=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=None
|storemode=property
|title=An Assessment Technique for Sustainability: Applying the IMAGINE Approach to Software Systems
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-995/paper2.pdf
|volume=Vol-995
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/re/RodriguezP13
}}
==An Assessment Technique for Sustainability: Applying the IMAGINE Approach to Software Systems==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-995/paper2.pdf
An Assessment Technique for Sustainability:
Applying the IMAGINE Approach to Software
Systems
Alejandra Rodriguez Birgit Penzenstadler
Software & Systems Engineering Donal Bren School of Informatics and Computer Science
Technische Universität München University of California, Irvine
Munich, Germany Irvine, CA, USA
alejandra.rodriguez@mytum.de bpenzens@uci.edu
Abstract—Sustainability is a concept for which exist many like the ISO 14000 for Environmental Management, cover the
definitions, but most of them are either vague or too limited; no environment dimension but do not give guidance for software
consensus has been achieved. One pragmatic solution is to provide systems. Besides, the software systems and IT supporting such
an implicit definition by setting up a standard with criteria that
have to be fulfilled, e.g., by a company in order to reach their developments are often obviated from the lifecycle analysis of
self-set sustainability goals. a sustainable development project or not clearly indicated in
The problem is that even with a defined goal or strategy for the analysis. Especially for software systems, sustainability
sustainability, practitioners lack of reference frameworks to align standards are not yet available and the majority of research
to and from there to derive concrete objectives and activities. focuses on green IT, energy-efficient software, and human
Consequently, it is hard to implement such goals or strategies
through the use of IT. computer interaction [11], [12]. Consequently, practitioners in
This paper presents the application of the IMAGINE ap- software development lack a guideline for assessing sustain-
proach [5], for analyzing and assessing sustainability, on a ability in their systems.
system supported by IT and software systems. The approach
was implemented and its applicability assessed in an industrial B. Contribution
case study in a Master student’s research project.
The approach provides project managers, business analysts, We provide the results of a case study in applying the
and requirements engineers with the capability to devise a specific IMAGINE approach [5], an analysis approach from the do-
strategy for particular contexts and sustainability goals. main of sustainable development, to a software-intensive sys-
I. I NTRO : C ONTEXT & P ROBLEM tem that exhibits a significant impact on the sustainability
of city mobility. It has been adapted to include the role of
Sustainability standards are used to assess companies in- technology into the analysis, and to inspect in depth the
terested in validating and certifying their products, projects, rationale, drivers and impact of the planned solution. It can be
or development and management practices. They consist of applied from the early phases of idea definition up to project
norms and reference criteria related to ideas that pursue finalisation, production and maintenance.
sustainability, and the assessment is usually performed by a
third party. II. BACKGROUND : IMAGINE AND D RIVE N OW
Several standards that are currently available focus on
sustainable development [1], [2], but we can also find stan- This section gives a short introduction to the IMAGINE
dards for sustainability reporting [9], [10], or sustainable approach and background on the DriveNow case study.
design [7], [3], among others. Furthermore these standards can
be segmented in the industry-specific sectors, like those listed A. The IMAGINE Approach
by the Industry Classification Benchmark [8], for instance The IMAGINE approach [5] originates from the envi-
food, oil and gas producers, mining, transportation, healthcare, ronmental studies field and applies systems thinking princi-
and telecommunications. ples [6].
It was designed to guarantee the cooperation of users,
A. Problem
experts in all levels, performers and public representatives,
None of these standards is designed for the application in all through the identification and understanding of problems of
contexts, and considering all sustainability dimensions. Norms sustainable development, definition of optimal indicators to
measure success, and to develop on decisions about further
Copyright c 2013 for the individual papers by the papers’ authors.
Copying permitted only for private and academic purposes. This volume is development, to conclude with the activities for achieving the
published and copyrighted by its editors. desired scenarios.
Thus the application of IMAGINE involves the use of and maintenance of registration, authentication and interaction
participatory techniques, the inclusion of varied groups of platforms between the provider, partners, users and members
stakeholders, the identification of meaningful and relevant of the community, and the creation of startups extending the
indicators for the groups, and the use of scenarios for current service.
and future states. This enables the tracking of the evolution- The initial idea of modern mobility services was integrated
ary behavior, the recognition of deviations from the goal to with environmental focuses, engaging the project in sustain-
apply timely corrections. It has only been applied so far in ability initiatives.
environmental systems.
The IMAGINE approach is carried out in five steps: C. Outline
1) Understanding the context: identify the stakeholders, The remainder of this paper describes the application of the
their perspectives, and scope the system to be assessed. IMAGINE steps for the case study of the DriveNow system.
