scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal Article•DOI•

Progress in sustainability science: lessons learnt from current methodologies for sustainability assessment: Part 1

Serenella Sala, Francesca Farioli1, Alessandra Zamagni2•
Sapienza University of Rome1, ENEA2
01 Nov 2013-International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (Springer Berlin Heidelberg)-Vol. 18, Iss: 9, pp 1653-1672
TL;DR: In this paper, the main challenges posed to sustainability assessment methodologies and related methods in terms of ontology, epistemology and methodology of purpose sustainability science (SS) are discussed.
Abstract: Purpose Sustainability Science (SS) is considered an emerging discipline, applicative and solution-oriented whose aim is to handle environmental, social and economic issues in light of cultural, historic and institutional perspectives. The challenges of the discipline are not only related to better identifying the problems affecting sustainability but to the actual transition towards solutions adopting an integrated, comprehensive and participatory approach. This requires the definitionofa common scientificparadigminwhich integrationand interaction amongst sectorial disciplines is of paramount relevance. In this context, life cycle thinking (LCT) and, in particular, life cycle-based methodologies and life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) may play a crucial role. The paper illustrates the main challenges posed to sustainability assessment methodologies and related methods in terms of ontology, epistemology and methodology of SS. The aims of the analysis are twofold: (1) to identify the main features of methodologies for sustainability assessment and (2) to present key aspects for the development of robust and comprehensive sustainability assessment. Methods The current debate on SS addressing ontological, epistemological and methodological aspects has been reviewed, leading to the proposal of a conceptual framework for SS. In addition, a meta-review of recent studies on sustainability assessment methodologies and methods, focusing those
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•DOI•
Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment

[...]

Marco Cinelli1, Stuart R. Coles1, Kerry Kirwan1•
University of Warwick1
01 Nov 2014-Ecological Indicators
TL;DR: 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.

607 citations

Cites background from "Progress in sustainability science:..."

  • ...Additionally, the spheres or pillars of sustainability considered can vary, which means that some studies can consider only environmental and economic aspects, others only the environmental ones and others environmental, economic and social together (Sala et al., 2013a)....

    [...]

  • ...…and perspectives, while one the other side there are more concrete and operational approaches that try to define and derive sustainability criteria/pillars to make the concept of sustainability operational (Omann 2004; Pope et al., 2004; Gibson, 2006; Cinelli et al., 2013a; Sala et al., 2013a)....

    [...]

  • ...This leads to the necessity to define clearly what the scope of the assessment is and what questions need to be answered, implying that different instruments should be used depending on each case (Sala et al., 2013b)....

    [...]

  • ...…by many authors when dealing with sustainability-related research (Teghem et al., 1989; Belton and Stewart, 2002; Benoit and Rousseaux, 2003; Munda, 2005; Polatidis et al., 2006; Munda, 2008; Sadok et al., 2008; Buchholz et al., 2009; Antunes et al., 2012; Rowley et al., 2012; Sala et al., 2013a)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Circular economy indicators: What do they measure?

[...]

Gustavo Longaray Moraga1, Sophie Huysveld1, Fabrice Mathieux, Gian Andrea Blengini, Luc Alaerts2, Karel Van Acker2, Steven De Meester1, Jo Dewulf1 •
Ghent University1, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven2
01 Jul 2019-Resources Conservation and Recycling
TL;DR: A classification framework to understand what indicators measure is proposed and none of the analysed indicators focuses on the preservation of functions.
Abstract: Circular Economy (CE) is a growing topic, especially in the European Union, that promotes the responsible and cyclical use of resources possibly contributing to sustainable development. CE is an umbrella concept incorporating different meanings. Despite the unclear concept, CE is turned into defined action plans supported by specific indicators. To understand what indicators used in CE measure specifically, we propose a classification framework to categorise indicators according to reasoning on what (CE strategies) and how (measurement scope). Despite different types, CE strategies can be grouped according to their attempt to preserve functions, products, components, materials, or embodied energy; additionally, indicators can measure the linear economy as a reference scenario. The measurement scope shows how indicators account for technological cycles with or without a Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) approach; or their effects on environmental, social, or economic dimensions. To illustrate the classification framework, we selected quantitative micro scale indicators from literature and macro scale indicators from the European Union 'CE monitoring framework'. The framework illustration shows that most of the indicators focus on the preservation of materials, with strategies such as recycling. However, micro scale indicators can also focus on other CE strategies considering LCT approach, while the European indicators mostly account for materials often without taking LCT into account. Furthermore, none of the available indicators can assess the preservation of functions instead of products, with strategies such as sharing platforms, schemes for product redundancy, or multifunctionality. Finally, the framework illustration suggests that a set of indicators should be used to assess CE instead of a single indicator.

