clean nvironment management centre 3rd meeting... · 22nd of june 2006; also giving details of the...

CLEMANCE CLEAN ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT CENTRE

REPORT OF THE 3RD INDUSTRIAL

SYMBIOSIS NETWORK (ISNET) MEETING 22ND

FEBRUARY, 2006 DURHAM

© 2006 University of Teesside, all rights reserved

ISNet 3RD Meeting, Durham, February 22ND 2006

CONTENTS

THE PROGRAMME ......................................................................................................................... - 3 - INTRODUCTION AND ISNET NEWS ........................................................................................... - 3 -

REVIEW OF OUTPUTS ......................................................................................................................- 4 - WELCOME TO DURHAM UNIVERSITY ...................................................................................... - 4 - “THE CLASSIFICATION OF EVOLVING INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS”............................. - 5 -

SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................- 5 - “REFLECTING ON IMPLEMENTING INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS THROUGH ECO-INDUSTRIAL PARK DEVELOPMENT” ....................................................................................... - 7 -

SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................- 7 - THE Q & A / DISCUSSION SESSION ........................................................................................ - 10 - “MULTI-SCALAR LANDSCAPES: TRANS-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS, BUSINESS ETHICS AND INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY”................................................................................... - 11 -

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................- 11 - “NOVEL POLYMER RECYCLING PROCESSES” .................................................................. - 14 -

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................- 14 - “THE ATTITUDE OF STAKEHOLDERS TO AN ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK IN KOREA”. - 16 -

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................- 16 - ANNEX A: SPEAKER PROFILES.......................................................................................... - 21 -

MR GARETH KANE ........................................................................................................................- 21 - DR KAREN JOHNSON .....................................................................................................................- 21 - DR JAMES BALDWIN .....................................................................................................................- 21 - PROFESSOR DAVID GIBBS............................................................................................................- 22 - DR SALLY RANDLES .....................................................................................................................- 22 - DAI MORGAN .................................................................................................................................- 23 - DOWON KIM...................................................................................................................................- 23 -

ANNEX B: LIST OF ATTENDEES .............................................................................................. - 24 - ANNEX C: POST MEETING REVIEW FORM ........................................................................... - 25 - ANNEX D: CONTACT ................................................................................................................... - 26 -

- 2 -


THE PROGRAMME

The focus of the 3RD meeting of the Industrial Symbiosis Network was

“Industrial Symbiosis and the Ecological Metaphor”. As is the norm, the topic

was chosen based on its relevance as identified by members of the Network

in previous meetings.

The 3RD meeting for the Industrial Symbiosis Network was held on the 22ND of

February 2006, at the School of Engineering, Durham University.

The main speakers for the day were Dr James Baldwin of Sheffield University

Management School and Professor David Gibbs of the Department of

Geography, University of Hull.

We were also brought up to speed on the research projects being carried out

by some members of the Network. These were given by Dr Sally Randles of

the University of Manchester ESRC Centre for Research on Innovation and

Competition (CRIC), Dai Morgan of Cambridge University Institute for

Manufacturing, and Do-Won Kim of the University Of East Anglia School Of

Environmental Sciences.

INTRODUCTION AND ISNET NEWS

The meeting started off with a ten minute introductory speech given by the

Project Manager for ISNet, Mr Gareth Kane. He welcomed the members of

the Network and gave apologies for the unavoidable absence of the Principal

Investigator for ISNet, Professor Graham Street, due to unforeseen

circumstances.

Mr Kane also went on to discuss ISNet news and upcoming events, giving

details of the next meeting to be held in Kalundborg, Denmark on the 21st and

22nd of June 2006; also giving details of the Gordon’s Research Conference

- 3 -


on Industrial Ecology which will take place in August and consist of a

networking and recruitment session.

He also discussed plans for the 4TH ISNet meeting and asked that any

members who would like to volunteer to host the meeting not hesitate to

contact the network so that preparations might begin.

Lastly he touched on the possibilities of having an online forum for the

Industrial Symbiosis Network members to be able to come together to

exchange ideas, materials, events, and other general information thus

encouraging networking within the members.

Review of Outputs

Mr Kane gave a review of the outputs of the Industrial Symbiosis Network,

bringing the members up to speed on how far the Network had come in

achieving its set targets.

