A Framework for the Application of Eco-efficiency to the Technology Development Process


  • Mauro Caetano Federal University of Goias (UFG)
  • Daniel Amaral Sao Carlos School of Engineering (EESC) / University of Sao Paulo (USP).




Innovation Management, Eco-efficiency, Environmental Sustainability, Technology Development, Technology Planning, Technology Transfer, Theoretical Model.


The use of technology development process (TDP) models by the enterprises can contribute to the usage control of natural resources of technologies before or after its integration on products, services or processes. Although the choice of a technology can consider the use of some performance metrics to identify their eco-efficiency, the literature about technology development models neglects this element. Based on a qualitative analysis of existing models, this paper proposes a conceptual model for the adoption of eco-efficiency indicators in the TDP by the innovation managers, distributed in three different stages: the initial stage, during the planning of a technology, the intermediate stage, at the technology development, and the final stage, at the technology transfer. Future research, such as prioritizing the indicators and the extent of the present analysis to other sustainability dimensions are suggested for structuring a sustainable model of TDP.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Mauro Caetano, Federal University of Goias (UFG)

Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering from Sao Carlos School of Engineering (EESC) / University of Sao Paulo (USP), Brazil. Professor at the Faculty of Administration, Accounting and Economy (FACE) and Agribusiness Postgraduate Program (PPAGRO) at Federal University of Goias (UFG), Brazil.

Daniel Amaral, Sao Carlos School of Engineering (EESC) / University of Sao Paulo (USP).

Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Sao Carlos School of Engineering (EESC) / University of Sao Paulo (USP), Brazil. Professor at EESC / USP, Brazil.


ADVANCE (2006). Sustainable value of european industry: a value based analysis of the environmental performance of european manufacturing companies.The Advance-project ¬/ EU Life. Gieselmanndruck, Postdam.

AYRES, R.U. (1996). Limits to the growth paradigm. Ecological Economics, 19, 117-134.

AYRES, R.U., Miller, S.M. (1980). The role of technological change. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 7, 353-371.

AZAPAGIC, A. (2004). Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12, 639-662.

BRERETON, P., Kitchenham, B.A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software, 80, 571-583.

BRYMAN, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(97).

CAETANO, M., Araujo, C. S., Amaral, D. C., Guerrini, F. M. (2011). Open innovation and technology development process: the gap on partnership adoption from a case study perspective. Product: Management & Development, 9(2).

CARRILLO-HERMOSILLA, J., Río, P., Könnölä, T. (2010). Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 1073-1083.

CLARK, K.,Wheelwright, S.C. (1993). Managing new product and process development: text and cases. New York: Free Press.

CLAUSING, D. (1993). Total quality development: a step-by- step guide to world-class concurrent engineering. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.

COOPER, R.G. (2006). Managing technology development projects. Research Technology Management, 49(6).

CREVELING, C.M., Slutsky, J.L,Antis, D. (2003). Design for six sigma: in technology & product development. Prentice Hall PH, New Jersey.

ELKINGTON, J. (2004). Enter the triple bottom line. In.: Henriques, A.; Richardson, J. The triple bottom line: does it all add up? London: Earthscan.

ENDE, J.V.D., Mulder, K., Knot, M., Moors, E., Vergragt, P. (1998). Traditional and modern technologyassessment: to- ward a toolkit. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 58, 5–21.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (2007). Life cycle assessment: principles and practices. http://www.epa.gov [Accessed September 18, 2007] .

FIGGE, F., Hahn, T. (2005). The cost of sustainability capital and the creation of sustainable value by companies. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(4).

FIKSEL, J., Mcdaniel, J., Mendenhall, C. (1999). Measuring progress towards sustainability principles: process and best practices. Ohio: Battelle Memorial Institute.

GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE (2007). Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, 2002. http://www.aeca.es/comisiones/rsc/documentos_fundamentales_rsc/gri [Accessed October 21, 2007] .

INSTITUTION OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERS (2007). The sustainability metrics: sustainable development progress metrics recommended for use in the process industries. http//www.icheme.org [Accessed October 15, 2007] .

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION. (1999). ISO 14031: environmental performance evaluation. Berlin.

JAPPUR, R. F., Campos, L.M.S., Hoffmann, V.E., Selig, P.M. (2008). A visão de especialistas sobre a sustentabilidade corporativa frente às diversas formações de cadeias produtivas. Revista Produção On Line, 8(3).

JIMÉNEZ-GONZÁLEZ, C., Curzons, A.D., Constable, D.J.C., Overcash, M.R.O., Cunningham,V.L. (2001). How do you select the “greenest” technology? development of guidance for the pharmaceutical industry. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 3( 1).

JUGEND, D., Silva, S. L. (2012). Integration in new product development: case study in a large brazilian high-technology company. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 7(1), 52-63.

KAEBERNICK, H. (2008). Reuse, recycling and remanufacting impediments for industrial implementation. 15th CIRP – International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering. Sydney, Australia: 17 – 19, March.

KAPLAN, S., Tripsas, M. (2008). Thinking about technology: applying a cognitive lens to technical change. Research Policy, 37, 790-805.

KARLSSON, C. (2009). Researching operations management. New York: Routledge.

LABUSCHAGNE, C., Brent, A.C. (2005). Sustainable project life cycle management: the need to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector. International Journal of Project Management, 23.

NEMOTO, M. C. M. O., Vasconcellos, E. P. G., Nelson, R. (2010). The adoption of new technology: conceptual model and application. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5(4), 95-107.

OLSTHOORN, X., Tyteca, D., Wehrmeyer, W., Wagner, M. (2001). Environmental indicators for business: a review of the literature and standardization methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 9.

ROBERTSON, D., Ulrich, K. (1998). Planning for product platforms. Sloan Mgt Rewiew. Sumer Springs.

RODRIGUES, G.S., Buschinelli, C.C.A.,Avila,A.F.D. (2010).An environmental impact assessment system for agricultural research and development ii: institutional learning experience at Embrapa. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5(4), 38-56.

SCHWARZ, J., Beloff, B., Beaver, E. (2002). Use sustainability metrics to guide decision-making. Chemical Engineering Progress, July.

SHEASLEY, W.D. (2000). Taking an options approach to new technology development. Research Technology Management, nov./dez., 37-43.

SIKDAR, S.K. (2003). Sustainable Development and Sustainability Metrics. AIChE Journal, 49(8), August.

THORESEN, J. (1999). Environmental performance evaluation: a tool for industrial improvement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 7, 365-370.

VELEVA, V., Ellenbecker, M. (2001). Indicators of sustainable production: framework and methodology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 9, 519-549.

VEREIN DEUTSCHER INGENIEURE (2006). VDI 4070: Nachaltiges wirtschaften in kleinen und mittelständischen unternehmen: anleitung zum nachhaltigen wirtschafen. Ber- lin: Beuth Verlag.





How to Cite

Caetano, M., & Amaral, D. (2012). A Framework for the Application of Eco-efficiency to the Technology Development Process. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(2), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242012000200003



Research Articles