517 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
A systemic framework for sustainability assessment

[...]

Serenella Sala, Biagio Ciuffo, Peter Nijkamp1•
VU University Amsterdam1
01 Nov 2015-Ecological Economics
TL;DR: This paper presents a novel methodological framework for SA, based on a literature meta-review of multi-scale and multi-purpose appraisal methodologies, models and indicators, and highlights the relevance of and policy challenges for SA development, with due attention for applicability in real-world decision contexts.

478 citations

Cites background or methods from "Progress in sustainability science:..."

  • ...…and lead tomultiple forms of knowledge and the synthesis of theory and practice intended to resolve pressing societal problems through collaboration among scientists from different academic disciplines and with other stakeholder groups (business, government, civil society) (Sala et al., 2013)....

    [...]

  • ...…basis of the meta-review of methods presented in Section 3.3.3.1, for the first community (i) involved in developing methods, developers need to consider which ontological, epistemological, and methodological aspects have to be covered by existing and new methods that handle SA (Sala et al., 2013)....

    [...]

  • ...We adopted the terminology as in Sala et al. (2013) acknowledging a hierarchically different role of each element....

    [...]

  • ...Furthermore, new science-society interactions are crucial, and lead tomultiple forms of knowledge and the synthesis of theory and practice intended to resolve pressing societal problems through collaboration among scientists from different academic disciplines and with other stakeholder groups (business, government, civil society) (Sala et al., 2013)....

    [...]

  • ...…having the ultimate objective of sustainability science clearly in mind, in order to perform a coherent sustainability assessment, according to Sala et al. (2013), the current research challenges call for: • adopting a holistic approach for understanding the dynamic interactions between…...

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges

[...]

Bruno Notarnicola1, Serenella Sala, Assumpció Antón, Sarah J. McLaren2, Erwan Saouter, Ulf Sonesson3 •
University of Bari1, Massey University2, SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden3
01 Jan 2017-Journal of Cleaner Production
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the challenges for life cycle assessment arising from the complexity of food systems, and recommend research priorities for both scientific development and improvements in practical implementation, including addressing issues related to: the distinction between technosphere and ecosphere; the most appropriate functional unit; the multi-functionality of biological systems; and the modelling of the emissions and how this links with life cycle impact assessment.

407 citations

Additional excerpts

  • ...Notwithstanding the positive and peculiar features of LCAbased methodologies compared to other environmental assessment methodologies (Sala et al., 2013a,b), a number of food-related challenges need to be addressed in order to further advance the currently available approaches and methods....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
A Review of Engineering Research in Sustainable Manufacturing

[...]

