IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i11p8627-d1156005.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualising a Model to Assess the Optimum Water Flow of Industrial Symbiosis (IS)

Author

Listed:
  • Harshini Mallawaarachchi

    (Department of Facilities Management, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa 10400, Sri Lanka)

  • Gayani Karunasena

    (School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3216, Australia)

  • Yasangika Sandanayake

    (Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa 10400, Sri Lanka)

  • Chunlu Liu

    (School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3216, Australia)

Abstract

Industrial Symbiosis (IS) has obtained worldwide concern as a new initiative for achieving collaborative benefits through the exchange of resources including water among industries. Even though these initiatives became prominent as successful projects in the early stages, many of them have resulted in failures in the long term due to the absence of the prior evaluation and optimisation of identified water synergies in IS planning. Further, the main attention has been given to achieving cost reductions in individual plants rather than analysing the environmental benefits of IS networks that can be achieved through the maximum recovery of wastewater. The existing evaluation emphasises the need to have a standardised way to assess the optimum water flow of IS. Thus, the purpose is to conceptualise a model to assess the optimum water flow of IS based on secondary data analysis. A desk study and a detailed literature review were selected as suitable methods for reviewing the existing literature relating to water exchange in IS networks, water input and output flow, and optimisation methodologies. As the key findings derived through analysis, water inputs and outputs, a boundary for the selection of industrial entities, typical water synergies, and optimisation formulas were established. Finally, a conceptual model was developed to assess the optimum water flow of IS, which was evaluated through expert interviews to identify further improvements. The developed model forms a unique foundation for assessing the optimum water flow of IS, applying in any context subject to context-specific enhancements. Most importantly, the novelty can be highlighted as the consideration given to maximum wastewater recovery in achieving the reduction in the freshwater utilisation of industrial entities within the IS network. Nevertheless, this conceptual model is still at its early development stage, and it is subjected to more empirical testing and research for its practicality and further refinement as a way forward for the research.

