Recycling

The faculty of human cognition often finds it difficult in making decisions concerning systems that are extensive and complex such as in the management of organizational operations, investment portfolios, military command and control situations and control of nuclear facilities. Even though one may fully comprehend the individual interactions amongst a system’s variables, it is usually very difficult to predict how a system will react to new stimuli as a result of a decision taken.

Under such circumstances, the results of many researches have indicated that the judgment and decision making capabilities of human beings could well fall short of the optimal. Stress and complexities acts negatively on the human cognition system, making it even harder to make what could be termed as the most optimal decision. The decision to be taken can nevertheless be very crucial, and a wrong decision could lead to catastrophe.

It therefore becomes essential to find some way to aid and help a human being in taking crucial decisions on complex systems not only in atmospheres of stress and pressure but also in normal situations. Science has strived to device such decision-making aids through out history. Operations research, statistics and economics have developed various methods for making rational choices. The advent of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and its dramatic developments in the last two-and-a-half decades has made it possible apply ICT in integrating various disciplines in aiding decision making in complex situations.

As a result, information science, artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology and the neurosciences have come together to develop a variety of decision making aids. These decision-making aids are practically implemented as computer applications deployed either as stand-alone tools in individual systems or are installed to cover entire working networks. Such decision-making tools and integrated computing environments are together known as Decision Support Systems (DSSs), which is a very broad term incorporating a multitude of methodologies, tools, techniques, approaches and technologies.

Druzdzel & Flynn (2002) takes all existing DSSs into consideration when they attempt to define them empirically as computer-based interactive systems that help users in making decisions. DSSs are sometimes also referred to as knowledge-based systems because they basically try to structure domain knowledge into a form on which mechanical decision making is possible. Decision Support Systems integrate information from various sources, allow intelligent access to the information sources that are relevant, and help in the process of organizing decisions to help human beings overcome their cognitive deficiencies.

Decision Support Systems strengthen the conventional tasks of accessing and retrieving information with reasoning support based on a model and model building approach. Framing, modeling and problem solving are supported by DSSs. They are usually used for strategic and tactical decisions to be made by planners and senior levels in the management. Such decisions have a reasonably low frequency but their consequences have very high potential. Therefore the time and investment taken in using DSSs to aid in taking such decisions are paid off in the long run.

Decision Support Systems not only define the alternative decision choices, but can help in picking out the most logical and optical choice amongst the alternatives adhering to and adopting elements from disciplines such as engineering economics, operations research, statistics and decision theory. Artificial Intelligence is used by Decision Support Systems to tackle problems in a heuristic manner in situations in which the problems are not amenable to formal conventional techniques.

Decision Support Systems have grown in popularity because it has been found that when decision-making systems are used appropriately they tend to increase efficiency and output providing appreciable competitive edge over rival businesses. This happens because organizations and businesses employing DSSs make sound choices in the deployment of technology, and in planning business operations, logistics and operations. Components of DSSs There are three fundamental components f Decision Support Systems are essentially made up of three basic elements: i. Data Base Management System (DBMS): The DBMS is the databank for the DSS.

The DBMS is a storehouse for the huge volumes of data that the DSS has to deal with in providing solution for the type of problem for which it has been designed. Unlike in other databases which provide physical data structure, the DMBS works on logical data structures which the users can interact with. In a good DBMS, the physical database structure and the way the data is actually process remains hidden from the user. The user only knows the different types of data that are available and how best to access this data to aid in decision making. ii. Model-Based Management System (MBMS): The MBMS plays a similar role to that of the DBMS.

The main task of an MBMS is to provide a mechanism whereby the applications that use a particular DSS are independent of the particular models that are used in the DSS. By doing so, the MBMS actually converts data available in the DBMS into information that helps in decision making. Users of a DSS usually have to handle unstructured problems. The MBMS is therefore required to help the users with building models. iii. Dialog Generation and Management system (DGMS): People use a DSS to comprehend a system in its entirety. The primary task of the DSS is therefore to provide insight.