Karl R. Haapala1, Fu Zhao2, Jaime A. Camelio3, John W. Sutherland2, Steven J. Skerlos4, David Dornfeld5, I.S. Jawahir6, Andres F. Clarens7, Jeremy L. Rickli3 •
Oregon State University1, Purdue University2, Virginia Tech3, University of Michigan4, University of California, Berkeley5, University of Kentucky6, University of Virginia7
01 Jan 2011-Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering-transactions of The Asme
TL;DR: A review of the state-of-the-art in sustainable manufacturing can be found in this paper, where several challenges relevant to manufacturing process and system research, development, implementation, and education are highlighted.
Abstract: Karl R. Haapala 1 School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, 204 Rogers Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331 e-mail: Karl.Haapala@oregonstate.edu Fu Zhao School of Mechanical Engineering, Division of Environmental and Ecological Engineering, Purdue University, 585 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN 47907 e-mail: fzhao@purdue.edu Jaime Camelio Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 235 Durham Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061 e-mail: jcamelio@vt.edu John W. Sutherland Division of Environmental and Ecological Engineering, Purdue University, 322 Potter Engineering Center, West Lafayette, IN 47907 e-mail: jwsuther@purdue.edu Steven J. Skerlos Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2250 GG Brown Building, Ann Arbor, MI 48105 e-mail: skerlos@umich.edu David A. Dornfeld Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, 6143 Etcheverry Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 e-mail: dornfeld@berkeley.edu I. S. Jawahir Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kentucky, 414C UK Center for Manufacturing, Lexington, KY 40506 e-mail: jawahir@engr.uky.edu A Review of Engineering Research in Sustainable Manufacturing Sustainable manufacturing requires simultaneous consideration of economic, environmen- tal, and social implications associated with the production and delivery of goods. Funda- mentally, sustainable manufacturing relies on descriptive metrics, advanced decision- making, and public policy for implementation, evaluation, and feedback. In this paper, recent research into concepts, methods, and tools for sustainable manufacturing is explored. At the manufacturing process level, engineering research has addressed issues related to planning, development, analysis, and improvement of processes. At a manufac- turing systems level, engineering research has addressed challenges relating to facility operation, production planning and scheduling, and supply chain design. Though economi- cally vital, manufacturing processes and systems have retained the negative image of being inefficient, polluting, and dangerous. Industrial and academic researchers are re- imagining manufacturing as a source of innovation to meet society’s future needs by under- taking strategic activities focused on sustainable processes and systems. Despite recent developments in decision making and process- and systems-level research, many chal- lenges and opportunities remain. Several of these challenges relevant to manufacturing process and system research, development, implementation, and education are highlighted. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4024040] Andres F. Clarens Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Virginia, D220 Thornton Hall, Charlottesville, VA 22904 e-mail: aclarens@virginia.edu Jeremy L. Rickli Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 217 Durham Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061 e-mail: jlrickli@vt.edu Corresponding author. Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the J OURNAL OF M ANUFACTURING S CIENCE AND E NGINEERING . Manuscript received July 11, 2012; final manuscript received March 4, 2013; published online July 17, 2013. Editor: Y. Lawrence Yao. Manufacturing and Sustainability The concept of sustainability emerged from a series of meetings and reports in the 1970s and 1980s, and was largely motivated by environmental incidents and disasters as well as fears about Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering C 2013 by ASME Copyright V AUGUST 2013, Vol. 135 / 041013-1 Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 07/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

328 citations

Cites background from "Progress in sustainability science:..."

  • ...[9] also provide a review regarding the progress of sustainability assessment, focusing on the ontology, epistemology, and methodology aspects....

    [...]

References
More filters
Book•
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

[...]