2) Agreeing on Sustainability Indicators (SI) and bands of Section III describes how the system of interest is scoped,
equilibrium: identify relevant indicators for each group Section IV presents the process of selection of sustainability
of stakeholders, agree in a common set for the whole indicators (SIs) and definition of bands of equilibrium for
system, and establish reference boundaries within which these indicators, Section V explains the development of future
each SI remains sustainable. scenarios and the AMOEBA diagram, Section VI discusses
3) AMOEBA scenario making: develop the desired future some open issues and limitations. Section VII concludes with
situations of the system in terms of the selected SI to open issues and suggestions for future work.
measure and depict it in an AMOEBA diagram.
4) Review and Metascenario making: review the status of III. U NDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT
the system conducting the whole process again and
contrasting the scenarios and diagrams over time.
5) Publicity and Marketing the message: end of an Imagine
iteration where the outcomes are publicized among
potential consumers of the information.
For each one of the steps a variety of instruments to ease the
adoption in companies is available in [14], for example: Con-
trolling, Corporate Social Accounting, Corporate Volunteering,
Cross-impact analysis, Dialog instruments, Eco-design/Design
for environment, Environmental Shareholder Value, Mission
Statement, Reporting, Scenario analysis, Supply Change Man-
agement, Sustainability Balanced Scorecard, and Total Quality
Environmental Management. Fig. 1. System and Stakeholders, acc. to [5]
B. The DriveNow Case Study
The assessment begins with the comprehension and delim-
Our industrial case study is developed for a car sharing
itation of the system or project of interest, and the context
system deployed in 2011 in three major German cities by
where it is applied. This first step is crucial to obtain a
BMW, Mini, and Sixt in a 50%-50% venture. The project
well defined problem and a precondition for a successful
concept was designed to provide new mobility services that
assessment.
are individually attractive and socially sustainable.
The business model of DriveNow presents the rent of
A. Stakeholder Perspectives
premium vehicles for a short period of time within the city
using public parking areas inside an established perimeter The system of interest is scoped from four main perspectives
without incurring in additional parking costs. as illustrated in Fig. 1, by directly gathering information from
We chose DriveNow for our case study as it is been relevant stakeholders and available documentation. The four
marketed as a positive contributor towards sustainability and perspectives are formed by individual representatives of stake-
environmental protection. Among their main goals are the holders under the roles of owners (customers), implementers
reduction of CO2-emissions by: replacing old private cars for (developers), beneficiaries (users), and regulators (government,
new shared cars, integrating new technologies and introducing legislation).
electronic cars, and reducing the number of cars with only one Figure 2 shows the results of the stakeholder analysis for all
passenger by encouraging car pooling. four perspectives in DriveNow. The owners are BMW, Sixt,
The project involves automobiles and technology for effi- and Stattauto, and the regulators are the government, certifying
ciency, care-hire know-how, IT systems and a comprehensive organizations, and controlling agencies like the police. The
customer registration and interaction network. The whole life- beneficiaries are the drivers, the community, and friends, and
cycle is highly dependent on technology, from the development the implementers include the whole development process as
of the equipment and software, the infrastructure, disposition well as marketing and additional service providers.
Fig. 2. Participants and Root Definitions in DriveNow
are identified and concisely stated. A graphical overview of
the DPSIR analysis approach is provided in Fig. 4. For the
complete set of DPSIR indicators in DriveNow, see [13, p.
25-29].
C. Root Definitions
For a succinct statement of the result we use Root Defini-
tions. A Root Definition is a structured description of a system
and a clear statement of activities which (might) take place in
the context of our system. A properly structured root definition
Fig. 3. DPSIR approach, acc. to [5] comprises three elements: What the aim of the system is, How
that aim is to be achieved, and whY the activity is carried out
w.r.t. a long-term aim. This is stated as ”A System to do W,
B. Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response Approach by means of H, in order to achieve Y”.
