Sustainable software products—Towards assessment criteria for resource and energy efficiency

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Sustainable software products—Towards assessment criteria for resource and energy efficiency. / Kern, Eva; Hilty, Lorenz M.; Guldner, Achim et al.
In: Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 86, 01.09.2018, p. 199-210.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Kern E, Hilty LM, Guldner A, Maksimov YV, Filler A, Gröger J et al. Sustainable software products—Towards assessment criteria for resource and energy efficiency. Future Generation Computer Systems. 2018 Sept 1;86:199-210. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2018.02.044

Bibtex

@article{9186098d73b64a32ae550d101691e524,
title = "Sustainable software products—Towards assessment criteria for resource and energy efficiency",
abstract = "Many authors have proposed criteria to assess the “environmental friendliness” or “sustainability” of software products. However, a causal model that links observable properties of a software product to conditions of it being green or (more general) sustainable is still missing. Such a causal model is necessary because software products are intangible goods and, as such, only have indirect effects on the physical world. In particular, software products are not subject to any wear and tear, they can be copied without great effort, and generate no waste or emissions when being disposed of. Viewed in isolation, software seems to be a perfectly sustainable type of product. In real life, however, software products with the same or similar functionality can differ substantially in the burden they place on natural resources, especially if the sequence of released versions and resulting hardware obsolescence is taken into account. In this article, we present a model describing the causal chains from software products to their impacts on natural resources, including energy sources, from a life-cycle perspective. We focus on (i) the demands of software for hardware capacities (local, remote, and in the connecting network) and the resulting hardware energy demand, (ii) the expectations of users regarding such demands and how these affect hardware operating life, and (iii) the autonomy of users in managing their software use with regard to resource efficiency. We propose a hierarchical set of criteria and indicators to assess these impacts. We demonstrate the application of this set of criteria, including the definition of standard usage scenarios for chosen categories of software products. We further discuss the practicability of this type of assessment, its acceptability for several stakeholders and potential consequences for the eco-labeling of software products and sustainable software design.",
keywords = "Energy-aware software, Environmental criteria for software, Green software, Model of software impacts, Resource efficiency, Sustainability indicators, Informatics",
author = "Eva Kern and Hilty, {Lorenz M.} and Achim Guldner and Maksimov, {Yuliyan V.} and Andreas Filler and Jens Gr{\"o}ger and Stefan Naumann",
note = "Funding Information: There have been many contributors to shape the set of criteria. The authors are thankful to each of them. We specifically would like to thank Marina K{\"o}hn, Dr. Hans-J{\"u}rgen Baumeister (both German Environment Agency), and Prof. Dr. Benno Schmidt from Bochum University of Applied Sciences. This work was supported by the German Environment Agency under project number 3715 37 601 0 . Appendix A Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018",
year = "2018",
month = sep,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.future.2018.02.044",
language = "English",
volume = "86",
pages = "199--210",
journal = "Future Generation Computer Systems",
publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sustainable software products—Towards assessment criteria for resource and energy efficiency

AU - Kern, Eva

AU - Hilty, Lorenz M.

AU - Guldner, Achim

AU - Maksimov, Yuliyan V.

AU - Filler, Andreas

AU - Gröger, Jens

AU - Naumann, Stefan

N1 - Funding Information: There have been many contributors to shape the set of criteria. The authors are thankful to each of them. We specifically would like to thank Marina Köhn, Dr. Hans-Jürgen Baumeister (both German Environment Agency), and Prof. Dr. Benno Schmidt from Bochum University of Applied Sciences. This work was supported by the German Environment Agency under project number 3715 37 601 0 . Appendix A Publisher Copyright: © 2018

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Many authors have proposed criteria to assess the “environmental friendliness” or “sustainability” of software products. However, a causal model that links observable properties of a software product to conditions of it being green or (more general) sustainable is still missing. Such a causal model is necessary because software products are intangible goods and, as such, only have indirect effects on the physical world. In particular, software products are not subject to any wear and tear, they can be copied without great effort, and generate no waste or emissions when being disposed of. Viewed in isolation, software seems to be a perfectly sustainable type of product. In real life, however, software products with the same or similar functionality can differ substantially in the burden they place on natural resources, especially if the sequence of released versions and resulting hardware obsolescence is taken into account. In this article, we present a model describing the causal chains from software products to their impacts on natural resources, including energy sources, from a life-cycle perspective. We focus on (i) the demands of software for hardware capacities (local, remote, and in the connecting network) and the resulting hardware energy demand, (ii) the expectations of users regarding such demands and how these affect hardware operating life, and (iii) the autonomy of users in managing their software use with regard to resource efficiency. We propose a hierarchical set of criteria and indicators to assess these impacts. We demonstrate the application of this set of criteria, including the definition of standard usage scenarios for chosen categories of software products. We further discuss the practicability of this type of assessment, its acceptability for several stakeholders and potential consequences for the eco-labeling of software products and sustainable software design.

