Categorising tools for sustainability assessment
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a cohesive categorisation of the most common sustainability assessment tools within the broader objective of lifting the understanding of tools from the environmentally-focused realm to that of the wider concept of sustainability.
About: This article is published in Ecological Economics.The article was published on 2007-01-15. It has received 1306 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Sustainability organizations & Sustainability science.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: A review of recent developments of LCA methods, focusing on some areas where there has been an intense methodological development during the last years, and some of the emerging issues.
2,683 citations
Cites background from "Categorising tools for sustainabili..."
...Information on environmental aspects of different systems is thus needed, and many tools and indicators for assessing and benchmarking environmental impacts of different systems have been developed (e.g., Finnveden and Moberg, 2005; Ness et al., 2007)....
[...]
TL;DR: Sustainability indicators and composite index are increasingly recognized as a useful tool for policy making and public communication in conveying information on countries and corporate performance in fields such as environment, economy, society, or technological improvement as mentioned in this paper.
2,181 citations
Cites methods from "Categorising tools for sustainabili..."
...Ness et al. (2007) developed a holistic framework for sustainability assessment tool which is shown in Fig....
[...]
Book Chapter•
01 Jan 2016TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare 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.
Abstract: 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.
859 citations
TL;DR: An overview of the definitions and units of measurement associated with environmental, social, and economic footprints is presented in this paper, where composite footprints combining two or more individual footprints are also assessed.
726 citations
TL;DR: The conceptual requirements for an adequate CSI are: (i) to consider environmental, economic and social aspects from the viewpoint of strong sustainability; (ii) to capture external impacts (leakage effects) of city on other areas beyond the city boundaries particularly in terms of environmental aspects; (iii) to create indices/indicators originally for the purpose of assessing city sustainability; and (iv) to be able to assess world cities in both developed and developing countries using CSI as discussed by the authors.
621 citations
Cites background from "Categorising tools for sustainabili..."
...…is to provide decision-makers with an evaluation of global and local integrated nature-society systems in short and long term perspectives in order to help them to judge which actions should or should not be taken in an attempt to make society sustainable (Devuyst, 2000; Ness et al., 2007)....
[...]
...The purpose of sustainability assessment is to provide decision-makers with an evaluation of global and local integrated nature-society systems in short and long term perspectives in order to help them to judge which actions should or should not be taken in an attempt to make society sustainable (Devuyst, 2000; Ness et al., 2007)....
[...]
References
More filters
9,849 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1981
TL;DR: The Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) as discussed by the authors is an alternative approach which enables managers of all kinds and at any level to deal with the subtleties and confusions of the situations they face.
Abstract: Whether by design, accident or merely synchronicity, Checkland appears to have developed a habit of writing seminal publications near the start of each decade which establish the basis and framework for systems methodology research for that decade."" Hamish Rennie, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1992 Thirty years ago Peter Checkland set out to test whether the Systems Engineering (SE) approach, highly successful in technical problems, could be used by managers coping with the unfolding complexities of organizational life. The straightforward transfer of SE to the broader situations of management was not possible, but by insisting on a combination of systems thinking strongly linked to real-world practice Checkland and his collaborators developed an alternative approach - Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) - which enables managers of all kinds and at any level to deal with the subtleties and confusions of the situations they face. This work established the now accepted distinction between hard systems thinking, in which parts of the world are taken to be systems which can be engineered, and soft systems thinking in which the focus is on making sure the process of inquiry into real-world complexity is itself a system for learning. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice (1981) and Soft Systems Methodology in Action (1990) together with an earlier paper Towards a Systems-based Methodology for Real-World Problem Solving (1972) have long been recognized as classics in the field. Now Peter Checkland has looked back over the three decades of SSM development, brought the account of it up to date, and reflected on the whole evolutionary process which has produced a mature SSM. SSM: A 30-Year Retrospective, here included with Systems Thinking, Systems Practice closes a chapter on what is undoubtedly the most significant single research programme on the use of systems ideas in problem solving. Now retired from full-time university work, Peter Checkland continues his research as a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellow. "
7,467 citations
"Categorising tools for sustainabili..." refers background in this paper
...Although the terms may have slightly different connotations, Conceptual Modelling is often referred to as conceptual modelling, mental modelling or soft-systems modelling (see Checkland, 1981)....
[...]
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Wackernagel and Rees as mentioned in this paper presented an analysis of the aggregate land area required for a given population to exist in a sustainable manner, and showed that at 11 acres per person, the U.S. has the highest per capita footprint.
Abstract: Review: Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the Earth. By Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees Reviewed by Gene Bazan Center for Sustainability, Pennsylvania State University Wackernagel, Mathis and William Rees. Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the Earth. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers, 1996. 160 pp. US $14.94 paper ISBN: 0-86571-312-X. Partially recycled, acid-free paper using soy-based ink. If the earth's inhabitants were to live at the standard of the U.S., we would require three planet Earths to support us. Many of us have heard or read something like this before. Our Ecological Footprint provides a graphically compelling and quantitatively rigorous way for us to engage in the worldwide sustainability debate: Ecological Footprint analysis. Through this analysis we can determine the consequences of our behavior, and proposed solutions, at any level: individual, household, community, nation, or world. Ecological Footprint analysis measures the aggregate land area required for a given population to exist in a sustainable manner. Wackernagel and Rees note that at 11 acres per person, the U.S. has the highest per capita footprint and suggest that this number should be closer to 6 acres per person. Further, the U.S. faces an 80% ecological deficit, which means we are borrowing from our grandchildren's legacy, and expropriating land from elsewhere in the world. By contrast, each European requires around 5 acres; however, Europeans face higher ecological deficits because they have smaller land areas. Unlike other approaches, which focus on the depletion of non-renewables such as fossil fuel and minerals, Ecological Footprint analysis asserts that the road to sustainability must be paved with sustainable practices. Thus, our use of fossil fuel must have as a compensatory sink the acres of woodlot required to sequester the carbon from our combustion of fossil fuel (in our cars, home heating, etc.) or, alternatively, the acres of fields required to grow biofuel. For example, in comparing our daily commute by car, bus or bicycle, and considering all land requirements (e.g., manufacturing land to produce
3,790 citations
TL;DR: A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human–environment systems is presented and it is shown that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards.
Abstract: Global environmental change and sustainability science increasingly recognize the need to address the consequences of changes taking place in the structure and function of the biosphere. These changes raise questions such as: Who and what are vulnerable to the multiple environmental changes underway, and where? Research demonstrates that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards (perturbations and stresses) alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards. This recognition requires revisions and enlargements in the basic design of vulnerability assessments, including the capacity to treat coupled human–environment systems and those linkages within and without the systems that affect their vulnerability. A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human–environment systems is presented.
3,733 citations