How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development
within Companies
Amer Ezoji and Nada Matta
ICD/ TECH-CICO, University of Technology of Troyes,12 Rue Marie Curie, Troyes, France
Keywords: Sustainability, Territorial Knowledge, Industrial Organization, Ontology.
Abstract: Nowadays sustainability is issued to industries in order to integrate it into their activities for sustainable
development. Studying of territorial resources impact on industrial activities and decision makers’
information when considering sustainability. The aim is to enhance the knowledge of actors in the industries
in relation to territorial resource through sustainable objective. Moreover, considering how this knowledge
can help to the different level of industry in regard to value creation for human and decision making. This
consideration is done by categorizing of territorial knowledge and linking them with other classes and
industrial organization.
1 INTRODUCTION
Company, industrial ecosystem and territory are
complex system in interaction that are organized to
their own specific goal. Although, this objective is
usually divergent, sustainable development can be
common target for these embedded systems. So, the
companies integrate sustainable issue into their
activities for sustainable development (Zhang et al.,
2013). Sustainable strategy cannot be considered an
independent issue: it should must be integrated into
corporate global development. This integration
needs to support sustainable goals to be in line with
other existing global corporate tendencies and
constraints (Hallstedt et al., 2010). Recently, there is
a shift to integrate territorial resource into product
development process of companies in a sustainable
perspective (Allais et al, 2015). Territory is
introduced as a place, where decisions are made and
where stakeholders gather around common questions
(Nitschel et al., 2016). Ontology is as suitable
method for representation of dispersed knowledge of
tangible and intangible resource of territory in
sustainable perspective of companies (Wijesooriya
et al., 2015). The main challenge for companies is
integrating of territorial resource and sustainable
issue to their activities that its management remain a
great challenge (Zhang et al, 2013, Allais et al,
2015).
Some of literature suggest that one of the
principal issue is capture of knowledge about its
territories for integrating into company activities
toward sustainability (Vadoudi et al., 2017, Allais et
al., 2015). In addition, lack of knowledge about the
territory’s features and their integrity are barriers for
searching a possible concept for sustainability.
This research propose is an ontology based of
territorial knowledge to improve company
sustainable performance at different level through
organizational innovation. It argues on the type of
territorial knowledge that help to the industrial
organization. Then, it argues how this knowledge are
linked together and help to which hierarchical level
of company.
2 SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainability issues affect every component of our
society from individuals to regional and global
organizations: major ecological or social crises are
due to natural resource overconsumption and rising
inequality at both local and global scales.
The growing attention given to sustainable
development is encouraging companies to integrate
sustainable issues into their activities. Sustainable
aspects should be embedded at all corporate from
global strategic decisions by top management,
through planning by tactical management, to daily
Ezoji, A. and Matta, N.
How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development within Companies.
DOI: 10.5220/0006893401110119
In Proceedings of the 10th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2018) - Volume 3: KMIS, pages 111-119
ISBN: 978-989-758-330-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
111

engineering and production activities of the
operational area (Zhang et al., 2013). To do so, the
company needs to carefully and reasonably break
down “sustainability” into several actions or
attributes to help its comprehension (Hallstedt et al.,
2010). For this reason, in our work an anthropic
definition of sustainability with 5 dimensions has
been adapted (Figuiere and Rocca, 2008).
Sustainability objectives focus on the human
development (social sphere). The environment is
considered as the limiting factor for anthropic
activity (ecological sphere). The economic sphere is
considered as means which enable the realization of
social objective with respect to ecological
boundaries. The political sphere is considered as the
place for public debate and long-term societal
orientation and decision making; i.e. the
coordination of sustainable industrial organization
and expectations from civil society. The territorial
dimension should be taken into account, adapting
global policy to local specificities to develop
appropriate solutions. So, organizational capability
in the companies which can be used to support the
system innovation toward five dimensions of
sustainability (Allais et al., 2017).
Territory is considered as value creation
network, where all of intangible and tangible
resources flow. Consequently, territorial integration
required organizational innovation into company
activities (Allais et al., 2015). A territory is an
evolving and complex combination of a set of actors
in which human activities occur and the
geographical space that these actors use, landscape
and manage (Moine, 2006).
Thus, it can be concluded that territory consist all
of intangible and tangible dimension of
sustainability to help the organizational capability in
the company to create the value for the human.