The information can be gathered by any participatory The root definitions elaborated for DriveNow were:
technique, using the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response 1) The Car Sharing Project focused on private users that do
(DPSIR) approach [4] shown in Fig. 3. The DPSIR seeks to not own a car, and realized by the implementers, in order
identify the Drivers to design the system, the Pressures to to establish the brand as a mobility service provider,
use unsustainable products or practices, what aspects of the while removing old cars from the streets, assuming
current State might seem affected by the introduction of the behavioral patterns, government support and managing
system, which Impact and level of severity is expected, and feasibility, capacity of production, offer and demand,
what are the Responses of the environment and users to the prices and easiness of use.
system regarding sustainability. The most common technique 2) The Car Sharing Project focused on offering community
in the early steps of the analysis are structured interviews. members that do not own a car, in order to provide a sup-
As major result after the consolidation of the interview data, port and convenience when needing a car for occasional
the main objectives of the system and the assumptions made use, while involving them into the membership and
Fig. 4. DPSIR indicators in DriveNow
maintaining the initiative sustainable without profiting, The catalogue is part of our research results and was created
assuming behavioral patterns, government support and based on general indicators and extensions for which we could
managing prices and schedules of use. find official measurement values. The catalogue is structured
into groups, with corresponding standard themes, sub-themes,
D. Data Collection in Interviews a list and a description of each indicator; Fig. 5 shows a
The interviews to collect the information in our case study fragment. For the full catalogue, please refer to [13].
were conducted with three representatives for the groups
of Owners, Beneficiaries and Regulators. The implementers’ B. Prioritization of Concerns
point of view was partially covered by the representative of
The final selection of SIs from the set of pre-selected ones
the owners. Once the system and context are clearly defined,
is performed by a multi-dimensional stakeholder prioritization
the next step is the selection of reference measures and the
of concerns, here the most relevant SIs for each stakeholder
establishment of sustainability criteria for each one of them.
are contrasted with the other stakeholders. The contrast is
The full documentation of the case study is accessible as
graphically depicted in a 2x2 matrix were each SI is assigned
Technical Report [13].
a point in the grid according to the relevance for each pair of
IV. AGREEING ON S USTAINABILITY I NDICATORS AND stakeholders.
BANDS OF EQUILIBRIUM Next, the SIs are grouped into topics, subtopics and fi-
nally listed individually. Our extension takes as basis the
three dimensions of the Triple Bottom Line, respectively the
Environmental, Social, and Economic perspective as topics,
and adds two more, namely the Human and Technology
dimensions. The Human dimension associates the SIs per-
tinent to individuals, contrary to the social dimension that
refers to the society collectively. The Technology dimension
makes reference to the technological infrastructure supporting
the different tasks over the lifecycle, as well as technology
capacity limits, availability and access to technology based on
demographics, extension and integration of additional services,
and communication mechanisms enabled by technology. The
Fig. 5. Sustainability Indicator Catalogue (Excerpt) structure is, hence, based on the five topics of our extended
approach, i.e. environmental, social, economic, human and
technology, each with subtopics and a list of selected SIs to
be measured.
C. Bands of Equilibrium
With the priority SIs selected, we define a band of equilib-
rium describing the boundaries within which our SIs values
must stay. This band is determined according to the selected
measurement unit and method, and is given by two values,
one for the minimum value our SI can have such that it is still
Fig. 6. Identified Topics in DriveNow (Excerpt)
sustainable (any value lying below is unsustainable by lack),
a second value for the maximum value of our SI to still be
There is no general consensus on the concept of sustain- sustainable (consequently, any value above is unsustainable by
ability; the definition of sustainability varies from company to excess).
company and from person to person, i.e. a precise conception For DriveNow, a general catalogue of SI indicators was
of sustainability varies depending upon who is using it and in developed, and a sub-set of them was selected and structured
which context [5, p. 28]. Hence flexibility on the selection of based on the information gathered in the previous step [13, p.
important measurements is needed, without losing standard- 37-47]. The bands of equilibrium were defined using values
ization and the comparison capability among companies. found in standards, regulations and publications, applicable to
the DriveNow project.
A. Catalogue of Sustainability Indicators At this point we have the foundations for the elicitation
A general catalogue of sustainability indicators (SIs) is of current and future scenarios. The next step evaluates the
therefore employed here and only those relevant and suitable weaknesses and strengths of the current status of the system,
for the context are pre-selected. They are prioritized in a the potential for improvement of particular SIs, as well as
subsequent step by simultaneously looking at the priority the overall improvement. It also gives a suggestion on the
assigned for each group of stakeholders. prioritised corrective actions to take.
Fig. 7. Current and Goal Scenarios of DriveNow
V. A MOEBA AND SCENARIO MAKING ’teeth’ will indicate several weaknesses on particular SIs in
In this third step we start with the current situation appraisal comparison to the level of the other SIs, on the contrary a
of the system and the definition of the future scenarios we more circular amoeba is an indication of equally evolved SIs
want to attain with the time. A consolidation of the previous as far as they lie within the band of equilibrium.
conducted steps can be summarized in the future scenarios The primary corrective actions must be those that accom-
and AMOEBA diagram. By obtaining a current measure of plish a sustainable and effective positive reaction without
the system for each SI, and defining the values we ideally negative effects, such that a more sustainable current situation
expect to reach at different future points in time, we obtain of the system can be achieved in a short time. A more
the current and goal values for each scenario. For simplicity sustainable situation is characterized by an AMOEBA diagram
in this paper we only consider one future scenario, therefore where no SI lies outside boundaries, and ideally all of them
only a goal value. are close to the goal value.
