UNEP

Chapter 10:

TechnologyTechnologyAssessmentAssessment

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Technology Assessment

Technology Assessment: “think before you act!” (Kranzberg, 1979)

When taken to the next level, it’s not only “think before you act”.

Any technology has obvious sought after effects called “first order effects.”

However, there are unintended effects as well called second and third order effects.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Dimensions of Consequences

Desired

Intended

Unplanned

Undesired

Unintended

Planned

Technological Decision

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

The automobile is fast, cheap transportation for the driver and provides profits for the manufacturer.– These are the first order effects that are obvious to

most consumers. However, there are second and third order effects.

– Decline of the railroads, urban decline, the interstate highway system, the decline in environmental quality, etc.

– The moving assembly line: drew women into the workforce

The difficulty of forecasting technological developments and the resulting side effects is one reason that criticism is ever present.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

History of Technology Assessment

Technology assessment dates back to the creation of the Regulatory Agency in the 1850’s which was created after more than 2,500 deaths related to the shipping industry.

Regulation spread to other areas as well, but in the early 20th century focus was shifted to technology.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

National Environmental Policy Act of 1972

This act required environmental impact statements for all federal actions significantly affecting the environment.

The Technology Assessment Act of 1972 was enacted by Congress to establish an Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) as an aid in the identification and consideration of existing and probable impacts of technological application; to amend the National Science Foundation Act of 1950; and for other purposes.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

The basic function of the OTA was to:

1. Identify existing or probable impacts of technology or technological problems

2. Where possible, ascertain cause-and-effect relationships3. Identify alternative technological methods of implementing specific

programs4. Identify alternative programs for achieving requisite goals5. Make estimates and comparisons of the impacts of alternative methods

and programs6. Present findings of completed analyses to the appropriate legislative

authorities7. Identify areas where additional research or data collection is required to

provide adequate support for the assessments and estimates.8. Undertake such additional associated activities as specified by the

appropriate authorities.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)

Topics studied by OTA have ranged widely from nuclear proliferation to pollution control, industrial competitiveness, computer security and privacy, and medical technology.

The OTA was extremely successful and widely acclaimed. The OTA published over 100,000 pages of the best available

analysis of policy issues. For 23 years the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)

provided Congress and other committees with an objective analysis of various technological and scientific issues that faced America.

The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment closed on September 29, 1995. It was small and fell victim to political downsizing in the 90’s in an attempt to streamline the budget.

The complete collection of publications by the office as well as other materials about its history are available online at:

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Biotechnology and Assessment

When dealing with living things, a whole host of ethical issues arise, that may not have surfaced with other forms of technological development.

Generally, morals, values, and religious beliefs surface when determining the positive and negative aspects of bio related technology.

The large-scale introduction of biomedical and other technologies in the second half of the 20th century has raised new ethical issues such as:

The definition of death Withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment Prenatal diagnosis and abortion Storage of frozen human embryos

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

The use of humans, animals, or fetal tissue for scientific research

The screening of persons for the AIDS virus or other infections

The disposition of toxic wastes The expansion of genetic engineering The awareness of bioethics and other moral issues has

caused us to pay more attention to practical problems of biological research and deal with the moral and social concerns of human behavior.

Modern Biotechnology is a collection of technologies that are all targeted for a specific purpose.

These “biotechnologies” all have a common factor, which is the use of cells and biological molecules.

Biotechnology is a very large and growing area of study.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Some common areas of research in Biotechnology include:

– Monoclonal Antibody Technology– Cell Culture Technology– Biosensor Technologies– Genetic Modification Technology– Antisense Technology– Protein Engineering Technology

These are only a fraction of the Biotechnology career areas that are currently being studied.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Focus of Technology Assessment

• Technology plays an important role in development• The dominant system of decision making in

technology selection, focuses on economic considerations and tends to disassociate social and environmental factors

• A fragmented approach in making technology choices has implications on efficiency and sustainability of technology

• Integration of economic, social and environmental considerations ensures Resource (Economic and Environmental) Efficiency and Social Acceptability

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

• Helping to describe the science and technology system

• Enabling better understanding of S&T structure

• Enabling better understanding of the impact of policies and programs on it

• Enabling to evaluate the impact of science and technology on society and the economy