3 PLACE OF TERRITORY IN
SUSTAINABILITY
Allais et al. encourages companies to integrate
territorial resources into the product development
process to create value for both the company and its
territory in a sustainable perspective (Allais et al.,
2015). Moreover, this research assists industrial
companies to both explore the use of latent resources
from their territory and to their responsibility facing
their stakeholders in a sustainable perspective. Better
circulation between the different organizational
functions in company, improve the integration of
sustainable issues (Zhang et al., 2013) and studying
a product’s environmental impact on an interacted
territory’s environmental statues can increase
decision maker’s information when considering
design for sustainability (Vadoudi et al., 2017).
Thus, it is needed to organize the territorial
knowledge for sustainability in the company. We
proposed to represent this knowledge by using of
ontologies. Ontology enables to meet the purpose of
sharing knowledge relating to defined terms and
concepts (Lin et al., 2013).In addition, previous
works don’t consider which type of territorial
knowledge affect on the industrial organization in a
sustainable perspective and how they can affect.
The aim of this research is help to the industrial
organization in order to increasing of their
knowledge about their territorial resource to
integrate this knowledge to their activities for
sustainability and especially, the effect on the
decision making of the industrial organization to
create the value for human regard to existing
territorial knowledge.
4 TERRITORIAL KNOWLEDGE
ONTOLOGY
It is needed to define the notion of the intangible and
tangible resource of territory as territorial
knowledge. The territorial dimension should be
taken into account, adapting global policy to local
specificities to develop appropriate solution for the
industry (Moine, 2006). We focus on ontology as
suitable method for representation of dispersed
knowledge of territory because ontology make
domain assumptions explicit and analyze the domain
knowledge (Wijesooriya et al., 2015). Territorial
knowledge ontology is approach to manage
knowledge and facilitate the consideration of the
complex relation among different type of territorial
knowledge to help industrial organizations in
decision making toward sustainability.
In order to describing territorial knowledge
ontology, it is need to justify the cluster of this
knowledge. Human capital is valued as key value
provider by integrating of individual, social and
organizational capital (Gobert et al., 2016).
Organizational capital within company ensure the
efficient use of resources. Individual and social
group identify the interaction with their environment
within a geographical system (Barreteau et al.,
2016). Human activities occur in the geographical
system that is managed by stakeholders (Nitschelm
KMIS 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing
112

et al., 2016) and infrastructural capital in
geographical system use for specific projects and
facilities to improve the productivity (Gobert et al.,
2016). The management of geographical capital is
done by political entity (Barreteau et al., 2016).
Moreover, economical capital creates the value for
human and industry through the product for human
consumption and provide resource for industrial
activity (Nitschel at al, 2016).
Thus from this literature, four main clusters are
identified for territorial knowledge ontology: human
capital, geographical sphere, economic sphere,
political sphere. Figure 1 represents the territorial
knowledge, as tree flowchart, which consist 5
dimensions of sustainability.
Figure 1: Tangible and intangible resource of territory, as
territorial knowledge.
4.1 Relationship between Territorial
Knowledge
There is the mutual relationship between
categorization of territorial knowledge and their
subset. Figure 2 show this mutual relationship as
graph flowchart to demonstrate how four level of
territorial knowledge are connected together for
objective of sustainability.
Figure 2: mutual relation between different categories of
territorial knowledge.
5 IMAPCT OF TERRITORIAL
KOWLEDG ON THE
INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION
Aim of this section is consideration the type of
territorial knowledge and how this knowledge assist
industrial organization in a sustainable perspective.
Thus, at first, role and levels of industrial
organization in companies will be considered. Then,
the effect of territorial knowledge and their subsets
will be analyzed.
5.1 Industrial Organization
Industrial companies should have the knowledge
about their territories features to embed this
knowledge at all company’s hierarchical levels for
sustainable objective, from global strategic
decisions, tactical management, to daily engineering
and production activities of the operational area
(Hallstedt et al., 2010). Strategic level assists “top
managers” who define the corporate strategic goals
that will create multi-values for all stakeholders.
At
tactical level, a global approach is necessary to
identify a sustainable trajectory depending on the
strategic objective and the complex and dynamic
changeable corporate context. The operational level
supports deployment of the process in the company
in accordance with the tactics chosen (Zhang et al.,
2013).