He stated first of all the aims and objectives of the Network, then went on to

give a breakdown of the EPSRC funding and how it is being used.

Lastly and most importantly, Mr Kane discussed at length the difficulties the

Network is facing when it comes to turning the meeting conclusions and ideas

into research projects. He took the network through the steps involved in

transforming ideas into research projects and the queries involved in the

process of transforming ideas to research projects.

To solve this problem, Mr Kane suggested a checklist system where a “Post

Meeting Review” form would be sent out so as to identify what meeting

conclusions or ideas are of the utmost relevance and should be turned into a

research topic. (See Annex C)

WELCOME TO DURHAM UNIVERSITY

Dr Karen Johnson gave a 10 minute welcome speech where she gave a brief

background on the School of Engineering, Durham University, as well as the

City of Durham and its environs. She then went on to discuss the importance

- 4 -


of sustainable development in the School of Engineering. That done, she went

in depth into her scholarly activities, discussing her interest in Soil and Water

remediation and her ongoing research in South Africa.

“THE CLASSIFICATION OF EVOLVING INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS”

The paper was delivered by Dr James Baldwin where for 20 minutes he

discussed a new approach to the classification of Industrial Ecosystems.

Summary Dr Baldwin started out by giving an outline of his presentation which was to:

• Give a brief review of existing classifications

• Discuss the science of classifications

• Define and give some insight to the state of the art of Manufacturing

Cladistics

• Discuss his research methodology as well as his preliminary findings

• Conclude

Next he discussed the current state of research, touching on the different

classifications and types of Industrial Ecosystems, Industrial Symbioses and

Eco-Industrial Parks. He went on to discuss Graedel’s (1996) Types I – III

classifications of Industrial Ecosystems; Chertow’s (2000) Types 1 – 5

classifications of Industrial Ecosystems and Eco-Industrial Parks and Lowe’s

(2001) EIP handbooks, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each

one.

Dr Baldwin stated that the problems associated with the classification of

Industrial Ecosystems include continually changing systems, subjectivity and

lack of consistency in classification systems and styles.

Citing Good (1965) he went on to give the pros of classification citing reasons

as mental classification and communication, the discovery of new fields of

research, the planning of an organisational structure and lastly stating that

classification also acts as a checklist.

- 5 -


Next, Dr Baldwin discussed the science of classification stating the two

biological principles of classification: Phenetics i.e. classification based on

physical attributes; and Phylogenetics, i.e. classification based on ancestral

commonality. He also discussed the 3 main classification disciplines:

Phenetic, Evolutionary, and Cladistic.

Citing Ridley (1993) and Wiley et al (1991) who reviewed the three disciplines,

he looked at the three schools with an eye to identifying the most natural and

objective of the disciplines. This he decided was Cladistics due to its unique

and unambiguous classification as well as the fact that evolutionary history,

which is its basis, cannot be changed thus lending the discipline some level of

objectivity.

Dr Baldwin then began a detailed discussion on Manufacturing Cladistics

citing McCarthy and Ridgway (2000) which states that Manufacturing

Cladistics:

“…facilitate the storage, alignment and development of structural models of

manufacturing systems [that]…would provide researchers and consultants

with a generic library of structural solutions for enabling manufacturing

systems to maximise their operating effectiveness”. Examples are given by

McCarthy, 1995 - Manufacturing complexity; Goh 2000 “Management

techniques”; Leseure, 1998 “Hand tool industry” and McCarthy et al, 1997

“Automotive Industry”. Dr Baldwin then briefly gave an example of

Manufacturing Cladistics using automotive assembly plants.

He then went on to discuss his project aims and his research methods. His

project aims he stated as

1. Identify different but generic industrial ecosystems

2. Identify character states

3. Construct a conceptual cladogram for Industrial Ecosystems using a

novel approach.

His research method, he stated, was to first create a conceptual cladogram,

search through the available literature looking at evolutionary characteristics,

typology studies and case studies on Manufacturing Cladistics and also look

at general IE literature.

Dr Baldwin then went on to briefly discuss his results, where he created a

conceptual cladogram based on organisational forms where industries were

- 6 -


grouped under Park Organisations, Complex/Cluster Organisations, and

Network Organisations; and also characteristics of the industries in question

such as Recreational Facilities, Power Generation, etc.

