See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/30509723

Sustainable development: A conceptual framework for the technology

management field of knowledge and a departure for further research

Article  in  South African Journal of Industrial Engineering · January 2012

DOI: 10.7166/19-1-105 · Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS

29 3,522

2 authors:

Alan Brent M.W. Pretorius

Victoria University of Wellington University of Pretoria
230 PUBLICATIONS   6,277 CITATIONS    71 PUBLICATIONS   738 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of a method to optimally size micro-grids based on meta-heuristic optimization algorithms View project

A Review and Synthesis of Research and Practice on Sustainable Business Models View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alan Brent on 01 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Association for Management of Technology
IAMOT 2007 Proceedings

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE

TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE AND A DEPARTURE
FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

ALAN C BRENT
Graduate School of Technology Management, University of Pretoria
Natural Resources and the Environment, CSIR
MARTHINUS W PRETORIUS
Graduate School of Technology Management, University of Pretoria
Pretoria, 0002, South Africa
[email protected]

The complexity of integrating the concept of sustainable development and the reality of technology or innovation management
practices has been argued. The purpose of the research was to establish a conceptual framework of the technology management
field of knowledge and identify the departure point for further research in terms of incorporating the concept of sustainable
development into the field. From a review of the literature it is concluded that sustainability aspects are not addressed adequately
in technology management theories and practices. The subsequent conceptual framework defines the context better in which
sustainable technology management should occur. Emerging technology management practices related to sustainable
development do emphasise the focus on technology strategy, selection and transfer, especially between developed and emerging
economies. At the core of these issues lies technology assessment that also forms part of other technology frameworks and
methodologies. For the departure point for further research it is therefore recommended to concentrate on the development of
technology assessment methods, based on the modification of the Technology Balance Sheet, Income Statement and Space Map
analytical techniques, that incorporate the dynamic interactions between nature and society that is researched in the newly
established field of sustainability science.

Keywords: Sustainable Development; Technology Management; Technology Assessment; Sustainability Science.

Introduction

The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)’s report in 1987 is

viewed as a major political turning point for the concept of sustainable development
(Mebratu, 1998). Since then the influence of the concept has increased extensively and it
features more and more as a core element in policy documents of governments and
international agencies (Mebratu, 1998). The World Summit on Sustainable Development
(WSSD) in 2002 highlighted this growing recognition of the concept by governments as well
as businesses at a global level (Labuschagne and Brent, 2005). This need to incorporate the
concept of sustainable development into decision-making, combined with the World Bank
three-pillar-approach to sustainable development (World Bank, 2001), resulted in the popular
business term “triple-bottom-line decision-making”.

The concept of sustainability and sustainable development may be understood intuitively, but
it remains difficult to express in concrete, operational terms (Briassoulis, 2001). However,
many agree that sustainable development is about achieving environmental, economic, and
social welfare for present as well as future generations (Azapagic and Perdan, 2000). From a
governmental perspective this can be at national and global levels (UNCSD, 2001). From an
organizational perspective this can be at project (Labuschagne et al., 2005a) and technology
(Brent et al., 2006; 2007) levels. In some cases stakeholders specifically require that

623
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

environmental, economic, and social goals must be met across all levels of development.
Sustainable development has subsequently been conceptualised as a state of dynamic
equilibrium between societal demand for a preferred development and the supply of
environmental and economic goods and services needed to meet this demand (Briassoulis,
2001). Systems approaches have been proposed to consider strategic sustainable development
planning in different sectors (Robèrt et al., 2002; Labuschagne et al., 2005b). But the
intricate relationships between the three dimensions of sustainable development, i.e.
environmental, economic and social welfare, have been difficult to model within the concept
of a clear absolute technological system (Brent et al., 2006; 2007). Specifically, trade-offs
between the three dimensions of sustainable development may not be possible to quantify as
the benefits cannot be measured. Proposals for these trade-offs can be referred to as ‘weak’,
i.e. indirectly indicating sustainability (Hanley et al., 1997; Rennings and Wiggering, 1997;
Atkinson, 2000).

Consensus on the general objectives and basic principles of sustainable development may be
obtained in theory. But consensus on the details of how to achieve sustainable development
or maintain sustainability is difficult to obtain in practice. This difficulty can be attributed to
the variety of perceptions on specific socio-cultural and political contexts that change over
time (Briassoulis, 2001; Brent et al., 2005a). To this end, the complexity of integrating the
concept of sustainable development and the reality of technology or innovation management
practices has been argued (Coles and Peters, 2003). The problem lies with the required
amalgamation of the:
(i) Traditional sustainability sciences of environmental and social assessment, and the
associated Integrated Environmental Management tools.
(ii) Conventional and resource- or environmental-focused economic sciences, and the
associated tools such as Life Cycle Costing.
(iii) The technology management theories and associated applications such as technology
forecasting and roadmapping, and transfer.

