Advertisement

Towards Quality of Life Through the “ErgoSustaiNomics” Approach

  • Hassan Sadeghi Naeini
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 825)

Abstract

The Ergonomics as a human-centered science concerns with human beings and their quality of life. Undoubtedly, the integration between ergonomics and the concept of sustainability might culminate in higher levels of quality of life (QoL). The author believes that making an appropriate communication and association between ergonomics and sustainability will end to better condition for people and quality life. To confirm and assess the importance of the mentioned integration between ergonomics and sustainability, some related papers were reviewed. The findings show that there are some characteristics in both ergonomics and sustainability in terms of quality of life promotion. Some of these potentials are common in both mentioned firms and some of them are specified in each field. Therefore, the author believes that making the synergy between ergonomics and sustainability make an effective and efficiency situation for the evolution of QoL, not only for daily life and for daily product usages by end users but for blue and collar workers during their jobs. The mentioned synergic field is named ErgoSustaiNomics by the author as a new paradigm. It seems that this new paradigm helps the related experts to manage a better future life for all.

Keywords

Ergonomics Sustainability Quality of life Health promotion 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to the Unit of Ergonomics- KTH, for contributing with resources enabling the literature searches. Also a special thanks to Prof. Eklund Jorgen, Andrew Thatcher, and Andrea Eriksson for their comments.

References

  1. 1.
    Genç R (2017) The importance of communication in sustainability & sustainable strategies. Procedia Manufact 8:511–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leach JM et al (2017) Improving city-scale measures of livable sustainability: a study of urban measurement and assessment through application to the city of Birmingham- UK. Cities 71:80–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaklauskas A et al (2018) Quality of city life multiple criteria analysis. Cities 72:82–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dyllick Th et al (2017) Towards true product sustainability. J Clean Prod 162:346–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caiado R et al (2017) Towards sustainable development through the perspective of eco-efficiency - a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 165:890–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moser G (2013) Quality of life and sustainability: toward person–environment congruity. J Environ Psychol 29:351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Laso J et al (2017) Introducing life cycle thinking to define best available techniques for products: application to the anchovy canning industry. J Cleaner Prod 155:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodríguez-Serrano I et al (2017) Assessing the three sustainability pillars through the Framework for Integrated Sustainability Assessment (FISA): case study of a solar thermal electricity project in Mexico. J Cleaner Prod 149:1127–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dawodu A, Akinwolemiwa B, Cheshmehzangi A (2017) A conceptual re-visualization of the adoption and utilization of the pillars of sustainability in the development of neighbourhood sustainability assessment tools. Sustain Cities Soc 28:398–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Partidario PJ, Vergragt PhJ (2002) Planning of strategic innovation aimed at environmental sustainability: actor-networks, scenario acceptance and backcasting analysis within a polymeric coating chain. Future 34:841–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Turisova R, Sinay J (2017) Ergonomics versus product attractiveness. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 18(1):1–13Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haight GM (2013) Human factors engineering, 2nd end. ASSE PubGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Inkeles G, Schencke I (1994) Ergonomic living: how to create a user-friendly home & office. Fireside Pub, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bridger R (2009) Introduction to ergonomics, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vidal MC et al (2012) Ergonomic sustainability based on the ergonomic maturity level measurement. Work 41(1):2721–2729Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garcia-Acosta G et al (2014) Ergoecology: fundamentals of a new multidisciplinary field. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 15(2):111–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haslea P, Jensen P (2012) Ergonomics and sustainability – challenges from global supply chains. Work 41:3906–3913Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pavlovic-Veselinovic S (2014) Ergonomics as a missing part of sustainability. Work 49(3):395–399Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tosi F (2012) Ergonomics and sustainability in the design of everyday use products. Work 41:3878–3882Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nadadur G, Parkinson MB (2013) The role of anthropometry in designing for Sustainability. Ergonomics 56(3):422–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pilczuk D, Barefield K (2014) Green ergonomics: combining sustainability and ergonomics. Work 49(3):357–361Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Karwowski W (2000) Symvatology: the science of an artifact-human compatibility. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 1(1):76–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thatcher A (2014) Theoretical definition and models of sustainable development that apply to human factors and ergonomics In: 11th international symposium on human factors in organisational design and management (ODAM 2014). Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zink K, Fischer K (2013) Do we need sustainability as a new approach in human factors and ergonomics? Ergonomics 56(3):348–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nickerson M (1992) Seeing ourselves in the global picture: guidepost in the sustainable future. Convergense 24/25(2):63–69Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sartori S, Latrônico da Silva F, Campos L (2014) Sustainability and sustainable development: a taxonomy in the field of literature. Ambient Soc 17(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Industrial Design DepartmentUniversity of Science and Technology (IUST)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations