Please turn your head, for a while, around the table that you have sat! What do you see? Four chairs, three cutleries, a box of Swedish pepparkaka, a dish of prinskorv and sill, and a bunch of other things? That’s great! Now, imagine that all these objects were without any kind of package! In this case, could you maintain, preserve, protect, or handle them? Definitely not! This is the basic role of packages and packaging.
More interesting is when your surrounding objects and their packages move! Another role of packages and packaging is that they make transport, shipment, and distribution of products and objects, possible. Combination of all such roles of packages constitutes packaging system. In general, packaging system includes design and development of products, primary packages (those which are in direct contact with the product), secondary packages (which contain several primary ones), and tertiary packages (assembly of a number of primary and secondary packages on a pallet or roll container).
Do you know that packages have life? Please do not be surprised if I tell you that they are born, live, and die. They can be even reused and recycled after their life and be born again!!! Please do not be shocked if I tell you that they have even logistic life! In fact they are transported, stored and warehoused, sorted, purchased, and sold. Logistic life of packages calls for integration, control, and management of their communication and movements. It also necessitates thorough analysis of interactions between packaging system and logistics system. My colleagues and I at division of packaging logistics at Lund University investigate such interactions by analyzing effects of logistics system (like transportation, communication, warehousing, inventory methods, and movement of resources (like unit-load-carriers) and money) on packaging system (products design and development as well as primary, secondary, and tertiary packages) and vice versa.
My current research is about developing sustainability of logistic life of packages. By this, I mean developing effective and efficient logistic life for our packages in a way that does not compromise logistic life of future generations of our packages. It is usually discussed that such development asks for harmonizing environment, society and economy of our packages in their logistic life.
Worth mentioning, my research focus is mainly on developing environmental sustainability of logistic life of our products (goods) and their packages. Such development calls for sustainable environment for sustainable logistic life of our sustainable packages.
In regard to this, I am analyzing effects of logistics (like distribution, transport, storage, reuse, and recycle) of our products and their packages on their environments (consider their ambience and surroundings) and vice versa.
To make a long story short, this phase of my research deals with design and development of environmentally sustainable packaging logistics. Such sustainability is mostly explored in interactions between packaging system, logistics system, and environment.My first research question can be considered as follow:
How can we design and develop environmental sustainable packaging logistics?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
My current research (Follow it in the two coming posts)!
Dear readers of this blog!
I hope you have started a prosperous 2010.
During the recent months, I received some questions about my current studies and reserach. At the moment, I do reserach on sustainable packaging logistics in a complex theoretical perspective. I do beleive that packaging logistics and its sustainable development are some of the best platforms for real world application of complexity thinking.
In the following posts,I am going to explain briefly some of the relationships between packaging system, logistics system, sustainable develeopment, and complexity thinking. In the two following posts, I discuss mostely about two parts of my research which are:
1) Sustsinable packaging logistics,and
2) Sustainable development of packaging logistics in a complexity paradigm.
So, please do not forget to pursue and read the two coming posts!
I hope you have started a prosperous 2010.
During the recent months, I received some questions about my current studies and reserach. At the moment, I do reserach on sustainable packaging logistics in a complex theoretical perspective. I do beleive that packaging logistics and its sustainable development are some of the best platforms for real world application of complexity thinking.
In the following posts,I am going to explain briefly some of the relationships between packaging system, logistics system, sustainable develeopment, and complexity thinking. In the two following posts, I discuss mostely about two parts of my research which are:
1) Sustsinable packaging logistics,and
2) Sustainable development of packaging logistics in a complexity paradigm.
So, please do not forget to pursue and read the two coming posts!
Friday, December 25, 2009
Happy new year
Merry christmas and happy new year to readers of this blog!
I wish a sustainable year with optimal complexity for you and your family!
I wish a sustainable year with optimal complexity for you and your family!
Monday, November 30, 2009
Ubiquitous Complexity!
I have never been so much proud of science of complexity unless Climate Smart Food conference which was held in Lund on 23-24 November. It was organized by Swedish Ministry of Agriculture on behalf of Swedish Presidency of the European Union.
The conference was about the climate impact of the entire food chain, i.e. from farm to fork to farm. At the beginning of the seminars, I really did not expect to hear anything about complexity and its themes and tools.