5.2 Analysis of the Economic Capital
Types to Help the Industrial
Organization
Economic sphere is considered as a mans which
enable the realization of human objective to create
the value. More over, market, client satisfaction and
finance are the main territorial knowledge in this
cluster which help the industrial organization
(Gobert et al., 2016, Nitschelm et al., 2016, Allais et
al., 2013). Value management support the
integration of sustainable development. Value is
defined as the relationship between the satisfaction
of the need and the resources used to achieve this
satisfaction (Habib et al., 2011).
The value is created for customers by use of an
artefact and by optimizing production cost and
strategic positioning in the value creation for
company.
The market economy is based on the mass
consumption. The value for the clients is created by
the possession of an identifiable and rewarding
object (brand, etc.). the value for the company is
created by the reduction of production costs, the
desirability of products.
The service economy aims to create value by
adding service to products. value for the client is
created by the multiplicity of service associated with
an inexpensive good and for the company is created
by maintenance of production cost at the lowest
(Allais, 2015).
Ter r itor ial knowledge
Po
l
i
t
i
c
Geography
Hu
m
a
n
ca
p
i
t
a
l
Eco
n
o
m
y
Human
ca pi ta l
Culture
Organization
I nfrastr ucture
Economic
Eco-spher e
Intellectual
ca pi ta l
pol i ti c
influence
foster
Effe ct
foster
cover
use
influence
How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development within Companies
113

Table 1: economic elements link to the industrial organization.
Elements How link to the industrial
organization
Link to other territorial
knowledge
Placed in which level of
industrial organization
Market Optimizing of cost for client
and company
Industrial production system
in infrastructural
Strategy
Service Combination of service with
low cost goods
Logistic in infrastructure Strategy
Production system
optimization
based on mass production Manufacturer and artefact in
infrastructure
Strategy
Functional Satisfaction by pairing of
product/ service
Environmental geography in
Eco- sphere
Strategy
Quaternary response by an array of
products, service
Client satisfaction in economy Strategy
The economy of functionality creates the value
for client by the satisfaction of a level performance
supported by product- service pair (Bourg et, 2005).
The quaternary economy aims to create value for
the clients by customizing the response to his
specific request. The company creates value by
tailoring a panel of products and services that meet
client expectations (Debonneuil, 2007). Also,
Finance are not the source of wealth creation but its
results and generate by operation and investments
(Fustec et al., 2011). These evolutions in economic
models have had profound consequences on the
methods of value creation of the company and its
organization.
Figure 3 shows detail of economic elements, as
territorial knowledge ontology, to create value for
human and companies.
Figure 3: economic capital to create value for human and
companies.
Table 1 show that how these economical
elements link to the industrial organization and other
territorial knowledge. More over, it is identified the
placement of these elements within industrial
organization.
Figure 4 show the relationship of economical
elements together, also with other territorial
knowledge in the other categories for value creation
and sustainable objectives
Figure 4: Graph of relationship between different elements
of economy together and with territorial knowledge.
5.3 Analysis of the Political Capital
Types to Help the Industrial
Organization
The political sphere is the only legitimate arena to
define development guidelines and must find a
prominent place and take precedence over economic
actors. Principle of governance such as capability,
democracy, council and administration in different
scales (local, regional, national and international)
support the industrial organization, as territorial
knowledge, for sustainability in figure 5 (Pecqueur,
2006, Buclet, 2011, Francesconi et al, 2015).
Democracy aims to build a balance between
individual preferences and the common interest in
meeting the challenge of sustainable development in
company. Capability aims to develop the capacity
of organizations/individuals to meet their own
expectation and decision making level.
Figure 5: Political capitals to help to the corporate
governance.
Economic capital
Market
Client
satisfaction
Produc t
system
optimization
Service
for
client
Finance
Economy
of
Functionality
Quaternary
economy
Race
of
innovation
Brand
Ser vi ce
Guanternary
I ndustry
( in frastructure)
I ndustrial
organi zation
st r a t eg y
Market
Value for
human( cli ent)
Client
sat i sfacti on
Support
Effect
on
Create
Array
Impact
Create
influence
Functional ity
Environmental
G eogr aphy
( Eco-sphere)
Create
influence
Create value
P
o
liti
c
al ca
p
ital
Rules
Gov ern an ce
Norms
Forms
Scale
Regulations
Local
Regional
National International
Council
Capability
Democracy
Adminis
t
r
a
t
ion
KMIS 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing
114

Allais et al. show the integration of intangible
capital of territorial knowledge, such as human
(stakeholders) and ecological aspects into strategic
decision process of industrial organization at local
scale. Strategic governance concerns decisions help
to top managers and giving the value to the
initiatives at the strategic level that come from
operational level (Allais et al., 2017).