From a research perspective the following main question was subsequently posed: Are
sustainability aspects addressed adequately in technology management theories and
practices? In other words, has technological research progressed into the field of
sustainability science, as has been suggested (Kates et al., 2001)? The research question
focuses on mainly those large-scale technologies, i.e. technologies that can only be added in
discreet sized lumps (Murto, 2000), and which are highly dependent on, or may pose risks to,
the natural resource base of countries and regions (Cooney, 2004).

Objectives of the paper

The primary objective of this paper is to establish a conceptual framework of the technology
management field of knowledge, and coupled tools and methodologies, as it relates to
sustainable development. The secondary objectives are to introduce a criteria framework of
what sustainable development entails in different resource-based sectors where technology
management occurs, e.g. the manufacturing, energy, and agricultural sectors, and to provide

624
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

insight into how sustainability aspects may be measured effectively as part of technology
management practices in these sectors.

From these objectives the paper aims to identify the departure point for further research in
terms of incorporating the concept of sustainable development into the technology
management field of knowledge, which is a specific agenda that may differ significantly from
other technology management orientated research themes (Pilkington and Teichert, 2006).

Methods

The primary objective of the paper was addressed by first considering the:
(i) Management of Technology (MOT) body-of-knowledge (BoK) process, which has
been initiated by the International Association for Management of Technology
(IAMOT, 2006), and specifically a survey on a Template for Graduate Programs and an
analysis of the results of a survey of 148 Technology Management or MOT graduate
programs (Portland State University, 2003).
(ii) Engineering and Technology Management Education and Research Council’s
identification of related research areas (ETMERC, 2006).

The Technovation journal was then searched for papers relating to tools and methodologies
of technology management in general, and on sustainable development, but relating to
technology management. The keywords of ‘technology management tools’, ‘technology
management methodology’ and ‘sustainable development’ were used in the review (see Table
1). Furthermore, a boolean search was conducted in multiple journal databases for the
keywords ‘technology management’ and ‘sustainable development’ (see Table 1).

The IAMOT BoK survey, the ETMERC identification of related research areas, and the
Technovation papers on ‘technology management tools’ and ‘technology management
methodology’ were used to construct a mind map of the technology management field of
knowledge (see Figure 1), which is downloadable from the internet (University of Pretoria,
2006). Mind maps are especially useful as support for intuitive-type research to highlight
casual connections between different aspects (Monaghan, 2003). In Figure 1 overlaps
between the IAMOT and ETMERC defined areas are shown with graphical links (left-hand
side of Figure 1). The linkages between defined technology management tools and
methodologies, and associated applications (right-hand side of Figure 1), and the IAMOT and
ETMERC areas are shown with numeric keys. The specific linkages between the core
technology management areas and sustainable development are emphasised with shadings.

The additional literature on ‘technology management’ identified a conceptual framework that

could be improved in the context of sustainable development. The obtained literature on

625
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

‘sustainable development’ was used to determine how the linkages between the core
technology management areas and sustainable development occur in practice.

Table 1. Journals and papers relating to technology management theories and practices,
and technology management orientated sustainable development
Journal Keywords References
Phaal et al., 2006
Technology management tools Maine et al., 2005
Brady et al., 1997
Technology management Liao, 2005
methodology Jacob and Kwak, 2003
Technovation Demaid and Quintas, 2006
Fahmy, 2005
Gerstlberger, 2004
Sustainable Development
Watanabe et al., 2003
Harris and Khare, 2002
Lambert and Boons, 2002
International Journal of Technology Transfer &
Commercialisation Momaya. 2005
(ABI Inform)
International Journal of Services Technology and
Management Banwet et al., 2003
(CSA Illumina)
International Journal of Biotechnology Sustainable Development AND Hamilton, 2001
(CSA Illumina) Technology Management
International Journal of Technology Management
Bowonder and Miyake, 2000
(CSA Illumina)
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Sharif, 1992
(CSA Illumina)
International Journal of Technology Management Khalil and Ezzat, 2005
(SCOPUS) Phaal et al., 2004

626
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

Figure 1. Mind map of the Technology Management field of knowledge

The detailed mind map can be downloaded from the website of the Department of Engineering and Technology Management of the
University of Pretoria (2006).

