Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 711e715www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Editorial

From cleaner production to sustainable production andconsumption in Australia and New Zealand: achievements,

challenges, and opportunities

Abstract

The objective of this special issue is to showcase what Cleaner Production (CP) practitioners and scholars in Australia and New Zealand haveaccomplished to date, and how they hope to progress in the coming decades. The contributions to this special issue have been grouped underthree main categories: sectoral, regional, and CP methods and tools. These contributions suggest that the CP debate has moved on from anec-dotal justification of CP through case studies to diffusing and broadening CP practices so that they fulfil their role as effective components ofa viable, sustainable society. The continued evolution of CP methods and tools in Australia and New Zealand is a good indicator of such a trend.Papers in all three categories identify and present responses to the challenges faced in ensuring that CP activities are both linked to and informedby policy-making and that they support and enhance decisions made in pursuit of sustainable production.� 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cleaner Production; Sustainable production and consumption; Australia; New Zealand

1. Introduction

The idea for this issue was proposed by Prof. Don Hui-singh, Editor-in-Chief of the JCP, in July 2004. This waspartly influenced by similar country and region specific JCPissues that were being developed by others in Canada and else-where as well as through the papers published and discussedduring second and sixth AsiaePacific Cleaner ProductionRoundtables that took place in Brisbane in 1999 [1] andMelbourne in 2005 [2], respectively. In addition, informaland formal networks that exist among CP practitioners andscholars in both Australia and New Zealand have been impor-tant vehicles for mobilising, strengthening, and sustaining theflow of scholarly contributions in CP in various sectors. In thisspecial issue, we showcase some of the work they haveundertaken.

When the concept of CP was first introduced to this regionin the late eighties, the focus was on the use of case studiesfrom elsewhere to demonstrate its potential and to encourageuptake by companies within this region. Since then, CP activ-ities have been focused on applying the concept in sector- andcontext-specific ways, and on identifying and respondingto the challenges that unique regional imperatives and

0959-6526/$ - see front matter � 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.06.011

parameters present. The emphasis now is not so much on ‘sell-ing’ the concept, but on making it work and on enhancing thecontribution it can make to the evolution of viable, sustainablesocieties.

Activities within the region draw attention to the widerange of ways in which the CP approach can help to de-velop, foster, and nurture sustainable societies. They includedetailed and thorough application of the concept itself to in-dustries as wide ranging as large mining operations andonto small facilities such as dry cleaners. However, theyalso manifest themselves in governmental policies that re-flect life cycle thinking, in product development and in ini-tiatives that tackle the thorny question of sustainableconsumption.

The objective of this special issue titled ‘‘From CP to Sus-tainable Production and Consumption in Australia and NewZealand: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities’’ is topresent what CP practitioners and scholars in Australia andNew Zealand have accomplished, and where they are headingin the coming decades. This includes consideration of how CPand business sustainability have been, are being, and areexpected to be, integrated with sustainable development atthe local, regional, and national levels.

712 Editorial / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 711e715

2. Overview of papers included in this special issue

There are twelve full research papers and three notes fromthe field in this special issue. The authors’ contributions inthis special issue have been categorised into the following:

� CP achievements and challenges at a regional level;� CP achievements and challenges at an industry sector

level; and� Recent developments in the application of CP methods

and tools, including life cycle assessment, benchmarking,product design and materials flow analysis.

2.1. CP at a regional level

Brown and Stone in ‘‘Cleaner production in New Zealand:taking stock’’ present a historical perspective on NewZealand’s CP policy, research and intervention initiatives sincethe late eighties. They set this within the context of NewZealand’s unique situation and the challenges these presentwithin a global market. The authors provide an analyticalreview of key CP initiatives both in terms of their measuredsuccesses, their contribution to progress towards a sustainableNew Zealand, and their shortcomings in this regard. Theauthors explain the highly de-regulated nature of the NewZealand economy and the role of voluntary industry frame-works, including national energy and waste strategies, andclimate change mitigation action plans. The authors concludethat a strong conservation ethic, an economy dependent ona buoyant primary food sector and a large SME businessbase contribute towards a positive outlook for cleaner produc-tion within business and, more broadly, sustainability withinsociety. However, they also question whether the policy mix,with its predominant focus on voluntary action, is robustenough for this to be realised.

