=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2286/paper_2
|storemode=property
|title=Classifying the measures of software sustainability according to the current perceptions
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2286/paper_2.pdf
|volume=Vol-2286
|authors=Shola Oyedeji,Ahmed Seffah,Birgit Penzenstadler
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/esem/OyedejiSP18
}}
==Classifying the measures of software sustainability according to the current perceptions==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2286/paper_2.pdf
Classifying the Measures of Software Sustainability
Ahmed Seffah Birgit Penzenstadler
Shola Oyedeji
LUT School of Engineering (LENS) Department of Computer Engineering
LUT School of Engineering (LENS)
Lappeenranta University of Technology and Computer Science California State
Lappeenranta University of Technology
Lappeenranta, Finland University Long Beach (CSULB) Long
Lappeenranta, Finland
ahmed.seffah@lut.fi Beach, California, USA
shola.oyedeji@lut.fi
birgit.penzenstadler@csulb.edu
Abstract— Energy efficiency is one of the very few
measures widely used for evaluating green and sustainable II. BACKGROUND
software systems. This paper investigates the current measures
of software sustainability from the four different software A. Sustainability in Software Development
sustainability perceptions: Sustainability in Software As a measurable attribute, software sustainability is more
Development, Green Software Systems, Software for than the perceptions of capacity to endure [6]. Sustainable
Sustainability, Sustainability of the Software Eco System and software measures should include the direct and indirect
Software Sustainability Dimensions (Economic, Social, negative impacts on economy, society, human beings, and
Individual, Technical and Environment). While exploring the
environment that result from development, deployment, and
literature on green and sustainable software systems, measures
of green software and software sustainability were identified,
usage of the software [7]. It is also beyond the current focus
compiled and classified according to the four sustainability of sustainability in requirements engineering where
perceptions. sustainability is considered as a nonfunctional requirement
(NFR) by some [8][9][10]. In [2], the authors reported on a
Keywords— green software, sustainable software, measures, software project in which sustainability requirements were
sustainability, sustainability perceptions, green measures, treated as quality requirements, and systematically elicited
software measurement. and documented. Another work also proposed an approach to
tackle sustainability during software systems development
I. INTRODUCTION and maintenance that decomposes sustainability into four
Sustainability is now one of the world major challenge aspect in software development life cycle such as the
[1][2]. The United Nations Sustainable development Goals development process, maintenance process, system
(SDGs) shows the importance of sustainability in all facet of production and system usage [11]. This approach is useful
human lives and development. Today’s economy rely on for a process engineer who instantiates this approach for a
information and communications technology (ICT) in which software development company or requirements engineer
software is a key factor and catalyst for all economic who instantiates it for a specific system under development.
activities and a major driver linking all sectors. As stated in The Software Sustainability Design Catalogue (SSDC)
an Ericsson report that ICT can help reduce the global that quantifies sustainability via a series of guidelines used
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 15% [3]. Currently ICT for incorporating sustainability into the design loop for
itself contributes an estimated 2% to the global CO2 software system. The SSDC is created to promote effective
emissions and accountable for approximately 8% of the sustainability engineering and integration in phases of
European Union (EU) electricity consumption [4]. This software development life cycle. Design according to the
shows ICT can a huge potential to help support sustainability authors Oyedeji et al. [12] is a good way to achieve
and Green [5] but at same time it is important to explore sustainability in software development.
avenues to make ICT domain more green and sustainable
because of its huge impact on sustainability. Finding ways to Furthermore a checklist and guide approach that
properly evaluate software in regards to green and demonstrates how to include the objective of environmental
sustainability will provide avenues to reduce the current sustainability from the very early steps of software
negative impacts of ICT. development can assist in identifying key stakeholders. This
will facilitate the ability to accommodate new objectives of
This research explores the ongoing perceptions in the improving the environmental sustainability of software
software engineering domain with the goal to identify the systems [13]. Roher et al. [14] suggests the use of
current and future measures used in the evaluation of green sustainability requirement patterns (SRPs), which will
and sustainable software. Via triangulation of data from provide software engineers with guidance on how to write
diverse sources, the measures are clustered into the four specific types of sustainability requirements with the goal to
perceptions of sustainability in software engineering and overcome the barriers of incorporating environmental
sustainability dimensions. The long term goal of this research sustainability into the requirements engineering process.
