumersthe ability to make validchoices between

different and competing products in the same categoryof objective environmental criteria.

Today, many countries have introduced their owneco-labeling schemes as shown in Figure 4.

Packaging

Packaging is an important element in the design andmarketing of the product, as packaging has valuablefunctions to perform:


11/16


r It displays essential legal and consumer information.r It protects the product.r It avoids unnecessary spillage in transit.r It presents the brand image.

The volume of single-use packaging has given riseto problems of disposal, giving rise to legislative pres-sures, forcing reconsideration of the amount and typeof packaging employed. Companies are therefore re-quired to assess the environmental impact of the pack-aging materials and to seek out more sustainable de-signs and materials, including assessing the potentialfor recycling and reuse of the packaging materials.

Design for environmentDesign for Environment (DFE) integrates environ-

mental aspects or environmental considerations intotheproduct development. The choices designers make dur-ing the development of a new or improved product willhave an influence on the environmental impacts duringeach stage of products life cyclefrom acquiring ma-terials to manufacturing, use, reuse, and ultimately tothe products final disposal (Canadian Standard Asso-ciation, 1995; Hassan et al., 1999). The strategies for

evolution towards sustainability is depicted in Figure 5(Storen, 1998).

DFE in practice

The most aggressive efforts on DFE is carried in France. The French Agency for Environment

Energy Management (ADEME) has put words sas prevention is better than cure and avoid poling practices rather than having to manage the conquences, into practice (French Agency for Envirment and Energy Management, 1999). ADEME collected 90 eco-design case studies from industin France that have incorporated DFE into the proddevelopment processes.

A product is easily recyclable when the materit comprises can be recycled in existing channels at rsonable costs. In the design stage, this criterion co

be achieved though;

r Design mono-materially.r Choose materials that are compatible with exist

recycling channels.r Plan for future material separation.r Consider the recovery and disposal at the end of

products life.

Some of the positive results from DFEapplicatioindustries are as follows (Crittenden and Kolaczkow1995):


12/16


r Replacement of chlorinated solvents in cleaning anddegreasing operations by non-chlorinated solvents,water and alkaline solutions.

r Substitution of chemical biocides by alternatives,

such as ozone.r Replacement of solvent-based paints, inks and adhe-

sive formulations with water-based materials.r Substitution of a more durable coating to increase

coating life.r Increase in the purity of purchased raw materials to

eliminate the use of trace quantities of hazardousimpurities.

r Reduction of phosphorous in waste water by reduc-tion in use of phosphate-containing chemicals.

r Replacement of hexavalent chromium salts by triva-

lent chromium salts in plating operations.r Replacement of solvent-based developing system by

a water-based system in the manufacturing of printedcircuit board.

r Replacement of cyanide plating baths with less toxicalternatives.

Ecological design

Orr (1994) calls for ecological design intelligence

and this requires the capacity to understand the ecolog-cal context in which human live, to recognize limitsand to get the correct scale of things. It is the ability tocalibrate human purposes and natural constraints anddo so with grace and economy. Ecological design in-elligence is not just about things like technologies. Atts heart ecological design intelligence is motivated by

an ethical view of the world order and our obligationso it.

Life-cycle approach

No products are totally environmentally friendly,since all productive processes have some impact onhe environment. This leads some environmentalists tohe conclusion that the only true green business is no

business at all. However, it is possible to assess theife cycle of any product in order to reduce its impact

on the environment. The concept of life cycle assess-ment, which appeared in the 1950s1970s, was refinedn the 1980s in order to solve a systematic difficulty

faced when trying to improve product ecological char-acteristics. This is known as contaminant transfer;

whereby a solution to one environmental problem leadso greater deterioration at another place or time in theif l Th f ll i i l f th

restaurant who would like to reduce the environmentalimpact of his business activity. He wishes to accom-plish this goal by reducing the disposable paper towelsthat his clients use to dry their hands in the wash room.