Collins et al. in ‘‘Business networks and the uptake of sus-tainability practices: the case of New Zealand’’ take a closerlook at the uptake of sustainability in Small and Medium sizedEnterprises (SMEs) by studying a sample of over 800 firms inNew Zealand. The authors compare environmental and socialperformances of firms that are part of a formal and function-ing sustainable business network with those that are not, andalso consider the effect of size on sustainability uptake. Thestudy found that network members and larger firms weremore likely to adopt or be engaged in sustainability practices.The sampled firms expressed the desire for more informationabout Sustainable Business Network, indicating the possibleimportance of such supportive networks in raising conscious-ness and possible future expansion of environmental andsocially responsible practices. A third of the sample citedcosts and other competing business priorities as barriers toadoption of sustainability practices. The research revealsthat regulations may not be the best change agent for sustain-ability in SMEs, and suggests that key drivers to businessadoption of sustainability practices are the beliefs and valuesof senior management.

Van Berkel in ‘‘Cleaner production and eco-efficiencyinitiatives in Western Australia 1996e2004’’ summarisesdevelopments in the promotion and implementation of CPand Eco-Efficiency (EE) in Western Australia (WA) during1996e2004. The period is divided into four stages: (i) ground-work (1996e1999), (ii) experimentation (1999e2002), (iii)roll out (2002e2004) and (iv) reorientation (2004 onward).Van Berkel argues that a concerted effort to define and clarifyconcepts, strategies and programs, and their subsequent rollout, resulted in a remarkable growth of CP activity in a rela-tively short period of time. This was reportedly achievedthrough persistent team work amongst academia, private busi-nesses, professional and non-governmental organisations, aswell as state and local government agencies. The author sug-gests that a current levelling off in CP practices in WesternAustralia is mainly due to saturation in current CP and EE the-ory and approaches. He also suggests that ingraining CP intomainstream business thinking requires more rigorous and inte-grated CP methods and tools, and innovative design and dis-semination of CP programs. The paper provides new foodfor thought for future research to customise and mainstreamCP in heavy process industries such as mining and metalsand oil and gas processing.

2.2. CP at a sectoral level

Reeve, in ‘‘Environmental improvements in the metal finish-ing industry in Australia’’, provides an account of environmen-tal improvements in the metal finishing industry in Victoriaover the past 15 years. This paper has been largely drawnfrom the author’s rich and extensive experience in the metalfinishing industry, and is provided as a ‘Note from the Field’.The author notes that the general consensus in Australasia isthat only approximately 20% of metal finishing companieshave actually implemented good housekeeping and processcontrol measures in the last 15 years. However, he suggeststhat if the surface area of work or weight of metal depositedis used as a basis for assessing uptake, the proportion is over30%, which is a positive sign for the future. Cyanide, hexava-lent chromium, cadmium, lead and chlorinated solvent emis-sions remain to be eliminated for fewer metal finishingshops. The notes provide glimpses of recent advances in theapplication of clean technologies, both in surface treatmentof metal and in closed loop bath chemical recovery and usesystems, both of which obviate the need for end-of-pipesolutions.

Pagan and Prasad, in ‘‘The Queensland food eco-efficiencyproject: reducing risk and improving competitiveness’’, pro-vide a historical and contemporary analysis of eco-efficiencyperformance in the Queensland food industry. In particular,the paper details a two-year eco-efficiency demonstration pro-ject, and discusses the outcomes of eco-efficiency assessmentsundertaken in food processing facilities such as beverage andvegetable processors, nut processors, vegetable and fruitwashers, and bakeries. The paper discusses several resourceefficiency measures alongside waste management initiativesin these companies. It provides practical insights into the

713Editorial / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 711e715

effective implementation of eco-efficiency opportunities infood processing facilities, and suggests areas for further re-search and education in this sector.