It was a great pleasure when Eskil Erlandsson, minister for agriculture, Johan Kuylenstierna from FAO, and Anita Wreford from Scottish Agriculture College, analyzed the role of adaptation in shadow of simplification and mitigation of effects of climate change.
In another presentation, Mr. Finn Rausing from Tetra Laval discussed about finding solution for complexity of food production and distribution as an important enabler of sustainable dairy chain.
I also tracked trace of complexity in Mads Greaker’s seminar from Statistics Norway/Göteborg University when he discoursed about Carbon leakage as one of the problems caused by imperfect climate treaties. Carbon leakage refers to the situation in which some countries efforts to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions result in increased emission elsewhere. This is a very good example of paradoxes in complex systems.
Mads mentioned also difficulties in defining boundaries of the system for ‘climate friendly’ labeling of products. In another seminar regarding launch of new climate label for food in Sweden, Anna Richert from Swedish Seal discussed about emerging paradoxes in a holistic labeling system. Science of complexity is a solid tool for investigating boundaries and paradoxes of ‘climate friendly’ labeling of food and products.
Ulf Sonesson fron SIK was another speaker who explained complexity of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a product as well as production and consumption systems of food chains. He also reminded the importance of systematic approach in simplification of the system.
Pascal Greverath, Chairman of Confedration of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA) Environment Committee presented about ‘European Food Sustainable Consumption and Production Round Table (SCPRT)’ project. He emphasized necessity of understanding and considering complexity of the SCPRT for achieving its goals which are:
1) Establish scientifically reliable and uniform environmental assessment methodologies for food and drinks; 2) Identify suitable tools for voluntary communication to consumers and other stakeholders; 3) Promote and report on continuous environmental improvement along the entire food supply chain.
Richard Lowe, from European Livestock and Meat Trading Union (UECBV), discussed about complexity of meat supply chain and diversity of range of factors affecting Greenhouse Gas Emissions such as fertilizer use on pasture, animal feed production, land use change whether for animal feed or livestock grazing, animal waste and its treatment, methane emissions directly from ruminants as a consequence of the way they convert food to energy, meat packaging and processing, etc.
Finally, Inger Andersson, Director General of Swedish National Food Administration, raised this question that how is it possible to avoid the conflict of objectives between the limitations of environmental and climate effects and the free movement of goods? My answer to this question, undoubtedly, was analyzing such paradoxes and conflicts by complexity thinking!
As it sounds, complexity thinking is spreading in several natural and social sciences. That is why I have called this post ‘ubiquitous complexity’!
The conference was about the climate impact of the entire food chain, i.e. from farm to fork to farm. At the beginning of the seminars, I really did not expect to hear anything about complexity and its themes and tools.
It was a great pleasure when Eskil Erlandsson, minister for agriculture, Johan Kuylenstierna from FAO, and Anita Wreford from Scottish Agriculture College, analyzed the role of adaptation in shadow of simplification and mitigation of effects of climate change.
In another presentation, Mr. Finn Rausing from Tetra Laval discussed about finding solution for complexity of food production and distribution as an important enabler of sustainable dairy chain.
I also tracked trace of complexity in Mads Greaker’s seminar from Statistics Norway/Göteborg University when he discoursed about Carbon leakage as one of the problems caused by imperfect climate treaties. Carbon leakage refers to the situation in which some countries efforts to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions result in increased emission elsewhere. This is a very good example of paradoxes in complex systems.
Mads mentioned also difficulties in defining boundaries of the system for ‘climate friendly’ labeling of products. In another seminar regarding launch of new climate label for food in Sweden, Anna Richert from Swedish Seal discussed about emerging paradoxes in a holistic labeling system. Science of complexity is a solid tool for investigating boundaries and paradoxes of ‘climate friendly’ labeling of food and products.
Ulf Sonesson fron SIK was another speaker who explained complexity of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a product as well as production and consumption systems of food chains. He also reminded the importance of systematic approach in simplification of the system.
Pascal Greverath, Chairman of Confedration of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA) Environment Committee presented about ‘European Food Sustainable Consumption and Production Round Table (SCPRT)’ project. He emphasized necessity of understanding and considering complexity of the SCPRT for achieving its goals which are:
1) Establish scientifically reliable and uniform environmental assessment methodologies for food and drinks; 2) Identify suitable tools for voluntary communication to consumers and other stakeholders; 3) Promote and report on continuous environmental improvement along the entire food supply chain.