The interfaces that a DSS uses needs to be highly user friendly as many people who use them specialize in planning and managerial decision making and may not be very well acquainted or oriented towards computing systems. The interfaces not only need to assist in building the models bit also need to provide adequate interactions with the models so that the users are able to gain insight and extract recommendations from the DSS. The DGMS is therefore primarily tasked with providing easy access and meaningful access to the DSS. DSS for Selection of Construction Materials, its relevance

This paper attempts to describe a Decision Support System to assist in making decisions to select construction materials based on a sustainability criterion. For every given construction job, there is a huge variety of construction materials to choose from. Economic factors and technology criteria have been traditionally the primary basis of selection of construction materials. Construction materials were selected against the requirements a desired life p, and a program of requirements and codes based on the characteristics of the material concerned such strength, viscosity, elasticity, bending moment, etc.

Rapid depletion of natural resources required for construction materials has however forced a change in perspectives. The focus has now shifted to ecological, health and ethical considerations. Making a selection decision based only on human judgment and past experience, taking all added aspects into consideration, becomes almost an impossible task. According to (Pearce, et. al. , 2001) it was essential that some new mechanism of assessing the available construction materials for the highest utility of the specific project was required.

The mechanism would have to evaluate the alternatives on the basis of their technical properties and cost parameters but also on the basis of the status of their availability in the ecosystem in the long-term context and from the perspective of natural resources. Such a holistic method could be implemented only through a Decision Support System. The DSS will have to provide all necessary information to enable the decision maker to take the most optimal decision keeping not only the technical and economical parameters under consideration, but also balancing the right degree of emphasis on the environment and sustainability aspect.

To achieve such an objective in the design of a Decision Support System the following development steps will have to be undertaken: 1. Sustainability will have to be defined for the selection of construction material. 2. Based on the definition of sustainability developed, a methodology has to be developed for selection and comparison of the alternative construction materials that are available. 3. The methodology for selection will have to be automated by development of a Develop a conceptual framework for a Sustainability Decision Support System (SDSS). Defining Sustainability

The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development defines sustainable development as development keeping the concerns of the future in sight. Sustainable development is that development that meets the requirements of the present generation without in any way endangering or compromising the scope for development of future generations. (WCED, 1987). Sustainability is therefore the concept of meeting present requirements in such a manner that the resources that go to fulfill the present requirement can also be utilized to meet similar requirements in the long run.

In other words, it is handling the present with an eye on the future. This concept of sustainability works on the inherent principle that human development is a going process that has to sustained at a pace at which the finite resources available in the world can easily cope with. A fine but much simplified example could be that of utilization of timber in the making of any civil construction. The decision maker will not only have to select the timber the quality of which is suitable for the construction in terms of strength, expected durability, etc.

but will also have to ensure that the made is a type of timber that is not endangered or on the verge of being extinct, a type that is easily available in the area of the construction with no threat to its future. The next question that could face the decision maker is whether timber, considering the depletion rate of natural resources, should be used at all. And if timber is not used then what are the other available alternatives that could be used in the place of timber?

The Decision Support System will have to be able to assist the decision maker in making these crucial decisions by providing structured and easy access to all relevant information. Sustainability is therefore a system with stability at its core. Changes to the system are not unrestrained but constrained so that a stable continuance of the system is maintained in the long run. Sustainability is very important for the construction industry because constructions have a very high impact on the ecology and the environment.

The people who make decisions in the construction industry literally hold fate in their hands in the sense that considered and logical decisions based on sustainability go a long way in protecting and preserving the environment that in turn sustains human kind. Decision makers at different levels in the construction industry therefore have to make judicious selection of construction material in order fulfill the present requirements without negatively affecting the requirements of others or putting at stake the very existence of the human race on this earth.