Figure 6: Graph of relationship between different elements
of politic together and with territorial knowledge.
5.4 Analysis of the Human Capital
Types to Help the Industrial
Organization
Human capital is defined as ability to innovate,
individual skills, creativity, experience, ability to
work in team, motivation, learning ability and
organization, etc. (Francesconi et al., 2015). These
elements give a prominent place to the company’s
organization with focus on the forward looking
management of human capital (Allais, 2015).
Individual, social and organization are the main
territorial knowledge of human capital which help
the industrial organization.
Intellectual capital (IC) as a cluster of Individual,
is used to create and use knowledge to enhance the
industrial value. This knowledge founded in the
organization that add value to the products/ services
through the application of intelligence (Jordao et al.,
2017). IC links to the knowledge management in the
organization of company though the knowledge,
competencies to improve the organization process
and ability to innovate. Increasing the body of
knowledge relating to the links between value-
creating processes inside the business (e.g. HR,
logistics) help to the industry and increase the
knowledge of decision makers (Allais et al., 2013).
Also, Innovation as a skill of intellectual capital not
sufficiently valued in the strategic level because
don’t inform the strategic decision making that must
be taken into account through knowledge
management and governance in company (Allais et
al., 2017, Jordao et al., 2017). Individual and groups
as a stakeholder can affect or affected by
organization and it is need to them in different
hierarchical level and their expectation should take
into account in decision making (Zhang et al., 2013).
Identification of the organizational filed should
be taken into account to create the commitment to
the desired change for sustainability. Sharing of
value for customers is created by the network that
support the design activity (e.g. local sourcing,
identity-related aspects of the product/service)
(Allais et al., 2015). Creating of multi-value for
stakeholders analyze by management of corporate
human resource and knowledge to help to the
strategic goals (Zhan et al., 2013). In addition,
Exchange of information between actors of networks
is necessary for communicating with internal and
external actors to optimize the circulation of
decision and data flow in the different level of
industry. Industrial organization has emphasized that
when decision making and information are not
equally shared, different activities become
unbalanced in company and stop allocating and
distributing resources efficiently (Rio et al, 2013).
Geographical information system(GIS) which can
help product designers to analysis the environmental
impacts before and after design, which change
design characteristics and product specifications
based on the environmental status of each geography
(vadoudi et al., 2017). Moreover, co-ordination of
actors improves territorial cohesion at different
levels and support the different structure of
territorial knowledge ontology (Toth et al, 2015).
Details of human capital knowledge in territory can
be seen in figure 7 as tree flowchart.
Figure 7: Human capitals, consists of social and individual
elements.
Table 2 show that how the elements of human
capitals link to the industrial organization, other
territorial knowledge and help to level of industrial
organization. Elements of human capital link
together and effect on the other territorial knowledge
which this relationship is showed in figure 8.
Value
cr ea ti o n
factors
Communication
( Organization)
Coordi nation
of politic and
compa ny
K nowledge of
deci sion makers
G o v er na nce
Effect on
Facilitate
Must be
adapted
Organizational
proxi mity
Sta kehol ders
( Human capital)
Create
Improve
Exaptation of
sta kehol der s
Hel p
Effect on
I nnovation
( H uman Capital)
Human
c
apital
Individual
Social
behavior
Group
Actors
network
culture
Intellectual
capital
learning knowledge innovation skills
organization
Value
Sha ring
management
communication
cordination
Information
system
Knowledge
Sharing network
GIS
we bsite
Knowledge
mana gement
Human
resource
How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development within Companies
115

Table 2: Main human capital’s elements link to the industrial organization.
Elements How link to the industrial
organization
Link to other territorial knowledge Placed in which level of
industrial organization
Intellectual capital knowledge & skills to add value
to product/ service
Knowledge management, economic,
environmental capital
Strategy, tactic , operation
innovation Give the value by linking of
operation and strategy
Governance and knowledge
management
Strategy, operation
Culture and behavior Cultural and behavior impact on
decision making
Individual , group, and product
innovation
Strategy, tactic , operation
Information exchange Communication between actors
of network to share decision ,
GIS
Environmental capital, governance,
market, product
Strategy, tactic , operation
Coordination Actors coordination, Structure’s
support: market
Product, knowledge sharing in
organization
Strategy, tactic
Figure 8: Graph of relationship between elements of
human capital together and with territorial knowledge.
