DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00336

Summary
The paper reports the development of a sustainable product design project that brings together tools from life cycle thinking, and systems thinking.
Life cycle and systems thinking are key perspectives needed to avoid the unintended consequences or unsubstantiated claims that inhibit development and adoption of more sustainable products. Chemistry as a discipline is uniquely positioned to offer technical solutions to real-world challenges (i.e., chemists introduce new chemicals and materials into the world), thus teaching chemistry students to think about innovation with a systems lens can be particularly advantageous. Despite this, academic courses and laboratories in chemistry typically focus on reductionist problem solving skills as opposed to examining the bigger picture.
The basis for the proposed approach is that there is a need for a multiple lenses approach of practical green product design to foster a holistic perspective that considers the impacts of an action on both the environment (through life cycle thinking) and societal and earth systems (through systems thinking). Life cycle thinking ensures that a green improvement at one stage of life does not have unrealized impacts elsewhere, and systems thinking considers the interconnections between components and anticipates ways in which action will be most beneficial for eliciting the desired system response.
A children’s car seat is used as an example product for thinking through these different lenses: green principles could drive exploration of the chemical hazards of the padding foam; life cycle thinking could expand on this to ask whether other types of foams have reduced end-of-life impacts; and systems thinking could further expand the scope to consider if an alternative foam with better end-of-life impacts has performance advantages, such as a reduced risk of accidental cracking during routine wear and tear. Using this combination of lenses students can be helped to design and implement chemistry-based solutions that increase product performance while anticipating trade-offs and limiting unintended consequences.
The project components were divided into three workshops, with each emphasizing different learning outcomes:
(a) In Workshop I students evaluated the life cycle impacts and toxicity for a material of concern. They learned how to use systems thinking to navigate the decision-making process around the selection of chemical and material alternatives. In this decision-making process, students experienced the importance of fully evaluating how a material replacement affects product performance, which led them to consider other possibilities for innovation, such as causing a life cycle change or creating a paradigm shift instead.
(b) In Workshop II they measured the performance of this material and compared it to alternatives. Studying a car seat was especially effective for teaching students to consider material performance because the students understood any car seat is going to have to pass regulatory safety testing before going on the market. Depending upon the foam alternatives selected for testing, students should learn that systems thinking is needed to design a next-generation product that is better from both an environmental and performance perspective.
(c) In Workshop III students designed a mock-product that was both high performing and environmentally friendly. Workshop III also provides an opportunity for implementing a systems thinking project in a lecture course without a lab. An instructor could provide students with a summary of life cycle impacts, toxicity, and performance measurements (i.e., the data that would be gathered during Workshops I and II) and students could use this information to perform Workshop III.
Although the project was piloted with master’s students evaluating polymer foams for use in an infant car seat, authors give evidences that this experiential learning approach gave students generalizable strategies for innovating and implementing sustainable practices in their current industrial positions. Moreover, they have suggested ways to adapt the duration and sophistication of the workshops to make them appropriate for a variety of course levels.

Relevance for Complex Systems Knowledge
The paper deals with systems thinking, and sustainable development.
The paper presents systems thinking as an important approach for guiding decision making for more sustainable solutions. Systems thinking consider how a specific technological solution impacts and is influenced by society, ecology, and other technologies.
According to their literature review, authors argue for a system that is made up of a collection of components (people, things, infrastructure, etc.) which work together to influence the goal of the system. The scope of the components and therefore of the system is determined by the defined boundaries. No matter what the boundaries are, a system’s components are interconnected and influential. These casual connections between components are termed feedback loops. Feedback loops can be complex and have delays between system intervention and observed effect. Systems are also affected by system–system interactions: feedback from other systems that influences the system of interest. Finally, systems have leverage points, wherein a small intervention can cause a major shift in system behavior.
Authors discuss about sustainable product design, sustainable improvements or alternatives to a specific product, sustainable alternative material, sustainable innovation and sustainable solutions, although there is not any explicit mention to sustainable development.

Point of Strength
The strength of the publication is the presentation of a way to leverage the strengths of systems thinking (along with life cycle thinking) to guide greener product or process design.