is to answer the following challenging questions: what are
the current measures used in evaluating green and B. Green software system
sustainability aspects of software systems and how can these Green software is an environmentally friendly software that
measures be grounded in the software sustainability consumes less energy, provides less impacts on environment
measurement theory. and support carbon management [15]. It is also software that
fulfils high level requirements, ensuring the software
engineering process, maintenance, and disposal saves and/or
reduces resource waste [16] [17]. Green software is divided
into four parts: software that is energy efficient during
execution, software that are embedded to execute and Sustainability Knowledge and Learning
support smart operations in green manner, software to Management software
produce environment viable products and policies [18]. The Software for environmental awareness on wildlife
goal of green software engineering is to provide supports for and plants
efficient consumption of natural resources while D. Sustainability of the software ecosystem
continuously monitoring, evaluating and optimizing the
aftermath effects caused during the software system life Today software systems are the pillars of the economy,
cycle [19]. the software eco system is probably the biggest system in the
world we human created. Software eco system has been
defined according to Jansen et al. [25] as a set of actors
Erdélyi [20] paper provides an overview of different
functioning as a unit and interacting with a shared market for
activities and advice on what to do in order to develop green software and services, together with the relationships among
software which uses energy efficiently and produce less them. These relationships are frequently underpinned by a
waste. The paper highlights three ways software engineering common technological platform or market and they operate
can be green such as: produce green software, produce through the exchange of information, resources and artifacts.
software to support environmentally consciousness (green by
software) and produce less waste during development. Thus, the sustainability of software ecosystem involves
the sustainment of the global system of software systems and
Dick et al. [21] provides basis for the right way to services covering aspect of how different sub systems form a
engineer green software systems using development process huge interconnected system and all the interactions. It covers
that ensures that the positive and negative effects of the all different components such as hardware, software and
software is continuously monitored and evaluated in order to network that is used to resolve complex relationships among
optimize the software over its life cycle to be more green companies/organizations in all the different sectors and
(environmental friendly). industries [26].
Colmant et al. [22] presented researches on to improve Sustainability of the software ecosystem entails how can
the software-energy efficiency on multi-core systems. the system of software systems endure with the evolving user
Colmant et al. [28] motivations were driven by the huge requirements and usage overtime with less negative impact
impact of the ICT on the world CO2 emissions which on the environments, social, technical and humans. This
represents 2%. Calero et al. [4] highlights some of the means the ability of software ecosystem to continue to
meanings of green software notably a software that function and evolve irrespective of any glitch is some part of
consumes less energy to run and produces as little waste as the ecosystem and should continuously fulfil users’ needs.
possible during its development and operation. Largely,
research on green software has focused more on energy III. PERCEPTIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY IN/ FOR SOFTWARE
consumption and environmentally friendly software systems. SYSTEMS
C. Software for Sustainability In this research, we defined sustainability as a quality
construct in the same ways other factors are defined (see, for
There has been some interest in various domains such as example, the ISO 25 000 family of standards). In our
manufacturing, energy sector, transportation and for different perception sustainability aims to create balance in the way
application in recycling, product packaging, data center
humans live, produce, and use products and services
setup, gas emissions. Some of the good examples are in grid
computing, in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) to change (resources) with the objective to have less negative impact on
the habit of people. the environment and promote the wellbeing of all living
species. This means the capacity of software systems to
In [23], authors presented a software system that support endure in certain ecosystems under current and future
sustainable lifestyles with an example of a domestic plant conditions while satisfying the needs of users today and
guild to show how sustainable human systems can tomorrow with minimum negative impact on the
effectively support a sustainable lifestyle, which can reduce environment; at the same time supporting business growth
the cost of living as well as the ecological footprint. and societal values.
Penzenstadler et al. [24] highlights vision for systems that Currently, the dimensions of software sustainability are
will be supporting sustainability in the future (2029) with a known and classified into five: economic, environment,
set of fictional abstracts around the concepts of social, individual and technical [27] but there is currently no
sustainability, complexity, collapse, and resilience of ICT clear categorisation for the perceptions of sustainability
systems. in/for software engineering. This section explains the
Software can also provide support for sustainability in categorization of software sustainability perceptions based
different domains such as: on the literature review from the background section.
The use of software systems for tracking gas Software sustainability evolution today can be perceive from
emissions one of the following perception (see Figure 1); Sustainability
in Software Development, Software for Sustainability, Green
Software for climate and disaster prediction
Software Systems, Sustainability of Software Ecosystems.
