The Challenges Of “cradle-to-cradle” Strategy - A Case .
Master Thesis for Sustainable Management2019/6/5The challenges of “cradle-to-cradle”strategy - A case study with HuaweicompanyAuthors:Xiaoyu ZhangShuai HuangSupervisor:Emilene Leite1
AbstractThe cradle to cradle (C2C) is a sustainable business strategy that mimics the natural recyclingcycle and waste is reused, the question of when and how to apply the C2C conceptsuccessfully in business is still controversial. This thesis takes Huawei, the leading enterprisein the mobile communication industry, as an example, and to investigate the challenges forChinese mobile communication companies in implementing an effective C2C strategy toachieve a sustainable development. This study used the semi-structured interviews in thequalitative data collection method to interview both Huawei and China Telecommunications’managers. Data analysis shows that for the electronics industry with low recycling rate andhigh pollution, Huawei still faces many challenges in adopting the C2C strategy，whichincludes alloy recycling, recycling of electronic products in consumers' hands, disassemblyproblems, and recycling of electronic products by value, Another challenge is the mismatchbetween C2C evaluation mechanism and China's mobile communications industry. Only fullyconsidered cradle to cradle, cradle to Grave, and Life cycle, the sustainable mode of themobile communications industry would be reached.keywords: Cradle to Cradle, Cradle to Grave, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Circulareconomy, Linear economy, Upcycle, Technical cycle, Disassembly, Material composition,Reverse logistics, Recycling behavior.key Abbreviations:C2C: Cradle to CradleC2G: Cradle to GraveCSR: Corporate Social ResponsibilityLCA: Life Cycle AssessmentMBDC: McDonough Braungart Design ChemistryEPEA: Environmental Protection Encouragement Agency2
1.Introduction1.1 Problem discussion1.2 Research question1.3 Purpose2. Theoretical framework2.1 Upcycle-Core idea of C2C2.2 C2C and Circular economy2. 3 C2C and LCA2.3.1 Comparison between C2C and LCA2.3.2Complementarity of C2C and LCA2.4 C2C evaluation mechanism2.4.1 Defects of C2C evaluation mechanism2.5 Biological cycle and Technical cycle2.6 Design for disassembly2.7 Material composition2.8 The system of reverse logistics2.9 Determinants of recycling behavior2.10 The research model3. Methodology3.1 Research design3.1.1 Case background3.2 Research approach3.3 Sampling type3.3.1 Sampling frame and sample selection3.3.2 Sample background3.4 Data collection3.4.1 Date source-Primary and Secondary Data collecting3.4.2 Semi-structured interview3.5 Ethical and procedural considerations3.6 Data analysis3.7 Operationalization3.7.1 Huawei Company3.7.2 China Telecommunications Corporation4. Empirical data4.1 C2C and Circular economy4. 2 C2C and 2020212222231
4.2.1 comparison between C2C and LCA4.2.2Complementarity of C2C and LCA4.3 C2C evaluation mechanism4.4 Biological cycle and Technical cycle4.5 Design for disassembly4.6 Material composition4.7 The system of reverse logistics4.8 Determinants of recycling behavior5. Discussion5.1 The system of reverse logistics5.1.1 Material composition5.1.2 Determinants of recycling behavior5.2 Circular economy5.2.1 Technical cycle5.3 C2C evaluation mechanism5.4 Sustainable Mode of telecommunications industry5.4.1 Design for disassembly23242526272728293030303131323333346. Conclusion357. Recommendation for company358. Limitation and Suggestions for future research36ReferenceAppendix:37432
1.IntroductionMost developed countries have environmental regulations that stipulate that chemicalmanufacturers, power plants and users have a responsibility to handle chemical wasteproperly. In the mid-1980s, this was often referred to as "cradle to grave" resourcemanagement.Today, modern environmental management sets out sustainable manufacturingpractices that highlight preventing waste and responsible care for the planet's naturalresources. The focus on recovery of resources, recycling and reuse can be described as"cradle to cradle" resource management （Kumar & Putnam,2008). The cradle to cradle(C2C) is a sustainable business strategy that mimics the natural recycling cycle and waste isreused. The concept has been created by an American architect named William McDonoughand a German chemist named Michael Braungart. The goal of the cradle-to-cradle approachis to create a circular resource management process rather than a linear process like a cradleto a grave. The cradle-to-grave concept is simply the process from birth to death, and its maingoal is to reduce waste. The cradle to cradle method goes a step further, trying to eliminatewaste completely (Study.com, 2019). In C2C strategy, there are two types of nutrients cycle.There are: i） biological cycle: materials are expect to return to the biosphere in the form ofcompost or other nutrients, from which new materials can be produced; and ii） technicalcycle: materials that are not used up during the process of product use can be reprocessed toallow them to be used in new products (EPEA, 2019). In order to achieve a sustainable worldbased on the concept of “cradle to cradle”, products should be beneficial in terms of health,environment and economy (Toxopeus, De Koeijer&Meij, 2015). The attitude of Zero wasteof C2C has attracted