Suggested Citation

  • Harshini Mallawaarachchi & Gayani Karunasena & Yasangika Sandanayake & Chunlu Liu, 2023. "Conceptualising a Model to Assess the Optimum Water Flow of Industrial Symbiosis (IS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:11:p:8627-:d:1156005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/11/8627/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/11/8627/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dick van Beers & Albena Bossilkov & Glen Corder & Rene van Berkel, 2007. "Industrial Symbiosis in the Australian Minerals Industry: The Cases of Kwinana and Gladstone," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(1), pages 55-72, January.
    2. Qinghua ZHU & Ernest A. LOWE & Yuan‐an WEI & Donald BARNES, 2007. "Industrial Symbiosis in China: A Case Study of the Guitang Group," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(1), pages 31-42, January.
    3. Tiu, Bryan Timothy C. & Cruz, Dennis E., 2017. "An MILP model for optimizing water exchanges in eco-industrial parks considering water quality," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 89-96.
    4. Marian R. Chertow, 2007. "“Uncovering” Industrial Symbiosis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 11(1), pages 11-30, January.
    5. Noel Brings Jacobsen, 2006. "Industrial Symbiosis in Kalundborg, Denmark: A Quantitative Assessment of Economic and Environmental Aspects," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 10(1‐2), pages 239-255, January.
    6. Mohammed Mahrach & Gara Miranda & Coromoto León & Eduardo Segredo, 2020. "Comparison between Single and Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms to Solve the Knapsack Problem and the Travelling Salesman Problem," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-23, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Emilia Faria & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Cristiane Barreto, 2021. "Social, Economic, and Institutional Configurations of the Industrial Symbiosis Process: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature and a Proposed Theoretical and Analytical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Juan Henriques & Paulo Ferrão & Rui Castro & João Azevedo, 2021. "Industrial Symbiosis: A Sectoral Analysis on Enablers and Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Marian Chertow & Yuko Miyata, 2011. "Assessing collective firm behavior: comparing industrial symbiosis with possible alternatives for individual companies in Oahu, HI," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 266-280, May.
    4. Ilaria Giannoccaro & Valeria Zaza & Luca Fraccascia, 2023. "Designing regional industrial symbiosis networks: The case of Apulia region," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1475-1514, June.
    5. Diogo Ferraz & Fernanda P. S. Falguera & Enzo B. Mariano & Dominik Hartmann, 2021. "Linking Economic Complexity, Diversification, and Industrial Policy with Sustainable Development: A Structured Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-29, January.
    6. Xin Nie & Jianxian Wu & Han Wang & Weijuan Li & Chengdao Huang & Lihua Li, 2022. "Contributing to carbon peak: Estimating the causal impact of eco‐industrial parks on low‐carbon development in China," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1578-1593, August.
    7. Sun, Lu & Li, Hong & Dong, Liang & Fang, Kai & Ren, Jingzheng & Geng, Yong & Fujii, Minoru & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Ning & Liu, Zhe, 2017. "Eco-benefits assessment on urban industrial symbiosis based on material flows analysis and emergy evaluation approach: A case of Liuzhou city, China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 78-88.
    8. João Azevedo & Juan Henriques & Marco Estrela & Rui Dias & Doroteya Vladimirova & Karen Miller & Muriel Iten, 2021. "Guidelines for Industrial Symbiosis—a Systematic Approach for Content Definition and Practical Recommendations for Implementation," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    9. Carlos Scheel & Bernardo Bello, 2022. "Transforming Linear Production Chains into Circular Value Extended Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Chembessi Chedrak & Gohoungodji Paulin & Juste Rajaonson, 2023. "“A fine wine, better with age”: Circular economy historical roots and influential publications: A bibliometric analysis using Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (RPYS)," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(6), pages 1593-1612, December.
    11. Anna Rohde-Lütje & Volker Wohlgemuth, 2020. "Recurring Patterns and Blueprints of Industrial Symbioses as Structural Units for an IT Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Alfred Posch & Abhishek Agarwal & Peter Strachan, 2011. "Editorial: Managing Industrial Symbiosis (IS) Networks," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(7), pages 421-427, November.
    13. Dong, Liang & Liang, Hanwei & Zhang, Liguo & Liu, Zhaowen & Gao, Zhiqiu & Hu, Mingming, 2017. "Highlighting regional eco-industrial development: Life cycle benefits of an urban industrial symbiosis and implications in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 361(C), pages 164-176.
    14. Jarmo Uusikartano & Hannele Väyrynen & Leena Aarikka-Stenroos, 2020. "Public Agency in Changing Industrial Circular Economy Ecosystems: Roles, Modes and Structures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, November.
    15. Luca Fraccascia & Vahid Yazdanpanah & Guido Capelleveen & Devrim Murat Yazan, 2021. "Energy-based industrial symbiosis: a literature review for circular energy transition," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 4791-4825, April.
    16. Glen D. Corder & Artem Golev & Julian Fyfe & Sarah King, 2014. "The Status of Industrial Ecology in Australia: Barriers and Enablers," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-22, March.
    17. Emilia Faria & Cristiane Barreto & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Jorge Alfredo Cerqueira Streit & Patricia Guarnieri, 2023. "Brazilian Circular Economy Pilot Project: Integrating Local Stakeholders’ Perception and Social Context in Industrial Symbiosis Analyses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-28, February.
    18. Luca Fraccascia & Ilaria Giannoccaro & Vito Albino, 2017. "Efficacy of Landfill Tax and Subsidy Policies for the Emergence of Industrial Symbiosis Networks: An Agent-Based Simulation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Juan Diego Henriques & João Azevedo & Rui Dias & Marco Estrela & Cristina Ascenço & Doroteya Vladimirova & Karen Miller, 2022. "Implementing Industrial Symbiosis Incentives: an Applied Assessment Framework for Risk Mitigation," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    20. John Rincón-Moreno & Marta Ormazabal & Maria J. Álvarez & Carmen Jaca, 2020. "Shortcomings of Transforming a Local Circular Economy System through Industrial Symbiosis: A Case Study in Spanish SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-18, October.

    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:15:y:2023:i:11:p:8627-:d:1156005. 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.