He closed his presentation by listing those who would benefit from this sort of

classification – Academics, Industrialists, the local community as well as

policy and decision makers; And what it could be used for – A benchmark of

past, current and best practice, identification of potential pitfalls/problems,

assessing opportunities within industrial sectors, organisational re-engineering

for sustainability, and, as a decision support tool.

“REFLECTING ON IMPLEMENTING INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS THROUGH ECO-INDUSTRIAL PARK DEVELOPMENT”

This paper was delivered by Professor David Gibbs where for 20 minutes he

discussed the issues involved in the implementation of Industrial Symbiosis

via the development of Eco – Industrial Parks.

Summary Professor Gibbs started out by giving the Cohen-Rosenthal definition of an

EIP as a:

“community of businesses that co-operate with each other and with the local

community to efficiently share resources (information, materials, water,

energy, infrastructure and natural habitat)…leading to economic gains, gains

in environmental quality and equitable enhancement of human resources for

the business and local community”.

He then went on to give a brief account of the methodology for his research

which included carrying out surveys, examining case studies as well as site

visits. The surveys were carried out via email, fax and telephone between

January and March of 2002 with a total of 53 interviews with 63 individuals;

the case studies were at 10 sites in the United States and 6 in Europe. The

fieldwork, he said, was carried out in July 2002 and December 2003 in the

United States and throughout 2003-2004 in Europe.

- 7 -


Professor Gibbs gave a list of the Eco Industrial Parks investigated in the

United States as well as in Europe giving the name of each park, the status,

i.e. “Proposed” “In planning stages” “Under construction” “Opened”

“Operational” e.t.c. and the “Greenness” of each park. He also gave the key

features of Industrial Ecology as well as the related questions which his

research aims to answer which are given below:

Feature 1: Cycling of materials and energy i.e. minimisation of waste

production, as well as energy and raw material consumption.

Research Questions:

• Is there evidence for industrial symbiosis at Eco-Industrial Parks?

• Do Eco-Industrial Parks act as closed systems?

• Does this lead to lock-in to current processes?

Feature 2: Networking and cluster building.

Research Questions:

• Do Eco-Industrial Parks involve networking behaviour between firms?

• What is the role of trust and cooperation in developing Eco-Industrial

Parks?

• At what scale should IS be implemented?

Feature 3: Sustainable development i.e. gains for the economy; the

environment and the society.

Research Questions:

• Do Eco-Industrial Parks involve local collaboration and partnership?

• Can Eco-Industrial Parks be promoted by public policy intervention?

• Do Eco-Industrial Parks lead to improved economic, environmental and

social outcomes, compared to locality/region in which located?

He then went on to discuss his observations and suggestions as follows

• Eco Industrial Parks as Industrial Symbioses – Here he noted that

although most Industrial Symbiosis synergies were potential, there was

- 8 -


an absence of inter-firm exchanges and interactions, especially

materials and energy interchanges.

• Closed Systems, Dynamism and Scale – He stated that in the absence

of Industrial Symbiosis closed systems, lock-in or path dependence

were not problems. He also noted that with reference to scale, it was

more fruitful to build on existing waste and energy interchanges i.e. a

“local-regional industrial ecosystem”. With respect to dynamism, he

pointed out that responses to change were different from those

envisaged in literature stating instead a tendency toward inhibition of

tenant recruitment and a general abandonment in the long run of the

eco industrial theme.

• Trust and Cooperation between participants – He pointed out that there

should be interactions other than materials or energy exchanges which

would include an interchange of personnel, co-operative purchasing,

travel to work and so on. This would thus create opportunities for “cross

filtration” of ideas, getting firms to meet and develop trust and is very

important for initial development and fund raising.

• Local Collaboration and Partnership – Professor Gibbs stressed that

this was of key importance, stating that it would help in catalysing new

interactions and sustaining existing ones.

• Public Policy Intervention - He noted that there were high levels of

public sector involvement also reporting at the same time a long

process of development of Eco industrial Parks.

• Eco Industrial Parks as Sustainable Development – He noted that

where the Eco Industrial Parks investigated are concerned, there is a

limited contribution to Environmental aims. He further buttressed this

point by citing the use of Fossil fuels at Redhills Ecoplex and

Londonderry, as well as the use of ground heat pumps at Phillips Eco

Enterprise Centre, the use of photovoltaic cells at Cape Charles and

Eco Dyfi and lastly the wind turbine at Ecotech. He also stated that

from an economic point of view, Eco Industrial Parks are a good

marketing device and possess a unique selling point. On the other

hand, he pointed out that there could also be a lack of success which

- 9 -


would lead to the abandonment of the proposed Eco Industrial Park.