He decides to replace the paper towels with textile onesto reach his goal. The restaurant owners decision hasreduced thesource of contamination, which is the wastein the bathroom. However, he will also increase anothertype of contamination by repetitive washing of the tex-tile towelsconsumption of detergents, water and en-ergy, pollution of water, etc. Hence, he will transfer thecontamination from one process to another. From theexample, it is illustrated that analyzing the ecologicalinterest of a decision with respect to one product ismeaningless if the global balance, i.e. the life cycle, is

not considered. From the idea of analyzing activitiesfrom the life cycle perspective, the methodology of lifecycle assessment emerged in order to standardize var-ious approaches. Hence, life cycle assessment (LCA)is a tool that can be used to systematically evaluate theenvironmental effects of a product, process or activity(Awang et al., 1999; Hassan et al., 2000; Zulina et al.,1999). The LCA methodology stems from the idea thatindustrial processes and activities are systemic in na-ture. Industrial processes and activities do not occur inisolation but are instead interlinked, via their suppliers

andcustomers, with other processes andactivities. Out-puts in the form of products and by-products transferfrom one operation to another, rendering them all inter-dependent. Any industrial system canbe represented bya system boundary that encompasses all the operationsof interest (Figure 6) (Boguski et al., 1996). The areasurrounding the industrial system boundary is definedas the system environment. The industrial system canbe represented by any organizational system that hasenvironmental aspects.

LCA analyzes the environmental burdens along the

continuum of a products life cycle and provides infor-mation on a per service basis to the user to help iden-tify, assess and solve the environmental concerns asso-ciated with products, processes, and activities. An LCA


13/16


framework has been developed by SETAC(1991, 1993)to organizethedevelopment of an LCAmethodologyhow to conduct LCA in a consistent and transparentmanner.

Industrial ecology

During the past few years, much research has beenconducted, for example in Austria, Canada, Denmark,Netherlands, Japan, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland,on how the term industrial ecology offers a frame-work within which to improve knowledge and deci-sions about materials use, waste reduction, and pollu-tion prevention and ultimately as a way of approachingsustainable development using nature as a guide.

The term industrial ecology suggests that mod-els of non-human biological systems and their inter-actions in nature are instructive for industrial systems.The biological model is attractive due to the manner inwhich nature developed its constituents to live off thebodies and wastes of one another. Industrial ecologyseeks to provide technical understanding that encour-ages systems of production and consumption that canbe sustained for very long periods of time without sig-nificant environmental harm. It takes a systems viewof industry in developing strategies to facilitate more

efficient use of material and energy resources and toreduce the release of hazardous as well as non-hazardous wastes to theenvironment (Figure 7). Theul-timate objective of industrial ecology is the emergenceof an economy that cycles virtually all of the materials ituses, emitting only micro amounts of wastes and pol-lutants, while providing high and increasing services

f i d i l l d i l d l d d di f h i l d h

to the large human population already present, andlikely to grow.

Biotechnology and geneticengineering: Dream or nightmare

By the late twentieth century scientific advancesfered solutions to human problems through a new foof biotechnology. Genetic engineering, the abilitytake genes for a particular characteristic andinsert thin a different plant and animal species, raised mpossibilities and unknown dangers. The bio-molecrevolution will ultimately challenge the ability to mnipulate life almost at all will. In this respect,

utilisation of microorganisms for environmental biomediation in addressing toxic wastes, might not ominimize pollution, but become a source of enerWork involving gene therapy has saved lives andcreased food production through genetic manipulatof certain crops, and produced reusable products sas bioplastics from corn. Areas of research includedevelopment of:

r Strains of staple foods which are resistant to hecides, insects, viruses and drought.

r Strains of fruit and vegetables with improved stor

qualities.r Animals withimproved productivity, suchas incre

ing milk yield in cows.

Biotechnology and genetic engineering ahave actual applications in (Mannion and Bow1994):


14/16


r Waste disposal technology involving treatment of in-dustrial or sewage effluents through bacteria (biore-mediation technology).

r Degradation of biological materials to produce fuels

such as ethanol.r Cultivation of fungi or algae to produce food for

animals and humans.

The harnessing of natural processes to serve humanneeds has infinite and intriguing potential for practicalapplication. For example, domestic waste dumped inandfill sites degrades through natural microbial pro-

cesses, resulting in the explosive and potentially haz-ardous discharge of methane. In a similar way, organicmaterial from domestic waste, sewage or agriculture

wastes can be biosynthesized by bacteria, to createmethane, sometimes called biogas (Abdullah et al.,1994), a valuable source of energy.

However, biotechnology and genetic engineeringhave their own problems. Ho (1998) discussed an un-precedented alliance between bad science and big busi-ness suggesting that consumers should be critical ofscientists tampering with nature and scrambling thegenetic code of species by introducing human genesnto animals and animal genes into vegetables. She

warns of unexpected effects on agriculture and biodi-

versity, of thedangers of genetic pollution that cannotbe reversed; the immorality of the patents of liferansgenic animals, plants and seeds taken freely by ge-

neticists of developed countries from the Third World,as well as human genes and human cell lines from in-digenous peoples.