627
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Discussion

An existing conceptual framework for technology management

A conceptual framework, which is the intent of this paper, supports understanding of an issue
or area of study, provides structure, communicates relationships within a system for a defined
purpose, and supports decision making and action (Phaal et al., 2004). Such a framework has
been introduced (see Figure 2), which is aimed at the firm level (Phaal et al., 2004). The
system, within which it applies, is that of a manufacturing business. The framework aims to
support understanding of how technological and commercial knowledge combine to support
strategy, innovation and operational processes in a firm, in the context of both the internal
and external environment.

Environment

Organisation

Commercial perspective

Strategy
I
Pull
Push Innovation mechanisms –
mechanisms – S S requirements
Technology
capabilities (knowledge
(knowledge base flows)
flows) Operations
E A

Technological perspective

Figure 2. Conceptual technology management framework at firm level (adopted from

Phaal et al., 2004)

628
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

The framework emphasises the knowledge flows that must occur between commercial and
technological functions of a firm, and that an appropriate balance must be obtained between
push (firm capabilities) and pull (market requirement) mechanisms (Phaal et al., 2004).
However, these mechanisms are defined from an internal-to-external perspective. The
framework does not accentuate the external-to-internal drivers of sustainable development,
which have been noted (Labuschagne and Brent, 2005a), especially for firms that develop
and deploy large-scale resource-oriented technologies (see Figure 3). From a sustainable
development perspective it is required to expand the ‘environment’ component of the
conceptual framework.

Furthermore, and especially for large-scale resource-oriented technologies, the system must
be extended beyond the firm level, i.e. the life cycle of the technology (or asset) and the life
cycle of the associated product value chain must be considered (Brent et al., 2005b; 2007).
Such an extended life cycle system is illustrated in Figure 4.

•Introduction of sustainable development

into government policies
•Civil society expectations

Pressure
License to Operate

•Investors looking for

evidence of good
corporate governance and
Push To incorporate
Sustainability/
Pull •International trade
agreements
effective management of
risk (e.g. Dow Jones SI) License to Exist
Align processes to principles of License to Sell
•Customers expecting
Sustainable Development proof
•Employees

Support
•Responsible Care Principles
•Sound Corporate Governance

Figure 3. Drivers of sustainable development (adopted from Goede as cited in

Labuschagne and Brent, 2005)

629
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Resource

Provisioni ng

Construction
Operations/

Maintenance
De -
commissioning

Product

Usage Process/technology
life cycle

Phase -out
&
disposal

Product life cycle

Figure 4. Life cycle system for large-scale resource-oriented technologies (adopted from
Brent et al., 2005b; 2007)

Defining a conceptual technology management framework in the context of sustainable

development

Many different criteria frameworks that aim to address the concept of sustainable
development in different sectors are available in the literature. From an analysis of the
different approaches, a framework has been introduced (Labuschagne et al., 2005b) that
focuses on large-scale resource-oriented technologies (see Figure 5). The framework
emphasises that the operational initiatives in industry must be evaluated separately in terms
of internal and external economic, social and environmental performances. However, the
internal operational sustainability must also be ensured, e.g. technology management
practices, and a fourth dimension of sustainable development has been suggested
(Labuschagne et al., 2005b; Mulder and Brent, 2006). Therefore, it is proposed that
technology management, as it relates to sustainable development, should be conceptualised as
a triangular-based pyramid (see Figure 6). The three conventional dimensions of sustainable
development form the base or foundation of the pyramid, and supports sustainable
technology management practices at the top of the pyramid.

The conceptual framework indicates two planes of influence. First, technology management
practices (at the firm level) influence other internal operations, but sustainable development
aspects, e.g. economic forces, natural resource constraints, and social behaviour, may also
influence internal operations. In turn, internal operations do exercise influence on different
sustainable development aspects. Similarly, there is interaction between internal operational

630
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

initiatives, the technology and product life cycle phases outside the firm level, and
sustainable development aspects.

It has been stated that conceptual frameworks exist largely in the mind and require practical
devices to ‘interface’ with the real world, in terms of both the development (induction) and
application (deduction) of frameworks (Phaal et al., 2004). The devices, i.e. tools and
methodologies, depicted on the right of the technology management mind map (Figure 1) are
primarily concerned with the interfaces between two planes of the conceptual framework.
This is reflected in the defined research and education focus areas of IAMOT and ETMERC.