Van Berkel, in ‘‘Eco-efficiency in the Australian mineralsprocessing sector’’, provides a detailed account of eco-efficiency opportunities, measures implemented and furtherresearch that is currently being undertaken in the mineralsprocessing sector. This is occurring on three main fronts: (i)eco-efficiency of existing operations, (ii) designing eco-efficiency into future generation plants, and (iii) technologyroutes for eco-efficient minerals processing. The paper providesan in-depth review of eco-efficiency concepts and their inter-pretations in the sector, and suggests five themes for scopingeco-efficiency: resource efficiency; energy use and greenhousegas emissions; water use and impacts; control of minor elementsand toxics, and by-product creation. The paper provides usefulframeworks and contemporary case studies drawn from the Aus-tralian minerals processing industry. The author argues, however,that greater challenges remain in extending the applicationof eco-efficiency from the currently prevailing operationalplatform to the design and technology platforms. He suggeststhat a paucity of evidence for the benefits thereof and a generallack of specific tools and methods for ingraining eco-efficiencyat the design and technology platforms are the most prominentfuture challenges facing the sector. The paper concludes thatboth hard (development and implementation of business sys-tems, processes, operating philosophy, and tools) and soft (train-ing, benchmarking and reward schemes) measures are requiredto extend eco-efficiency beyond the current stack of case studies.

Clay et al., in ‘‘Sustainability Victoria: influencing resourceuse, towards zero waste and sustainable production and con-sumption’’, discuss how Sustainability Victoria is stimulatingresource efficiency across the production and consumption cy-cle through the establishment of innovative partnerships withdesigners and brand owners, supplier-manufacturer relation-ships and through engaging consumer choice. The paperdocuments the lessons learned from Victoria’s past successeswith recycling and CP programs. This contribution is includedas a ‘Note from the Field’ because it draws from practicalpolicy and enforcement experiences of Victorian state sustain-ability agency. Sustainability Victoria is also working with theUnited Nations Environment Program through the Life CycleInitiative, and was the Chair of the sixth Asia Pacific Round-table for Sustainable Consumption and Production held inMelbourne in October 2005. This is a continually evolvingprogram, and the authors believe that it has yet to reach thetipping point where business can see the potential of life cyclethinking and the opportunity to take a share of the new econ-omy. The paper underscores the important role that sustainablegovernance has to play in fostering relationships amongstindustry, government, academia and society at large, andthereby facilitating progress in all fronts.

2.3. CP methods and tools

Howgrave-Graham and van Berkel, in ‘‘Assessment ofcleaner production uptake: method development and trial

with small businesses in Western Australia’’, report on the de-velopment, application, and limitations of an innovative semi-quantitative assessment method that was trialed in 140 SMEscovering four sectors: printing and book making, dry cleaning,food processing, and metal products. The authors have devel-oped and applied a three component rating system: (i) aware-ness of CP ideas and benefits amongst the SMEs, (ii) presenceof management features and system components for embed-ding CP (business capacity to implement CP), and (iii) CPcontent of innovations and operational improvements (out-comes) in the SMEs. The authors concede that the methodrelies upon professional judgements (subjective to measure)by CP experts and therefore, lacks precision in assessing therigour and depth of CP implementation (retrospective) inSMEs and their potential to continue on with the CP efforts( prospective). However, the authors argue that as shown bythe trial results, the method provides a more realistic pictureof the actual industry practice than generally achieved throughmail surveys where accuracy and reliability are constrained byself-selection, socially biased answers, and low response rates.More streamlined monitoring and data logging of CP perfor-mances need to be established, piloted, and improved inmany SMEs. Therefore, this area requires further research todevelop more robust and real-time models to overcome inher-ent conceptual, methodological, and fundamental complexitiesin assessing, monitoring, and reporting CP uptake in SMEs.

