A creative approach to sustainability can be applied upon an organization's business model. We begin our research with the assumption that business model innovation that takes into account a triple bottom line approach will be more sustainable over time. We focus our research on the conceptual stage when business model ideas are generated, and more precisely its creative tools. Our goal is to support, with a structured canvas, organizations whom wish to innovate upon their current business model and create concepts of more sustainable business models. In this paper, we present and discuss the tool we have named the "Triple layered business model canvas". We endeavoured to ensure that business models create, deliver and capture multiple forms of value by adding a second layer with nine environmental elements that follow a lifecycle approach, and by adding a third layer with nine social elements that follow a stakeholder approach. We share this new triple layered business model canvas and exemplify its use with a Nespresso case. In the end, we find new dynamics for analysis and new relationships for innovation. We conclude with limits and future research for more sustainable business model patterns.

The triple layered business model canvas: a tool to design more sustainable business models

The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models

Bio-based plastics - A review of environmental, social and economic impact assessments

Multi-criteria analyses (MCAs) are often applied to assess and compare the sustainability of different renewable energy technologies or energy plans with the aim to provide decision-support for choosing the most sustainable and suitable options either for a given location or more generically. MCAs are attractive given the multi-dimensional and complex nature of sustainability assessments, which typically involve a range of conflicting criteria featuring different forms of data and information. However, the input information on which the MCA is based is often associated with uncertainties. The aim of this study was to develop and apply a MCA for a national-scale sustainability assessment and ranking of eleven renewable energy technologies in Scotland and to critically investigate how the uncertainties in the applied input information influence the result. The developed MCA considers nine criteria comprising three technical, three environmental and three socio-economic criteria. Extensive literature reviews for each of the selected criteria were carried out and the information gathered was used with MCA to provide a ranking of the renewable energy alternatives. The reviewed criteria values were generally found to have wide ranges for each technology. To account for this uncertainty in the applied input information, each of the criteria values were defined by probability distributions and the MCA run using Monte Carlo simulation. Hereby a probabilistic ranking of the renewable energy technologies was provided. We show that the ranking provided by the MCA in our specific case is highly uncertain due to the uncertain input information. We conclude that it is important that future MCA studies address these uncertainties explicitly, when assessing the sustainability of different energy projects to obtain more robust results and ensure better informed decision-making.

Assessing the sustainability of renewable energy technologies using multi-criteria analysis: Suitability of approach for national-scale assessments and associated uncertainties

Application challenges for the social Life Cycle Assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment

Purpose
In May 2009, the Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products (the Guidelines) were launched at the occasion of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 26000 (Social Responsibility) meeting in Quebec City, Canada. Developed by a United Nations Environment Programme/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (“UNEP/SETAC”) Life Cycle Initiative project group on Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), the Guidelines provide a framework to assess social impacts across product life cycles. A year later, the Methodological Sheets for the Subcategories of Social LCA (“the Methodological Sheets”) are being made available to support practitioners engaging in the field. The Methodological Sheets provide practical guidance for conducting S-LCA case studies by offering consistent, yet flexible assistance.

Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA

This paper aims to establish principles for the increased application and use of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). Sustainable development (SD) encompassing resilient economies and social stability of the global system is growingly important for decision-makers from business and governments. The “17 SDGs” emerge as a high-level shared blueprint for peace, abundance, and prosperity for people and the planet, and “sustainability” for supporting improvements of products and organizations. A “sustainability” interpretation—successful in aligning stakeholders’ understanding—subdivides the impacts according to a triple bottom line or three pillars: economic, social, and environmental impacts. These context and urgent needs inspired the LCSA framework. This entails a sustainability assessment of products and organizations in accordance with the three pillars, while adopting a life cycle perspective. The Life Cycle Initiative promotes since 2011 a pragmatic LCSA framework based on the three techniques: LCSA = environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) + life cycle costing (LCC) + social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). This is the focus of the paper, while acknowledging previous developments. Identified and reviewed literature shows challenges of addressing the three pillars in the LCSA framework implementation like considering only two pillars; not being fully aligned with ISO 14040; lacking interconnectedness among the three pillars; not having clear criteria for results’ weighting nor clear results’ interpretation; and not following cause-effect chains and mechanisms leading to an endpoint. Agreement building among LCSA experts and reviewing processes strengthened the consensus on this paper. Broad support and outreach are ensured by publishing this as position paper. For harmonizing practical LCSA applications, easing interpretation, and increasing usefulness, consensed ten LCSA principles (10P) are established: understanding the areas of protection, alignment with ISO 14040, completeness, stakeholders’ and product utility considerations, materiality of system boundaries, transparency, consistency, explicit trade-offs’ communication, and caution when compensating impacts. Examples were provided based on a fictional plastic water bottle In spite of increasing needs for and interest in SD and sustainability supporting tools, LCSA is at an early application stage of application. The 10P aim to promote more and better LCSA applications by ensuring alignment with ISO 14040, completeness and clear interpretation of integrated results, among others. For consolidating its use, however, more consensus-building is needed (e.g., on value-laden ethical aspects of LCSA, interdependencies and interconnectedness among the three dimensions, and harmonization and integration of the three techniques) and technical and policy recommendations for application.

/pdf/principles-for-the-application-of-life-cycle-sustainability-3yvi7rgj02.pdf

Catherine Benoit-Norris

Papers

Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA

Principles for the application of life cycle sustainability assessment