Level 1 Corporate responsibility strategy

Level 2 Operational Societal

initiatives initiatives

Level 3 Economic Environmental Social

sustainability sustainability sustainability

Financial health Air resources Internal human

resources

Economic Water resources External

performance population
Level 4
Potential Land resources Stakeholder
financial benefits participation

Trading Mineral and Macro social

opportunities energy resources performance

Figure 5. Framework to evaluate the sustainability performances of operational

initiatives (adopted from Labuschagne et al., 2005b)

631
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Resource
Organisation
Provisioning

Commercial perspective Construction

Operations/

Maintenance
Strategy De-
I commissioning

Pull
Push Product
Innovation mechanisms –
mechanisms – S S
Technology requirements Process/technology
capabilities Usage
(knowledge
(knowledge base flows) life cycle
flows) Operations
E A
Phase -out
&
disposal
Technological perspective

Product life cycle

Internal
influence

External life cycles influence

Economic:
• Financial health
• Economic performance
• Potential financial benefits
• Trading opportunities

Environmental:
• Air resources
• Water resources
• Land resources Social:
• Mined abiotic resources • Internal human resources
• External population
• Stakeholder participation
• Macro social performance

Figure 6. Conceptual framework for technology management in the sustainable

development context

Interfaces between the planes and the sustainable development aspects have been considered
in theory, albeit to a lesser extent. Table 2 summarises the obtained literature that deals with
such interfaces. In these cases the technology management research and applications were
mainly associated with the sub-areas of risk management and decision-analysis or support,
and is highlighted in Figure 1 (dark shading).

632
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

Table 2. Current technology management research and applications in relation to

sustainable development
Reference Description of paper focus
The uncertainty associated with the changing legal and ethical imperatives of sustainable development and the
Demaid and Quintas,
related additional complexity of knowledge management in a specific sector; the similarities between the fields
2006
of sustainable development and risk are specifically highlighted.
Technological trends in specific sectors due to sustainable development pull and push drivers with a subsequent
Fahmy, 2005
strategic plan and policy advice for decision-makers.
Systematic design of regional innovation systems for policy support, whereby the multidimensional aspects of
Gerstlberger, 2004
sustainable development aspects are considered for effective, sustainable knowledge transfer in networks.
Policy options to substitute technologies in a specific sector for competitive advantage; sustainable
Watanabe et al., 2003 development, from an ecosystem perspective, is used as basis to formulate an approach for competitive
innovation.
Harris and Khare, Strategy development for a specific sector due to sustainability pull and push drivers; sustainable development
2002 risk are identified that decision-makers must consider for the long-term survival of the sector.
Societal and environmental problems related to mixed industrial parks, i.e. an extension of the industrial
Lambert and Boons,
symbiosis concept, are identified, and solutions are proposed to ensure the continuity and sustainability of these
2002
parks.
Strategic management of technology to sustain the competitiveness of organisations; sustainable development is
Momaya. 2005 synonymous with management performance and competitiveness in terms of productivity, growth, returns and
market capitalisation.
Technological competitiveness must be achieved to realise sustainable development, and the internal processes
Banwet et al., 2003 and assets that derive performances are important for decision-makers; no emphasis is placed on external
drivers.
Defining characteristics of technological trends and response firms to propose changes in management practices
Hamilton, 2001
for effective technology transfer.
Bowonder and Combining knowledge management and ecosystem theory concepts to sustain competitive advantage in an
Miyake, 2000 uncertain business context.
Increasing international cooperation to ensure the advancement and spread of technology that is economically
Sharif, 1992 efficient, commercially attractive, and environmentally sound, and that leads to self-reliance; technology-
oriented policies are addressed.
Khalil and Ezzat, Globalisation, competitiveness, and the risk of marginalisation of developing nations; responses in public
2005 policy are highlighted, with emphasis on human resource development.

Emerging technology management practices related to sustainable development

It has been noted that, as a research area, technology management is extremely diverse
(Pilkington and Teichert, 2006). This is emphasised in the mind map of Figure 1.
Furthermore, in the sustainable development context, technological research is viewed as one
of the four branches of sustainability science (Kates et al., 2001), i.e. concentrating on the
design of devices and systems to produce more social goods with less environmental harm.
Sustainability science in turn can be defined as the study and integration of particular issues
and aspects of radical, systemic approaches to innovation and learning for ecological and
social sustainability (Struyf, 2003). The merger of these two fields has led to concepts such
as Environmentally Sound Technologies (ESTs), i.e. technologies that have the potential for
significantly improved environmental (and social) performance relative to other technologies
(IETC, 2003a).

633
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

The European Institute for Technology and Innovation Management (EITIM, 2001) states:
"technology management addresses the effective identification, selection, acquisition,
development, exploitation and protection of technologies (product, process and
infrastructural) needed to maintain a market position and business performance in accordance
with the company's objectives".