C. Analysis According to Sustainability Dimensions
A. Data Collection for Values
An additional element of the assessment is the balance of
The current and goal values for each SI were obtained from SIs belonging to each one of the five topics of our approach,
official concept descriptions, sustainability reports, press pub- see Fig. 8. The amount of SIs belonging to a certain topic
lications, public statistical data from the city and government, are grouped together, plotted and the whole topic highlighted,
market analyses, and other documentation. The measurement building a color coding of five shades.
data from all sources were obtained by experts in the field, in In the AMOEBA, we can observe the general balance of the
some cases with the aid of specialized equipment (e.g. sensors system, depicting the priority SIs for multiple stakeholders in
measuring air pollution) and in general being reliable data. parallel. In our example (see Fig. 7) a shadow color is assigned
to each dimension (environmental, economic, social, human,
B. Future Scenarios
and technology), the SIs belonging are plotted close to each
The scenarios are depicted considering the four values other, and then highlighted with a triangular surface.
determined for each one of the priority SIs, the two values of
the band of equilibrium established in (Step 2), the value of the D. Current Challenges in DriveNow
current measurement and the value for the goal in the future, For readability, only a sub-set of indicators was selected for
all four for one scenario. These are plotted in an AMOEBA the AMOEBA diagrams presented here. Since the project was
diagram, for each defined future scenario, see Fig. 7. launched only one year ago, some SI values are undefined or
The graphical representation of the future scenarios in an did not change with respect to the initial scenario. However,
AMOEBA diagram enables the visual identification of SIs that Fig. 8 clearly depicts the challenges that DriveNow is currently
are lying outside the band of equilibrium either by exceeding facing:
the maximum sustainable, or by not reaching the minimum • With regard to the environmental aspect, the number of
sustainable limit, and those SIs closer or further from the cars that could be saved still has to increase.
goal value. By overlapping these four scenarios global insights • In the technological sector, there are some availability
can be gained about the system, its sustainability level, its issues for system improvements that have yet to be
weaknesses and strengths. An AMOEBA with too many solved.
Fig. 8. Amoeba diagram for DriveNow
• For the economic perspective, the market acceptance is B. Assessment of the AMOEBA Diagrams
currently too low and needs to be improved.
From the AMOEBA diagram we can determine where flaws
As the analysis can only provide insights into misalignments occur, distinguish the issue areas, and draw some conclusions
with goals, the respective actions to be taken to solve the about the corrective actions. Further investigation and feasi-
challenges are subject to individual efforts at BMW and Sixt, bility analysis can be performed to ensure that sufficiently
but we could provide them with a concise overview of the informed decisions are made.
current status of the project with regard to the sustainability A sustainable system in the AMOEBA diagram should have
dimensions. all the colors in an equal proportion. Whenever a topic is left
unattended, this is an indication for the inclusion of additional
VI. D ISCUSSION SIs in that specific topic, it is mainly achieved through strategy
revision and sensibilization. The topics with a high proportion
We are aware that the application of the IMAGINE ap- of unsustainable SIs in the current scenario implicitly advise
proach [5] in this setting is not in an application domain future steps to achieve the desired scenario and the main points
originally intended by its inventor. This research had the goal to invest.
to investigate the applicability and usefulness of an approach After some corrective actions have been applied and a
from within classical sustainability research to requirements reasonable time has passed, new data must be collected, and
engineering for software-intensive systems. the results of the whole process must be revised and adjusted.
C. Assessment of the DriveNow Case
A. Informal Evaluation
The DriveNow project was originally designed to encom-
There is no formal evaluation possible as there is no data pass mainly economic and social aspects. The introduction of
officially available that would have all the information gath- the environmental facet has not shown positive results yet,
ered using the IMAGINE approach. However, the feedback since it takes long time to exhibit changes. Moreover, the
by our industrial partner indicated that the analysis results results have been affected by the plan of future important
included not only a summary of the information they had contributions to the environment as is the introduction of
originally elaborated when gathering scope and requirements electronic cars. The assessment presented a current overview
of the project, but also held some new aspects due to its of the project, revealed relevant faults regarding environment,
completeness and integrity. the achievement of goals, and promising results with respect to
the social and economic aspects. It provides a basis for review D. Future Work
and forthcoming analyses. We intend to develop a toolset to support the usage of
the IMAGINE approach, which eases the current and historic
VII. C ONCLUSION information management for a system under consideration,
and the review step in posterior revisions. This work can be
The extension of the IMAGINE approach, an encompassing integrated to be part of a broader sustainability quality model
analysis approach from the sustainability science domain, has and established as a state of the practice standard for assessing
been successfully applied in an industrial case study with a sustainability in any context.
