<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Report on the 7th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering for Sustainable Systems (RE4SuSy 2018)</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Ahmed Alharti</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Ruzanna Chitchyan</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>California State University</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Long Beach</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="US">USA</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>-This year's edition of the workshop was held at the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity in Banff, Alberta, Canada at the 26th International Conference on Requirements Engineering.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>I. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>The RE4SuSy workshop series has established a strong and
growing research community around the different aspects of
sustainability and how to support them in requirements
engineering. Since requirements define how and what a software
will do, we maintain that requirements engineering is the key
point in software engineering through which sustainability can
be fostered. Thus, the RE4SuSy workshop series is concerned
with research on techniques, tools, and processes for
sustainability through requirements engineering.</p>
      <p>Last year the workshop initiated an effort to start converging
the RE for sustainability community to a common set of
fundamentals. This edition of the RE4SuSy workshop has
built on the initial convergence effort, helping to clarify what
characteristics a requirement should possess, and/or what
constraints it should meet in order to qualify as a “sustainability
requirement”.</p>
      <p>RE4SuSy is an interactive workshop: the contributors and
participants engaged into deep discussions and provided peer
feedback to all workshop submissions.</p>
      <p>The program featured five presentations with moderated
discussions and working sessions. In the following, we give a
brief summary of each.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>II. IF YOU BILL IT, THEY WILL PAY: ENERGY</title>
      <p>CONSUMPTION IN THE CLOUD WILL BE IRRELEVANT UNTIL</p>
      <p>DIRECTLY BILLED FOR</p>
      <p>Don’t leave the lights on! It is suggested that energy
consumption of software systems and services is a significant
issue as data-centers now account for a significant portion of
the worldwide energy consumption (2-3%). This paper argues
that until Cloud end-users have to pay for energy consumption
there will be little or no demand for optimizing energy
consumption. To address this, Hindle argues that Cloud services
should bill customers directly in order to motivate consumers
to consider the sustainability of the software services they
utilise. However, the challenges here are non-trivial: e.g., How
can energy consumption be measured directly in a Cloud
environment? What are the economic incentives for both Cloud
providers and Cloud consumers? How to create a paradigm
shift towards sustainability in both Cloud providers and Cloud
consumers?</p>
      <p>Discussion: During the workshop the discussion topics
around this paper focused on the economic incentives, and
challenges of measuring the energy consumption, the role of
software in energy consumption, and the optimization of
perceptual distance. Perceptual distance denotes that information
about energy consumption needs to be a direct feedback with
little delay, otherwise in the users’ view it will be discounted
from his/her consumption. For instance, when consumption
information is provided immediately at the end of a month,
before the beginning of the next month, where the energy
bill is seen to have increased significantly, the consumer may
try to analyze and change his/her behavior accordingly for
the new month. However, if he/she gets the feedback on
increased consumption three months later, then he/she may
not be interested in a change.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>III. TOWARDS TOOL-SUPPORT FOR SUSTAINABILITY</title>
      <p>PROFILING</p>
      <p>This paper argues that the most effective decisions related to
sustainability of software are made in the early stages of the
software development lifecycle. To support these decisions,
the authors introduce Sustainability Profiling for Software
(SuSoftPro); a tool that can assist in analysing sustainability
requirements. They present an analysis of the core features of
SuSoftPro in comparison with two other approaches, which
utilise Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. The effectiveness of
their approach is explored in a case study, which analyses the
sustainability aspects of a Skin Cancer Information System.
Their results suggest that SuSoftPro provides a method for
considering and prioritising sustainability requirements. This
raises the question of how should we maximise the positive
impact and minimise the negative impact across all
sustainability dimensions?</p>
      <p>The paper presented a study with fourteen stakeholders
and 23 high-level requirements were assigned to the relevant
sustainability dimensions. Fuzzy rating scales were used by
participants to assign relevance to each of these requirements.
