Conceptualising sustainability assessment
Sustainability assessment is being increasingly viewed as an important tool to aid in the shift towards sustainability. However, this is a new and evolving concept and there remain very few examples of effective sustainability assessment processes implemented anywhere in the world. Sustainability assessment is often described as a process by which the implications of an initiative on sustainability are evaluated, where the initiative can be a proposed or existing policy, plan, programme, project, piece of legislation, or a current practice or activity. However, this generic definition covers a broad range of different processes, many of which have been described in the literature as 'sustainability assessment'. This article seeks to provide some clarification by reflecting on the different approaches described in the literature as being forms of sustainability assessment, and evaluating them in terms of their potential contributions to sustainability. Many of these are actually examples of 'integrated assessment', derived from environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA), but which have been extended to incorporate social and economic considerations as well as environmental ones, reflecting a 'triple bottom line' (TBL) approach to sustainability. These integrated assessment processes typically either seek to minimise 'unsustainability', or to achieve TBL objectives. Both aims may, or may not, result in sustainable practice. We present an alternative conception of sustainability assessment, with the more ambitious aim of seeking to determine whether or not an initiative is actually sustainable. We term such processes 'assessment for sustainability'. 'Assessment for sustainability' firstly requires that the concept of sustainability be well-defined. The article compares TBL approaches and principles-based approaches to developing such sustainability criteria, concluding that the latter are more appropriate, since they avoid many of the inherent limitations of the triple-bottom-line as a conception of sustainability.
Life cycle sustainability assessment of products
Background Aims and ScopeSustainability was adopted by UNEP in Rio de Janeiro (1992) as the main political goal for the future development of humankind. It should also be the ultimate aim of product development. According to the well known interpretation of the original definition given in the Brundtland report, sustainability comprises three components: environment, economy and social aspects. These components or “pillars” of sustainability have to be properly assessed and balanced if a new product is to be designed or an existing one is to be improved.MethodsThe responsibility of the researchers involved in the assessment is to provide appropriate and reliable instruments. For the environmental part there is already an internationally standardized tool: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is the logical counterpart of LCA for the economic assessment. LCC surpasses the purely economic cost calculation by taking into account the use-and end-of-life phases and hidden costs. For this component, a guideline is being developed by SETAC as a basis for future standardization. It is a very important point that different life-cycle based methods (including Social Life Cycle Assessment ‘SLCA’) for sustainability assessment use consistent — ideally identical — system boundaries. This requirement includes that in LCC the physical life cycle (‘from cradle-to-grave’) is used instead of the frequently used marketing life cycle (‘from product development-to-end of market life’).Future DevelopmentsSLCA has been neglected in the past, but is now beginning to be developed. The central problems seem to be how to relate the social indicators (social impact assessment) to the functional unit of the product-system and how to restrict the many social indicators proposed to a manageable number. Meanwhile, qualitative and semi-quantitative approaches are used as substitutes for a full, quantitative SLCA. It is hoped that new methods will be developed and finally standardized by ISO. The combination of LCA, LCC and SLCA will provide the much needed tool for sustainability assessment of products.
Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment
Sustainability assessments require the management of a wide variety of information types, parameters and uncertainties. Multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been regarded as a suitable set of methods to perform sustainability evaluations as a result of its flexibility and the possibility of facilitating the dialogue between stakeholders, analysts and scientists. However, it has been reported that researchers do not usually properly define the reasons for choosing a certain MCDA method instead of another. Familiarity and affinity with a certain approach seem to be the drivers for the choice of a certain procedure. This review paper presents the performance of five MCDA methods (i.e. MAUT, AHP, PROMETHEE, ELECTRE and DRSA) in respect to ten crucial criteria that sustainability assessments tools should satisfy, among which are a life cycle perspective, thresholds and uncertainty management, software support and ease of use. The review shows that MAUT and AHP are fairly simple to understand and have good software support, but they are cognitively demanding for the decision makers, and can only embrace a weak sustainability perspective as trade-offs are the norm. Mixed information and uncertainty can be managed by all the methods, while robust results can only be obtained with MAUT. ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and DRSA are non-compensatory approaches which consent to use a strong sustainability concept, accept a variety of thresholds, but suffer from rank reversal. DRSA is less demanding in terms of preference elicitation, is very easy to understand and provides a straightforward set of decision rules expressed in the form of elementary “if … then …” conditions. Dedicated software is available for all the approaches with a medium to wide range of results capability representation. DRSA emerges as the easiest method, followed by AHP, PROMETHEE and MAUT, while ELECTRE is regarded as fairly difficult. Overall, the analysis has shown that most of the requirements are satisfied by the MCDA methods (although to different extents) with the exclusion of management of mixed data types and adoption of life cycle perspective which are covered by all the considered approaches.
A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment
Terms such as Integrated Assessment and Sustainability Assessment are used to label ‘new’ approaches to impact assessment that are designed to direct planning and decision-making towards sustainable development (SD). Established assessment techniques, such as EIA and SEA, are also widely promoted as SD ‘tools’. This paper presents the findings of a literature review undertaken to identify the features that are typically promoted for improving the SD-directedness of assessments. A framework is developed which reconciles the broad range of emerging approaches and tackles the inconsistent use of terminology. The framework comprises a three-dimensional space defined by the following axes: the comprehensiveness of the SD coverage; the degree of ‘integration’ of the techniques and themes; and the extent to which a strategic perspective is adopted. By applying the framework, assessment approaches can be positioned relative to one another, enabling comparison on the basis of substance rather than semantics.