Altham, in ‘‘Benchmarking to trigger cleaner production insmall businesses: dry cleaning case study’’, reports on recentresearch that investigated and implemented benchmarking asa CP tool in the dry-cleaning industry in Western Australia.The paper identifies the critical success factors for environ-mental benchmarking as: (i) identifying CP gaps in areasimportant to the long-term future of the businesses in question;(ii) promoting drivers to close performance gaps, and (iii)ensuring managers possess the correct skills to close thesegaps. The dry cleaners, on average, were found to havereduced hazardous waste generation by 48% and perchloro-ethylene consumption by 30%, and improved their energy ef-ficiency by 9%. The author argues that a critical success factorfor this research was that the dry cleaners who participated inthe project accepted the benchmarks as suitable targets andcommitted their businesses to achieving these targets in theiraction plans. Economic benefits from implementing CP mea-sures and maintaining social and environmental licences to op-erate were found to be important drivers.

James and Hes, in ‘‘Qualitative and quantitative tool devel-opment to support environmentally responsible decisions’’,describe the tools that have been developed to supportdecision-making by industry and government partners in sus-tainable product design and policy development. This is a ma-turing topic in Australia, especially in the building andconstruction and in built-environment sector, and is beingreported in this special issue as a ‘Note from the Field.’ Theauthors argue that it is important for tool development to bebased on solid research and information, but that the key toinfluencing product design decisions is the translation of thisinformation into a user-friendly format for designers. This

714 Editorial / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 711e715

involves the development of ‘knowledge products’ with thedesign team. The authors recommend doing this via a frame-work encompassing: (i) life cycle thinking; (ii) developmentof pragmatic and simple tools, applied to industry sectorsand/or individual companies; (iii) involving a multi-disciplinaryteam from within the project partners, and (iv) generating anddisseminating information through partnerships and collabora-tion. The authors have been applying this framework andapproach in one of their on-going projects entitled ‘‘PackagingImpact Quick Evaluation Tool� (PIQET),’’ and through theiraffiliations with the Sustainable Packaging Alliance. This pro-ject features significant collaboration with funding partnerssuch as individual companies and industry associations to de-velop the PIQET tool, particularly for the packaging industry.

Lundie et al., in ‘‘Australian characterisation factors andnormalisation figures for human toxicity and ecotoxicity,’’have tailored and enhanced the Uniform System for Evalua-tion of Substances (USES) e Environmental Life CycleAssessment (LCA) 2.0 model. The model was originally de-veloped for West European conditions, to estimate the toxicitypotential of substances, but has now been modified to suit theAustralian environment and population. The adapted modelwas used to calculate characterisation factors for 38 humancarcinogenic and 68 human non-carcinogenic substancesin terms of the marginal change in cumulative population-based risk and potential impacts (Disabilities Adjusted LifeYears e DALYs per kilogram). It was also used to calculatecharacterisation factors for freshwater, terrestrial, and marineecotoxicities of 100 substances (in terms of marginal changein potentially affected fraction of species). The substances cho-sen reflect reportable substances under the Australian NationalPollutant Inventory (NPI) scheme (http://www.npi.gov.au/) andcommonly used pesticides in Australian agriculture. Theauthors stress the importance of further research to obtaina more comprehensive assessment of pesticide use and dustemissions and the need to develop a regionally specified fateand exposure model for Australia.