The main goals that a DSS has to meet in selecting of construction materials based on sustainability are to improve the selection process of the construction material during the conceptual stage itself and to promote the use of innovative materials which could have more sustainable properties than the traditional materials that are currently in use. Sustainability factor in Construction Materials With regards to construction materials, adoption of sustainable selection criteria would imply the following: i. Matter and energy consumption should be minimized ii.

Minimum level of human satisfaction should be maintained. iii. There should be minimum negative environmental effects. Any effort to minimize the consumption of matter and energy has to target minimizing entropy gain and intergenerational of equity objectives. It has to be kept in mind that the process of consumption increases the entropy of materials and energy making them unsuaitable for use in the future (Roberts, 1994; Rees, 1990). The basic tenet of sustainability and sustainable material selection would therefore be maximizing utilization and minimizing consumption of matter and energy.

In laymen’s language this translates into ‘doing more with less’. Doing more with less however has to be balanced with maximizing human satisfaction with the less of matter and energy that is being consumed in the process. Unless the satisfaction of people is achieved, sustainability would run into a dead end. People and users will not accept changes necessary to make the world a better place to live in unless they are satisfied by the results of those measures. Ensuring the satisfaction of people therefore becomes an integral part of sustainability.

A part that is closely connected with economics as, in our economy-driven society, people are satisfied only when there is assurance that their economic interests will not only be safeguarded but also enhanced appreciably. Minimization of costs, maximization of comfort and safety and edification of the human spirit should be the ideal objectives in the process of selection of construction materials (Day, 1990). It all boils down to the sustainability of the human race which in turn makes it essential to ensure the sustainability and preservation of the ecosystem.

The sustainability of the ecosystem is ensured when emphasis is put on maintaining biodiversity, species habitat is left undisturbed and environmental deterioration and pollution are brought under control. The design objective of any DSS for selection of construction materials on the basis of sustainability will thus have to make these three global presumptions – less consumption of energy and matter, high human satisfaction and minimal negative effect on the environment.

A set of metrics of sustainability based on the definition of sustainability has to be developed for the construction materials. The metrics would then have to be adapted into an approach for comparing alternative materials to help in the selection process. Classification of Sustainability Attributes The next step in designing a Decision Support System for sustainable selection of construction materials would be take the attributes of sustainability and develop a system or taxonomy for classifying them into the categories of technology, ecology, economics and ethics.

Since technology is utilized to build construction facilities, it is imperative that sustainable technologies are applied. Carpenter (1994) defines sustainable technologies as technologies that do not harm the environment in any way and are based on the concept of renewing, reusing and recycling materials. Materials have to contribute to sustainability by building up suitable technologies. For a specific use, the measure of a material’s adaptability to sustainable technology is obtained by the extent to which the material is able to meet the required technical performance.

Span, reliability, ability to recycle and resistance to decay and damage are other technology-related indicators. Ecological sustainability can be achieved through material selection if the objective of material selection is to minimize environmental damage and degradation over the entire lifecycle of the material right from the stage in which the raw material is extracted to the final stage of either disposing the material or adopting it for reuse through the process of recycling.

Of particular importance in the consideration of sustainability is the way the material will affect the ecology. The domain of all human activities comprises the natural ecological systems which provide all the raw materials to meet the varied requirements of human beings (Norton 1994). Thus, integrity of the systems has to be maintained in order to ensure the continues availability of raw materials in the form of ecological resources. The search of feasible alternatives for limited natural resources leads us to the realm of economic sustainability.

Alternative resources that can be developed at minimal cost to the society have to be maintained and identified by the Decision Support System. The total life cycle cost of a project depends on the life cycle costs of the constituent construction materials. Selection of construction materials based on the lowest life cycle cost ultimately brings down the life cycle cost of the entire construction project. Manufacturing, transportation, assembly, maintenance and disposal or recycling costs determine the lifecycle cost of a construction material.