Fuzzy ratings were used as the authors consider them to
be more precise in expressing stakeholder preferences that
numerical ones.</p>
      <p>Discussion: The workshop discussion around energy
profiling and behavior change centered around 3 main points:
(i) incentivization to think about sustainability, (ii) prevalence
of doomsday narrative versus a more in-depth exploration of
transition stories, and (iii) observation that economic gains and
losses are considered to be of prime importance (e.g. as drivers
to lower one’s energy bill) but it is convenience that really
drives human behaviour, as humans are creatures of habit.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>IV. KARLSKRONA MANIFESTO: SOFTWARE</title>
      <p>REQUIREMENT ENGINEERING GOOD PRACTICES
The Karlskrona Manifesto was incepted in 2014 and since
then, the research group that remained steady around it
conducted a number of studies with practitioners to investigate
what their perceptions of sustainability were and how it
could support requirements engineering. This paper takes a
straightforward approach to mapping the principles to phases
of the software development lifecycle and recommends a few
practices for application of these principles. In addition, the
paper presents a template for application of the best practices
and explains these using an illustrative example study. The
next step in this research is a planned confirmatory case
study with application of the principles with a template to
an industrial setting.</p>
      <p>Discussion: The discussion session on the application of
the Karlskrona Manifesto touched a number of topics. One
promising approach suggested for use in future research was
storytelling as a way to describe ‘how it’s done’ in addition
to a best practice template. As examples of this, the agile
story books about XP (by Kent Beck) were proposed. For
instance, the “XP Explained” book discusses how agile
processes worked at Chrysler. It was also suggested to set up a
web portal that would show different examples from different
case study systems. One of the questions to resolve (which
is outside of the scope of this particular piece of research) is
how to promote best practices as opposed to engaging into
‘method wars’.</p>
      <p>Thinking of freely available materials for confirmatory case
studies, it was suggested that the SQL Lite OS project has a
repository of requirements which could be useful for such a
study.</p>
      <p>V. PUBLIC POLICY CHALLENGES: AN RE PERSPECTIVE
This paper analyzed the mass stream media around seven
topics that were popular during the past 12 months. It assessed
whether we can identify challenges associated with defining,
formulating and realizing public policies, whether the
challenges have analogs in RE for software intensive systems,
and how RE techniques could help mitigate the identified
public policy challenges. Furthermore, it considers whether RE
techniques can be used to proactively identify possible public
policy challenges during formulation and before enactment.</p>
      <p>The investigated topics were big data algorithms that have
drawn sufficient attention to warrant public policy discussions,
IT projects in support of some policy goal, social (e.g. free
speech, critical thinking, gender issues, fake news,
radicalism), privacy (e.g. location data, social media, children’s
selfdetermination), policy (e.g. cybersecurity, copyright, taxes,
housing), climate change (e.g. resilience, carbon emissions,
energy, electric vehicles, pipelines), controlled substances (e.g.
state versus federal law, avoiding crime, licensing, taxes), and
equalization (e.g. income, taxes, resources, cost of living). The
analysis identified a number of challenges that drew parallels
in requirements engineering.</p>
      <p>Discussion: Much of the discussion was about more
examples of the lack of analysis used in policy decisions. One
issue discussed at this session focused on the relevance of
the measurement scope referred to as the “Magnitude of
Unintended Consequences”. A local change measured locally
could or could not be felt globally, yet it will matter for the
given locality; a change observed at one level of analysis could
have repercussions at another level. This raises the challenge
of how to measure the direct and indirect impact of decisions.
VI. AN EXPLORATION OF SUSTAINABILITY THINKING IN</p>
      <p>RESEARCH SOFTWARE ENGINEERING</p>
      <p>This paper proposes an avenue for research that rethinks
the development of research software from a sustainability
perspective. For this, the paper uses the analysis of a goal
model that explores the meaning of sustainability for the
domain of research software engineering. In order to get clarity
on the underlying values and to extract exemplary
sustainability requirements, it revisits the sustainability reference model
from 2013 by Penzenstadler and Femmer and instantiates it for
the case example of two dedicated research software systems
from the field of Model-Driven Engineering, namely Henshin
and SiLift.</p>
      <p>The exploration of the five dimensions leads to exemplary
objectives for the two tools at hand that can be implemented
via activities and assessed via indicators. Next steps for this
research are to implement some of identified activities for the
studied tools (i.e., Henshin and SiLift).</p>
      <p>Discussion: The discussion session topics for this paper
related to licensing (which can harm the community), and
the notion of ‘dependency hell’. This ‘hell’ poses a problem
for maintenance as it expects that the versions of particular
libraries on which one’s software depends should be locked
up. For future work, there was a recommendation to look at
Greg Wilson’s Software Carpentry for Replicable Software and
to relate to the work of Dan Katz on the WSSSPE workshop
series and Jeffrey Carver’s efforts for a Sustainable Scientific
Software Institute in the US.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>VII. NEXT STEPS</title>
      <p>In the final session of the workshop the discussion focused
on the next steps for both the workshop in general and specific
actions related to the papers presented during the day. Having
established a strong and growing research community around
the different aspects of sustainability and how to support them
in requirements engineering the discussion centered on the
challenge of growing the research community and the potential
steps required to achieve growth.</p>
      <p>A potential opportunity is to demonstrate empirically the
unsustainability of scientific software and link it to mechanisms
for sustainability profiling underpinned by the principles set
out in the Karlskrona manifesto with software and requirement
engineering best practice.</p>
      <p>A final topic for discussion was how to embed sustainability
thinking into the computer science and software engineering
curriculum and the need to ingrain sustainability as the core
theme.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <article-title>Figure 1</article-title>
          .
          <fpage>RE4SuSy</fpage>
          <string-name>
            <surname>2018: Ahmed</surname>
            <given-names>Alharti</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Abram Hindle, Colin C. Venters, Timo Kehrer, and Birgit Penzenstadler.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>