Sustainability assessment: basic components of a practical approach
The last few years have brought many experiments with forms of sustainability assessment, applied at the strategic and project levels by governments, private-sector firms, civil society organizations and various combinations. The attractiveness of the work so far suggests that it is now time to prepare for comprehensive adoption and more consistent application of the requirements and processes. The key first steps in sustainability assessment regime design are addressed in this paper. They centre on the basic sustainability requirements that should inform a transition to sustainability assessment; the main implications of these requirements for sustain-ability assessment decision criteria and trade-off rules; how to incorporate proper attention to the specific circumstances of applications into particular cases and contexts; and, more generally, how to design practical sustainability assessment regimes.
A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools
Neighborhood sustainability assessment tools have become widespread since the turn of 21st century and many communities, mainly in the developed world, are utilizing these tools to measure their success in approaching sustainable development goals. In this study, seven tools from Australia, Europe, Japan, and the United States are selected and analyzed with the aim of providing insights into the current situations; highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, successes, and failures; and making recommendations for future improvements. Using a content analysis, the issues of sustainability coverage, pre-requisites, local adaptability, scoring and weighting, participation, reporting, and applicability are discussed in this paper. The results of this study indicate that most of the tools are not doing well regarding the coverage of social, economic, and institutional aspects of sustainability; there are ambiguities and shortcomings in the weighting, scoring, and rating; in most cases, there is no mechanism for local adaptability and participation; and, only those tools which are embedded within the broader planning framework are doing well with regard to applicability.
Beyond The Pillars: Sustainability Assessment As A Framework For Effective Integration Of Social, Economic And Ecological Considerations In Significant Decision-Making
Sustainability is an essentially integrative concept. It seems reasonable, then, to design sustainability assessment as an essentially integrative process and framework for decision-making on undertakings that may have lasting effects.The realm of sustainability has often been depicted as the intersection of social, economic and ecological interests and initiatives. Accordingly, many approaches to sustainability oriented assessments — at the project as well as strategic level — have begun by addressing the social, economic and ecological considerations separately and have then struggled with how to integrate the separate findings. The problem is exacerbated by the generally separate training of experts in the three fields, the habitual collection of data separately under the three categories and the common division of government mandates into separate social, economic and ecological bodies. The combined effect is not merely an absence of integrative expertise, data and authority but an entrenched tendency to neglect the interdependence of these factors. The three pillars or triple bottom line approach also appears to encourage an emphasis on balancing and making trade-offs, which may often be necessary but which should always be the last resort, not the assumed task, in sustainability assessment.There are, however, important concerns underlying advocacy and application of some three pillar, limited integration approaches. Most significant are well-grounded fears that integrated, sustainability-based assessments may facilitate continued or even renewed neglect of traditionally under valued considerations, especially the protection of ecological systems and functions. This problem needs to be addressed thoughtfully in judgements about how integration is to be done.One possible solution is to take sustainability as an essentially integrative concept and to design sustainability assessment more aggressively as an integrative process. This would entail a package of regime and process design features, centred on ones that.• build sustainability assessment into a larger overall governance regime that is designed to respect interconnections among issues, objectives, actions and effects, though the full interrelated set of activities from broad agenda setting to results monitoring and response;.• design assessment processes with an iterative conception-to-resurrection agenda, aiming to maximise multiple, reinforcing net benefits through selection, design and adaptive implementation of the most desirable option for every significant strategic or project level undertaking;.• redefine the driving objectives and consequent evaluation and decision criteria to avoid the three conventional categories, to ensure attention to usually neglected sustainability requirements and to focus attention on the achievement of multiple, mutually reinforcing gains;.• establish explicit basic rules that discourage trade-offs to the extent possible while guiding the decision-making on those that are unavoidable;.• provide means of combining, specifying and complementing these generic criteria and trade-off rules with attention to case- and context-specific concerns, objectives, priorities and possibilities;.• provide integrative, sustainability-centred guidance, methods and tools to help meet the key practical demands of assessment work, including identifying key cross-cutting issues and linkages among factors, judging the significance of predicted effects, and weighing overall options and implications; and.• ensure that the decision-making process facilitates public scrutiny and encourages effective public participation.
information system management system cloud computing decision making information technology world wide web life cycle hidden markov model markov model wide web world wide empirical study sustainable development literature review factors affecting life cycle assessment developing country web server parallel algorithm factors influencing cycle assessment electronic commerce technology acceptance model environmental management protein structure user authentication empirical investigation technology acceptance amino acid independent set cloud computing service integrated model protein sequence protein data bank corporate governance nucleic acid set problem sustainability assessment technology adoption environmental management system mobile commerce environmental sustainability internet banking life cycle costing fast parallel maximum independent set mobile banking electronic busines independent set problem maximum independent maximal independent set business network perceived risk cloud computing adoption maximal independent internet web computing adoption workload characterization adoption model sustainability indicator fast parallel algorithm target prediction sustainability issue life cycle sustainability performance outcome top management support adoption of mobile innovation adoption corporate sustainability system adoption information technology adoption adoption decision influencing the adoption cycle sustainability tam model weighted independent set technology adoption model adoption rate sustainability reporting set packing amino acid substitution adoption behavior weighted independent commerce adoption consumer adoption adoption of internet generalized hidden markov sustainability practice banking adoption weighted set subset problem acid substitution e-business adoption product adoption perceived behavioral control natural capital mirna target prediction electronic commerce adoption mobile banking adoption adoption research toe framework ecological sustainability agricultural sustainability independent sequence internet web server technology adoption research review [publication type] united state