These lifecycle costs in turn determine the economic sustainability of a construction material. The moot point of sustainability is adopting a futuristic view. The concern is not only with meeting the needs of the present generation but at the same time ensuring that resource utilization is done in such a way that it is possible to retain, invest and convert them in such a way that there is no scarcity to meet the requirements of the future generations (Daly & Cobb 1994). This is the principle behind the ethics of sustainability.

The attributes of ethical sustainability are the extent of depletion of natural resources that utilization of the material could represent, extent to use the material can be reused and to which nonrenewable resources the material can be used as a substitute (Norton, 1994). The Decision Support System therefore has to base its classification of sustainability attributes on the taxonomy of technology utilized, maintenance of ecological balance, economic feasibility and ethical concerns for the future of human kind.

The vast scope and complexity of such a DSS can be appreciated when we take all these factors into consideration. Determining the Indicators of Sustainability The DSS for construction materials selection has to consider indicators of sustainability of construction materials with respect to the three global objectives of sustainable development – resource consumption, human satisfaction and environmental impact. The more exhaustive the list of indicators, the more the DSS will tend towards perfection.

Indicators could be as varied and wide ranging as the scale on which the harvesting is done, whether infrastructure for harvesting is available, how accessible the raw materials are, the extent of processing the material has to be out through, how renewable the materials, maintainability, toxicity, market pricing of comparable resources, etc. Each indicator has to be correlated with the sustainability of the material, and the correlation determined through sensitivity analysis and indexed and rated so that comparison of the materials is possible to the minutest details.

Selection of indicators of sustainability of the materials therefore assumes great importance in any DSS. Database or knowledge base development in this respect has to systematic and incremental throughout the development cycle. Consideration of the context of use also holds equal importance in the determination of sustainability of any construction material. Contextual indicators could be as apparent as the availability and use of ice blocks in the poles and sand in the deserts. But these indicators could also be user specific, condition specific or site characteristic specific.

Context modifiers therefore have to be built into any DSS. It is the context modifiers that make the sustainability ratings of construction materials for each project unique. Decision makers set threshold values in heuristics databases which enable them to specify the values that they want to be calculated. Edwards et al. (1994) and Greene (1994) give examples of techniques in transportation systems in which the energy required to transport a particular material from one place to another for various modes of transport can be calculated for different modes or types of transport. Materials Selection adopting the Rational Actor Approach

The Rational Actor Approach is centered on the principal assumption that if human decision makers are provided with complete information on the possible results and options in the choices that they have to make, they would choose the optimal alternative, or the option with the maximum possibility of turning out to be the outcome that is most wanted or desired. This being true, the goal of the DSS is to enable the decision maker to select construction materials as per their sustainability so that the vast majority of the materials selected for construction are sustainable materials.

The rational actor model has three phases (Simon, 1983): Phase 1: Determining all choices that are possible. Phase 2: Analyzing every choice for the consequences that it they may lead to. Phase 3: Finally choosing an alternative that is rated as the best based on considerations of utility and the most probable consequence or output.. In the DSS, the Rational Actor Model can be further fine tuned by the adoption of a few modifications. First, the material alternatives that are obviously not suitable for the project element could be pruned off the database based on classification of materials according to some given standards.

The software will therefore prune materials such as ceramic tiles when considering the construction of a foundation footing column. This eliminates the possibility of users ignoring feasible but unfamiliar materials. A second modification could be the introduction of user weightings for each sustainability attribute. The weightings are a way of personalizing or customizing the system. Input of the weightings accord the methodology adopted in the system higher acceptability for the user who provides the weightings. The weightings also enable customization of the sustainability of the final design product.

(Pearce, et. al. , 2001). The ordered stages of the methodology adopted with modifications can now be defined for the Decision Support System. In its first step, the methodology generates the alternatives that would be available for making the selection. This is a comprehensive set of alternatives that could include all the materials available in the market. In its second stage, the clearly infeasible alternatives are pruned from the list of available alternatives through the application of some technical performance thresholds or other heuristics.

