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.