many new enterprises to get into the field of sustainable development(Bakker, Wever, Teoh& De Clercq, 2010).In recent years, the improvement of people's living standard is due to the development ofscience and technology, more and more consumers pursue personalized commodities anddiversified commodities, which is reflected in the consumption of electronic products. Due tothe change of industrial competition environment and consumer demand, the upgrading speedof high-tech electronic products is accelerated to meet consumer demand. Since the 1980s,many developed countries have been working on how to reduce the adverse impact on theenvironment in the process of disposing of waste products, and many foreign researchershave studied these issues, especially the recycling of electronic products: How to select themethod of recycling, optimization model and related theoretical analysis.With the growth ofawareness of environmental protection, many consumer begin to pay close attention to thecompany whether to make the use of sustainable materials in their products or services,whether they take corporate social responsibility (CSR) to protect the environment andsociety, which makes the traditional industry model "cradle to grave" is not enough to satisfythe consumers demand of reducing adverse effects on the environment.Therefore, the conceptof supply chain management has been transformed from "cradle to grave" to "cradle tocradle"（Khan, Dong, Zhang & Khan, 2017）. However, in the electronics industry, successin achieving ecological and economic goals is a challenge (Weznek, 2003).The waste streamof e-waste is now expanding, but due to the low level of recycling, many electronic productsare eventually thrown into landfills. The toxins released by burning e-waste cause pollution3
and health problems (O'Lear, 2010).By 2010, the International Electronics Association'srecyclers estimate that 1 billion computers will be discarded. They also claim to recycle 1.5billion pounds of electronic equipment each year, including 40 million computer devices,including processors, displays and printers, Half of the recyclable material is recycled metal(Reverselogisticstrends.com, 2019). Due to the short life cycle of electronic products and thelarge number of defective products, traditional incineration, crushing, burying and otherprocesses have caused serious harm to the environment due to mercury, arsenic, chromium,lead and other heavy metal elements contained in the products. If the C2C model isimplemented in the product design process, recycled materials can be recycled （Khan et al.2017). In order to answer the research question, a case study of Huawei will be used.1.1 Problem discussionThe main value of C2C is that it raises many questions about current business practices.However, the question of when and how to apply the C2C concept successfully in business isstill controversial（Bocken, de Pauw, Bakker & van der Grinten, 2016). O'lear (2010)discusses the C2C business model in chapter 5 of her book about environmental politics.Different from the mainstream ideas, O'lear (2010) critically considered the social problemsthat might arise from C2C. The main emphasis is on the power of ideology. The authorbelieves that ideology affects consumers' values and ultimately changes consumer spendinghabits. In order to shorten the service life of products, businesses have created the concept of"planned obliteration", that is, using inferior raw materials to produce products, thusaccelerating the repeated purchase frequency of consumers and resulting in a larger amountof garbage. As a result, companies are designing the recycling of commercial waste to'whiten' the rise in total waste. Consumers are beginning to see their spending habits asharmless and considering the resulting waste as legitimate. Consumers no longer think aboutthe environmental costs caused by early scrapping, nor do they delved into the fate ofrecycled waste. The power of this ideology is dominated by corporations, and they can evengain a good reputation from it.In such a business mindset, even a shift in strategy to a cradleto-cradle model would not help, as planned obliteration still exists and consumer habits havechanged already. When environmental protection becomes a means of commercial marketing,benefits will be the primary factor for business consideration. Recycling policies for thispurpose only exacerbate the consequences of inefficient resource allocation. It is difficult torealize the ecologically effective sustainable operation mode that is imagined in the C2Ctheory.However, the literature on how to combine C2C concepts with practice to achieveecologically effective sustainable development is limited. This creates barriers and a lack ofguidance for companies that want to implement a C2C strategy. Furthermore, Toxopeus et al.(2015) still points out that C2C production requires a systematic certification process toobtain certification labels. The C2C certification label will also have a positive impact on thereputation of the organization as a reward to the company that implements the C2Cdevelopment model effectively. It can be found from Huawei's 2014 sustainable development4