He stated that the success of an Eco Industrial Park depends largely

on the local economy.

Professor Gibbs rounded up by discussing the future prospects for Industrial

Symbiosis and Eco Industrial Parks as policy initiatives stating that there is

obviously a large disparity between Eco Industrial Park ideals and what is

actually on ground. He stressed the importance of incremental approaches,

economic success, trust and cooperation as well as appropriate structures

and regulations to the success of Eco Industrial Parks.

He stated further that for an Eco Industrial Park or an Industrial Symbiosis

Project to be so classified, waste and energy exchanges must occur,

suggesting that local agencies act as network brokers and “Institutional

anchor tenants”. He also suggested that local organisational cultures be taken

into consideration and the spatial extent of firms’ operations be ascertained.

THE Q & A / DISCUSSION SESSION

After Professor Gibbs had rounded up his presentation, a Question and

Answer/ Discussion session proceeded for 30 minutes where the delegates

asked questions, aired their views, and held discussions concerning the topic

at hand.

The result of this session was a list of salient points to be investigated by the

network pending feedback on the points regarded as priority by the Network.

Below is the list of points in question:

• Is it too early in time for the creation of Eco Industrial Parks and

Industrial Symbiosis Projects?

• Is the Ecological Metaphor at all applicable to Industrial Ecosystems?

- 10 -


• What is the role of emissions trading and the like in Industrial

Symbiosis?

• Do the definitions of Eco Industrial Parks and Industrial Symbiosis

actually turn out to be some sort of constraint?

• Which approach is better? The Eco Industrial Park approach where a

geographical area is set aside and industries are made to move in and

work together on their own; or the National Industrial Symbiosis

Programme approach where demands for materials and energy noted

within industries by a middle man (NISP) and supplies provided by

other industries with materials or energy to get rid of.

• Where does “money” fit into the scheme of things as regards the

Ecological metaphor?

• How does the size and interests of industries (SMEs and

Multinationals) affect Industrial Symbiosis?

“MULTI-SCALAR LANDSCAPES: TRANS-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS, BUSINESS

ETHICS AND INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY”

After lunch, the delegates reconvened for the second half of the meeting with

Dr Sally Randles giving a 20 minute presentation on her research “Multi-scalar

Landscapes: Trans-national Corporations, Business Ethics and Industrial

Ecology”

Summary Dr Randles kicked off her presentation by first of all asking two questions

citing Mirata and Pearce (2006) as well as Gibbs and Deutz (2005 & 2004):

1. Why do attempts to policy-push collaborative, synergetic arrangements

between geographically-proximate business units with the aim of

improving resource efficiency across an industrial complex (industrial

symbiosis, eco-industrial parks) remain in practice elusive, patchy

- 11 -


and difficult to sustain? (Gibbs and Deutz 2005, Deutz and Gibbs

2004, Mirata and Pearce 2006)

2. Under what conditions might they be successful? (Mirata and Pearce

2006).

To these she gave the proposition that stressed the importance of scalar

alignments to business ethics.

According to Dr Randles (citing Mirata and Pearce 2006) for Industrial

Symbiosis projects to be successful:

• The overarching environmental policies and regulations must be

adhered to.

• There must be the availability of relevant, reliable, and cost effective

technologies.

• Physical, chemical and geographic attributes of input – output streams

must be carefully considered and planned as well as the utility logistics,

processing and managerial needs and capacities.

• There must be the potential for revenue generation which must also be

cost efficient.

• There must be a compatible Information Management system in place

where information may be exchanged across participants.

• Within the participants there must be a measure of trust and openness

as well as some measure of mental proximity and decision power.

• Upfront investment must be available.

• Possible risks must be noted and solutions provided if possible.

Dr Randles then went on to touch on Industrial Symbiosis and the Ecological /

Systems Metaphor. She stated that in Industrial Ecology, a scale problem

though identified was readily set aside because since the Ecological metaphor

is the basis of Industrial Symbiosis (being a natural systems analogue) it is

assumed that the efficiency of resource utilisation and waste minimisation is

optimised. Also she stated that there is a tendency for Industrial Symbioses

initiatives to assume local autonomy thus ignoring national influences. In a

- 12 -


situation where there is the tendency for Trans-national corporations to

outsource, this assumed autonomy automatically poses a problem.

