IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i7p2496-d158343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Capability Maturity Model for Life Cycle Management at the Industry Sector Level

Author

Listed:
  • Helene Seidel-Sterzik

    (Institute of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

  • Sarah McLaren

    (Institute of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

  • Elena Garnevska

    (Institute of Agriculture and Environment, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand)

Abstract

One approach to incorporate environmental sustainability in organisations is the implementation of Life Cycle Management (LCM). LCM is a comprehensive and integrated approach for measuring and managing environmental impacts. Successful sector-wide uptake of LCM has the potential to enable the environmental impacts associated with an industry sector to be efficiently measured and managed in a continual improvement process. There is an opportunity for the New Zealand primary sector to strengthen its competitiveness in the global market place by demonstrating the environmental credentials of its products and supporting the country’s “green and clean” image. Previous research has identified the barriers and enablers to successful LCM uptake by New Zealand primary sector Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) in a sector-based context. This paper builds on that foundation and presents a Life Cycle Management Uptake Evaluation Framework (LUEF) that allows both individual organisations and industry sectors to identify the key factors affecting successful LCM uptake and assess their level of maturity for each factor. The key factors used in this study are structure, culture, resource availability, LCM strategy, knowledge, market requirements and communication. The study employed a qualitative methodology and used face-to-face interviews with different stakeholders in the value chain for the New Zealand kiwifruit sector to inform the development of the framework. In the framework, each factor is represented as a maturity scale to allow organisations as well as industry sectors to assess their position on the scale. This will help them to create a baseline assessment, both for themselves as an organisation, as well as on an industry sector level. The baseline assessment will allow them to identify areas for improvements, which can be tracked over time by checking the progress on the scales in the individual areas. It can also be used as a communication tool for stakeholders in the supply chain (e.g., growers, post-harvest operators and staff from industry boards). These stakeholders can use the tool to measure and compare performance, including evaluating their own performance against the industry average, as well as performance of the industry sector over time. This is useful to engage these stakeholders and demonstrate that changes (such as reducing carbon footprints) have a positive impact and lead to progress (as well as highlighting any actions that need to be reviewed and adjusted).

Suggested Citation

  • Helene Seidel-Sterzik & Sarah McLaren & Elena Garnevska, 2018. "A Capability Maturity Model for Life Cycle Management at the Industry Sector Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2496-:d:158343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2496/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2496/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nigel Roome, 1992. "Developing environmental management strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 11-24, March.
    2. Jake Schmidt & Ned Helme & Jin Lee & Mark Houdashelt, 2008. "Sector-based approach to the post-2012 climate change policy architecture," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(5), pages 494-515, September.
    3. Ans Kolk & Anniek Mauser, 2002. "The evolution of environmental management: from stage models to performance evaluation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(1), pages 14-31, January.
    4. Christine Jaushyuam Lai, 2016. "The Effect of Individual Market Orientation on Sales Performance : An Integrated Framework for Assessing the Role of Formal and Informal Communications," Post-Print hal-02312307, HAL.
    5. Helene Seidel-Sterzik & Sarah McLaren & Elena Garnevska, 2018. "Effective Life Cycle Management in SMEs: Use of a Sector-Based Approach to Overcome Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, January.
    6. Lea Stadtler & Haiying Lin, 2017. "Moving to the Next Strategy Stage: Examining Firms' Awareness, Motivation and Capability Drivers in Environmental Alliances," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 709-730, September.
    7. Giovanni Peri, 2005. "Determinants of Knowledge Flows and Their Effect on Innovation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(2), pages 308-322, May.
    8. Glen W. S. Dowell & Suresh Muthulingam, 2017. "Will firms go green if it pays? The impact of disruption, cost, and external factors on the adoption of environmental initiatives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1287-1304, June.
    9. Ulrich Wassmer & Raymond Paquin & Sanjay Sharma, 2014. "The Engagement of Firms in Environmental Collaborations : Existing Contributions and Future Directions," Post-Print hal-02313050, HAL.
    10. Yudi Fernando & Geevaneswary Saththasivam, 2017. "Green supply chain agility in EMS ISO 14001 manufacturing firms: empirical justification of social and environmental performance as an organisational outcome," International Journal of Procurement Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 51-69.
    11. Andrew J. Hoffman, 1993. "The importance of fit between individual values and organisational culture in the greening of industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(4), pages 10-18, December.
    12. Lee, Su-Yol & Klassen, Robert D. & Furlan, Andrea & Vinelli, Andrea, 2014. "The green bullwhip effect: Transferring environmental requirements along a supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 39-51.
    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. Marianna Lena Kambanou, 2020. "Life Cycle Costing: Understanding How It Is Practised and Its Relationship to Life Cycle Management—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Dwi Ratna Hidayati & Elena Garnevska & Paul Childerhouse, 2021. "Sustainable Agrifood Value Chain—Transformation in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Chen, Qiuwen & Ma, Xiaohan & Hu, Jiayu & Zhang, Xiaohong, 2023. "Comparison of comprehensive performance of kiwifruit production in China, Iran, and Italy based on emergy and carbon emissions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 483(C).

