Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Toward Sustainable Operations of Supply Chain and Logistics Systems pp 141–152Cite as

Sustainability Classification for SMEs—A Guidance of Sustainability Assessment with the Use of Averaged Traits Quality Method

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: EcoProduction ((ECOPROD))

Abstract

This chapter presents a method for aggregation of different indicators, which are relevant for sustainability assessment. The originality of the procedure relies on the use of Averaging Quality Rating method that was used on the level of indicators analysis for making them comparable despite different measurement method (qualitative or quantitative). It is suitable for small- and medium-sized companies (SMEs) where the information system is rather undeveloped.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A total of 99.8 % of all companies in Poland are SMEs. Structure of Polish companies is very similar to the structure in UE (PARP).

References

  • Böhringer C, Jochem PE (2007) Measuring the immeasurable—a survey of sustainability indices. Ecol Econ 63(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buselich K (2004) An outline of current thinking on sustainability assessment—a background paper prepared for the Western Australian state sustainability assessment. Murdoch University, Western Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Darton R (2005) Measuring our future—the role of sustainability metrics. In: The 11th Hartley lecture delivered at the royal society on 10th November 2005. Available via http://www.eng.ox.ac.uk/chemeng/people/darton/Hartleylecture.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2014

  • Devuyst D, Hens N (2001) How green is the city? sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments. Columbia University Presss, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudek-Burlikowska M (2006) Quality research methods as a factor of improvement of preproduction sphere. J Achiev Mater Manuf Eng 18(1–2):435–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Esty DC, Levy MA, Srebotnjak T, de Sherbinin A, Kim CH, Anderson B (2006) Pilot 2006 environmental performance index. Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Fatimah YA, Biswas W, Mazhar I, Islam MN (2013) Sustainable manufacturing for Indonesian small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): the case of remanufactured alternators. J Remanuf 3(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng SC, Joung CB (2009) An overview of a proposed measurement infrastructure for sustainable manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the 7th global conference on sustainable manufacturing. Available 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng SC, Joung CB, Li G (2010) Development overview of sustainable manufacturing metrics. In: Proceedings of the 17th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering, pp 6–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Garetti M, Taisch M (2012) Sustainable manufacturing: trends and research challenges. Prod Plann Control 23(2–3):83–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golinska P, Kosacka M, Mierzwiak R, Werner-Lewandowska K (2014) Grey decision making as a tool for the classification of the sustainability level of remanufacturing companies. J Clean Prod

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques J, Catarino J (2014) Sustainable value and cleaner production—research and application in 19 Portuguese SME. J Clean Prod

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood B, Mellor M, O’Brien G (2005) Sustainable development: mapping different approaches. Sustain Dev 13(1):38–52. https://scholar.google.pl/. Accessed 15 Jan 2015

  • Kollberg B, Elg M, Lindmark J (2005) Design and implementation of a performance measurement system in Swedish health care services: a multiple case study of 6 development teams. Qual Manag Healthc 14(2):95–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolman R (2013) Different varieties of quality and their practical use. Publisher Placet, Warsaw (in Polish)

    Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Liu X, Hu D, Wang R, Yang W, Li D, Zhao D (2009) Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing urban sustainable development: a case study for China’s Jining city. Landsc Urban Plan 90(3):134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monfreda C, Wackernagel M, Deumling D (2004) Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity assessments. Land Use Policy 21(3):231–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecol Econ 60(3):498–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintér L, Hardi P, Martinuzzi A, Hall J (2012) Bellagio STAMP: principles for sustainability assessment and measurement. Ecol Indic 17:20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope J, Annandale D, Morrison-Saunders A (2004) Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 24(6):595–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinne J, Lyytimäki J, Kautto P (2013) From sustainability to well-being: lessons learned from the use of sustainable development indicators at national and EU level. Ecol Indic 35:35–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen MA, Kishawy HA (2012) Sustainable manufacturing and design: concepts, practices and needs. Sustainability 4(2):154–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Schau EM, Traverso M, Lehmann A, Finkbeiner M (2011) Life cycle costing in sustainability assessment—a case study of remanufactured alternators. Sustainability 3(11):2268–2288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh RK, Murty HR, Gupta SK, Dikshit AK (2009) An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol Indic 9(2):189–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sustainable Measures (2010) Characteristics of effective indicators. Available via http://www.sustainablemeasures.com/Indicators/Characteristics.html. Accessed 14 July 2014

  • Thurstone L (1927) The method of paired comparisons for social values. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 21:384–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNDP—United Nations Development Programme (2005) Human development report 2005. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN) (2008) Guidance on corporate responsibility indicators in annual reports. United Nations conference on trade and development, New York and Geneva. Available via http://unctad.org/en/docs/iteteb20076_en.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2014

  • Verheem R (2002) Recommendations for sustainability assessment in the Netherlands. In: Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference of the international association for impact assessment

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. XV, 400

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Poznan University of Technology, Strzelecka 11, 60-965, Poznan, Poland

    Monika Kosacka, Rafał Mierzwiak & Paulina Golinska-Dawson

Authors
  1. Monika Kosacka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafał Mierzwiak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paulina Golinska-Dawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monika Kosacka .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Asian Institute of Technology, Khlong Luang, Pathumthani, Thailand

    Voratas Kachitvichyanukul

  2. Industrial Engineering, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand

    Kanchana Sethanan

  3. Engineering Management, Poznan University of Technology, Poznan, Poland

    Paulina Golinska- Dawson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kosacka, M., Mierzwiak, R., Golinska-Dawson, P. (2015). Sustainability Classification for SMEs—A Guidance of Sustainability Assessment with the Use of Averaged Traits Quality Method. In: Kachitvichyanukul, V., Sethanan, K., Golinska- Dawson, P. (eds) Toward Sustainable Operations of Supply Chain and Logistics Systems. EcoProduction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19006-8_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation