One of the more interesting ideas to emerge in industrial ecology is the notion that environmental impacts can be reduced by moving from a focus on the physical possession of products to functional needs that can be met by their use. This idea is variously called the functional economy (Stahel), product service combinations (Manzini), product-to-service (McDonough), servicizing (the
Tellus Institute), or product service systems (PSSs) (
Dutch Ministry of the Environment).
The core concept is that, as consumers, we seek not the product, but rather the functionality that it offers us; and further, if economic relationships can be structured to encourage this shift in focus, many opportunities for meeting human needs with fewer physical goods will emerge. This dematerialization will, in turn, lead to fewer environmental impacts.
In this issue, [Journal of Industrial Ecology Vol. 4, No. 1] Chris Ryan of RMIT University grapples with this topic and asks how the design community can help facilitate a transition to product service systems (PSSs), especially to the more ambitious, rather than incremental, forms that it might take. In a recent dissertation, Rens Meijkamp of the Technical University of Delft examines a particular version of PSS in Europe -- commercial car sharing -- in detail.
Clearly, if one physical product can be used by many people -- thereby avoiding the need for the production and disposal of multiple, duplicative "copies" of that product, then there is some environmental advantage to be gained. Yet, the industrial ecology community must be careful in its calls to focus on the service or utility to be obtained from a product rather than on the product itself. There are at least four pitfalls to be avoided here.
First, there is often a confusion of issues of ownership and matters of physical use. Decoupling ownership from possession does not necessarily change the design of products or the nature of their use and disposal. Leased automobiles, for example, are neither designed differently nor do they face a different fate in terms of end of life management.
Second, application of PSSs to consumer durables may not always have a high environmental payoff. As many LCAs will attest, the most environmentally damaging stage of the life cycle of a durable product is often its use or consumption phase. Sharing of a durable product by multiple users means that the ratio of the environmental burdens of production and/or disposal to the number of users is reduced. But if the environmental impacts of the production and disposal phases are relatively trivial compared to those of the consumption phase, then we could be chasing the wrong target. In fact, product sharing, without the appropriate protections or contractual provisions, could make the individual user less concerned about maintenance, creating what economists call moral hazard, and potentially increasing use-phase environmental burdens or reducing product lifespan. It is important to note, however, that PSSs are really a cluster of related concepts; some researchers (e.g., Meijkamp) are particularly attentive to the behavioral dimensions of these novel ways of meeting human needs. In some cases, it is argued that the environmental gains from behavioral gains are at least as important as the changes in the product itself.
Third, contemporary economics and marketing theory have insights to lend that industrial ecologists have not been quick enough to adopt. Business students learn that products can be conceptualized as bundles of attributes and that consumers are attracted to the bundle that most effectively matches their particular needs or desires (at a given price). Marketers map these characteristics in "product space" by arranging competing (and proposed) products according to how those products measure on various attributes.
Open any widely used marketing textbook and you will see extensive discussions of product attributes and product space. In fact, some consumer goods companies in their market research systematically ask consumers which attributes or functions they desire in a product and physically design the product to offer those specific characteristics. Where this is the case, industrial ecology will not achieve environmental improvements by simply arguing that more attention to the functional characteristics of the product will lead to a transformation in production and consumption. More is going on here than a narrow failure to look beyond the physical manifestation of the product.
Finally, as Chris Ryan notes, the physical character of a product has meaning above and beyond the functional needs that it fulfills. As we all know, an automobile provides more than mobility; it confers social status and identity. Perhaps this realization of the "nonfunctional" dimensions of products can be seen not as an impediment to environmental progress, but as a means to realizing that progress. Think here of the famous Ford Mustang. This sports car -- at least in American culture -- was the epitome of sex appeal and social status. Ironically, it achieved its vaunted cultural status because, un-like other sports cars, it was inexpensive. In fact, Lee Iaccoca, the automobile executive responsible for the creation of the Mustang and, for while, a celebrity in American society, made his career by taking an otherwise nondescript and not especially powerful automobile, the Ford Falcon, and putting a sports car body on it. Voilà, he created a sports car for the masses and eventually a cultural icon. Seen in environmental terms, he gave average consumers the "utility" of a sports car -- that is, the social recognition -- without the excess engine capacity that would have otherwise led to more pollution. The buyers of the Mustang did not really need or want a fast car; they just wanted one that looked like a fast car. (This lovely parable is complicated, however, by the fact that many purchasers of the Mustang chose to upgrade its horsepower.)
The challenge is thus to imitate this feat, even if it was not intentional, that is, create products that meet the social and cultural needs of consumers without the environmental burden. Put another way: Do not merely decouple the social and cultural requirements from the physical functionality, but rather, by meeting those intangible requirements, avoid extraneous features, functions, and, ultimately, environmental burden.
The PSS -- or whatever label you prefer -- one of the notions in industrial ecology that holds notable promise for novel approaches to environmental improvement. Yet, as with many developments in this new field, we must attend not only to the materials flows, but also to the social and cultural factors that shape them. And here too, much can be learned from those that have gone before us.
---------------
Reid J. Lifset is editor-in-chief of the Journal of Industrial Ecology, a GreenBiz News Affiliate. Lifset also is on the faculty at the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies at Yale University in New Haven, Conn., and is a member of the science task force of the New York-New Jersey Harbor Consortium, which was organized by the New York Academy of Sciences. This piece was first published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology Vol. 4, No. 1.