This would result in a set of alternations that are all feasible for the application under consideration. The crucial third step consists of the Decision Support System ranking the alternatives based on the sustainability and utility of the material for the use that it is intended for. At this juncture, the decision maker feeds in his weights for each attribute of sustainability as per the priority that particular attribute holds for the decision maker.

Manufacturer information and other sources determine the values for the sustainability attributes of each material, and a normalized value is worked out for each value of the attributes. The weights and normalized values for the sustainability attributes of each material are then multiplied and added together to produce the index of subjective utility for that material. A ranking of the alternatives is developed by sorting their utility values. The Decision Support System then outputs the alternative with the highest utility value to the user.

The decision maker is at liberty to choose the highest ranked alternative for the particular application or any other alternative as he or she may deem suitable from the point of view of cognitive abilities and professional experience. The DSS then moves on to take up other design elements for consideration. From the Decision Maker’s Point of View From the decision maker’s or user’s point of view, the decision maker has to first feed in a list of the design components that have been conceptualized for the construction.

Values for relevant parameters that describe the conceptual design and the decision making have to be fed in. The DSS uses these values to generate a list of feasible materials for each design element from the materials database of the DSS utilizing heuristics for material selection from the internal logic or knowledge base of the DSS. After the DSS generates a list of feasible materials for each element, it queries the decision maker for the personalized weightings for the sustainability attributes.

The Sustainability Index Calculator calculates the values of the sustainability attributes for each feasible material. An Amalgamator Module of the DSS amalgamates the weightings of the decision maker with the sustainability attribute values for each material that could be utilized and sorts the materials according to their individual rankings. The DSS recommends the material with the highest rating to the decision maker who is free to either accept the recommendation of the Decision Support System or to opt for an alternative from the list of alternatives provided by the DSS.

Conclusions The Decision Support System for the selection of construction materials on the basis of sustainability therefore analyzes the feasible materials for each element of a construction from a wide range of perspectives. The factors that influence the ultimate output of the Decision Support System incorporate the technologies and economies of construction processes, the characteristics of the applicable materials, ecological and environmental concerns, sustainability aspects, and most important of all, the professional and personal preferences of the user or the decision maker.

Each of these factors by themselves could constitute individual expert systems. The complexity and sophistication of such decision support systems can thus be appreciated along with their great utility in helping decision makers to make crucial decisions. References -01 Carpenter, S. , 1994, Sustainable Communities. School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta. Daly, H. , E. , and Cobb, J. , B. , Jr. , 1994, For the Common Good, 2nd ed. Beacon Press, Boston.

Day, C. , 1990, Places of the Soul. Aquarian Press, San Francisco, CA. Druzdzel, Marek, J. , & Flynn, Roger, R. , 2002, Decision Support Systems, Decision Systems Laboratory, School of Information Sciences and Intelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh. Edwards, P. ,J. , Stewart, P. ,J, Eilenberg, I. , M. , and Anton, S. , 1994, Evaluating Embodied Energy Impacts in Buildings: Some Research Outcomes and Issues, in Kibert, C. , ed. Sustainable Construction. CIB TG 16, Tampa, FL, Nov. 6-9, pp. 173-182. Greene, D. , L. , 1994, Transportation and Energy, Transportation Quarterly, v. 48, n. 1, Norton, B, G. , 1994, Sustainability: Two Competing Paradigms.

Texas A&M Conference. School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta. Pearce, Annie, R. , Hastak, M. , Vanegas, Jorge, A. , 2001, A Decision Support System for Construction Materials Selection using Sustainability as a Criterion, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.