Environmental education

The final requirement is for local, long-term devel-opments for change to be pioneered through educationfor sustainability. Many ecological and environmentalprojects have been designed to incorporate an educa-ional aspect. Thus, schools, colleges and universities

may provide different levels of responsibilities throughcourses to industry and the public, these levels being:

r Product design.r Waste management.r Pollution control.r Protection and clean-up of specific sites.r Staff training.r Media presentation and publicity.

E i l d i i l idi i l

fostering environmental awareness. It is vital to informlocal consumers on choices of goods, transportationand leisure patterns for environmental sustainability,and crucial in establishing a sustainable quality of life.

Education for the masses

The second aspect of human resource development,the education of the masses, is often forgotten but nev-ertheless equally important, as the training for specificskills. Sham Sani (1999) suggested that values associ-ated with environmental ethics need to be embraced byeveryone. A person who is highly skilled in environ-mental technology, for example, may not necessarilyhave the passion for the preservation of the environ-

ment. Such values need to be nurtured right from in-fancy. It has been recognised that no legislation andno conservation programme, however good its design,could be successful without public support. This couldonly come from well-informed citizens who are fullycommitted to their right to quality environment. Edu-cation of the masses includes all sections of the com-munity from politicians, administrators and the privatesector right down to school children and ordinary peo-ple in the street. This should involve the participation ofgovernmental institutions, the media, the private sector

and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in orderto reach all target groups.

Conclusions

Our aim in the future is to develop an economicsystem that has a high quality of life with the lowestpossible resource use. The ecological development ofour cities and towns requires the establishment of sys-tems that maximize the efficient use of resources andminimize the export of wastes into the environment.Cities should focus on measures that promote greenconsumerism and its implementation in the environ-mental business sector.

ReferencesAbdullah, A. M., Awang, M. B., Hassan, M. N., 1994. A prelimi-

nary analysis of greenhouse gases emission from a landfill site

in Klang Valley, Malaysia: a case study. pp 702708. Proceed-

ings of the 5th. JSPS-VCC Seminar on Integrated Engineering,

Engineering Achievement and Challenges, VOL. 2. JSPS-VCC,

Johor Baharu, Malaysia.

Abdul Latiff Mohamad, 2000. Kesan Pembangunan Sosio-Ekonomi

Ke Atas Kepelbagaian Biology Khususnya Status Spesies Tum-buhan di Malaysia. In: Jamaluddin Md. Jahi (Ed.), Pengurusan

persekitaran di Malaysia: Isu dan Cabaran. pp. 72103. Bangi


15/16


Greeningof World Trade Issues, pp. 322.HarvesterWheatsheaf,

New York.

Awang, M., Zakaria, Z., Hassan, M. N., 1999. Industrial Ecology

Concept, Application and Research Directions for Malaysia. Pa-

per presented at the Environmental Quality Council Meeting(Unpublished and Internal Circulation). 1999 August 3.: Kuala

Lumpur, Malaysia.

Awang, M.,Hassan, M. N., Zakaria, Z., 1998. Life cycle assessment

principles and guidelines. In: M. Awang, M.N. Hassan, Z. Za-

karia, K. Badri, T.L. Chong, W.N.A. Sulaiman, M.K. Yusoff

(Eds.), Environmental Management Standards ISO 14000

Towards a Sustainable Future. pp. 151178. Universiti Putra

Malaysia, Serdang.

Awang, M., Jaafar, A. B., Abdullah, A. M., Ismail, M. B., Hassan,

M. N., Abdullah, R., Johan, S., Noor, H., 2000. Air quality in

Malaysia: impacts, management issues and future challenges.

Respirology 5(2), 183196.

Boguski, T. K., Hunt, R. G., Cholakis, J. M., Franklin, W. E., 1996.Life Cycle Assessment methodology. In: M. Curran (Ed.), En-

vironmental Life Cycle Assessment, pp. 124139. McGraw-Hill,

New York.

Canadian Standards Association (CSA), 1995. Design for Environ-

ment (DFE)-Environmental Technology. Document No: Z762-

95. Canadian Standards Association, Vancouver.

Charter, M. (Ed.), 1992. Green Marketing. Greenleaf Publishing,

Interlead Production Limited, Sheffield.

Crittenden, B., Kolaczkowski, S., 1995. Waste Minimisation: A Prac-

tical Guide. Institute of Chemical Engineers, Rugby.

Department of Environment (DOE), 1996. Environmental Quality

Report 1996. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Science, Technology

and the Environment. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

DOE, 1998. Environmental Quality Report, 1998. Kuala Lumpur:

Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment. Kuala

Lumpur, Malaysia.