For ESTs, the emphasis is not only on the firm level, but also on the regional, national and
international levels (IETC, 2003b). This again stresses the requirement to expand the
technological system that is managed, as is shown in the conceptual model (Figure 6), and an
adaptation to the EITIM definition is proposed, i.e. technology management addresses the
effective identification, selection, acquisition, development, exploitation and protection of
technologies (product, process and infrastructure) needed to sustain the competitive
advantage of regional sectors in accordance with the sector, regional, national and
international sustainable development objectives. A number of cases have been documented
in literature that supports the proposed definition of technology management (see Table 3).

Table 3. Emerging technology management research and applications in relation to

sustainable development
Reference Description of paper focus
An accepted strategy for medium- and large-scale industry sectors in less developed countries is identified as
capability building for technology options based on technology transfer with the aim of achieving
Grieve, 2004
competitiveness in international markets; the ‘intermediate technology’ approach is also introduced for the
clustering of small-scale developments in sectors of the third-world.
A strategy is suggested that focuses on selected niches with the aim of integrating the innovation dimension
Tsoutsos and
into a policy for specific technology options; the growth in successful applications would lead to the
Stamboulis, 2005
development of new industry sectors in countries.
Strategies for enhancing the flexibility of technological systems, which is increasingly required because of
Knot et al., 2001
uncertainties and fast developments, to promote alternative technology options and change in industry sectors.
A more informed analysis of technological innovation, and associated options, is suggested for discussions
Coles and Peters,
about the future direction of industrial society and subsequent strategies that is required to adapt specific sectors
2003
to sustainability requirements.
Mechanisms are explored for transferring technologies into sectors of developing countries, by first
Bessant and Francis,
characterising technologies, and then identifying strategies for organisational development to facilitate such
2005
transfers.
Malairaja and Zawdie, Policy issues are discussed that need to be addressed to enhance the effectiveness of the transfer and innovation
2004 of specific technologies in sectors of developing countries.
Analysis and strategy of how new technologies can be delivered in specific sectors of developing countries;
Ayele, 2005
specifically the transfer of knowledge between sectors and between innovation processes is addressed.
Harris and Pritchard, Adaptation of a technology transfer model for application at company, network and government level for
2004 symbiotic strategy formulation.

Table 3 further shows that the literature on technology management and sustainable
development increasingly deals with three main issues:
(i) Integrated strategies across companies, sectors, regions, and, in some cases, across
countries.
(ii) Selection of appropriate technological options across companies, sectors, regions and
countries.

634
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

(iii) The transfer of technologies (and knowledge) across companies, sectors, regions and
countries.

A focal point of these three issues is that of technology assessment or evaluation, which also
forms part of other technology frameworks and methodologies (see Figure 1). Technology
evaluation is one of the most significant techniques in an innovation function, such as
technology transfer, and it is best utilized in screening new ideas, assessing innovative or not
innovative technologies; it is a set of principles, methods and techniques or tools for effective
assessing the potential value of a technology and its contribution to a company’s
competitiveness and profitability (Bakouros, 2005). Models (Pretorius and de Wet, 2000) and
metrics (Geisler, 2002) have been introduced to assist the technology assessment process at
firm level. The following statements have been made with regards to the ongoing
development of metrics (Geisler, 2002):
(i) Technology is not judged by its existence alone, nor is its mere existence a sufficient
condition for successful usage.
(ii) We cannot evaluate technology unless and until we put it in the context of social (and
environmental) and economic phenomena.
(iii) Technology is not defined and evaluated by what it is, but by the criteria outside itself –
by its actual and potential users.

These statements support the system expansion component of the conceptual framework
(Figure 6), and the notion of sustainability performance indicators that have been proposed
for technology management purposes (Labuschagne et al., 2005; Brent et al., 2005b; 2007).

Sustainability performance indicators for technology management

General technical, economic, environmental and social indicators have been proposed for
technology transfer evaluations (Dunmade, 2002). For large-scale resource-oriented
technologies specific sustainability indicators have subsequently been developed, which are
described in detail elsewhere (Brent and Visser, 2005; Labuschagne and Brent, 2006; Mulder
and Brent, 2006). Although the applications of these indicators do attempt to follow a holistic
approach, constraints have been noted where sustainability information is required from parts
of the expanded system that is not controlled by the particular technology management
decision-makers. Especially in the initial research and development phases of technology
management, a set of principles, methods and techniques or tools must be established for
effectively assessing the potential value of a technology and its contribution to sustainable
development during the market uptake phases of its life cycle (see Figure 7).

