Towards a closed steel eco-cycle - conjoint analysis as a decision tool
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15626/Eco-Tech.2005.002Nyckelord:
Steel ecocycle; Conjoint analysis; Experimental design; Environment valuesAbstract
The Swedish steel industry has over the past 20 years made substantial efforts to promote energy
efficiency and environment protection. However, the dominant part of these investments has been
directed to the individual production sites, most of which today have 'solved' their own acute
environmental problems. The focus has therefore switched to the properties and performance of
the steel products where the evaluation of environmental performance is a complex task that
often requires simultaneous consideration of many different attributes.
Conjoint analysis is commonly used in marketing research, to evaluate how consumers appreciate
specific attributes in products. It has also been widely used in health care, traffic planning and
quality management. Conjoint analysis has also been applied to environmental issues such as
energy, recreation, environmental valuation, ecosystem management, consumer preferences to
products, public preferences to industrial projects, waste management, and environmental policy
development. This previous research has shown that the method is well suited for evaluating
environmental issues.
Here we briefly present the methodology and review some papers on environmental applications.
It is our intention to use this approach as a tool to integrate environmental considerations into
both process and product development within the steel industry.
Statistik
Referenser
Statistics Sweden, 2005. Exports by important SITC commodity groups, January-June 2005, www.scb.se 2005-10-03
Jernkontoret, 2004. "Steel Eco-cycle, programme plan 2004-2008".
Green, P.E., Srinivasan, V., 1990. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice, Journal of marketing 54, 3-20. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251756
Farber, S,, Griner, B., 2000. "Using conjoint analysis to value ecosystem change", Environmental Science & Technology 34, 1407-1412. https://doi.org/10.1021/es990727r
Luce, R., Tukey, J., 1964. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(64)90015-X
Hanley, N., Mourato, S., Wright, R.E,, 2001. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? Journal of Economic Surveys 15, 435-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6419.00145
Louviere, J., 1988. Conjoint analysis modelling of stated preferences. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 22, 93-1 20, https://www.jstor.org/stable/20052837
Nairn, A., Ede, L., Naude, P., 2004, Multivariate statistics in industrial marketing management: a practitioner tool kit. Industrial Marketing Management 33, 573-582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.12.004
Gustafson, A., Herrmann, A., Huber, F. Ed., 2003. Conjoint measurement, methods and applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Hanley, N., Wright, R.E., Adamowicz, V., 1998. Using choice experiments to valuate the environment - design issues, current experience and future prospects. Environmental and resource economics 11, 413-428.
Boxall, P., Adamowicz, W,, Swait, J., Williams, M., Louviere, J., 1996. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecological Economics 18, 243-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00039-0
Martens, H., Martens, M,, 2001, Multivariate analysis of quality, an introduction. Wiley & Sons, LTD, Chichester, UK.
Esbensen, K., 2002. Multivariate data analysis - in practice. Camo Process AS, Oslo, Norway.
A.lvarez-Farizo, B,, Hanley, N,, 2002, Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms, An example from Spain, Energy Policy 30, 107-116, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00063-5
Anderson, R,, Hansen, E,, 2004, The impact of environmental certification on preferences for wood furniture: a conjoint analysis approach, Forest Products Journal, 54, 42-50,
van der Meulen, H.A.B,, de Snoo, G,R., Wossink, G.A.A,, 1996, Farmers' perception of unsprayed crop edges in the Netherlands, Journal of Environmental Management 47, 241 255. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1996.0050
Poortinga, W,, Steg, L, Vlek, C,, Wiersma, G,, 2003, Household preferences for energy saving measures: A conjoint analysis, Journal of Economic Psychology 24, 49-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00154-X
Box, G,E,P,, Hunter, W,G,, Hunter, J,S,, 2005, Statistics for experimenters. Wiley & Sons, Inc Publication, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA.
Bullock, C,, Elston, D,, Chalmers, N,, 1998, An application of economic choice experiments to a traditional land use-deer hunting and landscape change in the Scottish Highlands, Journal of Environmental Management 52, 335-351, https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1997.0179
Ewing, G,, Sarigollu, E,, 2000, Assessing consumer preferences for clean-fuel vehicles: A discrete choice experiment Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 19, 106-118, https://www.jstor.org/stable/30000491
Turpie, J,, Joubert, A,, 2001, Estimating potential impacts of a change in river quality on the tourism value of Kruger National Park: an application of travel cost, contingent and conjoint valuation methods, Water SA 27, 387-398,
Gustafsson, A., 1 996, Customer focused product development by conjoint analysis and QFD, Dissertation no 4 I 8, Linköping University,
Martens, H,, Nres, T,, 1989, Multivariate calibration, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK,
Johnson, F.R,, Desvousges, W.H., 1997, Estimating stated preferences with rated-pair data: environmental, health, and employment effects of energy programs, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34, 79-99, https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1997.1002
Roe, B., Teisl, M,, Levy, A,, Russell, M,, 2001, US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity, Energy Policy 29, 917-925, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00006-4
Goossen, M,, Langers, F,, 2000, Assessing quality of rural areas in the Netherlands: finding the most important indicators for recreation, Landscape and Urban Planning 46, 241-251, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00058-4
Poe, G,, 1999, Maximizing the environmental benefits per dollar expended: an economic interpretation and review of agricultural environmental benefits and costs, Society & Natural Resources 12, 571-598, https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.186405
Kangas, J., Kangas, A., 2005, Multiple criteria decision support in forest management - the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained, Forest Ecology and Management 207, 133-143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.023
Rolfe, J,, Bennett., J, Louviere, J,, 2000, Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation, Ecological Economics 35, 289-302, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00201-9
Stevens, T,, Belkner, R,, Dennis, D,, Kittredge, D., Willis, C,, 2000, Comparison of contingent valuation & conjoint analysis in ecosystem management, Ecological Economics 32, 63-74, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00071-3
Adamowicz, W,, Swait, J,, Boxall, P,, Louviere, J,, Williams, M, 1997, Perceptions versus objective measures of environmental quality in combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental valuation, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32, 65-84, https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1996.0957
Blarney, RX, Bennett, J,W,, Louviere, J,J., Morrison, M.D,, Rolfe, J,C,, 2002, Attribute causality in environmental choice modelling, Environmental & Resource Economics 23, 167 186, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021202425295
Carlsson, F., Frykblom, P., Liljenstolpe, C, 2003 , Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments, Ecological Economics 47, 95-103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2002.09.003
Farber, S,, Griner, B,, 2000, Valuing watershed quality improvements using conjoint analysis, Ecological Economics 34, 63-76, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00153-1
Garrod, G,D,, Willis, K,G,, 1999, Methodological issues in valuing the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas, Journal of Rural Studies 15, 111-117, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(98)00046-1
Probert, EJ,, Dawson, G,F,, Cockrill, A, 2005, Evaluating preferences within the composting industry in Wales using a conjoint analysis approach, Resources Conservation and Recycling 45, 128-141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2005.03.001
Bigsby, H,, Ozanne, L, 2002, The purchase decision: consumers and environmentally certified wood products, Forest Products Journal 52, 100--105,
Chen, C, 2001, Design for the environment: a quality-based model for green product development management science, Management Science 47, 250--263, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.2.250.9841
Noori, H,, Chen, C,, 2003, Applying scenario-driven strategy to integrate environmental management and product design, Production and Operations Management 12, 353 368, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2003.tb00208.x
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Nummer
Sektion