Rees, W. , E. , 1990, The Ecology of Sustainable Development, The Ecologist, v. 20, n. 1. Roberts, D. V. , 1994, Sustainable Development – A Challenge for the Engineering Profession, in Ellis, M. , D. , ed. The Role of Engineering in Sustainable Development. American Association of Engineering Societies, Washington, DC. Sage, Andrew, P. , 1991, Decision Support Systems Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , New York. WCED – United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. ,1987, Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Introduction

The problem of water every year is becoming increasingly important, forcing scholars and political scientists talk about the inevitability of future conflicts over ownership of this strategic resource. Indeed, the population in the Middle East and Africa is growing at a rapid pace, and the sources of the water almost as quickly exhausted. Arid climate, uncontrolled population growth and other factors make water a truly “transparent gold» XXI century. Stocks worldwide oceanic and continental waters are 1.5 billion cubic kilometers; they are extremely high salt content and are not suitable for drinking. The share of fresh water in the world’s total water is 2.53% or 31-35 million cubic kilometers. But those waters enclosed by the glaciers, which are in the form of air and soil moisture in the underground seas, are not available for development.

Thus, humankind has conditionally 0.3% or 93.0 thousand cubic kilometers fresh water, which could be used for industrial and economic goals. (USGS, 2011) According to figures published in August 2004 in a joint report by the World Health Organization and UNICEF more than one billion people still use unsafe sources of drinking water. Those most at risk are developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa area. African Bank experts estimate that for a radical improvement of rural water supply for the people of Africa to 2015 need to find at least $ 10 billion. In this case, 80 percent of Africans will be able to enjoy clean water, while continuing to be as massive investment in 2025 to normal water around the black continent.

As pointed out by the International Water Management Institute, to solve the problem of water, it is needed to take urgent measures. In particular, to build reservoirs, use the rainwater harvesting, etc. The most acute problem of water shortage is for Africa and Asia as an arid regions and the purpose of this essay to provide and compare two possible way of solution such as desalination and recycling.

Background

“Globally, water consumption over the past 100 years has increased by six times and will double again by 2050. Some countries have already run out of water and cannot produce food. The consequence will be even more widespread water shortages and soaring prices for this resource “, – said the director of the International Water Management Institute Frank Rijsberman. (APEC Water, 2011)

Population

(FAO Water, 2012)

In the twentieth century the world’s population has tripled. During this period, the consumption of fresh water has increased in 7 times, including at the municipal water needs in13 times. With this rise in consumption become the lack of water resources in many regions of the world. According to the World Health Organization, more than two billion people in the world today suffer from a shortage of drinking water. In the next 20 years, given the current trends of population growth and the world economy is expected to increase demand for fresh water for at least 100 cubic kilometers per year.

Water sources

(IMSD, 2012)

The 97% of water in our planet is saline water, the other 3% is fresh water. The surface water resource consists of ground water (30.1%), icecaps and glaciers (68.7%), and others (0.9%), such as water vapor and clouds. The biggest part of water that is used is found in lakes (87%), swamps (11%) and rivers (2%). Unfortunately, water problem in Asia and Africa are closely related to another equally important problem as food. Arab countries annually spend $ 50 billion just for agricultural irrigation. As the Minister of Egypt Water Resources Mahmud Abu Zeid said by 2025 90% of the Arab countries would fall below the “poverty of water resources.” To prevent this, need for a unified Arab strategy of water use. (5th World Water Forum Secretariat, 2009)

Options of solutions

In the oil-rich Arab countries went through the right, but expensive, deciding to allocate billions of dollars annually for the desalination of sea water. By some estimates, the Arabian country’s now use about 70% of desalinate water.( NRC, 2010) However, the governments of most countries in Asia and Africa, such costs obviously can afford. Another way to save water is recycling. For example, for many years in Singapore does not throw waste water into rivers and the sea. All dirty water is recycled and cleared. Singaporeans are not only purifying sewage water. They desalinate sea water and collect rainwater.

Desalination

The UN agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the National Organization of more than 15 countries are engaged in desalination of ocean and sea water. This allows the most efficient way to absorb the wealth of the ocean water. Desalination of salt water is perspective because a large numbers of arid areas adjacent to ocean coast, or are close to it. Thus, ocean and sea water are raw materials for industrial use. Nowadays exist about 30 ways to of desalination of sea water. All methods of turning salt water into fresh water require more energy.