AB - Many authors have proposed criteria to assess the “environmental friendliness” or “sustainability” of software products. However, a causal model that links observable properties of a software product to conditions of it being green or (more general) sustainable is still missing. Such a causal model is necessary because software products are intangible goods and, as such, only have indirect effects on the physical world. In particular, software products are not subject to any wear and tear, they can be copied without great effort, and generate no waste or emissions when being disposed of. Viewed in isolation, software seems to be a perfectly sustainable type of product. In real life, however, software products with the same or similar functionality can differ substantially in the burden they place on natural resources, especially if the sequence of released versions and resulting hardware obsolescence is taken into account. In this article, we present a model describing the causal chains from software products to their impacts on natural resources, including energy sources, from a life-cycle perspective. We focus on (i) the demands of software for hardware capacities (local, remote, and in the connecting network) and the resulting hardware energy demand, (ii) the expectations of users regarding such demands and how these affect hardware operating life, and (iii) the autonomy of users in managing their software use with regard to resource efficiency. We propose a hierarchical set of criteria and indicators to assess these impacts. We demonstrate the application of this set of criteria, including the definition of standard usage scenarios for chosen categories of software products. We further discuss the practicability of this type of assessment, its acceptability for several stakeholders and potential consequences for the eco-labeling of software products and sustainable software design.

KW - Energy-aware software

KW - Environmental criteria for software

KW - Green software

KW - Model of software impacts

KW - Resource efficiency

KW - Sustainability indicators

KW - Informatics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046359636&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.future.2018.02.044

DO - 10.1016/j.future.2018.02.044

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 86

SP - 199

EP - 210

JO - Future Generation Computer Systems

JF - Future Generation Computer Systems

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. An assessment of the grain structure evolution during hot forward extrusion of aluminum alloy 7020
  2. Einleitung
  3. (Dis) integrated valuation
  4. Functional complementarity and specialisation
  5. Attention and Information Acquisition
  6. The Effects of Social Interaction and Social Norm Compliance in Pay-What-You-Want Situations
  7. Chemotaxonomy of Pochonia and other conidial fungi with Verticillium-like anamorphs
  8. What Triggers Corporate Sustainability
  9. Elevated air carbon dioxide concentrations increase dissolved carbon leaching from a cropland soil
  10. How do conflicts impact change in family businesses?
  11. Measuring Effective Democracy
  12. Fence-sitters no more
  13. Evaluation of Magnesium Die-Casting Alloys for Elevated Temperature Applications
  14. Expected climate change consequences and their role in explaining individual risk judgments.
  15. Habitat management on multiple spatial scales can enhance bee pollination and crop yield in tropical homegardens
  16. Microstructural investigations of MG-AL alloys containing small amount of SiC nucleants
  17. Works Councils in the Production Process
  18. The Rise and Fall of Electricity Distribution Cooperatives in Germany
  19. Characterization and ranking of biodiversity hotspots: centres of species richness and endemism
  20. Temporary exports and characteristics of destination countries
  21. The outcome of coaching and training for self-employment. A statistical evaluation of outside assistance support programs for unemployed business founders in Germany
  22. Was fehlt in der EVS?
  23. Microstructure investigation of Mg-10Gd-1La containing alloy subjected to fatigue deformation
  24. Fahrverhalten in Abhängigkeit diskreter Emotionen unterschiedlicher Valenz
  25. Was bringt diese Aufgabe?
  26. Higher productivity in importing German manufacturing firms
  27. The impact of soft-skills training for entrepreneurs in Jamaica
  28. The influence of motivation, opportunity, ability, and tacitness on repatriate knowledge transfer
  29. The effect of extrusion ratio and material flow on the mechanical properties of aluminum profiles solid state recycled from 6060 aluminum alloy chips
  30. Einkommenssituation Selbständiger in der Europäischen Union
  31. Kompetenzentwicklung im Schuljahr nach PISA 2012
  32. Vergleich von Polaritätsprofilen durch Neuheitsfilter
  33. Sustainable Value Added
  34. Traits of dominant plant species drive normalized difference vegetation index in grasslands globally
  35. Choosing between Internet-based psychodynamic versus cognitive behavioral therapy for depression
  36. Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia
  37. Conflict strength:
  38. The German Bank Restructuring Act: An Economic Perspective
  39. Does more respect from leaders postpone the desire to retire?
  40. Cool weather tourism under global warming:
  41. Unterricht im Lernbereich Globale Entwicklung
  42. Miscounselling in the German Insurance Market-Utility-Orientated Implications for the Meaning of Miscounselling