Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
1144096 Systems Engineering Procedia 2011 16 Pages PDF
Abstract

This paper further explains the context of this new legislation and describes, compares and then analyzes the four alternative strategies to reducing end-of-life waste, i.e., repairing, reconditioning, remanufacturing or recycling. It also presents a more robust definition of remanufacturing, which differentiates if from repair and reconditioning engineering. By using a two-stage sequential decision game model, the economic behavior of the main stakeholders under three different types of take-back modes are presented; based on the objective of social welfare maximization, the issues of take-back network, recycling targets setting, recovery catalogs sorting and, supervision and stimulation of take-back models are discussed. Our conclusions demonstrate that: manufacturers, recyclers and consumers do not always share the same preference over three patterns, but the mode of manufacture-leading take-back can reach maximum social welfare; the most efficient network system should be around the manufacturer individual take-back responsibility to build; the take-back level and the recovery catalogs must synthesize the factors involve environmental impact of product, take-back cost/benefit, and recycling and manufacturing industries’ market structure etc.; the supervision and stimulation decision matrix associated with the Producer Responsibility Organization is as an effective tool to balance the environmental benefits and social welfare.

Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering Engineering Control and Systems Engineering