5.5 Analysis of the Geographical
Capital Types to Help the
Industrial Organization
Geographical system is considered as action
perimeter and is the based system including physical
features of the earth, atmosphere, resource,
infrastructure and socio-ecological activities
(Dahlman et al., 2015). It can be compartmentalized
into geographical resource, industrial and
anthropized ecosystem and human capital.
Eco-sphere refers to the human- environmental
systems. Infrastructures act as fundamental facilities
to improve the productivity of existing resources.
Environmental geography is the interaction of
humanity and environment
and define as space for
the circulation flow (Cerceau et al., 2018).
Moreover, Industrial and territorial ecology is
strategy of natural resource management and
planning to create the economical, social and
environmental value for stakeholders of a geography
toward sustainability. So in this regard, coordination
between actors can help to the implementation of
this synergy (Buclet, 2011). Natural resource as
main element of a geography, is used to describe all
of input flow from eco-sphere that enter to the
techno-sphere (Zhang et al., 2015). Techno-sphere
refers to global technology system integrating all
human activities (Vadoudi et al., 2017).
Substance flow is a key factor to assess the
resource consumption and environmental impacts.
Moreover, substance flow can flow within the
techno-sphere, and between techno-sphere and eco-
sphere and their environmental impact should be
taken into account by in three level of industrial
organization through product life cycle in
geographical system. Elementary flows, product
flows and waste flows as sub parts of substance
flows have the environmental impact within eco-
sphere and techno- sphere (Zhang et al, 2015).
Technology as one of sub classes of infrastructure
that increase the productivity and great flexibility
with supplier and customers that environmental
impact of product can be abstracted as four types:
production phase, transport phase, use phase and
disposal phase by human or industry (Zhang et al,
2015). Sub classes of geographical capital is showed
in figure 9 as tree flowchart.
Figure 9: Classes of geographical capital as territorial
knowledge.
I nnovation
Communication
Envir onmental
Geography
Knowledge
I n tel lect ual
Share
in
Has
organization
Actors Network
Create
Us e & create
Use
Effect on
Market
( Economy)
Product/ ser vice
Ad d value
learning
Hel p
Stake holders
(indi vidual &
gr oup)
skills
Governance
(politic)
Hel p
Val u ed by
Hel p Hel p
geographical
c
apital
Eco -s ph ere
infrastructure
logistic
transport
Technology
Natural resource
Environmental Geography
Human activities
Consequences
Flow
circulation
Substanc e flow
Elementary
Flow
Product
flow
Waste
Flow
process
Energy
Product
Material
product
assembly
Resource
Emission
Convert
New
product
industry
product
supplier manufacturer
KMIS 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing
116

Table 3: Main geographical capital’s elements link to the industrial organization.
Elements
How link to the industrial
organization
Link to other territorial
knowledge
Placed in which level of
industrial organization
Substance flow
Environmental aspect by
extracting of substance and
produced substance
Human activity of social,
transport, production in techno-
sphere and eco-sphere
Strategy, tactic ,
operation
Resource flow
Input flow from natural
resource that enter to industry
Supplier in geography, production
in industry, GIS
Strategy
Product flow
Valuable substances produced
from a process
Natural resource, technology,
political capital
Strategy, tactic ,
operation
Human activates
Reduce the environmental
impacts on ecosystems by
Industrial ecology
Environmental capital,
governance, economy, technology
for producing from wastes,
culture in, coordination of actors
Strategy, tactic ,
operation
It can be summarized from geographical capital
that they are considered from environmental
perspective and from this aspect can help to other
territorial knowledge ontology for improving of
sustainability in company. This consideration is
showed in figure 10. Link between elements of
geographical capital with industrial organization,
other territorial knowledge is showed in table 3.
Figure 10: Graph of relationship between elements of
human capital together and with territorial knowledge.
6 RELATED WORKS
Some of work define ontology for the sustainability
according to territorial resources. Zhang et al. define
ontology- semantic representation of product life
cycle to organize the concept of process and flow of
substance (Zhang et al., 2015). Cerceau et al.,
demonstrated the resource management by the
territorial context through industrial ecology
(Cerceau et al., 2018). Lin et al, illustrated an
ontology based process-oriented to support the
product development with knowledge sharing to
help organizations, suppliers and customers (Lin et
al., 2013). This ontology represents concepts related
to development stage of product and it missed the
considering of human and geographical capital.