Importance of Science & Technology (S&T) indicators

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Innovation and Technology Indicators

The indicators include 4P's: Publications, Patents, Prototypes and Product

They are considered as outputs of science and technology indicators

However, this topic will only focus on the assessment of technology through the process undertaken by companies

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

“4P’s” Concept

Direct Impact of International Cooperation

Products

Patents

Publications

Scientific Research

Knowledge Based Economy

S&T Role in Knowledge Based

Community

S&T Research not Involving International CooperationCurrent Status of Scientific Research

Indirect Experience Gained through International Cooperation

Prototypes

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

• It is important to …… Integrate Environmental, Social and Economic

Considerations… Focus on environment and development together and

puts them at the centre of the economic and political decision making process

... Adapt the country specific parameters and constraints

Sustainable Assessment of Technology (SAT)

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Some Key Characteristics

• It Undergoes progressive assessment (tiered) procedure (screening, scoping and detail assessment) thereby optimizing information requirements.

• It operates on strategic as well as operational level• It is a quantitative procedure allowing objective

assessment, sensitivity analyses and incorporation of scenarios

• It incorporates Continuous improvement through Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle

• It is not an automated process thereby making country specific adaptation possible

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Use of Technology Assessment

Policy and Government LevelFor Strategic Planning and Policy making

Financing Institution LevelFor Assessing projects for funding

Operational Level For assessment of alternative technologies

Community and Cluster LevelFor assessment and comparison of collective alternative technologies

Community / Enterprise LevelFor comparing technology options

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Application

The application areas include:• Environment and health related programs• Provision of basic infrastructure such as roads, power,

water etc.• Bio-diversity management• End-of pipe water and waste management

technologies• Water and waste recycling programs• Process technology modernization at shop floors and

at industrial clusters

Process of Sustainable Assessment of Technology

Screening

Public Information

/ Consultatio

n

Define targets

Issues to be addressed /

Problems to be solved

Strategic Level Assessment

Preferred Technology Options

Operational Level AssessmentDetailed engineering

design & costing

Monitoring / Performance Evaluation

Scoping

Detailed Assessmen

t

Cus

tom

ized

Crit

eria

and

Indi

cato

rs

cons

ider

ing

envi

ronm

enta

l, so

cial

an

d ec

onom

ic c

onsi

dera

tions

Implementation

Situational Analysis

Anticipating Future Scenarios

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Examples of problems related to healthcare waste management

Lack of healthcare waste management has resulted in public health problems in the community as people are exposed to needles and contaminated waste

Improper healthcare waste management practices pose a risk to the health and safety of health workers, waste collectors and patients in the health facility

Poor healthcare waste treatment methods have created a serious environmental problem in the local community causing resentment among neighbors affected by foul odors, smoke, air pollutants, contaminated water, or toxic ash from the health facility

Inadequate waste management practices are putting a strain on the solid waste management system and undermine the potential for material recovery and recycling.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #1 – Situation Analysis

Situation Analysis and Defining TargetsThe Situation Analysis includes:

• Baseline data collection• Stakeholder consultation• Mapping and analyses

These two Steps help to identify issues, assess their significance and leads to setting of targets that should be addressed by proper technology intervention.

Situational Analysis

Define targets

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #2 – Strategic Level Assessment

Strategic level assessmentThis is done by planners, decision–makers, elected representatives through participatory sessions

The outcomes are important as it• Helps to develop customized criteria and indicators

for operational level from generic level.• Facilitates short-listing and identification of suitable

options• Provides leads to future scenario building (e.g.

population growth, tighten legal requirement) there by putting more light on technology choice.