report and the company's official website that the C2C business model of circular economywas advocated and promoted by the company, which formed an output of ideology virtuallysimultaneously. If so, will this kind of C2C ideology output have a positive impact on theHuawei company's sustainable development? On the other side, Huawei set up more than 190waste electronic product recycling sites in the Asia-pacific region to help promote theimplementation of C2C strategy, but the follow-up progress of this project is not shown in thecompany's annual sustainable development report (Building a better connected world, 2014).The study found that, in 2015, there were nearly 7 billion mobile phone users worldwide(ITU, 2015). Meanwhile, the global mobile phone recycling rates have not reached 10%(Tanskanen, 2012). The previous data apparently does not meet the requirements of C2Cdesign paradigm for product recyclability, which means the current situation of mobilecommunication industry is not conducive to the realization of C2C strategy. This also bringschallenges to Huawei's C2C development.1.2 Research questionWhat is the current status of Mobile Communications Enterprise's "cradle to cradle" strategyin China? - a case study with Huawei as an example.1.3 PurposeTo investigate the challenges for Chinese mobile communication companies in implementingan effective C2C strategy to achieve a sustainable development.2. Theoretical framework2.1 Upcycle-Core idea of C2CBraungart and McDonough (2013) point out that pollution is not the core problem behindenvironmental disasters, but the real culprit is flawed design. The author proposes a conceptof "upcycle", which aims to encourage people to take good care of all creatures, love allchildren and let products interact with nature in the process of product design andmanufacturing. The idea of upcycle requires humans to place themselves in nature to think,which means to be part of nature rather than to separate ourselves from environment(Kopnina, 2018). Traditional thinking holds that human beings can only cause damage to theearth, and the upcycle is similar to C2C philosophy, encourages people to think positivelyabout the relationship between human beings and nature. We should not limit ourselves tohow to reduce harm, but think optimistically about how to create common interests toincrease eco-effective. The idea that simply treating nature as something need to be protectedis a closed and arrogant thought. It would never harness power from natural such as microbes5
and solar energy. The upcycle encourages entrepreneurs to redefine their business modelswith open and innovative thinking, and only by people-oriented manufacturing can developC2C products in a real sense. Do not be afraid of failure and frustration is also an importantspiritual force for enterprises in the process of seeking C2C model. Because the nature ofC2C is innovation, it must be based on numerous examples of failure. Therefore, in order toestablish a C2C development model, the entrepreneurship that is brave to accept challengesand optimistic to face failure is also an important influencing factor. Braungart andMcDonough (2013) criticizes the idea of 'ecologism' that the earth can only be protected byminimizing people's needs. The authors believe that such a short-sighted idea limits thedevelopment mode of interdependence and common prosperity of human and nature.2.2 C2C and Circular economyC2C is regarded as a form of circular economy. A circular economy is an economicdevelopment model characterized by resource conservation and recycling and harmoniouswith the environment. The circular economy emphasizes organizing economic activities intoa "resource - product - renewable resource" feedback process (Kopnina, 2018). In order toachieve this feedback process, it is important to integrate circular economy issues in the earlystages of the product design process. Because once product specifications are developed,usually only small changes are possible (Bocken, Farracho, Bosworth & Kemp, 2014). Thus,as a design paradigm of circular economy, C2C should be considered at the very beginning ofproduct design. The circular economy has been seen as a promising way to help alleviate thepressure of global sustainable development. Since the circular business model cancontinuously reuse products and materials in an economically feasible way and use renewableresources as far as possible (Geissdoerfer, Savaget, Bocken&Hultink, 2017). Europe andChina have adopted the principle of circular economy as part of their future strategy (Su,Heshmati, Geng& Yu, 2013).However, different opinions hold that the core concept of how to conduct with circulareconomy is to slow down the flow rate in the closed loop, that is to say, extending the lifecycle of products is the key to the success of the circular economy (Bocken et al. 2016). Aclosed loop that moves too fast in a circular economy even put more pressure on theenvironment than a traditional linear economy. However, the C2C concept is not focus on theproduct life cycle, that is to say, the main role of C2C is just to close the whole loop withoutpaying attention to the effectiveness within the cycle.Bocken et al. (2016) indicated that, as a typical representative of circular economy, C2C'spursuit of more cycles without considering the service life of products will lead to furtheracceleration of linear resource flow (selling more and more effective products), resulting invery limited saving of total resources. Therefore, in the initial product design, enterprisesshould try to use environment-friendly and recyclable materials to process the recycledproducts, improve product quality and make them enter the recycling cycle. (Khan et al.2017).6
