Purpose This literature review starts from the recognition of the importance of the social performance of sustainable products and the SLCA approach as a potential tool to measure this performance. The goal of this research is to analyze the bibliographies (papers and authors) that could be considered to be the basis to support the application of the SLCA concept in product performance. Methods A bibliographical survey was conducted in two databases (Italian and Brazilian) covering the articles published from 2010 to 2013. The structure of the research consists of four steps: selection and analysis of recent scientific papers related to SLCA, selection and analysis of recent scientific papers related to the application of SLCA to a product, analysis of all of the references cited in recent scientific papers related to the application of SLCA to a product, and analysis of all of the scientific papers cited in recent scientific papers related to the application of SLCA to a product. Results and discussion In 99 articles derived from the first selection, 13 articles specifically discussed the use of SLCA to products related to five different sectors. The investigation of the references cited in these papers identified 524 references used in 56 different journals and 358 authors. To discover the most cited references, the 220 articles published in scientific journals were examined. The work of Dreyer et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88-97, 2006) was utilized in 62 % of the 13 selected articles and by the all of the sectors. Other important studies are also Benoît et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:156-163, 2010), Jørgensen et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):96-103, 2008), and Weidema (Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(1):89-96, 2006). Regarding an individual analysis of the authors, we highlight Hauschild, Jørgensen, Noris, and Dreyer. Conclusions In summary, the results indicate that the article of Dreyer et al. (Int J Life Cycle Assess 11 (2): [88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95][96][97] 2006) was cited by several authors in the scientific studies over the last decade and that Hauschild, Jørgensen, Norris, and Dreyer were the most cited authors. However, regarding the frequency and distribution of the citations in all of the sectors, a deeper discussion regarding whether the effects are due to the sample or are based on the use of the SLCA being in its infancy is required. Note that a factor that differentiates a mature thematic area of a new field of study is the presence of shared references. Thus, the definition of a common approach among scientists applying SLCA would result in a bibliography with a shared basis.
The integration and quickness between the phases of product development process are key elements for companies' competitiveness and the prototyping technologies provide relevant means for the development of new products. The prototyping of products by additive manufacturing can vary in quality, costs, materials and characteristics, however, incorporating environmental and sustainable attributes are important strategies to support the design for manufacturing. This paper proposes method for multi-attribute evaluation of prototyping technology associated with sustainable product conception. This proposal focuses on improving the decision-making process and provide the prioritization of technical characteristics and it was evaluated and validated, through case studies, applying selective laser sintering and fused deposition modelling technologies into two prototype developments: a bristles protector (lightweight composite product) and a toothbrush (single massive product). The research innovates by proposing a matrix that allows the inclusion of environmental and sustainable features in the design decisionmaking process, promoting the integration of multiple perspectives that involves customer, product and technology associated with sustainable concepts meeting the current demand of the society and companies for the development of sustainable products.
The construction industry in its heterogeneity has a need for better communication and process coordination among stakeholders. This lack of coordination is due to barriers in interoperability in strategic, conceptual and technological perspectives. Interoperability is the ability for agents to communicate and exchange data, information and knowledge. Around this definition, literature suggests that Building Information Modelling (BIM) will play an important role in the development of interoperability in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. Considering that barriers in interoperability can cause difficulties in the AEC industry (such as design overlapping, coordination issues and many kinds of financial loss), the need for a specific method and tools to assess the level of maturity in this field was perceived. This paper provides an approach to assess interoperability in the AEC domain. It is based on the concerns suggested by the main interoperability frameworks found in literature, such as the European Interoperability Framework (EIF). The interoperability assessment is then structured using the value levels (communication, coordination and cooperation) proposed by Grilo and Jardin-Goncalves [1] as maturity levels. The AEC attributes were then formatted in a multi-criteria decision making structure, AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), from which specialists gave their opinion through a questionnaire to determine the perceived level of interoperability. The assessment and diagnosis stage of the research led to the conclusion that data interoperability is still the biggest issue, so a new method to assess interoperability between software and formats is described as a verification experiment, highlighting the main barriers in BIM.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.