Smart infrastructural management software
Enterprise carbon and energy management software Sustainability in software development
Smart transportation software to reduce CO 2 (Development): this refers to the processes
emissions. involve in the development of software
(software development life cycle).
Software for sustainability (Usage): how One of the most referenced sustainability measurement
software are used to support sustainability, an model for software system is the GREENSOFT Model [7]. It
example is a software in fridge to minimize is a conceptual reference model for “Green and Sustainable
energy wastage (embedded software). Software”, which has the objective to support software
developers, administrators, and software users in creating,
Green software systems (Focused impact): maintaining, and using software in a more sustainable way
software systems that uses less energy resource [34]. Another software sustainability measurement approach
and promotes policies that supports green is the Sustainable Business Goal Question Metric (S-BGQM)
awareness. [35]. It encourages the incorporation and measurement of
Sustainability of software ecosystems (Net sustainability during the entire software system development
effect): This is the total impact of the entire processes. Kramer [36] also wrote about sustainability
software ecosystem (systems of system) measurement by proposing some set of questions that should
be addressed by any sustainability framework.
The advancement of software sustainability from the four
perceptions has received different level of research attention A study for monitoring software energy hotspot proposed
and contributions. Sustainability in software development, power model for software energy cost formula as Esoftware
Green Software system we observed has the most important = Ecomp +Ecom +Einfra, where Ecomp is the computational
advancement in research compared to software for cost (i.e., CPU process- ing, memory access, I/O operations),
sustainability and sustainability of software ecosystem that Ecom is the cost of exchanging data over the network, and
were not fully explored. Einfra is the addi- tional cost incurred by the OS and runtime
platform (e.g., Java VM) [37]. The study focused on energy
Figure 1 portrays the categorization of software consumption of CPU and network demanding software at
sustainability perceptions. different levels of granularity. Also, the formula proposed for
software energy efficiency (EF) is
UsefulWorkDone/UserdEnergy [38]. This generic measure
provide a way for evaluating the energy consumption of
different software parts and modules using white box testing
to measure which parts are consuming more energy and to
see which parts can be optimized for efficient energy usage.
In order to facilitate research on energy usage attribution,
software energy footprint lab was setup to provide insight on
energy footprint measurements with results interpreting
hardware dissipation profiles for various servers under
different kinds of software stress [39]. This shows the
relations between different hardware resource and the
amount of resource required by the running software in
relation to the power consumption.
Furthermore, a support tool is presented to analyze
legacy systems in order to estimate the energy consumption
and detect parts of the system with higher energy
consumption. Using the profiling technique, the tool
instrument legacy Java systems in order to keep track of its
Figure 1. Sustainability Perceptions in/for Software Engineering execution. This information, together with the energy
consumption, enables the engineer to analyze legacy system
IV. MEASURES AND MEASUREMENT OF GREEN AND consumption detecting energy peaks in the system [40].
SUSTAINABILITY IN/FOR SOFTWARE SYSTEMS
Additionally, a modular Energy-Aware Computing
This section presents different research work relating to Framework (EACOF) is proposed as a way to allow access
green and sustainable software system measures and to energy consumption information of software through API
measurement. According to Britannica [28], measurement is calls. The EACOF is separated into two task for collection
the science of assigning of a quantity, either quantitative or and utilization of dynamic energy consumption data which
qualitative, to a characteristic of an object or event, while reduce development and maintenance overhead required for
making it comparable to other objects or events. Here object the successful completion of each task[41]. Another
is the software and event is the development process. approach is also proposed for monitoring power
Sustainability measurement is still a new idea [29] [30] [31] consumption of software in order to assist software designers
[32]. Indeed, Lami et al. [31] stated that there are few studies and developer to reduce software power consumption and
about ‘what’ aspects of sustainability to measure and ‘how’ have better energy efficiency [42]. This approach currently
to do it. Calero et al. [33] highlighted that nowadays, monitors power consumption at source code level, this
sustainability is a key factor that should be considered in the approach will provide better insights on software energy
software quality models, though there has less research consumption if extended to the hardware running the
channelled towards sustainability measurement. Seacord et software.
al. [29] stated that planning and management of software
sustainment is impaired by a lack of consistently applied, As summarized in Table 1 and the research work detailed
practical measures, and there is no central theoretical in [43] [44] [45] and [46], other measures of green and
framework on measurement of software sustainability. sustainable software have been on software and hardware
energy consumption with less research for measures has a “YES or No” to indicate if the proposed measure in the
covering software sustainability dimensions such as research paper cover any of the categories listed in Table 1.
individual, social, economic and software sustainability Most of the measures descriptions does not explicitly
perceptions (Software for sustainability and Software indicate that the authors considered sustainability
ecosystem). dimensions. Base on the descriptions and explanations of the
authors for all measures, we have categorized those measures
The measures detailed in Table 1 are structure based on according to the right sustainability dimension (Economic,
categorization of software sustainability and green measures
Social, Individual, Technical and Environment) to show how
for software sustainability dimensions and the four it relates to the four sustainability perceptions.
sustainability perceptions. Each column after the main title
TABLE I. MEASURES FOR GREEN AND SUSTAINABLE SOFTWARE LINKED TO SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSIONS AND PERCEPTIONS
Name Definition Formula Software Green Software for Software Sustainability
Development Software sustainability ecosystem Dimensions
Lifecycle
[37] Software The computational cost of Esoftware = Ecomp Yes Yes No No Environment
energy cost performing task involving +Ecom +Einfra where
CPU processing, memory Ecomp is the
access, I/O operations and computational cost
exchanging data over the (i.e., CPU process- ing,
network. memory access, I/O
operations), Ecom is
the cost of exchanging
data over the network,
and Einfra is the addi-
tional cost incurred by
the OS and runtime
platform (e.g., Java
VM)
[39] Software Not stated Experimental lab setup No Yes No No Environment
energy details can be found in
footprint [39]
Energy Not stated Energy Efficiency = No Yes No No Environment,
Efficiency (EF) Technical
[47] UsefulWorkDone
/UsedEnergy
Performance Not stated, sub- Yes Yes No No Environment
Efficiency (PE) characteristics measure
[48] listed as Time behavior,
Resource utilization,
capacity
Power Usage The ratio of facilities PUE= Total Facility No Yes No No Environment,
Effectiveness energy (supply side) to IT Energy/IT equipment Technical
(PUE) [49] equipment energy Energy
(demand size)
Performance Not stated Not available No Yes No No Environment,
[50] Technical
Efficiency [50] Not stated, third level Not available Yes Yes No No Environment,
indicators provided as: Technical
Time Behaviour,
Resource Utilization
Resource usage Not stated, third level Not available Yes Yes No No Technical
[50] indicators provided as:
CPU Usage, I/O Usage,
Memory Usage, Storage
Usage
Energy impact Not stated, third level Not available Yes Yes No No Environment
[50] indicators provided as:
Energy Consumption,
CO2 Emission, Green
Energy Usage
Energy Speedup is defined as the Speedup= /To where No Yes No No Environment,
efficiency ratio of serial code is the total Technical
(Speedup runtime over parallel code execution time of non-
Greenup, runtime. optimized code, and
Powerup, and) To is the total
Greenup is the ratio of the execution time of the
[51] total energy consumption optimized code.
of the non-optimized code
(E ) over the total energy Greenup = E /Eo
consumption of the Assuming, P is the
optimized code (Eo). average power
consumed by the non-
Powerup implies the optimized code and Po
power effects of an is the average power
optimization. A less than consumed by the
1 Powerup implies power optimized code
savings while a greater
than 1 Powerup indicates Powerup =Po /P =
that the optimized code Speedup /Greenup
consumes more power in
average.
Software Natural resources and Transportation from/to Yes No No No Environment
Project’s environ- mental impact the office, and Long-
Footprint [30] used during software haul trips. Example
development. used in the article:
Work-From-Home
Days: 2 days out of
165 total team- days
(33 project days * 5
team members)=1.21%
Long-Haul Roundtrips:
By airplane: 6; By
train: 0.
Functional Functional Completeness, Not available Yes Yes No No Technical
Suitability (FS) Functional correctness,
[48] Functional
appropriateness
Compatibility Not stated, sub- Not available Yes Yes No No Technical
[48] characteristics measure
listed as Co-existence,
Interoperability
Usability [48] Not stated, sub- Not available Yes Yes No No Technical,
characteristics measure Individual
listed as Appropriateness
recognizability,
Learnability, Operability,
User error protection,
User interface eesthetics
Reliability [48] Not stated, sub- Not available Yes Yes No No Technical
characteristics measure
listed as Maturity,
Availability, Fault
tolerance, Recoverability
Portability [48] Not stated, sub- Not available Yes Yes No No Technical
characteristics measure
listed as Adaptability.