    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. Suzanne Benn & Damien Giurco & Paul James Brown & Renu Agarwal, 2014. "Towards Responsible Steel: Preliminary Insights," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Pierre‐Xavier Meschi & Anne Norheim‐Hansen, 2020. "Partner‐diversity effects on alliance termination in the early stage of green alliance formation: Empirical evidence from carbon‐emission reduction projects in Latin America," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 250-261, January.
    3. Lixiang Wang & Weian Li & Lujun Qi, 2020. "Stakeholder Pressures and Corporate Environmental Strategies: A Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Francesco Calza & Giorgia Profumo & Ilaria Tutore, 2016. "Corporate Ownership and Environmental Proactivity," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 369-389, September.
    5. Rüdiger Hahn, 2013. "ISO 26000 and the Standardization of Strategic Management Processes for Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(7), pages 442-455, November.
    6. Xue Yang & Yuandi Wang & Die Hu & Yongqiang Gao, 2018. "How industry peers improve your sustainable development? The role of listed firms in environmental strategies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1313-1333, December.
    7. A. D. Nuwan Gunarathne & Ki‐Hoon Lee, 2020. "Eco‐control for corporate sustainable management: A sustainability development stage perspective," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 2515-2529, November.
    8. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2016. "The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of Architectures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 193-221, January.
    9. Christin Seifert & Matthias Damert & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Environmental Management in German Hospitals—A Classification of Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Carmen Isensee & Kai-Michael Griese & Frank Teuteberg, 2021. "Sustainable artificial intelligence: A corporate culture perspective [Sustainable artificial intelligence: Eine unternehmenskulturelle Perspektive]," NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum | Sustainability Management Forum, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 217-230, December.
    11. Roberto Fernández Gago & Mariano Nieto Antolín, 2004. "Environmental management and strategic positioning of Spanish manufacturing industries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 33-42, January.
    12. Ilaria Tutore, 2021. "Exploring the Effect of National Culture on Corporate Environmental Proactivity," International Journal of Operations Management, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 17-22, October.
    13. Lea Stadtler & Haiying Lin, 2017. "Moving to the Next Strategy Stage: Examining Firms' Awareness, Motivation and Capability Drivers in Environmental Alliances," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 709-730, September.
    14. Harish Kumar Jeswani & Walter Wehrmeyer & Yacob Mulugetta, 2008. "How warm is the corporate response to climate change? Evidence from Pakistan and the UK," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 46-60, January.
    15. Su‐Yol Lee, 2012. "Corporate Carbon Strategies in Responding to Climate Change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 33-48, January.
    16. Noushi Rahman & Corinne Post, 2012. "Measurement Issues in Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility (ECSR): Toward a Transparent, Reliable, and Construct Valid Instrument," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(3), pages 307-319, February.
    17. Zhengxia He & Leyi Kuai & Jianming Wang, 2023. "Driving mechanism model of enterprise green strategy evolution under digital technology empowerment: A case study based on Zhejiang Enterprises," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 408-429, January.
    18. Riandita, Andra, 2022. "To collaborate and innovate for sustainability: Food retailers and their external partners," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    19. Marie‐Josée Roy & François Thérin, 2008. "Knowledge acquisition and environmental commitment in SMEs," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(5), pages 249-259, September.
    20. Marilyn T. Lucas, 2010. "Understanding environmental management practices: integrating views from strategic management and ecological economics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(8), pages 543-556, December.

    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:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2496-:d:158343. 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.