A Novel Methodology for the Sustainability Impact Assessment of New Technologies

The introduction of new technologies can have profound impact on society and nature. Therefore, a need exists for a method that can provide a balanced assessment of new tech-nologies that takes into account all different impacts. Within the EU-funded PROSUITE pro-ject, the aim is to develop a methodology for the sustainability assessment of existing and emerging technologies. Here, existing approaches of sustainability assessment are re-viewed. All of them have their merits, but none of them is applicable in a generic way to all aspects of sustainability for a technology. Using concepts developed initially for environ-mental life cycle assessment, we propose an approach consisting of the following major impact categories: 1) impact on human health; 2) impact on social well-being; 3) impact on prosperity; 4) impact on natural environment; 5) impact on exhaustible resources. All pri-mary impacts can be grouped under these categories. For several of these categories still quite some analysis of mechanisms in the cause-effect chain is necessary and there will be substantial remaining uncertainties for the others. For a complete assessment, the five major impact categories need to be integrated. Several approaches are available for this purpose, such as multicriteria analysis with or without weighted aggregation.

[1]  Mary Stewart,et al.  A Consistent Framework for Assessing the Impacts from Resource Use - A focus on resource functionality (8 pp) , 2005 .

[2]  J. Elkington Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development , 1994 .

[3]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment , 1999 .

[4]  J. Stiglitz,et al.  The measurement of economic performance and social progress revisited , 2009 .

[5]  Eric Neumayer,et al.  Weak Versus Strong Sustainability , 1999 .

[6]  Edgar G. Hertwich,et al.  Economic modelling and indicators in life cycle sustainability assessment , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[7]  Tim Jackson Prosperity without growth? : the transition to a sustainable economy : [summary] , 2009 .

[8]  Francis X. Johnson,et al.  A review of environmental issues in the context of biofuel sustainability frameworks , 2011 .

[9]  Martin K Patel,et al.  Life Cycle Risks for Human Health: A Comparison of Petroleum Versus Bio‐Based Production of Five Bulk Organic Chemicals , 2007, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[10]  L. German,et al.  Social sustainability of EU-approved voluntary schemes for biofuels: Implications for rural livelihoods , 2011 .

[11]  G. Brundtland,et al.  Our common future , 1987 .

[12]  Not Indicated,et al.  International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed guidance , 2010 .

[13]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  H. Daly,et al.  For the Common Good , 1999 .

[15]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  C. Bauer,et al.  Sustainability of electricity supply technology portfolio , 2009 .

[17]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  A normative-functional concept of sustainability and its indicators , 2009 .

[18]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Life Cycle Sustainability Dashboard , 2012 .

[19]  Tim Jackson,et al.  Prosperity Without Growth , 2009 .

[20]  Keith Skene,et al.  Transition to a sustainable economy , 2015 .

[21]  H. Daly,et al.  Natural Capital and Sustainable Development , 1992 .

[22]  I. Boustead,et al.  Handbook of industrial energy analysis , 1979 .

[23]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. , 1996 .