Another research proposes sustainability knowledge
improvement on multi-dimensional views to
environmental management by focusing on
sustainability (Wijesooriya et al., 2015).
It can be concluded that all of aspects of
sustainability concepts represented in these works
are difficult to be applied to help industries. Some of
them only consider the environmental perspective
and other consider economical with some aspects of
social. In the research of Wijesooriya et al.,
individual, group and organization are used to reflect
social ontological dependencies and there is not any
consideration about political concept. Enhancing the
knowledge of territorialization process in industrial
ecology by identifying of local stakeholders is
considered by Cerceau et al. In this ontology, the
geographical capital is to be taken into account and
there is missing about the social, political and
economical concepts. A model proposed by Vadoudi
et al. to integrate geographical data with product
related throughout substance flows over whole life
cycle (Vadoudi et al., 2017) and there is lack of
human capital and economic and political concepts.
In our territorial knowledge ontology for
sustainability is tried to present a comprehensive
taxonomy of territorial knowledge which can help
industrial organization in order to value creation and
decision making. It is introduced an intention of
ontology that enables the description of successful
sustainable dimensions and includes necessary
relationships. Difference of our ontology is that this
territorial knowledge ontology manages and
facilitate the consideration of the complex relation
among different type of territorial knowledge to help
industrial organizations in decision making, value
creation for human and company.
Governance
Eco- sphere
Substance
flow
Pr oduct phase
T echno spher e
( I ndustr y &
technology)
Share
in
Use
infrastructure
ener gy
Has
Help
Natural
resour ce
GI S
( O r g a ni za ti on)
Effect
Waste
Waste
Pr oduct
Material
Come
from
Ent er to
Has
Effect on
Come from
E mi ssion
How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development within Companies
117

7 CONCLUSION
This Paper state the effect of territorial knowledge
on the sustainability within companies. At first, it is
founded that the lack of territorial knowledge and its
feature are barrier for searching a possible concept
for sustainability in companies. In order to answer
this lack, it was needed to organize the territorial
knowledge to help the hierarchical levels of
industries, strategic, tactical and operational, toward
sustainability. So, it is proposed an ontological based
of territorial knowledge to support the industrial
organization with identifying type of territorial
knowledge. The aim was help to hierarchical level of
industry for creating of value for human and
industry and supporting the decision making
according available territorial knowledge.
At present, this research is still a preliminary
work. In future works, the most important elements
of territorial taxonomy will be selected for
considering the effect of elements on the sustainable
perspective of industrial organization for goal of
value creation. Moreover, it will be considered the
influence of territorial knowledge on the actors of
hierarchical level for sustainability.
REFERENCES
Allais, R., Roucoules, L. and Reyes, T., 2017. Governance
maturity grid: a transition method for integrating
sustainability into companies? Journal of cleaner
production, 140, pp.213-226.
Allais, R. and Gobert, J., 2016. A multidisciplinary
method for sustainability assessment of PSS:
Challenges and developments. CIRP journal of
manufacturing science and technology, 15, pp.56-64.
Allais, R., Roucoules, L. and Reyes, T., 2015. Inclusion of
territorial resources in the product development
process. Journal of cleaner production, 94, pp.187-
197.
Allais, R., Reyes, T. and Roucoules, L., 2013. Exploratory
study of the inclusion of territorial resources in design
process. In ICED2013 (p. 10).
Barreteau, O., Giband, D., Schoon, M., Cerceau, J.,
DeClerck, F., Ghiotti, S., James, T., Masterson, V.,
Mathevet, R., Rode, S. and Ricci, F., 2016. Bringing
together social-ecological system and territoire
concepts to explore nature-society dynamics. Ecology
and Society, 21(4).
Buclet, N., 2011. Territoire, innovation et développement
durable: l'émergence d'un nouveau régime
conventionnel?. Revue d’Économie régionale &
urbaine, (5), pp.911-940.
Bourg, D. and Buclet, N., 2005. L'économie de function-
nalité. Changer la consommation dans le sens du
développement durable. Futuribles, (313), pp.27-37.