Strategic Level Assessment

Examples of issues and targets at strategic level

ISSUES TARGETSAll health facilities in the area do not have a way to treat their infectious waste

Implementation of a large-scale central treatment technology to handle infectious waste from all generators in the area; promulgation of policies to require treatment of all infectious waste

Long distances and poor roads between districts preclude one central treatment facility for the province

Designation of a cluster treatment hub in each district and deployment of technology at each hub

Health facilities are remotely located and too far from each other

Implementation of a decentralized treatment scheme with a technology appropriately sized for each facility

The health facility plans to expand the number of beds, types of services, and its area of coverage in the future

Deployment of technology that is modular and can be easily scaled up

Strong public opposition to open burning and air pollution

Deployment of technology with little or no air emissions

Inadequate space in the landfill Use of technology that results in significant volume reduction; expansion of existing recycling infrastructure

Lack of information and training in healthcare waste management among health workers

Development of training programs as part of facility accreditation and/or professional licensing

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #3 – Operational Level Assessment

Operational level assessmentEngineers and technical staff assess the available

technology optionsIn community or enterprise level, operational level

assessment can be the first step.The level of expert opinion and technical information is

very important.

Operational Level Assessment

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #4 – Three-Tier-Assessment

Screening

Scoping

Detailed Assessme

nt

Customized Criteria and Indicators

considering environmental,

social and economic

considerations

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Screening

In this Step:

• The short listed systems from Operational level Assessment, undergoes objective YES/NO type answers

• Options which do not qualify one or more conditions, are eliminated.

Operational level assessment - Generic Screening Criteria

Heading Criteria Notes

Compliance Compliance with local environmental laws

The technology must comply with environmental laws of the city, municipality, district and/or province, such as air pollution or landfill regulations.

Compliance Compliance with national environmental laws

The technology must comply with national environmental laws, in particular, air pollution, wastewater, and solid waste disposal laws, and healthcare waste or hazardous waste management regulations. Some countries or local governments have banned incineration. Others specify only approved technologies for the treatment of one or more classifications of healthcare waste.

Compliance Compliance with multilateral environmental agreements

Many countries are parties to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, and the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. Both of these Conventions have guidance related to healthcare waste treatment. The technology should be consistent with this guidance and the country’s National Implementation Plans for these treaties.

Other requirements

Consistency with WHO policies

Many countries have adopted the World Health Organization’s policy on “Safe health-care waste management” (2004)

Other requirements

Meeting the objectives of 3R programs

Many local governments promote reduce-reuse-recycling programs. The technology should meet the objectives of these local environmental programs.

Other requirements

Other basic criterion Include other basic criterion from the stakeholder consultation workshops. Examples that might be raised during a consultation are: proven technology, good environmental performance, no smoke stack or visible smoke, safe handling of infectious waste, etc.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Scoping

• It is a Comprehensive and Qualitative type (High/Medium/Low) assessment

• Various technology options are assessed against generic or customized criteria and indicators with use of computational methods such as:– The weighted sum technique– Sensitivity analysis– Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM): By

‘Expert choice’, a software using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to carry out MCDM

Operational level assessment – General Scoping Criteria

A. Technical Suitability

Criteria Notes

Preference for locally manufactured technologies Can the equipment be manufactured locally to reduce cost and support local employment

Availability of spare parts and usage of local materials To minimize downtime, consumable items and spare parts should be readily available. If there are no locally manufactured technologies, preference could be given to technologies that make use of locally made accessories, consumable items, and spare parts.

Availability of local expertise It would be essential to have the necessary local expertise for commissioning as well as operation, maintenance and repair of the technology. If local expertise is not available, preference could be given to vendors that are willing to train local operators and technicians to run and maintain the technology.

Compatibility with existing technology or management system

In some cases, it is possible that the new technology system would build upon some existing system. As such, it is essential that the new system is compatible with the existing infrastructure/ technology systems as well as the organization’s management systems.

Operational level assessment – General Scoping Criteria

B. Environment (Resources and Emissions)

Criteria Notes

Air emissions Some technologies, such as steam-based systems, have minimal air emissions while others, such as incinerators, release significant air contaminants that require air pollution abatement.

Liquid effluents Liquid effluents—such as sterile condensate, wastewater with high biological oxygen demand, spent chemical disinfectants, or contaminated effluents from scrubbers—are released in varying amounts and impact the environment differently.

Solid residues Some residues, such as sterilized plastics, have lower health/safety and environmental risks, compared to other residues, such as unshredded needles or incinerator ash.

Volume reduction Higher reduction in volume could mean lower transportation and disposal costs and lower impact on landfill space.

Noise Hammer mills and some shredders may generate unacceptable levels of noise especially if the treatment plant is adjacent to the community.