Using the Holcim group as an example, Dr Randles discussed Scale AND

Business Ethics. She started by first of all defining Business Ethics which she

described as a “Pre-disposition towards a set of values, intent, and actions

considered “virtuous” e.g. environmental and economy ethics, resource

efficiency, waste minimisation, e.t.c.; then gave a brief rundown of the

company profile stating that the Holcim Group is a Swiss holding company

which was established 1912 in Holderbank, recording a sales of over 13bn

Swiss Francs (2004) with subsidiaries in over 70 countries. She stated further

that the group is largely involved in Cement manufacture (which is the

epitome of a dirty, polluting, resource & energy intensive process) with sales

about 76%. Mr Rolf Soiron, according to Dr Randles, is the chairman of the

group with Marcus Ackermann as Chief Executive. 8 out of 9 remaining Board

members are Swiss Nationals.

Dr Randles then went on to discuss the factors influencing the formation of

high ethical standards of the Group as well as the translation of these

standards into business strategy and operations. She listed these factors as:

• The Code of Conduct within the Group is formed around “high Business

Ethics” and driven from centre to periphery

• Holcim (Cimpor and Lafarge) are driving up industry environmental

standards via the World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s

(WBCSD) Cement Sustainability Initiative

• Environmental Monitoring Systems are adhered to such as:

♦ Industry Standards ISO 14001 (plus)

♦ Emissions Monitoring and Reporting (EMR) – 40 million

Swiss francs invested in equipment, over 1.6 million invested

in maintenance and training

♦ Plant Environmental Profile

- 13 -


• The Group also engages in green new-product development, fuel

substitution, and clinker substitution

• Local awards and recognition

Dr Randles brought her presentation to a close by stating first of all that

multiple scales involved in the formation and diffusion of business ethics

intersect with the different scales that industrial symbiosis projects might be

encouraged by stakeholders of government and businesses. She went on to

state the four typologies offered as:

• Local Scalar alignment (e.g. Kalundborg)

• Local Scalar mis-alignment

• Dominant (trans-national) corporate ethic, recognised by the locality

(e.g. Holcim with local awards)

• Dominant (trans-national) corporate ethic, indifferent to the locality

Finally she gave her recommendations as:

1. Contribution to empirical research agenda: Case studies should

be carried out to investigate/test the above

2. There should be an enrichment of Industrial Ecology with

insights from Geography, Management Sciences, and Social

Sciences in general.

“NOVEL POLYMER RECYCLING PROCESSES”

This paper was delivered by Dai Morgan where for 20 minutes he discussed

the problems associated with the recycling of certain types of plastic

packaging and his proposed solution to this problem.

Summary

Mr Morgan started off by giving some background on himself, and the point at

which his research is in. He also went further to state the organisations

funding his research as the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research

Council (EPSRC) and Sealed Air Cryovac, which is a leading global

- 14 -


manufacturer of materials and systems for protective, presentation and fresh

food packaging in the industrial, food and consumer markets.

Next he gave a bird’s eye view of the current situation with plastic food

packaging stating that although indispensable in the consumer society, is

fraught with environmental concerns.

He discussed that normally, plastics are recycled either mechanically, by

melting it down, extruding and pelletising it, or chemically by heating it in the

absence of oxygen thus breaking it into its components. According to Mr

Morgan, current processes are incapable of recycling certain types of

packaging and as such, a novel process is required. The attraction and focus,

Mr Morgan stated, for this research is that first of all, the waste material to be

processed is uncontaminated, controllable, and there is available funding for

this research from Industries concerned about the taxes being levelled against

them for the disposition of this waste product which is so essential to the

consumer society.

The initial results, according to Mr Morgan, of treating the said Polymer

brought about a high pressure reprocessable sheet material which could be

used, for example, as paper and plastic edge protectors.

Mr Morgan then went on to discuss his approach as compared to Industrial

Symbiosis and the Ecological Metaphor stating that these concepts involve

“closed loop” operations as opposed to the linear “open loop” operations

usually carried out by Man. He stated that as with Industrial Symbiosis and the

Ecological Metaphor, his research attempts to “close” the loop as regards

Polymer recycling processes.