DOE. 1999. Environmental Quality Report 1999. Kuala Lumpur:

Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment. Kuala

Lumpur, Malaysia.

French Agency for Environment and Energy Management

(ADEME), 1999. Product Design and Environment90 Exam-

ples of Eco-Design. Agence de lEnvironnement et de la Maitrise

de lEnergie, Paris.

Hassan, M. N., Awang, M., Zakaria, Z., 1999. Challenge in life cycle

assessmentand recyclingdevelopment on industry. FMM Updateon ISO 14000: International and National Development Impact

on Industries. 1999 July 20.: Petaling Jaya, Selangor.

Hassan, M. N., Theng, L. C., Rahman, M. M., Salleh, M. N.,

Zakaria, Z., Awang, M., 2000. Solid waste managementwhats

the Malaysian position. Urban Sustainability in the Context of

Global Changetowards Promoting Healthy and Green City.

Oxford Press, New Delhi.

Hassan, M. N., Zakaria, Z., Awang, M., Siah, B. Y., 2000. The eval-

uation of environmental impacts and costs of municipal solid

waste management in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur

using Life Cycle Inventory Model. Fourth International Confer-

ence on EcoBalanceMethodologies for decision making in a

sustainable 21st Century. 2000 Oct 31Nov. 2.: National Institutefor Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba, Japan.

Ho, M.-W., 1998. Genetic Engineering: Dream or Nightmare. Third

J. T. Willig (Eds.), Moving Ahead with ISO 14000. pp. 239

John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Husseini, A., 1996. Environmental labelling. In: Implementing

14000. Irwin Professional Publishing, Chicago.

Hutchinson, A., Hutchinson, F., 1997. Environmental BusiManagementSustainable Development in the New Millen

McGraw-Hill, London.

Jamaluddin M. J., 1998. Environmental Quality Management: W

the Local Authorities Can Do. In: M. N. Hassan, I. Komo

A. Abdullah (Eds.), National Review on Environmental Qu

Management:Towards the Next Two Decades, pp. 167183

stitute for Environment and Development (LESTARI), Unive

Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia.

Jamaluddin M. J., 2000. Zon Pinggir Pantai Malaysia: An

Kegunaan,Tekanan Penggunaan dan Pengurusannya. Jamalu

Md. Jahi (Ed.), Pengurusan Persikitaran di Malauysia: Isu

Cabaran, pp. 257281. Bangi: Pusat Pengajian Siswazah,

versiti Kebangsaan MalaysiaLee. K. M., 2000. The ISO 14000 series and its impact on the e

ronment. In: M. Awang, M. N. Hassan, Z. Zakaria, K. Badr

L. Chong, W. N. A. Sulaiman, M. K. Yusoff (Eds.), Environm

tal Management Standards ISO 14000Towards a Sustain

Future. pp. 14. Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang.

Lovins, A. B., et al., 2000. A road mapfor natural capitalism. In: H

vard Business Review on Business and the Environment. pp.1

158. Harvard Business Publishing, Boston.

Mannion, A. M., Bowlby, S. R. (Eds.), 1994. Environmental Is

in the 1990s. John Wiley, Chichester.

Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia, 1999.

nual Report, Section 4Local Government. Technical

tion of the Local Government Division, Kuala Lum

Malaysia.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OEC

1996. Legal and Administrative Approaches in Mem

Countries and Policy Options for EPR Program, OE

Paris.

Orr, D., 1994. Earth in Mind: On Education, the Environment

the Human Prospect. Island Press, Washington D.C.

National Science and Technology Council, (1995) Bridge to Sus

able Future. National Science and Technology Council, W

ington, US.

Porter, M. E.,Van derLinde, C.,1995.Green andcompetitive: en

the stalemate. In: Harvard Business Review on Business andEnvironment. Harvard Business Publishing, Boston.

Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, (SETA

1991. A Technical Framework for Life Cycle Assessments

ciety of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensac

FL.

SETAC, 1993. Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A C

of Practice, SETAC Foundation for Environmental Educa

Pensacola, FL.

Storen, S., 1998. Indusrial ecology initiatives in Nordic

dustrial research projects for product ecodesign. Nov

Seminar Teknologi MalaysiaNorway, 1998 November

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Sham, S., 1999. Human resource challenges to meet environmtal management paradigm shift in Malaysia. MATREM Rev

Keynote Address, MATREM Review Workshop, United


16/16

challenges of global environmental issues on ecosystem management in msia

Documents