system that has been online for a year, supported by IT and
with a focus on sustainability in its roots. The developed ACKNOWLEDGMENT
indicator catalogue is available for use in other assessments We would like to thank our industry partners from BMW
in related application areas. for providing us with the necessary input to perform the study
and for giving feedback on the analysis results. This work
A. Summary is part of the EnviroSiSE project (grant number PE2044/1-1)
funded by the DFG in Germany.
The first two steps are mainly used to scope the right
problem and the participation of several stakeholders from R EFERENCES
each group enriches the result. The third step provides succinct [1] ISO 14000 - Environmental management, 2004. http://www.iso.org/iso/
information and an overview of the current system status, home/standards/management-standards/iso14000.htm.
as well as it provides insights and indications of strengths, [2] ISO 26000 Guidance on social responsibility, 2010. http://www.iso.org/
iso/home/standards/iso26000.htm.
weaknesses and potential for improvement. The fourth step is [3] U.S. General Services Administration. Sustainable design.
there to enable flexibility and make possible an evolutionary [4] EEA (European Environment Agency). Environmental indica-
assessment over time. This information can later be used for tors:typology and overview. Technical Report 25, EEA (European
Environment Agency), Sept 1999.
informed and precise decision making relating to sustainability [5] Simon Bell and Stephen Morse. Sustainability indicators: Measuring
matters. the immeasurable? Earthscan Publications, London :, 1999.
[6] Peter Checkland. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. John Wiley and
Sons, April 1981.
B. Benefits [7] U.S. Green Building Council. Leadership in energy and environmental
design (leed). http://www.usgbc.org/.
Our experience with the IMAGINE approach with regard [8] FTSE Group. The industry classification benchmark (icb), 2012.
to requirements engineering practices exhibits improvements http://www.icbenchmark.com/.
[9] Global Reporting Initiative, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Sustainability
in the elicitation process. The identification of stakeholders in Reporting Guidelines, version 3.1 edition, 2006.
different areas and at different hierarchy levels, including gov- [10] Christian Herzig and Stefan Schaltegger. Corporate sustainability re-
ernment and certifying organizations, sustainability experts, porting. an overview. In Stefan Schaltegger, Martin Bennett, and Roger
Burritt, editors, Sustainability Accounting and Reporting, volume 21,
potential and real partners, as well as market factors, endorsed pages 301–324. Springer Netherlands, 2006.
the balance regarding prioritization and completeness of the [11] Lorenz Hilty, Wolfgang Lohmann, and Elaine Huang. Sustainability and
elicited requirements. ICT — an overview of the field. In Proceedings of the EnviroInfo 2011,
2011.
The formulation of root definitions helped to state purposes [12] Stefan Naumann, Markus Dick, Eva Kern, and Timo Johann. The
clearly and to define a more sharp scope. The SIs help to greensoft model: A reference model for green and sustainable software
state finer measurable objectives, as well as to convey long and its engineering. Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems,
2011.
and short term goals. The AMOEBA diagrams depict infor- [13] Alejandra Rodriguez and Birgit Penzenstadler. An Assessment Tech-
mation of different scenarios in a manageable and compact nique for Sustainability: Applying the IMAGINE Approach to Soft-
way, understandable for the participants, and useful for the ware Systems. Technical Report TUM-I1218, Technische Universität
München, 2012.
assessment over time. The flexibility of the approach regarding [14] S. Schaltegger, C. Herzig, O. Kleiber, and J. Mueller. Nachhaltigkeits-
the instruments that can be used in the different business areas management in Unternehmen. Center for Sustainability Management
eases and assist the adoption into companies. on behalf of Bundesministerium fuer Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reak-
torsicherheit, 2002.
C. Assessment
The take-away message is that it is worth looking over
the rim of one’s teacup and evaluate the use of techniques
of related domains in a different setting. It is unlikely that
approaches are applicable one-to-one, but it is very likely
that it can be adapted in a way that contributes more than
developing new techniques from scratch. In the case at hand,
the study brought new insights for the system and a means to
perform an encompassing analysis that will be reused in the
future evolution of the project.