Installability,
Replaceability
rather giving meaningful interpretation of what the
V. DISCUSSION measurement means. For example today, fridges are
Table 1 provides details of measures attributed to green categorized using A+, A++ and A+++ for quantifying and
and sustainable software. From Table 1, it can be identified measuring its energy efficiency. Normally A+ consumes less
that most measures focused on energy efficiency or power energy, A++ has better energy efficiency than A+ and A++
consumptions. With most focus on green software, there is a has the best energy efficiency in today market. According to
limitation on having a holistic approach towards software the EU Directive 92/75/EC which established an energy
sustainability measurement. The measures of software consumption labelling scheme [52], there are different
descriptions of the measures that quantify why Fridge is
sustainability should consider the following:
labelled A+, A++ or A++ based on its energy consumption.
Human (End users) system interaction: involves the In the same line, there is need for a foundation or framework
measures of the system sustainability based on how it to ground the different measures for software sustainability
impacts on users and their level of awareness about measures and measurement with clear interpretation.
sustainability and green. It entails the well-being of the
software users’ community and the changing of the Currently, there is not enough firm scientific basis for
human mindset. important choices on how sustainability related factors
Software system developers: evaluate the sustainability should be defined and measured, the varying purposes for
which the measures are used. This makes it difficult to
of the processes and practices for the development and
effectively and efficiently evaluate software sustainability
integration of sustainability in software systems. using the right measures.
One of the key question/concern that should be clearly
answered by a sustainability measurement framework is the VI. CONCLUSION
difference between the different scales of software
measurement and the interpretation of these scales of In this position paper, we summarized the research
measurement for sustainability. The problem of software results on the categorization of software sustainability
sustainability measurement is not only in measuring but perceptions. Using the identified four perceptions of software
sustainability, we referenced the current measures to each of
the four perceptions. The major focus of all identified green Aspects in Software Engineering,” 3rd Int. Conf.
and sustainable software measures are on green software. Comput. Sustain., pp. 1–4, 2013.
Energy efficiency has received the most attention. Research
[12] S. Oyedeji, A. Seffah, and B. Penzenstadler, “A
work is needed to identify and assess the validity of other
measures related to the other perceptions. Research on catalogue supporting software sustainability
measures of sustainability has to be grounded in the tradition design,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 1–30,
and theory of software measurement. This requires 2018.
considering software sustainability as a quality attribute and [13] B. Penzenstadler, “Infusing green: Requirements
define it in the same way other attributes are defined. engineering for green in and through software
systems,” 3rd Intl. Work. Requir. Eng. Sustain. Syst.
REFERENCES 2014, vol. 1216, no. 1, pp. 44–53, 2014.
[1] United Nations, World Economic and Social Survey [14] K. Roher and D. Richardson, “Sustainability
2013. 2013. requirement patterns,” 2013 3rd Int. Work. Requir.
[2] G. saval Martin, mahaux, patrick heymans, Patterns, RePa 2013 - Proc., pp. 8–11, 2013.
“Requirements Engineering: Foundation for [15] S. Murugesan and G. Gangadharan, Harnessing
Software Quality,” Requir. Eng. Found. Softw. Green IT : Principles and Practices, no. September.
Qual., vol. 4542, no. January, pp. 247–261, 2007. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2012.
[3] Ericsson, “Technology for Good,” Available online: [16] T. Juha, “Good, bad, and beautiful software. In
https://www.ericsson.com/assets/local/about- search of green software quality factors,” CEPIS
ericsson/sustainability-and-corporate- Upgrad. XII 422–27, no. July, 2011.
responsibility/documents/2015-corporate- [17] L. Erdmann Hilty, L., Goodman, J., Arnfalk, P. and
responsibility-and-sustainability-report.pdf L. Erdmann Hilty, L., Goodman, J., Arnfalk, P.,
Accessed on 30-11-2017, 2014. “The Future Impact of ICTs on Environmental
[4] C. Calero and M. Piattini, “Introduction to Green in Sustainability,” IPTS Publ., no. August, p. 68, 2004.
software engineering,” Green Softw. Eng., pp. 1– [18] M. N. Malik and H. H. Khan, “Investigating
327, 2015. Software Standards: A Lens of Sustainability for
[5] N. Condori-Fernandez, G. Procaccianti, and N. Ali, Software Crowdsourcing,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp.
“Metrics for green and sustainable software: 5139–5150, 2018.