2. 3 C2C and LCA2.3.1 Comparison between C2C and LCAThe Cradle to Cradle (C2C) concept has become a more mature alternative to the ecoefficiency concept based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The concept of eco-efficiencyis often defined as “increasing maximum value with minimal resource utilization andminimal pollution” (Huesemann, 2004). C2C concept challenges traditional methods bylooking to the future of absolute environmental sustainability，the way to achieve it is toincrease the positive impact on the environment by designing “eco-effectiveness” productsrather than designing “Eco-efficiency” products to reduce negative impacts, because Ecoefficiency aims to reduce the negative environmental footprint of human activities, whileC2C attempts to increase the positive footprint (Bjørn&Hauschild, 2013). The concept ofeco-efficiency does not involve a long-term vision or strategy, the link between resourceconsumption and waste discharge is not well linked to the state of sustainable development,increased eco-efficiency may lead to an increase in consumption levels. In summary, ecoefficiency focuses on reducing impacts, thereby increasing the relative environmentalsustainability of products, C2C's sustainability approach is to “maximize the effectivenessof ecosystems” rather than eco-efficiency methods that reduce damage (Bjørn&Hauschild,2013).2.3.2Complementarity of C2C and LCAThe concept of C2C is very focused on material strategy，which is inspired by nature andshows the future of sustainable development (Bakker et al. 2010). While the C2C conceptrepresents an inspiring vision for future product design for more continuous material loopsand renewable energy-based energy systems, the performance of C2C products in LCA isnot guaranteed to be good. C2C emphasizes innovation in the direction of continuous upcycle at the expense of energy efficiency (Braungart, 2011). C2C tends to generate plannedscrapping. "planned scrapping" refers to the fact that the service life of the productsproduced is so short that there is no economic benefit. Therefore, consumers will have torepeat the purchase, which will promote consumers to buy more products and make theenvironment unsustainable (Bulow, 1986). C2C does not see waste itself as a problem, butcare about how to deal with it (Pauli, 2010). The main negative criticism related to C2C isthat its process is related to establishing physical restrictions, instead encouraging to usematerials creatively and extravagantly to shorten product life (Braungart, McDonough&Bollinger, 2007).Since the eco-efficiency of C2C products is not considered, from the perspective of LCA,C2C products are often not as sustainable as eco-efficiency reference products(Bjørn&Hauschild, 2013). Increasing the durability of a product means that it can withstandlonger, more demanding use, making possible a product-service system and a sharingeconomy from which owners can derive more value. This contrasts with planned7
obrogation (Brennan, Tennant&Blomsma, 2015). For companies that choose to apply theC2C concept in product innovation, they cannot record the sustainability of their products（Bjørn&Hauschild, 2013). However, Braungart et al. (2007) pointed out that the analysisof eco-efficiency should be condemned, because although eco-efficiency can provide shortterm economic and ecological advantages, it lacks a long-term perspective to establish atruly positive relationship between industry and nature.2.4 C2C evaluation mechanismThe company can also choose to apply for C2C certification for its products, thiscertification has been managed by Environmental Protection Encouragement Agency(EPEA) and McDonough Braungart Design Chemistry (MBDC), but now assigned to nonprofit organizations (Bjørn&Hauschild, 2013).MBDC evaluates products and materials forcompanies of any size, MBDC is the creator of the cradle-to-cradle design framework andthe cradle-to-cradle certification product program, helping businesses gain business valuefrom products designed For the emerging circular economy（Dyllick&Rost, 2017)， andthe goal of EPEA is to provide high-quality products that are safe for human health and theenvironment and can be reused in the fields of biotechnology and biotechnology Gorman(Gorman, Mehalik, &Werhane, 2017). Certification is divided into five different levels:basic, copper, silver, gold and platinum, of which gold and platinum have the moststringent requirements (MBDC, 2019)2.4.1 Defects of C2C evaluation mechanismWhen developing C2C products, enterprises must consider the final destination of eachmaterial in the process of product design. Toxopeus et al. (2015) believes that the companycannot independently develop a C2C product, and must seek the cooperation of professionalC2C evaluation agencies. However, the study points out that the existing C2C authority stillhas some imperfections, which leads to errors in the final evaluation results (Toxopeus et al.2015). For example, EPEA- a certification agency founded by C2C philosophy