Beer and Grant, in ‘‘Life-cycle analysis of emissions fromfuel ethanol and blends in Australian heavy and light vehicles’’,use streamlined life cycle assessment studies to draw conclu-sions about the benefits of ethanol as an energy source. Theyfound that there are only marginal greenhouse emission reduc-tions associated with the use of 10% ethanol in petrol, whereasthe use of 85% or more ethanol has demonstrable greenhousegas benefits in both light and heavy vehicles. They suggestthat there is, however, considerable doubt as to whether suchvehicles using 85% ethanol will be able to meet the futureEuro3 and Euro4 standards for hydrocarbon and other toxicair emissions. A ‘State of Knowledge’ report published in2001 by the Department of Environment and Heritage, Austra-lian Federal Government, indicates that there are knowledgegaps in emissions of air toxics from vehicular exhausts. Todate, these gaps have not been filled by recent research. The au-thors identify the need for a detailed breakdown of appropriateAustralian weighting factors that can be applied to different airtoxics, so that their relative effects on human health and carci-nogenesis can be determined. The authors will be examining

these issues in the coming years as part of their on-going re-search work under the auspices of Australia’s NationalEnvironment Protection Measure (NEPM) on air toxics.

Despite increasing efforts to dematerialise our economiesin the future, metals and non-metallic materials are likely tocontinue to play an important role in our technosphere. Theyare therefore, also likely to be subject to on-going demandwell into the future. Community concerns regarding wastegeneration and emissions from primary metals production pro-vide an incentive to use LCA to identify those parts of themetal production life cycle that have significant environmentalimpacts. Norgate et al., in ‘‘Assessing the environmental im-pacts of metals production processes’’, explain how LCA hasbeen used by the Minerals Division of Australia’s Common-wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation(CSIRO) to assess the ‘‘cradle-to-gate’’ environmental impactsof a number of metal production processes in Australia. Theauthors note that the life cycle impacts of minor elements(e.g. radioactive lanthanums and actinums) that are capturedin the early stages of ore processing are yet to be determined.They suggest that it is therefore, desirable to extend the scopeof future LCA studies to include dispersion of these minorelements. Current knowledge on the magnitude of the minorelements that are mined and discharged each year is limitedand insufficient to account for their dispersion. However, re-cently initiated research projects at CSIRO Minerals and theCooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Resource Pro-cessing are aimed at gathering the required data and perform-ing predictive modelling to estimate dispersion of minorelements in various solid, liquid, and gaseous emission streamsfrom minerals processing operations.

Taking a systemic view on metals recycling and reuse, vanBeers and Graedel, in ‘‘Spatial characterisation of multi-levelin-use copper and zinc stocks in Australia’’, present a metalsflow analysis methodology to characterise stocks of copperand zinc that are in use in technosphere. They do so usingfour spatial scales: (i) central city, (ii) urban region, (iii)states/territories, and (iv) the whole country. The spatial analy-sis of in-use stocks indicates that 50% of all copper and zincstocks reside in just 10% of Australia’s local government areas.The largest stocks occur in large urban regions, which can con-tain copper and zinc densities more than a hundred times higherthan rural areas. These regions are expected to be majorAustralian ‘‘metal mines’’ in the future. Some 75% of the totalcopper and zinc stocks in Australia reside in three states: NewSouth Wales, Victoria, and Queensland. The authors suggestthat this presents a dramatic perspective on the ability of mod-ern cities to attract and concentrate industrial metals.

In the second paper of this series, van Beers et al., ‘‘Copperand zinc recycling in Australia: potential quantities and policyoptions’’, report on the potential quantities of discarded copperand zinc in future decades, and the policy options for metal re-cycling implied by such a macro-level metals flow analysis. TheLCA (Norgate et al.) and metals flow analysis (van Beers et al.)papers complement each other and their findings combine toprovide medium- and long-term strategic positioning for envi-ronmental sustainability for mining and metals industries.