635
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Market, social-ecological and institutional interface

Resource
provisioning

Construction /
Commissioning
Operations &
Maintenance
De-
commissioning

Product
usage Process /
Asset
life cycle
Phase-out
&
R&D R&D R&D R&D Disposal
gate gate gate gate
Product
life cycle
Assessment

Market
Research

Scale-up
Idea

uptake

Business Business Business

gate gate gate

Pre-feasibility
Idea Hardware / Implementation
/ Development Phase out
Business Operation
generation Feasibility Piloting Design Product
Study

Science

Engineering

Technology Management

Figure 7. Technology life cycle interventions and associated evaluated systems

636
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

Conclusions

The turn of the millennium has seen increasing efforts to align technological research with
the emerging field of sustainability science (Clark and Dickson, 2003). However, the field of
science and technology for sustainability is in its infancy (AAAS, 2006). From the review of
the literature summarised in this paper, it is concluded that sustainability aspects are not
addressed adequately in technology management theories and practices. A conceptual
framework is subsequently proposed, which is based on an existing framework for
technology management, but as the field relates to sustainable development. The framework
defines the context better in which sustainable technology management should occur in
practice. An expanded system perspective is required, that not only includes the respective
technological, operational and business life cycles across companies, sectors, regions and
countries, but also the dynamic interaction between macro, meso, and micro economies,
societies at large, and the natural environment, as perceived by sustainability science. A
modification to the definition of technology management has subsequently been proposed.

The technology management field is extremely diverse, which is illustrated through an

introduced mind map. However, emerging technology management practices related to
sustainable development do emphasise the focus on technology strategy, selection and
transfer, especially between developed and emerging economies. At the core of these issues
lies technology assessment, which also forms part of other technology frameworks and
methodologies. As a departure point for further research in terms of incorporating the concept
of sustainable development into the technology management field of knowledge, it is
therefore recommended to concentrate on the development of technology assessment
methods, as they are used in technology management practices, which incorporate the
intrinsic modelling that is researched in the field of sustainability science. To this end, the
modification of the available Technology Balance Sheet, Income Statement and Space Map
analytical techniques are currently being investigated, with specific emphasis on the initial
research and development phases of technology management.

Ultimately, the challenge lies in the formation and coordination of transdisciplinary research
teams (Pohl, 2001) that are required to reach truly sustainable technology management
practices.

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2006. FORUM: Science and
Innovation for Sustainable Development. Website: http://sustsci.aaas.org/, accessed 20
December 2006.

637
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Atkinson, G., 2000. Measuring corporate sustainability. J. Env. Planning and Man. 43 (2),
235-252.

Ayele, S., 2005. Biotechnology generation, delivery and adoption: The case of Bt
biopesticide in Eqypt. Int. J. Tech. Man. and SD. 4 (2), 75-91.

Azapagic, A., Perdan, S., 2000. Indicator of sustainable development for industry: A general
framework. Trans IchemE 78 (b), 243-261.

Bakouros, Y., 2005. Technology evaluation. Portland International Conference for the
Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Portland, Oregon.

Banwet, D.K., Momaya, K., Shee, H.K., 2003. Competitiveness through technology
management: an empirical study of the Indian software industry. Int. J. Services Tech. and
Man. 4 (2), 131-155.

Bessant, J., Francis, D., 2005. Transferring soft technologies: Exploring adaptive theory. Int.
J. Tech. Man. and SD. 4 (2), 93-112.

Bowonder, B., Miyake, T., 2000. Technology management: A knowledge ecology

perspective. Int. J. Tech. Man. 19 (7), 662-684.

Brady, T., Rush, H., Hobday, M., Davies, A., Probert, D., Banerjee, S., 1997. Tools for
technology management: An academic perspective. Technovation 17 (8), 417-426.

Brent, A.C., Heuberger, R., Manzini, D., 2005a. Evaluating projects that are potentially
eligible for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) funding in the South African context.
Env. and Dev. Econ. 10 (5), 631-649.

Brent, A.C., van Erck, R.P.G., Labuschagne, C., 2005b. A sustainability cost accounting
methodology for technology management in the process industry. International Association
for the Management of Technology (IAMOT), Vienna, Austria.

Brent, A.C., Visser, J.K., 2005. An Environmental Performance Resource Impact Indicator
for Life Cycle Management in the manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 13 (6), 557-565.

Brent, A.C., van Erck, R.P.G., Labuschagne, C., 2006. Sustainability Cost Accounting: Part 1
- A monetary procedure to evaluate the sustainability of technologies in the South African
process industry. South African J. Industrial Eng. 17 (2), 35-51.

Brent, A.C., van Erck, R.P.G., Labuschagne, C., 2007. Sustainability Cost Accounting: Part 2
– A case study to demonstrate and assess the introduced monetary procedure to evaluate the
sustainability of technologies in the South African process industry. South African J.
Industrial Eng., in press.