Cerceau, J., Mat, N. and Junqua, G., 2018. Territorial
embeddedness of natural resource management: A
perspective through the implementation of Industrial
Ecology. Geoforum, 89, pp.29-42.
Dahlman, C.T., Renwick, W.H. and Bergman, E., 2015.
Introduction to Geography: People, places &
environment. Pearson.
Debonneuil, M., 2007. L'espoir économique: vers la
révolution du quaternaire. Bourin éd.
Francesconi, A., 2015. The Territory as a Reference Key.
In Advanced Cultural Districts (pp. 54-73). Palgrave
Pivot, London.
Fustec, A., Bejar, Y., Gounel, T., Zambon, S. and
Thevoux, S., 2011. French standard for measuring the
non-financial and financial value of intangible
corporate capital (référentiel français de mesure de la
valeur extra-financière et financière du capital
immatériel des entreprises). French ministry of
economy, finance and industry.
Figuière, C., & Rocca, M., 2008. Un développement
véritablement durable: quelle compatibilité avec le
capitalisme financier? In Colloque international" La
problématique du développement durable vingt ans
après: nouvelles lectures théoriques, innovations
méthodologiques et domaines d'extension", CLERSE,
Lille,
Gobert, J., and Allais, R. 2016. On the use of intangible
assets management in PSS projects. Procedia CIRP,
47, pp.472-477.
Habib, L. and Lederlin, F., 2011. La force de l'immatériel:
pour transformer l'économie. Presses universitaires de
France.
Hallstedt, S., Ny, H., Robèrt, K.H. and Broman, G., 2010.
An approach to assessing sustainability integration in
strategic decision systems for product development.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(8), pp.703-712.
Jordão, R.V.D. and Novas, J.C., 2017. Knowledge
management and intellectual capital in networks of
small-and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of
Intellectual Capital, 18(3), pp.667-692.
Lin, J.S., Hsu, W.L. and Chang, J.H., 2013. An ontology
based product development framework considering
eco-design. In Proceedings of the International
MultiConference of Engineers and Computer
Scientists (Vol. 2).
Moine, A., 2006. Le territoire comme un système
complexe: un concept opératoire pour l'aménagement
et la géographie. L’Espace géographique, 35(2),
pp.115-132.
Nitschelm, L., Aubin, J., Corson, M.S., Viaud, V. M.S.,
Viaud, V. and Walter, C., 2016. Spatial differentiation
in Life Cycle Assessment LCA applied to an
agricultural territory: current practices and method
development. Journal of cleaner production, 112,
pp.2472-2484.
Parente, M. and Villari, B., 2010. Design, system,
territory: a multidisciplinary didactic activity to
enhance places. In Connected 2010–2nd International
Conference on Design Education (Pp. 1-5).
KMIS 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing
118

Pecqueur, B., 2006. Le tournant territorial de l'économie
globale. Espaces et sociétés, (1), pp.17-32.
Rio, M., Reyes, T., Roucoules, L., 2013. Toward proactive
(eco) design process: modeling information
transformations among designer’s activities. Journal of
Cleaner Production 39, 105e116. transition. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 142, pp.8-22.
S Lorino, P. and Tarondeau, J.C., 2015. De la stratégie
Aux processus stratégiques. Revue française de
gestion, (8), pp.231-250.
Tóth, B.I., 2015. Territorial capital: theory, empirics and
critical remarks. European Planning Studies, 23(7),
pp.1327-1344.
Vadoudi, K., Bratec, F. and Troussier, N., 2017. A GIS-
oriented semantic data model to support PLM for DfS.
International Journal of Product Lifecycle
Management, 10(3), pp.210-230.
Wijesooriya, C., Heales, J. and McCoy, S., 2015, January.
Multi-Dimensional Views for Sustainability:
Ontological Approach. In In 21 st Americas
Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2015)
(pp. 1-14).
Zhang, Y., Luo, X., Buis, J.J. and Sutherland, J.W., 2015.
LCA-oriented semantic representation for the product
life cycle. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86, pp.146-
162.
Zhang, F., Rio, M., Allais, R., Zwolinski, P., Carrillo,
Roucoules, L., Mercier-Laurent, E. and Buclet, N.,
2013. Toward a systemic navigation framework to
integrate sustainable development into the company.
Journal of cleaner production, 54, pp.199-214.
How Territorial Knowledge Effects on the Sustainable Development within Companies
119