Mr Morgan summarised his presentation by stating that:

1. Certain types of polymers are considered to be un-recyclable

2. The nature of industrial waste streams makes it the best initial target

3. The Ecological metaphor provides a useful perspective to guide

process & logistical considerations

He then brought his presentation to a close by stating that:

1. Changing the scale of the industrial food web helps close the loop

- 15 -


2. Re-use helps extend value accrued from material

3. Landfill is significantly delayed

“THE ATTITUDE OF STAKEHOLDERS TO AN ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK IN KOREA”

This paper was delivered by Dowon Kim where for 20 minutes he discussed

the factors influencing the attitude of stakeholders to EIPs in Korea as well as

how one may evaluate the performance of an Eco Industrial Park.

Summary

Mr Kim started his presentation by first of all briefly discussing his research

interests, stating that he had recently introduced an Eco Industrial Park in

Korea and was involved in one of the pilot scheme projects there. He is also

currently carrying out research focused on building a strategic frame for

developing Eco Industrial Parks and also how one may evaluate the

performance of an Eco Industrial Park.

Mr Kim then gave an overview of his presentation stating that he would

discuss the results of the survey concerning the stakeholders’ attitude to an

EIP in Korea, the strategic issues for the development of an EIP and give a

short review of Korean EIPs.

Next, he discussed the main benefits of an Eco Industrial Park which he

divided into Economic, Environmental and Social as follows:

1. Economic

Reduction in production cost

Increase in resource efficiency

Increase in competition

Creation of additional opportunities

2. Environmental

Reduction of contamination in industrial region

Reduction in the use of natural resources

- 16 -


Extension of the lifetime of landfills

Upgrading environmental technologies & the level of sustainable

development

3. Social

Development of the regional economy through job creation

Better circumstances to do business with less environmental

conflicts

Upgrading the overall standard of industry

Development of a “win-win” culture in the society

Mr. Kim went on to enumerate the main risks of an EIP which he listed as

Instability in business, discontinuation of BPX (By Product EXchange) links

caused by process innovation, business model change or business

withdrawal; the burden of initial Investment and financing; and a conflict in the

interests of stakeholders.

Next, he discussed the circumstances that facilitated the creation of EIPs in

Korea, which he stated as being first of all an increase in environmental

governance and costs to manufacturing, the need to reform the old industrial

system, the continuous demand for new Industrial Estates, the close spatial

locations of most industrial estates, the increase in public concern for

environmental quality and lastly, the overall global demand for higher

environmental standards.

He also talked about the motivations for EIPs in Korea which he listed as:

1. Direct/indirect economic support for businesses involved

• Financing (Grants), tax benefit, subsidies

• Technology, certificates, exemptions

2. Activating market for recycled products

• Creation of a demand for these products

• Preferred purchase

3. Economic instruments to promote EIPs

• Stricter regulations & charges on improper waste treatment

• Waste disposal tax

- 17 -


• Primary resource levy

• Environmental accounting

Subsequently, using a diagram, Mr. Kim discussed the main barriers of EIPs

in Korea which he stated as being mainly a lack of confidence in stakeholders

culminating from several other barriers which he divided into Systematic and

Cultural problems. Some of the barriers he mentioned were ineffective policy

and legislation, difficulties in sharing information, insufficient knowledge and

infrastructure, and an unfavorable economic situation in Korea.

Mr. Kim then discussed the strategic issues concerning Eco Industrial Park

developments. Using charts and diagrams, he enumerated these issues,

touching first of all on the Critical Filters for the evolution of EIPs as well as

the areas in need of development as regards the implementation and

sustenance of EIPs. Part of the proposed strategy to implement EIP

development in Korea involved:

1. Securing commitment & ownership from stakeholders

2. Optimising the spatial design of EIPs

3. Developing reliable performance evaluation

4. Technological development strategies including information systems

5. Efficient & effective implementation procedure & organisational design

6. Raising public concern about circular resource use & EIPs

7. Revising policy & legislation (Economic instruments)

Mr Kim went on to give a brief review of Korean EIPs stating that at present,

there are about 500 industrial estates in Korea and that the country is at the

initial stage of EIP development. He stated further that as at the year 2002, an

EIP forum was set up with targets drawn up. These targets included:

• 2004~2005: Planning 6 pilot regions

• 2005~2009: 3 Pilot scheme EIP projects

Next, using diagrams, he charted the trend of the production process in

industries in terms of waste minimisation.