MeGSuS 2014,” in Proceedings - 2014 Joint [19] J. T. Kern Eva, Markus Dick, Naumann Stefan,
Conference of the International Workshop on Guldner Achim, “Green software and green
Software Measurement, IWSM 2014 and the software engineering - definitions, measurements,
International Conference on Software Process and and quality aspects,” Proc. First Int. Conf. Inf.
Product Measurement, Mensura 2014, 2014, pp. Commun. Technol. Sustain. ETH Zurich, Febr. 14-
62–63. 16, 2013, no. January, pp. 175–182, 2013.
[6] B. Penzenstadler and A. Fleischmann, “Teach [20] K. Erdélyi, “Special factors of development of green
Sustainability in Software Engineering?,” in 24th software supporting eco sustainability,” SISY 2013 -
IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering IEEE 11th Int. Symp. Intell. Syst. Informatics, Proc.,
Education and Training (CSEE&T), 2011. pp. 337–340, 2013.
[7] S. Naumann, M. Dick, E. Kern, and T. Johann, “The [21] M. Dick and S. Naumann, “Enhancing software
GREENSOFT Model: A reference model for green engineering processes towards sustainable software
and sustainable software and its engineering,” product design,” 24th Int. Conf. Informatics
Sustain. Comput. Informatics Syst., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. Environ. Prot. (EnviroInfo 2010), vol. 2010, pp.
294–304, 2011. 706–715, 2010.
[8] A. Raturi, B. Penzenstadler, B. Tomlinson, and D. [22] M. Colmant, R. Rouvoy, and L. Seinturier,
Richardson, “Developing a sustainability non- “Improving the energy efficiency of software
functional requirements framework,” Proc. 3rd Int. systems for multi-core architectures,” Proc. 11th
Work. Green Sustain. Softw. - GREENS 2014, pp. Middlew. Dr. Symp. MDS 2014 - co-located with
1–8, 2014. ACM/IFIP/USENIX 15th Int. Middlew. Conf., pp. 2–
[9] C. C. Venters et al., “The Blind Men and the 5, 2014.
Elephant Towards an Empirical Evaluation [23] J. Norton, A. J. Stringfellow, J. J. L. Jr, B.
Framework for Software Sustainability,” vol. 2, no. Penzenstadler, and B. Tomlinson, “Domestic Plant
1, pp. 1–6, 2014. Guilds : A Software System for Sustainability,” vol.
[10] B. Penzenstadler, A. Raturi, D. Richardson, and B. i, 2013.
Tomlinson, “Safety, security, now sustainability: [24] B. Penzenstadler et al., “ICT4S 2029 : What will be
The nonfunctional requirement for the 21st the Systems Supporting Sustainability in 15
century,” IEEE Softw., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 40–47, Years ?,” 2014.
2014. [25] S. Jansen and M. Cusumano, “Defining software
[11] B. Penzenstadler, “Supporting Sustainability ecosystems: a survey of software platforms and
business network governance : Software Ecosystems energy footprints,” in 2013 2nd International
Analyzing and Managing Business Networks in the Workshop on Green and Sustainable Software,
Software Industry,” Softw. Ecosyst. Anal. Manag. GREENS 2013 - Proceedings, 2013, pp. 30–37.
Bus. Networks Softw. Ind., pp. 13–28, 2013. [40] V. Cordero, I. G. R. De Guzmán, and M. Piattini,
[26] J. V. Joshua, D. O. Alao, S. O. Okolie, and O. “A first approach on legacy system energy
Awodele, “Software Ecosystem: Features, Benefits consumption measurement,” in Proceedings - 2015
and Challenges,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl., IEEE 10th International Conference on Global
vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 1–6, 2013. Software Engineering Workshops, ICGSEW 2015,
[27] B. Penzenstadler and H. Femmer, “A generic model 2015, pp. 35–43.
for sustainability with process- and product-specific [41] H. Field, G. Anderson, and K. Eder, “EACOF: A
instances,” GIBSE 2013 - Proc. 2013 Work. Green Framework for Providing Energy Transparency to
Softw. Eng. Green by Softw. Eng., no. June 2015, enable Energy-Aware Software Development,” pp.
pp. 3–7, 2013. 1194–1199, 2014.