In general, the share of electricity accounts for about half of the cost of desalination, the other half goes to the maintenance and depreciation of equipment. So, the cost of desalinated water depends mainly on the cost of electricity. (FWR, 2011) However, where is a lack of fresh water and exist the conditions for the desalination the cost factor recedes into the background. In some areas desalination is environmentally advantageous than bringing water from far away. Desalination of salt water is developing quite rapidly. As a result, every two or three years, the total capacity of installations doubled.

Recycling

Cleaning and recycling of industrial water is a key point in the cycle of water supply and sanitation. Standard cleaning contaminated industrial water will significantly improve the quality of water before re-use and avoid inappropriate use of potable water and a costly drain collection system in municipal wastewater. (Anglogold Ashanti, 2010) A problem that can be found this denial by people using of purified sewage water as the main source, but in the world there are countries which do not enjoy much of a choice.

The only salvation for those countries is recycling water plants. In the case of the location on the coast, desalination is the option but if the sea is far and the country cannot afford the costs of desalination the recycling sewage plants is the good choice. Water passes membrane cleaning and disinfected with ultraviolet light: it is sufficient for industrial use. That portion of the water that goes into the water, further purified and mixed with water reserves in reservoirs, which are filtered and supplied to the taps.

For instance, in Egypt they have Nile River and use its water but dirty water is drained from the waste back into the Nile. (Ecopreneur, 2011) This kind of water cannot substitute drinking water but will significantly reduce the cost of transportation of drinking water and provide an opportunity for the use of recycled water in industry and agriculture for arid regions.

Conclusion

Nowadays Asia, the Middle East and the most part of Africa has unstable supply of fresh water. Over the past forty years, the number of fresh water at the rate per person decreased by almost 60%. The main consumer of water is agriculture. Nowadays this sector accounts for over 85% of all available fresh water. Needs are increasing and the amount of water decreases. Today, almost 2 billion of people in more than 80 countries have a limited supply of drinking water. By 2025 nearly 50 countries with a total population of 3 billion people will face water shortages. (World Bank, 2007)

Even with the abundance of rain that falls in China, a country half the population is not provided properly with drinking water in the regular mode. In such an acute shortage of fresh water is becoming especially popular desalination and water recycling as an alternative way to recharge. For the health and tone, people need clean and fresh water. Crude raw water is the cause of many human diseases, so people should not drink it. Water treatment is one of the most promising solutions to meet the needs of the population in the drinking water because groundwater resources are reduced, and rivers and lakes are on the verge of its existence.

The ability of countries to solve problems related to climate change, and the issue of water, in particular, like many in the Middle East, is directly dependent on the will and determination of the political leadership of the region. (STS, 2012) Once, the King Hussein of Jordan argued that “the only question that Jordan would plunge into a war – is water.” The same opinion is shared by the former UN General Secretary, Boutros Ghali, the Egyptian, stated that “the next war in the Middle East will be over water.”

AVON COMPANY

Avon company is based in united states of America and sells their product globally. It was founded by David H. McConnell and has worked for over 120 years .The Avon main principle is to meet fully obligation of corporate citizen by contributing well being of society and the environment in which it function  .The company has rules to operate for its well function which include to make  families throughout the world with product of the highest quality backed by a guarantee of satisfaction, to render a service to customers that is outstanding in its helpfulness and courtesy, give full a service to customers that is outstanding in its helpfulness and courtesy, share with  others the rewards of growth and success of the company, meet full the obligations of corporate citizenship by contributing to the well-being of society and the environment in which it  operate.

The company deals with beautification products such as lipsticks, fragrances and anti-aging skincare. The has very strong vision statement  which states aims at being the best company that best understands and satisfies the product, service and self-fulfillment needs of women – globally. Its mission is to build a unique portfolio of Beauty and related brands, striving to outsmart their competitors in quality, innovation and value, and elevating their image to become the beauty company most women turn to worldwide.

