(Downloads - 0)
For more info about our services contact : help@bestpfe.com
Table of contents
Introduction générale
1 Présentation des cas d’étude
1.1 Généralités
1.2 Choix des cas d’étude
1.3 L’écoparc industriel Daniel Gaudreau
1.4 Le technopole Savoie Technolac
1.5 L’écoparc Savoie Hexapole
1.6 Les parcs industriels du Grand Annecy
1.7 Synthèse de la description des cas d’étude
2 Écoparc : revue de la littérature et définition du concept
2.1 Résumé
2.2 Introduction
2.3 Materials and Methods
2.3.1 Literature review on the sustainability of business parks
2.3.2 Case Studies
2.4 Results from the literature review on sustainability in business parks
2.4.1 Sustainable development through industrial ecology : eco-industrial parks and other initiatives
2.4.2 Sustainable urban planning and development
2.5 Observation and proposal of a new concept of sustainable business park
2.5.1 Observation of initiatives towards sustainable business parks
2.5.2 Proposal for a new concept : the mixed-use ecopark
2.6 Systemic modeling of mixed-use ecopark
2.6.1 Systemic nature of the MUE
2.6.2 Method
2.6.3 Description of the systemic model of an MUE
2.6.4 Discussion
2.7 Concluding remarks
3 Développement d’un outil d’aide à la décision pour l’établissement du plan d’action d’un écoparc
3.1 Résumé
3.2 Introduction
3.3 The MUE and its control
3.3.1 Emergence of the MUE
3.3.2 The MUE as a system
3.3.3 Control of the MUE
3.4 MCDA for the MUE performance expression model
3.4.1 Choosing MCDA for the MUE performance expression
3.4.2 Formulation of the MUE performance expression problem
3.4.3 The MACBETH method
3.4.4 Using MACBETH for the MUE action plan performance expression
3.5 Performance expression of Victoriaville MUE
3.5.1 Presentation of the case study
3.5.2 Action plan performance expression
3.5.3 Discussion
3.6 Conclusion
4 Proposition d’un modèle d’agrégation de la performance pour l’expression de la performance durable de l’écoparc
4.1 Résumé
4.2 Introduction
4.3 The MUE and its sustainability
4.3.1 The MUE
4.3.2 Sustainability
4.3.3 MUE sustainability
4.4 A model for the assessment of MUE sustainability
4.4.1 Outline
4.4.2 Aggregation : weighted arithmetic mean & Choquet integral
4.4.3 MACBETH
4.5 Case Study
4.5.1 Daniel Gaudreau Industrial Ecopark
4.5.2 Description of the DGIE assessment problem
4.5.3 Determination of DGIE elementary expressions
4.5.4 Aggregation of DGIE elementary expressions : Three-pillar performance expressions
4.5.5 Aggregation of DGIE three-pillar performance expressions : Overall sustainability expression
4.5.6 Discussion and outlook
4.6 Conclusion
Conclusion générale
Contributions de la thèse
Perspectives
Application du cadre méthodologique
Enrichissement du cadre méthodologique
Vers d’autre pistes de recherche
Bibliographie
Liste des figures
A Annexe 1 : Vers un modèle d’expression de la performance pour le pilotage d’un écoparc d’activités i
A.1 Résumé
A.2 Introduction
A.3 Le concept d’écoparc d’activités
A.3.1 Concepts fondateurs
A.3.2 De la notion de parc éco-industriel à la notion d’écoparc d’activités
A.3.3 Définition de l’écoparc d’activités
A.4 Les enjeux du pilotage de l’écoparc
A.4.1 Le pilotage de l’écoparc Savoie Technolac
A.4.2 L’écoparc comme un système pilotable
A.5 Etat de l’art sur le pilotage de l’écoparc
A.5.1 Pilotage de la chaîne d’approvisionnement et du parc éco-industriel
A.5.2 Le pilotage en entreprises – Rappels
A.6 Vers un modèle d’expression de la performance pour le pilotage de l’écoparc
A.6.1 Modélisation systémique et décomposition des objectifs
A.6.2 L’expression de la performance
A.6.3 Proposition d’un cadre méthodologique pour la construction d’un système d’indicateurs de la performance
A.7 Conclusion
B Annexe 2 : A review of Actions Towards Circular Economy for Business Park Governance.
B.1 Résumé
B.2 Introduction
B.3 Systemic Modelling of Business Parks transtionning towards CE
B.4 Governing body of the business park : definition and uts role
B.5 Review of actions towards circular economy in business parks
B.5.1 Method and materials
B.5.2 State of the art on the actions supporting the transition to a CE in a business park
B.6 Impact analysis of the actions on the entities of the business park
B.7 Conclusion
C Annexe 3 : From SCM to Eco-Industrial Park management : Modelling Eco-Industrial Park’s symbiosis with the SCOR model xxvi
C.1 Résumé
C.2 Introduction
C.3 Eco-Industrial Parks and Supply Chains, definition and comparatison
C.3.1 Eco-Industrial Park as an application of Industrial Ecology
C.3.2 Supply Chains and Supply Chain management
C.3.3 Comparison between EIP and Supply Chain
C.4 Supply Chain management applied to EIP
C.4.1 Presentation of the SCOR model
C.4.2 The SCOR model transferred to the EIP
C.5 Case Study
C.5.1 Some elements about Kalundborg EIP
C.5.2 Application of the SCOR-inherited model to Kalundborg EIP’s symbiosis xxxiii
C.6 Conclusion
1 Structure de la thèse
2.1 Position of the EIP concepts
2.2 Emergence of the MUE within its founding concepts
2.3 Structure of the MUE
2.4 Illustration of external and internal interactions
3.1 Deployment of MUE finality ( » means that the value of the criteria should be maximized and # means that the value of the criteria should be minimized)
3.2 The MACBETH procedure for the MUE action plan performance expression, adapted from (Clivillé et al., 2007)
3.3 Gantt chart for DGIE action plan (See Appendix 3.6 for a description of the actions) 45
3.4 Pairwise comparison matrix of the criteria for DGIE action plan performance expression (Extracted from M-MACBETH)
3.5 Pairwise comparison matrix of the sets of actions for the criterion « Attr/Ret » (Attraction and retention of jobs) and the resulting interval scale. (Extracted from M-MACBETH)
3.6 Predicted elementary and global performance expressions of DGIE. (Extracted from M-MACBETH)
3.7 Predicted evolution of the global performance expression of DGIE
3.8 Predicted evolution of the elementary performance expressions of DGIE
3.9 Integration of MACBETH in the Deming wheel for the MUE control
4.1 Deployment of MUE sustainability
4.2 Overall MUE sustainability assessment model
4.3 Aggregation of the elementary performances into the overall sustainability expression of the MUE
4.4 Complete procedure for the overall sustainability assessment of the MUE
4.5 WAM weights for DGIE
4.6 CI parameters for DGIE
4.7 Estimates of potential CI parameters for the three traditional paradigms of sustainability
A.1 Cycle de vie de l’écoparc
A.2 Décomposition des objectifs de l’écoparc
B.1 Class diagram of the business park
B.2 Percentages of actions impacting business park class
C.1 The three types of ecology, from linear to cyclic industrial systems (Jelinski et al., 1992)
C.2 The SCOR overall Supply Chain processes structure (APICS, SCOR 11.0 Overiew Booklet, 2014)
C.3 Processes structure of an EIP of n companies inherited from the SCOR model (Prod=Product, CoP=Co-Product, ByP=By-Product and Res=Residual Product)
C.4 Kalundborg symbiosis represented with the inherited SCOR process structure