[28] E. Britannica, “Measurement instruments and [42] S. Cagri, C. Furkan, C. James, K. Fouad, P. Lori,
systems. Accessed on 7-12-2017 from: and W. Kristina, “Towards Power Reduction
https://www.britannica.com/print/article/371701,” Through Improved Software Design,” pp. 1–8,
pp. 1–2, 2017. 2007.
[29] R. Seacord et al., “Measuring Software [43] P. Bozzelli, Q. Gu, and P. Lago, “A systematic
Sustainability,” J. Chem. Inf. Model., vol. 53, no. 9, literature review on green software metrics,”
pp. 1689–1699, 2013. Sis.Uta.Fi, 2013.
[30] F. Albertao, J. Xiao, C. Tian, Y. Lu, K. Q. Zhang, [44] E. Kern, M. Dick, S. Naumann, A. Guldner, and T.
and C. Liu, “Measuring the Sustainability Johann, “Green Software and Green Software
Performance of Software Projects,” 2010 IEEE 7th Engineering – Definitions , Measurements , and
Int. Conf. E-bus. Eng., pp. 369–373, 2010. Quality Aspects,” pp. 87–94, 2013.
[31] G. Lami and L. Buglione, “Measuring software [45] T. Debbarma and K. Chandrasekaran, “Green
sustainability from a process-centric perspective,” measurement metrics towards a sustainable
Proc. 2012 Jt. Conf. 22nd Int. Work. Softw. Meas. software: A systematic literature review,” 2016 Int.
2012 7th Int. Conf. Softw. Process Prod. Meas. Conf. Recent Adv. Innov. Eng. ICRAIE 2016, 2017.
IWSM-MENSURA 2012, pp. 53–59, 2012. [46] R. V. O. Connor and A. D. Eds, Software Process
[32] M. R. Idio, “Measuring Sustainability Impact of Improvement and Capability Determination, vol.
Software,” vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 5–7, 2014. 155, no. June. 2011.
[33] C. Calero, M. F. Bertoa, and M. Angeles Moraga, [47] T. Johann, M. Dick, S. Naumann, and E. Kern,
“A systematic literature review for software “How to measure energy-efficiency of software:
sustainability measures,” Green Sustain. Softw. Metrics and measurement results,” 2012 1st Int.
({GREENS)}, 2013 2nd Int. Work., pp. 46–53, 2013. Work. Green Sustain. Software, GREENS 2012 -
[34] S. Naumann, M. Dick, E. Kern, and T. Johann, “The Proc., pp. 51–54, 2012.
GREENSOFT Model: A reference model for green [48] G. Oleksandr, K. Vyacheslav, and F. Mario,
and sustainable software and its engineering,” “Software Quality Standards and Models Evolution:
Sustain. Comput. Informatics Syst., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. Greenness and Reliability Issues,” vol. 469, pp.
294–304, 2011. 277–299, 2016.
[35] S. Oyedeji, A. Seffah, and B. Penzenstadler, [49] E. Rondeau, F. Lepage, J. Georges, E. Rondeau, F.
“Sustainability Quantification in Requirements Lepage, and J. Georges, “Measurements and
Informing Design,” 6th Int. Work. Requir. Eng. Sustainability,” 2015.
Sustain. Syst., vol. i, 2017. [50] S. A. . Koçak, G. I. . Alptekin, and A. B. . Bener,
[36] K.-L. Kramer, User Experience in the Age of “Evaluation of software product quality attributes
Sustainability. 2012. and environmental attributes using ANP decision
[37] a Noureddine, A. Bourdon, R. Rouvoy, and L. framework,” CEUR Workshop Proc., vol. 1216, pp.
Seinturier, “Runtime monitoring of software energy 37–44, 2014.
hotspots,” in Automated Software Engineering [51] S. Abdulsalam, Z. Zong, Q. Gu, and M. Qiu, “Using
(ASE), 2012 Proceedings of the 27th IEEE/ACM the Greenup, Powerup, and Speedup metrics to
International Conference on, 2012, pp. 160–169. evaluate software energy efficiency,” 2015 6th Int.
[38] T. Johann et al., “How to measure energy-efficiency Green Sustain. Comput. Conf., 2016.
of software : Metrics and measurement results,” no. [52] A. Michel, S. Attali, and E. Bush, “Energy
April 2015, pp. 51–54, 2012. efficiency of White Goods in Europe : monitoring
[39] M. A. Ferreira, E. Hoekstra, B. Merkus, B. Visser, the market with sales data,” no. June, pp. 1–53,
and J. Visser, “Seflab: A lab for measuring software 2015.