- 18 -


Mr. Kim discussed the implementation plan of EIPs in Korea which is split into

3 stages:

1st Stage (’05~’09) EIP Scheme Projects

This will involve:

• Carrying out pilot scheme projects of selected industrial regions

• Networking material & energy flow organically within the industrial

region/estate

2nd Stage (’10~’04) Building Circular Network

This will involve:

• Leveraging & modifying the results of pilot projects

• Disseminating the networks for circular resource use to the whole

nation

3rd Stage (’14~’19) Settling Korean EIPs

This will involve:

• Forming circular industrial estates based on industrial ecology from the

planning and design stage

Lastly, he rounded up his presentation by giving a list and description of the

Korean EIP Pilot Projects which are as follows:

1. Pohang National Industrial Estate (NIE):

• Steel complex, POSCO (9,500) & 446 product chain businesses

• Issues: waste water, solid waste, incineration residue

• Recycling network of steel by-products, waste acid & waste heat

2. Yosu NIE:

• Chemical complex located in south west coast, 168 firms with

12,000 employees

• Issues: VOC, waste, water

• Cleaner process, Water pinch

- 19 -


3. Ulsan/ Mipo/ Onsan NIE:

• Heavy industrial complex (refining, chemicals, non-ferrous

metals & mechanicals), 827 firms with 96,000 employees

• Issues: water, air, solid waste, VOC, aged facilities

• Resource circulation in energy, water and waste

4. Bawol/ Shihwa:

• Dyeing, fibre & paper

• Issues: odor, sludge, water recycling

5. Cheongju:

• Electronic & semi-conductor

• Issues: odor, WWTP capacity, solid waste

6. Kyongnam:

• Casting & papers

• Issues: odour, solid waste, sludge

After Mr. Kim’s presentation, the meeting was brought to a close at 2.10

pm signaling the beginning of the Research Student networking session

began.

- 20 -


ANNEX A: SPEAKER PROFILES

MR GARETH KANE Gareth is the Centre Manager of the Clean Environment Management Centre

(CLEMANCE) at the University of Teesside. He is project manager for ISNet

and the Centre’s SME Support Programme. He is currently acting project

manager of NISP – North East, which builds on the highly successful Tees

Valley Industrial Symbiosis Programme (2003-2004). He is also a director of

Carbon Neutral North East. His research interests include energy, waste and

sustainable product design.

DR KAREN JOHNSON Karen is a lecturer in Civil Engineering at the School of Engineering at

Durham University. She is also Course Director for the MSc in Environmental

Engineering towards Sustainable Development.

Her projects include an EPSRC funded research project (CL:AIRE accredited,

http://www.claire.co.uk ) entitled “The use of recycled construction/demolition

and industrial waste as a substrate in a novel manganese removal passive

treatment system”.

Karen has had ten years’ experience in hydrogeological consultancy work and

in the design of mine water treatment systems (both internationally and

nationally). She is currently an Associate Member of the Institute of Chemical

Engineers and is working towards Chartered Engineer status. She is also a

member of the EPSRC College from 2006-2009.

DR JAMES BALDWIN James currently holds a lectureship at the Management School, University of

Sheffield, UK, specialising in Sustainable Operations Management and

Industrial Ecology. Prior to this, he held an ESRC Postdoctoral Fellowship,

studying industry as an evolutionary complex system, in the Department of

Mechanical Engineering.

- 21 -

http://www.claire.co.uk/


He also serves on the Editorial Board of the journal Progress in Industrial

Ecology; a regular reviewer for the Journal of Cleaner Production; and guest

reviewer for Benchmarking: an International Journal, Journal of Environmental

Management and International Journal of Global Environmental Issues.

He is currently involved in two new research projects. The first concerns the

evolutionary classification of industrial ecosystems. The second is a new 3-

year complexity research project investigating the evolution and classification

of aerospace supply chains. This research, sponsored by both the ESRC and

the Boeing Corporation, is a collaborative project between the first-tier

suppliers in the aerospace industry and the Universities of Sheffield and

Cranfield.