Operational level assessment – General Scoping Criteria

C. Economic/financial aspects

Criteria NotesCapital cost of the treatment technology The capital costs should include shipment, customs, installation,

start-up, testing, and commissioning costs could vary widely for different technologies. Particularly in developing countries, the capital cost could be an important consideration.

Capital costs of all accessories and related equipment The capital costs of all necessary accessories and related equipment should also be considered. These accessories could include containers, bins, trolleys, weighing scales, conveyors, bin loaders and other waste handling equipment, transport vehicles, boilers, computer controls, shredders, compactors, skips or dumpsters, water treatment systems, air pollution control systems, wastewater treatment systems, etc.

Operation and maintenance costs The main operating costs are labor, fuel (diesel, gas, etc.), electricity, water, consumables (personal protection equipment, disposable boxes and bags, labels, cleaning supplies, etc.), sewage, and landfill disposal costs, as well as preventive maintenance and repair costs including replacement parts.

Installation requirements If installation costs are not included in the capital cost of the technology, they should be estimated based on vendor information, technology fact sheets and expert opinions. Installation includes site preparation, foundation, construction or renovation of the space where the treatment technology will be located

Operational level assessment – General Scoping Criteria

D. Social/cultural aspects

Criteria NotesCommunity acceptance of the technology Some technologies are easier to understand than others. For

example, where pressure cookers and microwave ovens are common, communities are able to accept autoclave and microwave technologies more readily. Hospital personnel are generally already familiar with autoclaves and incinerators. However, many communities may be opposed to the siting of incinerators in their neighborhoods.

Income generation potential Job potential may be an important consideration in the community. The job potential can be assessed primarily by referring to vendor information, technology fact sheets and expert opinions.

Acceptability of treatment residues The acceptability of residues may depend on religious or cultural norms. Some communities may require that all healthcare waste be rendered unrecognizable. Others may require the burial of body parts and may not accept the burning, sterilizing or chemical decomposition of anatomical waste.

Extent of necessary resettlement of people Technology systems that use a lot of space or that should be sited far away from populations may mean the relocation of people. There may be other important social equity issues related to this criterion.

Visible or aesthetic impact Many communities are opposed to the sight of flue gas stacks and visible smoke.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Detailed Assessment

• The options with best overall ratings from Scoping are selected for detailed assessment

• The Assessment level is situation specific and requires detailed and quantitative information.

• The outcome is a list of technology options ranked as per their scores

Process stability

805.5, 922.5,1008

Level of automation

Estimated useful life

Fuel consumption

Electricity consumption

Savings in energy

Capital investment

O & M costs

Financial incentivesPayback periodNPV / IRR

Secondary contaminantgeneration

PPE requirement for staff

Safety risk for workers and communities

Noise levels

Odour levels

Person-power requirements

Technical knowledge

requirements

25

50

75

100

Technology 1

Technology 2

Technology 3

Composite Star Diagram for Detailed Assessment

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #5 - Preferred Technology Options

Before discarding low scoring options and/or final decision on selection of technology one must keep in mind• Highest score technology option for current scenario

needs to be carefully reviewed for different scenarios as it may not be equally eligible as feasible option in other scenarios

• On the other hand, the technology options with less score may qualify for different scenarios with suitable technology transfer/capacity building efforts.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #6 - Anticipating Future Scenario

In order to check the robustness of selected technology options, same methodology with simulated future scenario’s to be applied so at to confirm that the technology stands the test of time.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #7 - Implementation and Monitoring

Once the decision on Suitable Option is made, this step covers the following:• Engineering design

• Tendering

• Actual construction and commissioning

Evaluation of technology during operational phase ensures meeting of desired objective against criteria considered in SAT process

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Methodology #8 – Reporting, Monitoring and Feedback

• Reporting the outcome of monitoring and evaluation to stakeholders, govt. agencies and decision makers acts as basis for situation analysis for future projects and helps in making informed decisions

• It helps refine and build the Methodology by - – Inclusion of additional criteria

– Disqualification of technology in future for similar

situations due to negative experiences.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Technical Evaluation

Innovative product, not “me too” Competitive advantages, features, and benefits Barriers to competitive entry (hard to imitate) High quality Third-party test results Ability to deliver a consistent, quality product on time Spin-off, different market applications Environmentally safe