715Editorial / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 711e715

Although the contributions in this special issue provide aninspiring account of what has been happening in Australia and,to a lesser extent, in New Zealand, it is clear that much morecan still be done. The rigour and sophistication that have beendemonstrated by the papers in this issue need to be extended toother sectors and activities. We need more in-depth, context-specific stories and in-depth insights into the managementsystems, technical and policy tools are needed to supportand enhance CP-related activities. Certainly, more effort needsto be put into integrating CP into both national and regionaldevelopment agendas, and in recognising the contribution itcan make in pursuit of the kinds of radical transformationsthat are necessary for sustainable development to be achieved.This must be followed through by translating policies intomarket mechanisms of the new paradigm, so that businesses,governments and civil societies work together to make prog-ress and are able to showcase concrete actions on the ground.

Implementing CP into the overall sustainable developmentagenda requires a double pronged approach. One is to increaseresource efficiency, promote stewardship and prevent eco-logical damage from occurring in existing production andconsumption activities. The other is to identify and implementradically sustainable options for alternative forms of develop-ment and growth. To move this forward, global and regionalmechanisms are needed to consolidate stakeholder interests,build consensus, share knowledge, foster stakeholder partner-ships and initiatives, and monitor progress.

We have much to do in coming years and certainly shouldnot rest on our laurels. There are clear research and knowledgegaps in elevating CP practice to the sustainable production andconsumption paradigm, and in the role played by financialmarkets to promote sustainable growth. We hope that this spe-cial issue provides one more reason to continue this effort. Wehope that it will spur others to undertake further research onsustainable product service systems, sustainable consumptivepatterns, governance and policy tools to promote change forsustainability, and the role of financial markets therein, andthat the results of their endeavours will contribute towardssubsequent special issues in Australia and New Zealand. Weremain committed to keeping the spirited search for a sustain-able future, alive.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Prof. Don Huisingh, Editor-in-Chief, for his encouragement and support throughout theprocess of completion and publication of this special issue.Most importantly, we would like to thank all the authors fortheir efforts and patience in the process of producing this

special issue. Considerable effort went into selecting expertreviewers around the world in the fields of speciality and dis-ciplines that are represented by the papers in the special issue.Our sincere gratitude to all the reviewers below for allocatingtheir personal time and for providing their extensive knowl-edge and experience to enhance the quality and contemporaryrelevance of this special issue:

Adisa Azapagic Helen Lewis Robert Pagan

Albena Bossilkov Jan Sage Sebastien Humbert

Alma Whiteley Jeff Seadon Stefanie Hellweg

Ake Thidell John Craig Steve Harris

Ayman Elshkaki John Russell Sven Lundie

Christine Byrch Jon Ward Terry Norgate

Darrell Reeve Lesley Stone Venkatesan Narayanaswamy

David Pennington Mary Stewart Walter Cox

Donald Huisingh Michael Schaper Walter Wehrmeyer

Donald Rogich Philip Bangerter William Altham

Frans Verspeek Philip Peck Yuichi Moriguti

Glen Corder Rana Pant

Gregory Brown Rene van Berkel

Finally, we thank the editorial and publishing team at Elsevierfor making these contributions available to all readers.

References

[1] Global competitiveness through cleaner production. In: Scott JA,

Pagan RJ, editors. Proceedings of the second Asia Pacific cleaner produc-

tion roundtable. Brisbane, Australia: Australian Cleaner Production Asso-

ciation Inc., ISBN 0-646-38546-1; 21e23 April 1999. p. 681.

[2] Proceedings of the sixth Asia Pacific roundtable for sustainable con-

sumption and production (CD ROM proceedings), 10e12 October 2005,

Melbourne, Australia.

Venkatesan Narayanaswamy*URS Australia Pty Ltd,

Principal Engineering and Technical Sustainability,Level 3, 20 Terrace Road, East Perth,

Western Australia 6004, Australia*Corresponding author.

E-mail address: venky_narayanaswamy@urscorp.com

Lesley StoneSustainability Uptake Research Group Limited, New Zealand

University of Auckland, New ZealandE-mail address: l.stone@sustainabilityuptake.com

Accepted 21 June 2006

Available online 22 August 2006