PROFESSOR DAVID GIBBS David is Professor of Human Geography and Director of the Graduate School

at the University of Hull. He has held visiting posts at Macquarie University,

Monash University and the University of Cincinnati.

His research interests are in the field of local and regional economic

development, with a particular focus upon the interplay between economic

development and the environment. He is the author of number of journal

articles on these topics and of the book Local Economic Development and the

Environment, published by Routledge in 2002.

Recent research projects have included ESRC-funded work on ‘Sustainability

and the Local Economy: The Role of Eco-Industrial Parks’ and ‘Governance

and Regulation in Local Environmental Policy Making’. He is currently co-

investigator on an ESRC-funded project on ‘Consultation as Science

Communication? The Case of Local Air Quality Management’ as part of the

ESRC’s Science in Society programme.

DR SALLY RANDLES Sally is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Research on Innovation and

Competition, Manchester Business School. She spent ten years in local

- 22 -


economic development including as Principal Economic Development Officer

at Bedfordshire County Council.

She has co-edited a book with Professor Ken Green, Industrial Ecology and

Spaces of Innovation, which is currently in production with Edward Elgar. Sally

holds a first degree in Management Sciences, an MBA and a PhD in

economic geography.

Her research interests include exploring the interfaces between Industrial

Ecology and Innovation Studies.

DAI MORGAN Dai is a Research student at the Institute for Manufacturing, Cambridge

University Engineering Department (CUED). He specialised in Manufacturing

Engineering for his first degree, graduating from Cambridge in the summer of

2005. As part of his coursework he undertook an investigation into novel

recycling processes, and that work has been continued into a PhD. The

project is being conducted in conjunction with Sealed Air Cryovac, a global

food packaging manufacturer with a facility near Cambridge.

DOWON KIM Dowon Kim is a PhD student studying Eco-industrial Development at the

University of East Anglia. He has 15 years of work experience in a petroleum

and petrochemical industry including 8 years in an Industrial Estate in Korea.

During his time in industry, he has been involved in the projects regarding

improving the value of industrial by-products, pollution prevention,

environmental businesses and technology management. As part of his current

research he is involved in the Korean Eco Industrial Park schemes.

- 23 -


ANNEX B: LIST OF ATTENDEES

NAME ORGANISATION

Dr Sue Haile University of Newcastle

Dowon Kim University of East Anglia

Dr Karen Johnson Durham University

Dai Morgan University of Cambridge

Ekanem Edet CLEMANCE

Gareth Kane CLEMANCE

Dr Peter Norman University of Newcastle

Professor David Gibbs University of Hull

Professor Graham Street CLEMANCE

Dr James Baldwin University of Sheffield

Dr Sally Randles Manchester University

James Lyons University of York

Alasdair Dalzel - Job CLEMANCE

Alistair Trail CLEMANCE

Christine Parry CLEMANCE

Dr Rahman Pattanathu CLEMANCE

Gordon Lamb Renew Tees Valley

Dr David Wright University of Teesside

Paul Jackson Renew Tees Valley

Dr Colin Pritchard University of Edinburgh

Abhishek Agarwal Robert Gordon University

Dr Pauline Deutz University of Hull

Dr Peter Strachan Robert Gordon University

- 24 -


ANNEX C: POST MEETING REVIEW FORM

INTERESTED? IDEA/ISSUE/PROPOSAL ALREADY

DOING IT Lead Partner

NEEDS FURTHER DEBATE

Exploring the robustness of industrial eco-systems by applying ecological robustness models

Reviewing industry to determine the barriers to IS presented by the definition of waste

Is the Ecological Metaphor at all applicable to Industrial Ecosystems?

What approach to Industrial Symbiosis works better? EIP vs. NISP

- 25 -


ANNEX D: CONTACT For further information on the Industrial Symbiosis Network and how to get involved,

please contact the following:

The Project Coordinator,

ISNet, CLEMANCE

School of Science and Technology,

University of Teesside,

Middlesbrough,

TS1 3BA

Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Tel: +44(0)1642 384418; +44(0)1642 384560

Fax: +44(0)1642 384418

WWW: http://www.tees.ac.uk/depts/clemance/industrial.cfm

- 26 -

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.tees.ac.uk/depts/clemance/industrial.cfm

clean nvironment management centre 3rd meeting... · 22nd of june 2006; also giving details of the...

Documents