The Avon company work extra hard to be become the destination store for women, offering the convenience of multiple brands and channels, and providing a personal high touch shopping experience that helps create lifelong customer relationships. The company has embarked on direct selling and reinvention of the channel, offering a business opportunity that delivers high earnings, recognition, service and support, making it easy and rewarding to be associated with this company thus improving its image. The company desire to be a global champion for the health and well-being of women through humanitarian efforts that eliminate breast cancer from the face of the earth, and that empower women economically.  The company participates in environmental conservation through its police which requires:

That  the company Conduct its operations in a manner that demonstrates its  respect for the environment through the efficient use of natural resources, waste minimization, reuse and recycling practices;
That it meets or exceed all environmental laws and regulations of the countries and communities in which  it operates;
That it continues to develop processes, practices and procedures that improve the environmental quality of  its operations and  its products across their life cycle, from initial design to ultimate disposal;
Finally to continuously improve its environmental management system and measure progress towards environmental goals.

     Avon does not conduct animal testing on any of its products or raw ingredients and does not require that suppliers of raw ingredients and finished products produced for Avon conduct animal testing on its behalf. Since it desires to continue in its leadership role to support the development and validation of new alternatives to animal testing it is in partnership with other cosmetic companies in efforts organized by the European cosmetic industry trade association (COLIPA) to identify and develop new alternatives.

The company also works hard to give the shareholder of the company high yield by tirelessly pursuing new growth opportunities while continually improving profitability, a socially responsible, ethical company that is watched and emulated as benchmark in the industry it is committed to selling only safe products, using only safe ingredients in its cosmetics products and complying with applicable regulations in every county in which Avon products are sold. The company closely monitors all existing, new and proposed regulations governing the sale of its products throughout the world to ensure that it is fully informed and in compliance with the law. It adheres fully to all regulations governing the sale of all its products in each country where it does business. Although regulatory requirements may differ around the world, Avon has a single, global product safety standard, irrespective of the country in which products are sold. Avon has continued to revolutionize the beauty industry by launching innovative, first-to-market products using Avon-patented technology. In addition, its growth vision includes expanding into new geographies, bringing its high-quality products and personalized service to more and more women.

Avon has been consistently recognized as one of the most admired companies and one of the best companies to work for, with a highly diverse global workforce of nearly 40,000 employees. These employees include sales representatives whose duties are to conduct door to door sales of the company’s products. The company has CEO who coordinates its business across different countries besides motivating the sales representatives. The company gives opportunity to and earning to new markets (developing-market) sales representatives. That differentiates it from other great manufacturers of mass beauty products. In addition to great branded products for good value, first and foremost   it offers women in those markets the opportunity to be economically independent and run their own businesses. In many ways it is the largest micro-lender because it front its sales representatives their first order and that “mini loan” is paid back after they sell their first order. That gets women into business for the first time. A diverse supplier base provides economic and social vitality to the communities in which we live and work.  The company use Supplier Diversity Program this helps the company to reinforce it commitment that it should mirror the image of those who buy its products with those who provide goods and services to make its products. The supplier diversity team supports the initiatives of the corporation’s Women and Minority Business Enterprise spending goals throughout all of Avon’s North American business locations, which include Atlanta, California, Canada, Delaware, Illinois, New York and Puerto Rico.

 The company has potential suppliers who add value, on a competitive basis, to the procurement of the materials to make the products it provides and to creatively enhance the services in its supplier diversity database.  The company operates in more than 60 countries and its products  are sold in over 100, Avon  company its  responsibility  is to ensure that its business practices are environmentally sound and that its products are safe and effective for their intended purpose.

In conclusion the company seem to successful for number of reasons it has enough employee who will cover the whole market as they are distributed to the region they it is selling its product, also it easy empowering women with no income through mini loan which are paid back late, it has a big market for their product which are sold globally, also it has social responsibly for society it is selling its product.

Reference

1) http://avoncompany.com.

2) By Ellen Byron The Wall Street Journal