Publishable summary:
The follow-up of the T9.1 has been focused on the further development of the methodologies presented in the D9.1. Main goals of the deliverable are to provide the common framework for the evaluation and coordination of the demonstration activities, and to carry out a first evaluation of the lighthouses using those methodologies.
For the evaluation of the industrials symbiosis cases, Industrial Symbiosis Readiness Level Matrix (ISRLM) has been further developed to provide a more accurate evaluation of the symbiosis maturity of the demo case. Each lighthouse did a self-assessment using this matrix, showing different maturity of the IS cases. The highest level of maturity across all evaluated aspects was found in the Swedish lighthouse (Frövi facilities). Escombreras lighthouse showed an equilibrated development across the different axes (i.e. technical, economical and managerial aspects). The Brescia Lighthouse showed a higher heterogeneity across the different readiness perspectives, which is to be expected when the IS includes several actors and also non-industrial partners (Confindustria Brescia and RINA-CSM) participated in the ISRLM assessment. However, the differences different readiness level axed (i.e. legal) between the different partners might indicate the leadership of one partner to guide the other across that axis.
Regarding the coordination of the demonstration activities across the demo cases, Symbiotic Failure Mode Effect Analysis (SFMEA) have been developed to coordinate the symbiosis efforts within each demo case, and across them. The idea is to use the methodology to improve the communication and to establish a preventive approach to the different aspects of the demonstrations activities that might affect the progress of the project. In this manner, not only technical risks are assessed but also risks related to the management and the economic situation of the demo case. Similar risks have been identified across the lighthouses, hence, lessons learnt about the strategies to overcome them can be extracted. On the other hand, each lighthouse has specific risks that could happen in the others, thus, preventive actions can be developed and replicated across them.
The work will continue with the assessment of the followers and fostering the dialogue among the different demo cases, furthermore, the risk of not fulfilling CORALIS goals will be analyzed to determine joint-strategies for the measures of the impacts. This activity will help to the final evaluation of the demonstration tasks (T5.6, T6.6, and T7.6).
This deliverable continues to build and elaborate on outcomes from the T2.1, were the ISRLM was developed, and the T2.4 where the Community of Members was analysed. Furthermore, the outputs of this tasks will feed in and help identifying effective replicability measures (rest of the WP9 tasks). Finally, the outputs of the task will also feed the T10.4 – CORALIS Handbook.