Thomas S. Kuhn
01 Jan 1962
TL;DR: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions as discussed by the authors is a seminal work in the history of science and philosophy of science, and it has been widely cited as a major source of inspiration for the present generation of scientists.
Abstract: A good book may have the power to change the way we see the world, but a great book actually becomes part of our daily consciousness, pervading our thinking to the point that we take it for granted, and we forget how provocative and challenging its ideas once were-and still are. "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is that kind of book. When it was first published in 1962, it was a landmark event in the history and philosophy of science. And fifty years later, it still has many lessons to teach. With "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", Kuhn challenged long-standing linear notions of scientific progress, arguing that transformative ideas don't arise from the day-to-day, gradual process of experimentation and data accumulation, but that revolutions in science, those breakthrough moments that disrupt accepted thinking and offer unanticipated ideas, occur outside of "normal science," as he called it. Though Kuhn was writing when physics ruled the sciences, his ideas on how scientific revolutions bring order to the anomalies that amass over time in research experiments are still instructive in our biotech age. This new edition of Kuhn's essential work in the history of science includes an insightful introductory essay by Ian Hacking that clarifies terms popularized by Kuhn, including paradigm and incommensurability, and applies Kuhn's ideas to the science of today. Usefully keyed to the separate sections of the book, Hacking's essay provides important background information as well as a contemporary context. Newly designed, with an expanded index, this edition will be eagerly welcomed by the next generation of readers seeking to understand the history of our perspectives on science.

36,808 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

[...]

Thomas S. Kuhn, David Hawkins
01 Jul 1963-American Journal of Physics

34,393 citations

Book Chapter•DOI•
Our common future

[...]

Gro Harlem Brundtland, Mansour Khalid
01 Jan 1987

13,141 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
A translation approach to portable ontology specifications

[...]

Thomas R. Gruber1•
Stanford University1
01 Jun 1993-Knowledge Acquisition
TL;DR: This paper describes a mechanism for defining ontologies that are portable over representation systems, basing Ontolingua itself on an ontology of domain-independent, representational idioms.

12,962 citations

"Progress in sustainability science:..." refers background in this paper

  • ...2.2 Ontology of sustainability science In information science theory, ontology is a ‘formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualisation’ (Gruber 1993)....

    [...]

  • ...In information science theory, ontology is a ‘formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualisation’ (Gruber 1993)....

    [...]

Book•
The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies

[...]

Michael Gibbons, Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotny, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, Martin Trow 
01 Jan 1994
TL;DR: The authors argued that the ways in which knowledge is produced are undergoing fundamental changes at the end of the twentieth century and that these changes mark a distinct shift into a new mode of knowledge production which is replacing or reforming established institutions, disciplines, practices and policies.
Abstract: In this provocative and broad-ranging work, a distinguished team of authors argues that the ways in which knowledge — scientific, social and cultural — is produced are undergoing fundamental changes at the end of the twentieth century. They claim that these changes mark a distinct shift into a new mode of knowledge production which is replacing or reforming established institutions, disciplines, practices and policies. Identifying a range of features of the new moder of knowledge production — reflexivity, transdisciplinarity, heterogeneity — the authors show the connections between these features and the changing role of knowledge in social relations. While the knowledge produced by research and development in science and technology (both public and industrial) is accorded central concern, the authors also outline the changing dimensions of social scientific and humanities knowledge and the relations between the production of knowledge and its dissemination through education. Placing science policy and scientific knowledge in its broader context within contemporary societies, this book will be essential reading for all those concerned with the changing nature of knowledge, with the social study of science, with educational systems, and with the relations between R&D and social, economic and technological development.

7,486 citations

Related Papers (5)
Life cycle sustainability assessment of products

[...]

13 Feb 2008-International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Walter Kloepffer
Life Cycle Assessment: Past, Present, and Future†

[...]

01 Jan 2011-Environmental Science & Technology
Jeroen B. Guinée, Reinout Heijungs, Gjalt Huppes, Alessandra Zamagni, Paolo Masoni, Roberto Buonamici, Tomas Ekvall, Tomas Rydberg 
Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

[...]

22 Oct 2010-Sustainability
Matthias Finkbeiner, Erwin M. Schau, Annekatrin Lehmann, Marzia Traverso 
A systemic framework for sustainability assessment

[...]

01 Nov 2015-Ecological Economics
Serenella Sala, Biagio Ciuffo, Peter Nijkamp
Categorising tools for sustainability assessment

[...]

15 Jan 2007-Ecological Economics
Barry Ness, Evelin Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin Urbel-Piirsalu, Stefan Anderberg, Lennart Olsson