Richard Lowe, from European Livestock and Meat Trading Union (UECBV), discussed about complexity of meat supply chain and diversity of range of factors affecting Greenhouse Gas Emissions such as fertilizer use on pasture, animal feed production, land use change whether for animal feed or livestock grazing, animal waste and its treatment, methane emissions directly from ruminants as a consequence of the way they convert food to energy, meat packaging and processing, etc.
Finally, Inger Andersson, Director General of Swedish National Food Administration, raised this question that how is it possible to avoid the conflict of objectives between the limitations of environmental and climate effects and the free movement of goods? My answer to this question, undoubtedly, was analyzing such paradoxes and conflicts by complexity thinking!
As it sounds, complexity thinking is spreading in several natural and social sciences. That is why I have called this post ‘ubiquitous complexity’!
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Running!
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up;
It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning in Africa, a lion wakes up;
It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn’t matter whether you are a lion or gazelle:
When the Sun comes up, you had better be running. (Adopted from Jim Wixom)
It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning in Africa, a lion wakes up;
It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn’t matter whether you are a lion or gazelle:
When the Sun comes up, you had better be running. (Adopted from Jim Wixom)
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
"TRUST" - Glue of organizations
I heartily love this five-letter word: "TRUST"!
I do believe that trust is glue of organization. This organization can be a family, a group, a company, a supply chain, a country or any other assembly of entities.
Have you ever wondered that why managers, governors, or politicians are so much sensitive to what mass media reflect? Undoubtedly, media are powerful tools for building or destroying a trustful atmosphere in society and peoples’ brains.
By reading and pondering history of nations, I estimate that deterioration and lack of trust between people and their governors have been major reasons of revolution and turmoil in societies. On the other hand, lack of trust between countries has been an important cause of several wars and battles.
Analogically, trust between supply chain’s orchestrator and other agents of the chain plays a significant role in solid management of the system. Trust glues entities of the supply chain together. This is “trust” that enables supply chain relationships from co-operation and co-ordination to integration, then to collaboration, and finally to adaptation. How can supply chain entities collaborate and adapt with each other without a solid trustful atmosphere in the system?
I think that role of logistics service providers and third parties are very important in creation of trust in the system. I will explain this issue in another post.
Lack of trust is also a main source of non-value adding complexity in supply chains. Non-trustful entities in supply chains reveal non-trustful patterns of behavior during time. In this way, learning from emerging patterns and as a result adaptation and co-adaptation becomes harder and perplexing. Dissipative behavior and relationship amplifies chaos in the system. Later on, I will explain the relation between complexity, chaos, and evolution in complex systems like supply chains.
I do believe that trust is glue of organization. This organization can be a family, a group, a company, a supply chain, a country or any other assembly of entities.
Have you ever wondered that why managers, governors, or politicians are so much sensitive to what mass media reflect? Undoubtedly, media are powerful tools for building or destroying a trustful atmosphere in society and peoples’ brains.
By reading and pondering history of nations, I estimate that deterioration and lack of trust between people and their governors have been major reasons of revolution and turmoil in societies. On the other hand, lack of trust between countries has been an important cause of several wars and battles.
Analogically, trust between supply chain’s orchestrator and other agents of the chain plays a significant role in solid management of the system. Trust glues entities of the supply chain together. This is “trust” that enables supply chain relationships from co-operation and co-ordination to integration, then to collaboration, and finally to adaptation. How can supply chain entities collaborate and adapt with each other without a solid trustful atmosphere in the system?
I think that role of logistics service providers and third parties are very important in creation of trust in the system. I will explain this issue in another post.
Lack of trust is also a main source of non-value adding complexity in supply chains. Non-trustful entities in supply chains reveal non-trustful patterns of behavior during time. In this way, learning from emerging patterns and as a result adaptation and co-adaptation becomes harder and perplexing. Dissipative behavior and relationship amplifies chaos in the system. Later on, I will explain the relation between complexity, chaos, and evolution in complex systems like supply chains.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Teamwork!
Coming together is a begining;
Keeping together is progress;
Working together is success. (Henry Ford)
Keeping together is progress;
Working together is success. (Henry Ford)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)