Towards a comprehensive absolute sustainability assessment method for effective Earth system governance: Defining key environmental indicators using an enhanced-DPSIR framework

Abstract Reflecting the growing interest in the concept of absolute sustainability, this research defines an absolute sustainability assessment method (ASAM) with three key characteristics: (i) assessment of a comprehensive range of environmental impacts in absolute terms; (ii) evaluation of these impacts at an early stage in impact pathways; and (iii) the capacity to assess these impacts at multiple economic levels. To that end, using an enhanced Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (eDPSIR) framework, this study systematically classified the environmental indicators reported in the Planetary Boundaries (PBs), Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by mapping them on to a network of cause-effect chains developed in previous work, and extended to include the areas of protection in LCA. It was found that twelve major environmental problems could be defined as key central nodes in this causal network, and that the PBs and LCA evaluated many of these environmental problems at an early stage in the causal network while the SDGs generally addressed similar problems at the latter end of the causal network. Six of these environmental problems were addressed in all three approaches (PBs, LCA and SDGs) and the others were addressed in one or two approaches. An associated (but incomplete) set of absolute environmental sustainability indicators were identified that are already available in one or more of the three approaches; some of these indicators require further methodological development in order to support the advancement of an ASAM for effective Earth system governance.

[1]  F. Chapin,et al.  Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity , 2009 .

[2]  M. Jacobs,et al.  Sustainable development and the local economy , 1992 .

[3]  Magdalena Svanström,et al.  Using the planetary boundaries framework for setting impact-reduction targets in LCA contexts , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[4]  Bernd Siebenhüner,et al.  Earth system governance: a research framework , 2010 .

[5]  Kenneth W. Abbott,et al.  Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance , 2012, Science.

[6]  Michael Elliott,et al.  DPSIR—Two Decades of Trying to Develop a Unifying Framework for Marine Environmental Management? , 2016, Front. Mar. Sci..

[7]  Manuele Margni,et al.  A proposal to measure absolute environmental sustainability in life cycle assessment , 2016 .

[8]  B. Muys Sustainable development within planetary boundaries: a functional revision of the definition based on the thermodynamics of complex social-ecological systems , 2013 .

[9]  Magdalena Svanström,et al.  A life cycle assessment (LCA)-based approach to guiding an industry sector towards sustainability: the case of the Swedish apparel sector , 2016 .

[10]  B. Moldan,et al.  How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets , 2012 .

[11]  Saurabh Gupta,et al.  An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies , 2009 .

[12]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[13]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Indicators for Environmental Sustainability , 2017 .

[14]  Rudolf de Groot,et al.  A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets , 2008 .

[15]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet , 2015, Science.

[16]  Michael Z. Hauschild,et al.  Better – But is it Good Enough? On the Need to Consider Both Eco-efficiency and Eco-effectiveness to Gauge Industrial Sustainability , 2015 .

[17]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  The environmental sustainability of nations. Benchmarking the carbon, water and land footprints against allocated planetary boundaries , 2015 .

[18]  Mikolaj Owsianiak,et al.  Potentials and limitations of footprints for gauging environmental sustainability , 2017 .

[19]  Serenella Sala,et al.  Chemical footprint: A methodological framework for bridging life cycle assessment and planetary boundaries for chemical pollution , 2013, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[20]  Jyri Seppälä,et al.  On the meaning of the distance-to-target weighting method and normalisation in Life Cycle Impact assessment , 2001 .

[21]  Rana Pant,et al.  A distance-to-target weighting method for Europe 2020 , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[22]  Lennart Olsson,et al.  Categorising tools for sustainability assessment , 2007 .

[23]  H. Daly,et al.  For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future , 1990 .

[24]  Rudolf de Groot,et al.  Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural perspective , 2003 .

[25]  G. O’Brien,et al.  Sustainable development: mapping different approaches , 2005 .

[26]  Hao Zhang,et al.  A Novel Weighting Method in LCIA and its Application in Chinese Policy Context , 2011 .

[27]  Hayo M.G. van der Werf,et al.  The Use of Reference Values in Indicator-Based Methods for the Environmental Assessment of Agricultural Systems , 2011 .

[28]  Anders Bjørn,et al.  Introducing carrying capacity-based normalisation in LCA: framework and development of references at midpoint level , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[29]  Michael Jacobs,et al.  The Green Economy: Environment, Sustainable Development and the Politics of the Future , 1992 .

[30]  John C. V. Pezzey,et al.  Sustainability: An Interdisciplinary Guide , 1992, Environmental Values.

[31]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  LCIA framework and cross-cutting issues guidance within the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. , 2017, Journal of cleaner production.

[32]  T. Bruckner,et al.  Climate change decision-support and the tolerable windows approach , 1999 .

[33]  K. A. Brekke Economic Growth and the Environment: On the Measurement of Income and Welfare , 1997 .

[34]  Klaus Bosselmann,et al.  Operationalizing Sustainable Development: Ecological Integrity as a Grundnorm of International Law , 2015 .

[35]  Detlef P. van Vuuren,et al.  From Planetary Boundaries to national fair shares of the global safe operating space — How can the scales be bridged? , 2016 .

[36]  Thomas Backhaus,et al.  Exploring the planetary boundary for chemical pollution. , 2015, Environment international.

[37]  Mark A. J. Huijbregts,et al.  ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[38]  Rudolf de Groot,et al.  Framing environmental indicators: moving from causal chains to causal networks , 2008 .

[39]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Towards harmonizing natural resources as an area of protection in life cycle impact assessment , 2017, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[40]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Challenges in implementing a Planetary Boundaries based Life-Cycle Impact Assessment methodology , 2016 .

[41]  Margaret Robertson,et al.  Sustainability Principles and Practice , 2014 .

[42]  P Ekins,et al.  A Framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability , 2005 .

[43]  Annie Levasseur,et al.  Area of concern: a new paradigm in life cycle assessment for the development of footprint metrics , 2016, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.