638
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

Briassoulis, H., 2001. Sustainable development and its indicators: Through a (planner’s)
glass darkly. J. Env. Planning and Man. 44 (3), 409-427.

Clark, W.C., Dickson, N.M., 2003. Sustainability science. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100 (14) 8059-8061, website:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/100/14/8059, accessed 20 December 2006.

Coles, A.-M., Peters, S., 2003. Sustainable development, global innovation and advanced
technologies: The case of fuel cells. Int. J. Env. Tech. and Man. 3 (3/4), 278–289, In: 2005.
Alternative Energy Sources. Fuel and Energy Abs, 46 (1), 26.

Cooney, R., 2004. The precautionary principle in biodiversity conservation and natural
resource management: An issue paper for policy-makers, researchers and practitioners. IUCN
Policy and Global Change Series No. 2, World Conservation Union, IUCN, Cambridge, UK.

Demaid, A., Quintas, P., 2006. Knowledge across cultures in the construction industry:
Sustainability, innovation and design. Technovation 26 (5-6), 603-610.

Dunmade, I., 2002. Indicators of sustainability: Assessing the suitability of a foreign

technology for a developing economy. Tech. in Soc. 24 (4), 461-471.

Engineering and Technology Management Education and Research Council (ETMERC),

2006. Main research areas. Website: http://www.etmerc.org, accessed 20 December 2006.

European Institute for Technology and Innovation Management (EITM), 2001. Our purpose
and mission. Website: http://www-eitm.eng.cam.ac.uk, accessed 20 December 2006.

Fahmy, Y.M., 2005. Catalysis role for sustainable industrial development in Egypt with
prospective. Technovation 25 (6), 645-655.

Geisler, E., 2002. The metrics of technology evaluation: Where we stand and where we
should go from here. Int. J. Tech. Man. 24 (4), 341-374.

Gerstlberger, W., 2004. Regional innovation systems and sustainability: Selected examples of
international discussion. Technovation 24 (9), 749-758.

Grieve, R.H., 2004. Appropriate technology in a globalizing world. Int. J. Tech. Man. and
SD. 3 (3), 173-187.

Hamilton, W.F., 2001. The biotechnology revolution: Lessons for technology management
research and practice. Int. J. Biotech. 3 (1-2), 157-167.

639
AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Hanley, N., Shogren, J., White, B., 1997. Environmental economics in theory and practice.
Palgrave Macmillan, United Kingdom.

Harris, R., Khare, A., 2002. Sustainable development issues and strategies for Alberta's oil
industry. Technovation 22 (9), 571-583.

Harris, S., Pritchard, C., 2004. Industrial Ecology as a learning process in business strategy.
Prog. in Industrial Ecology 1 (1/2/3), 89-111.

International Association for Management of Technology (IAMOT), 2006. IAMOT Body-of-

Knowledge (BoK). Website: http://www.iamot.org/bok/, accessed 20 December 2006.

International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC), 2003a. Environmentally Sound

Technologies and Sustainable Development. United Nations Environment Programme,
website: http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/knowledge, accessed 20 December 2006.

International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC), 2003b Technology Transfer: The

Seven “C”s for the Successful Transfer and Uptake of Environmentally Sound Technologies.
Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, United Nations Environment Programme,
website: http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/knowledge, accessed 20 December 2006.

Jacob, W.F., Kwak, Y.H, 2003. In search of innovative techniques to evaluate pharmaceutical
R&D projects. Technovation 23 (4), 291-296.

Kates, R.W., Clark, W.C., Corell, R., Hall, J.M., Jaeger, C.C., Lowe, I., McCarthy, J.J.,
Schellnhuber, H.J., Bolin, B., Dickson, N.M., Faucheux, S., Gallopin, G.C., Grübler, A.,
Huntley, B., Jäger, J., Jodha, N.S., Kasperson, R.E., Mabogunje, A., Matson, P., Mooney, H.,
Moore III, B., O'Riordan, T., Svedin, U., 2001. Sustainability Science. Science 292 (5517),
641-642.

Khalil, T.M., Ezzat, H.A., 2005. Management of technology and responsive policies in a new
economy. Int. J. Tech. Man. 32 (1-2), 88-111.

Knot, J.M.C, van den Ende, J.C.M., Vergragt, P.J., 2001. Flexibility strategies for sustainable
technology development. Technovation 21 (6) 335-343.

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A.C., 2005. Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: The need
to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector. Int. J. Project Man. 23 (2), 159-168.

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A.C., Claasen, S.J., 2005a. Environmental and social impact
considerations for sustainable project life cycle management in the process industry. Cor.
Social Resp. and Env. Man. 12 (1), 38-54.