creatorsWilliam McDonough and Michael Braungart, its expert group mainly consisting withmaterial experts, the situation has led to the tendency of evaluation agencies to focus onmaterial (product) optimization rather than encouraging the development of innovativeproducts (Toxopeus et al. 2015). This goes against the basic concept of C2C - 'ecoeffectiveness rather than eco-efficiency'. The C2C products evaluated by this standard mayonly meet the eco-efficiency, but fail to produce eco-effectiveness results. As a matter of fact,products with C2C 'tags' may not fundamentally fit the cradle-to-cradle theory due to lack ofinnovation. EPEA ratings target companies' specific products based on five criteria- materialhealth, material reutilization, renewable energy, water stewardship and social fairness (EPEA,2019). Judging from the cases targeted by Toxopeus et al. (2015)’s research, companies tendto mainly consider material health and material reutilization into product design, resulting inthe risk that the other three criteria will be neglected. This led to among the three principles8
of C2C - no waste, only sustainable energy and the promote diversity, only the first principleis actively implemented. On the other hand, due to the lack of energy consumptionassessment in the concept of C2C, C2C products may have the weakness on product lifecycle. Toxopeus et al. (2015) therefore suggest that when designing and manufacturing C2Cproducts, LCA should be included to improve product sustainability.2.5 Biological cycle and Technical cycleMaximizing recycling is often described as a "closed loop," which concept known as a"cradle-to-cradle" approach (McDonough&Braungart, 2002). There are two broad recycles:"biology" and "technology". Gaps remain in the development, implementation anddissemination of effective product solutions and design solutions to support the transition to acircular economy. The circulatory system approach needs to be adopted at both technical andbiological levels. Within the framework we propose, these levels are called "design for thetechnical cycle" and "design for the biological cycle" respectively (Mestre& Cooper, 2017)."Biological cycle design" represents biological design solutions that occur (or are inspired by)in natural ecosystems, in which materials are recycled over time in nature.Bio-basedrecycling strategy, using biomaterials, at the end of its life cycle, can safely return to thebiosphere to provide nutrients for (micro)biological life without waste (Mestre& Cooper,2017)."Technology cycle design" means the use and conversion of materials and energy and/ortechnologies and the optimization of their design to the highest possible level of efficiency.The goal is to minimize material and energy inputs and emissions emissions throughout theproduct's life cycle, while maximizing value propositions for users and society (Mestre&Cooper, 2017). Technical cycle strategies include "slow the loop strategies" and "close theloop strategies". "Slow the loop strategies" include slowing down the flow of material at eachstage of the life cycle, such as the design of durability and extended product life (Vezzoli andManzini, 2008); It also addresses recent developments from the perspective of value addedusers, such as emotionally durable designs (Chapman, 2005). "Close the loop strategies"includes recyclability design strategy, detachable design strategy and appropriate materialselection strategy. It is worth noting that there may be tensions between the policies that needto be addressed (such as between durability and recyclability). "Technology cycle design"solutions can be developed at a progressive level of innovation in the short or medium term(Mestre& Cooper, 2017). ‘slow the loop strategies’ and ‘close the loop strategies’ can beimplemented in existing business models to optimize their current level of efficiency,although in some cases more radical solutions may be required.Setting an example that combine the "slow the loop strategies" and "close the loop strategies",Fairphone represents a new approach to the design and manufacture of mobile phones.Founded in the Netherlands in 2013, Fairphone aims to "create positive social and9
environmental impacts from the beginning to the end of the life cycle of mobile phones"(Fairphone, 2019) by four main principles: durable design, fair materials, good workingconditions, and reuse and recycling. The qualities associated with Fairphone's looping focuson the later stages of its life cycle and emerge from its modular design. Fairphone alsohighlights its social responsibility in managing the end-of-life of its and other brands ofphones. Its partner, Teqcycle, receives refurbished phones (used in the second-hand market)and recycled them (when the refurbished cost exceeds the phone's value).2.6 Design for disassembly"Design for disassembly" is a strategy that overlaps technology and biocycle design and is acontribution to technology and biocycle design to ensure that products and components canbe easily separated and reassembled. This strategy is also critical for the separation ofmaterials entering different cycles (biological and technological) (Reijnders, 2008). Designfor disassembly technology is crucial to allow for higher technical efficiency (Chiodo, 2005).Thus, disassembly should be considered in