No safety/health risks, regulatory control

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Market Evaluation

Competitive advantage “USP”: Unique Selling Proposition Differentiate on quality,

service, or innovation Market Pull vs. Market Push

Solves customer problems Sunrise vs. Sunset market Significant market niche Market plan/strategy Distribution channels available Repeat sales likely Year-round vs. Seasonal demand

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Approaches to Differentiation

Prestige – Rolex, Mont Blanc

Quality – Honda, Cadillac Top-of-the-Line image –

Ralph Lauren, Cross Pens Innovative, technological

leadership – 3M Corp. Engineering design and

performance – Mercedes A different taste – Dr.

Pepper, Listerine Product reliability –

Johnson & Johnson baby products

Superior service – Federal Express

Full range of services – Merrill Lynch

Complete line of products – Campbell’s Soups

Spare parts availability - Caterpillar

More for your money – McDonald’s, Wal-Mart

Special features – Jenn-air’s indoor cooking tops

Economy – GE’s miser light bulbs

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Economic Evaluation

Premium, price possible for quality Competing on innovation, quality & service - not price Low up-front investment intensity Low overhead High value-added Business plan High productivity Minimum product liability Owners have financial commitment Management paid for performance, not title High Return on Investment (ROI) Realistic financial projections Good margins & profitability Good cash flow

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Management Evaluation(The most important criteria)

Experienced in industry Entrepreneurial aptitude and attitude Results-oriented, bias for action Business experience and education Visionary leadership – sees “big” picture Business strategy is clear and concise “Team” has experience and depth (Production, engineering,

finance, marketing, management) Experienced consultants, advisors (Technical, business, legal,

accounting) Outside accountability Board of Directors, investors, etc.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Relative Market Share Is Closely Related To Profitability

11% 11%

20% 20%

34%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0 16 30 45 80

Relative Market Share (%)

RO

I (%

)

High Market Share Increases ROI

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

ROI Increases With Market Share Rank

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

RO

I (Pr

etax

)

#5 #4 #3 #2 #1Market Share Rank

Higher Market Share Increases ROI

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

High Quality Products & Services Are Most Profitable (Less 12% Cst Of Cap.)

10%

18% 18%

21%

29%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

RO

I(%)

0 5 25 50Perceived Quality By Competition

Quality Increases Rate of Return

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Good Productivity Is Closely Tied To High ROI

05

101520253035

ROI (%)

25K 30K 35K 50KValue Added Per Employee

High Productivity Increases Profitability

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Major Factors Causing High Profits

1. Strong Market Position Relative Market Share > 80%

2. Low Investment Intensity Investment/Sales < 33%

3. High Productivity Value Added/Employee > $60 K

4. High Perceived Quality Quality > 50%

5. Low R&D Marketing Expense Marketing + R&D/Sales < 10%

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Major Factors Causing Profit Trouble

1. Weak Market Position Relative Market Share < 25%

2. High Investment Intensity• Fixed Capital Investment/Sales < 33%

or• Working Capital Investment/Sales > 70%

3. Low Productivity Value Added/Employee < $45K

4. Poor or Standard Quality Quality < 0

5. High R&D & Marketing Expense Marketing + R&D/Sales > 15%

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Product Lifecycle

17-20 years – 1970 10-20 years – 1980 5-6 years – 1990 2-3 years – 2000 Less than 1 year for some products Need for constant innovation,

improvement, new product development

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

New Products

Need a champion Market test Get to market swiftly (market plan) First to market gains share,

higher margins, etc. Sell benefits, not features Unique benefits – innovative, better,

faster, etc.

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Small Business Success…

70% keep on going after 8 years- Dun& Bradstreet survey of 800,000 small businesses started in 1985

80% fail in 5 years is myth!

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

High Risk Economy

Unemployment Low Real Wages – all time high Record Profits Export Growing 3x growth of economy

BUT…

12% college graduates lost job since 1993 Corporate downsizing Job insecurity Economic uncertainty

UNEPUNEPUNEP

UNEP

Strategies for companies…

Reengineer, restructure-boost productivity, profits-cut costs

Technological innovation Export in growth countries Invest in deregulated markets