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A.C., van Erck, R.P.G., 2005b. Assessing the sustainability
performances of industries. J. Cleaner Prod. 13 (4), 373-385.

640
 IAMOT Proceedings 2007: Sustainable Development and Technology Management

Labuschagne, C., Brent, A.C., 2006. Social indicators for sustainable project and technology
life cycle management in the process industry. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 11 (1), 3-15.

Lambert, A.J.D., Boons, F.A., 2002. Eco-industrial parks: Stimulating sustainable

development in mixed industrial parks. Technovation 22 (8), 471-484.

Liao, S.-H., 2005. Technology management methodologies and applications: A literature

review from 1995 to 2003. Technovation 25 (4), 381-393.

Maine, E., Probert, D., Ashby, M., 2005. Investing in new materials: a tool for technology
managers. Technovation, 25 (1), 15-23.

Malairaja, C., Zawdie, G., 2004. The ‘black box’ syndrome in technology transfer and the
challenge of innovation in developing countries: The case of international joint ventures in
Malaysia. Int. J. Tech. Man. and SD. 3 (3), 233-251.

Mebratu, D., 1998. Sustainability and Sustainable Development: Historical and conceptual
review. Env. Impact Assess. Rev. 18, 493-520.

Momaya, K., 2005. Technology management and competitiveness: is there any relationship?
Int. J. Tech. Transfer and Commercial. 4 (4), 518.

Monaghan, P., 2003. Interdisciplinary research design. School for New Learning, DePaul
University, website: http://snl.depaul.edu, accessed 20 December 2006.

Mulder, J., Brent, A.C., 2006. Selection of sustainable agriculture projects in South Africa:
Case studies in the LandCare programme. J. Sustain.Agric. 28 (2), 55-84.

Murto, P., 2000. Competitive equilibrium and investments in a growing market: The choice
between small- and large-scale electricity production. Annual Meeting of the Energy
Economics Subprogram of the NERI, Reykholt, Iceland, website:
http://www.ioes.hi.is/rammi4.htm, accessed 20 December 2006.

Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R., 2006. Technology management tools: Concept,
development and application. Technovation 26 (3) , 336-344.

Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R. 2004. A framework for supporting the management
of technological knowledge. Int. J. Tech. Man. 27 (1), 1-15.

Pilkington, A., Teichert, T., 2006. Management of Technology: Themes, concepts and
relationships. Technovation 26 (3), 288-299.

641
 AC Brent & MW Pretorius

Pohl, C., 2001. How to bridge between natural and social sciences? Natures Sciences
Societes 9 (3), 37-46.

Portland State University, 2003. ETM study: List of current responses. Website:
http://www.etm.pdx.edu/survey/results.asp, accessed 20 December 2006.

Pretorius, M.W., de Wet, G., 2000. A model for the assessment of new technology for the
manufacturing enterprise. Technovation 20 (1), 3-10.

Rennings, K., Wiggering, H., 1997. Steps towards indicators of sustainable development:
Linking economic and ecological concepts. Ecological Econ. 20, 25-36.

Robèrt, K.-H., Schmidt-Bleek, B., Aloisi de Larderel, J., Basile, G., Jansen, J.L., Kuehr, R.,
Price Thomas, P., Suzuki, M., Hawken, P., Wackernagel, M., 2002. Strategic sustainable
development: Selection, design and synergies of applied tools. J. Cleaner Prod. 10, 197-214.

Sharif, N., 1992. Technological Dimensions of International Cooperation and Sustainable

Development. Tech. Forecasting and Social Change 42 (4), 367-383.

Struyf, I.L.R., 2003. Inter-organizational learning for sustained competitiveness and

ecological sustainability – the case of beta-testing activities of alternative-fuel, fuel cell-
driven public transport buses. Doctoral research paper, Erasmus Centre for Sustainability and
Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Tsoutsos, T.D., Stamboulis, Y.A., 2005. The sustainable diffusion of renewable energy
technologies as an example of innovation-focused policy. Technovation 25 (7), 753-761.

United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD). Indicators of

sustainable development: Guidelines and methodologies. 2001; website:
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/isd.htm, accessed 20 December 2006.

University of Pretoria. Related links: Technology Management Mindmap. 2006; website:

http://www.up.ac.za/engmot, accessed 20 December 2006.

Watanabe, C., Kondo, R., Nagamatsu, A., 2003. Policy options for the diffusion orbit of
competitive innovations: An application of Lotka–Volterra equations to Japan’s transition
from analog to digital TV broadcasting. Technovation 23 (5), 437-445.

World Bank (2001). What is Sustainable Development. Website:

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/sd.html, accessed 20 December 2006.

642
View publication stats