the process of product design. Specifically, duringdisassembly, toxic and hazardous substances in the product may increase the potential impacton human and environmental health (Huang, Liang& Yi, 2017). Despite to that, The productdisassembly process also could bring a positive impact on the environment (Deniz&Seckin,2002). Effective disassembly design enables the recovery of valuable components, and therest can be recycled, re-sold, or stored for future use (Brennan, Gupta&Taleb, 1994). At thedesign stage, product modularization should also be considered to simplify the product andimprove disassembly efficiency. Product modularization is dividing the product into severalparts- namely several modules. Each part has independent function but geometric connectionwith a consistent interface and consistent input and output interface unit. The same type ofmodule can be reused in the product family and swaps. Due to the modularity of the product,the components are highly common, so the product disassembly efficiency can be accelerated.Some studies have shown that the disassembly efficiency of products has a direct impact onthe economic benefits of environmental protection products. In most cases, 80% of themanufacturing cost of products can be determined at the design stage (Tuncel et al., 1993).The key point of disassembly design is that it is easy to disassemble and can remove partsand materials without damage (Chiodo and Boks, 2002). Since most of today's used productsare comminuted, designs that are easy to disassemble may irritate for reuse and recycling.From a C2C perspective, it makes sense to redesign products that are easy to disintegrate andupgrade, otherwise the most likely scenario for their obsolescence would be landfill and/orincineration (Bakker et al. 2010). The C2C model is a new perspective of sustainabledevelopment. Its basic idea is that the safe recovery and use of raw materials should beconsidered in product design, and nutrition management should replace traditional wastemanagement. C2C pursues green and innovative design; That is, from the first stage ofproduct design, research and development, the product should be carefully designed and easyto disassemble, so that the raw materials are easy to be recycled, can establish a recyclingsystem and raw material recycling network platform, so that the raw materials back to thebiological cycle or processing cycle, which can effectively avoid the waste of raw materials10
and energy, but also can reduce the cost. Clean energy should be used whenever possible inthe manufacturing process. In the sales stage, the C2C model is helpful to open up newmarkets for raw materials, transform wastes into valuable materials, and enhance thecompetitiveness of enterprises through innovation (Khan, et al. 2017).2.7 Material compositionCost-effectiveness may be the biggest problem facing enterprises in implementing C2C. Acost-effective analysis is a way to assess the value of a project by comparing the full cost andbenefits of the project. Dutch companies such as Oce (copiers and printers) That lease highend copiers may find it relatively easy to implement C2C principles because of a 100% return(Bakker et al. 2010）.C2C material strategy involves both material composition a
The goal of the cradle-to-cradle approach is to create a circular resource management process rather than a linear process like a cradle to a grave. The cradle-to-grave concept is simply the process from birth to death, and its main goal is to reduce waste. The cradle to cradle
Cradle to Cradle CertifiedCM is a certification mark licensed by Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation InstituteTM Executive Summary Construction Specialties, Inc is applying to have its Pedisystems Entrance Flooring Products, recertified in the Cradle to Cradle CertifiedCM program by the Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute under
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
V ERSION 3.0 CRADLE TO CRADLE CERTIFIEDCM PRODUCT STANDARD iii FOREWORD This version of the Cradle to Cradle CertifiedCM Product Standard (Version 3.0) replaces Version 2.1.1. The Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute will begin certifying products using . In 2002, the book
4.1 Making the way the organisation operates Cradle to Cradle-proof 7 4.2 Choosing a suitable procurement strategy 8 4.3 Procuring Cradle to Cradle products that meet the minimum requirements for public sustainable procurement 8 4.4 Applying the Cradle to Cradle-related criteria from the criteria documents 9
The Cradle to Cradle is a concept for reducing resource use and pollution Cradle to Cradle is a concept for eliminating waste Materials should either go back to nature or be "food" for new products. The Cradle to Cradle concept Obtain material Manufacturing Assembly Operation Disassembly Waste / 'downcycling'
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
Abrasive water jet (AWJ) machining has been known for over 40 years. It was introduced, described and presented by Hashish [1]. It is often used to cut either semi-finished products or even final products, namely from plan-parallel plates of material. Nevertheless, applications of abrasive water jets for milling [2], turning [3], grinding [4] or polishing [5] are tested more and more often .
