Streamlined benefit analysis of products based on the Sustainable Development Goals: Integrating the voice of society into life cycle sustainability assessment

IF 4.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL Journal of Industrial Ecology Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1111/jiec.13464
Martin Möller, Rainer Grießhammer
{"title":"Streamlined benefit analysis of products based on the Sustainable Development Goals: Integrating the voice of society into life cycle sustainability assessment","authors":"Martin Möller,&nbsp;Rainer Grießhammer","doi":"10.1111/jiec.13464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Conducting benefit analyses used to be a controversial endeavor. In the absence of a consistent normative framework, indicators had to be determined on a case-by-case basis, requiring time-consuming stakeholder workshops. The 2030 Agenda provided the missing normative basis to enable the inclusion of benefit aspects in life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). However, given the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and their 169 targets, it has remained unclear which of these targets relate to products and services and should therefore be used as indicators in benefit analyses. Against this background, this paper presents a consistent and well-defined indicator framework for product-related benefit analyses, developed through a detailed alignment with the 2030 Agenda and comprising a set of 30 indicators. It also describes how benefit analysis can be integrated into the LCSA methodology to provide a sound, evidence-based framework for research and policy making: First, it outlines a sustainability self-assessment tool for corporate researchers and designers, embedded in a Stage-Gate process as a “voice-of-society” perspective. Second, it discusses approaches to improve regulatory impact assessment for policy making, particularly in the area of chemicals management. An illustrative case study shows how the developed benefit indicators can address current shortcomings in socio-economic analysis methodology, such as an unbalanced focus on the economic impacts and insufficient information on human and environmental impacts. Despite its limitations, such as the inherent focus on societal benefits and existing “blind spots” in the 2030 Agenda, the indicator set has the potential to enrich LCSA studies with previously neglected aspects.</p>","PeriodicalId":16050,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","volume":"28 3","pages":"397-409"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jiec.13464","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13464","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conducting benefit analyses used to be a controversial endeavor. In the absence of a consistent normative framework, indicators had to be determined on a case-by-case basis, requiring time-consuming stakeholder workshops. The 2030 Agenda provided the missing normative basis to enable the inclusion of benefit aspects in life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). However, given the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and their 169 targets, it has remained unclear which of these targets relate to products and services and should therefore be used as indicators in benefit analyses. Against this background, this paper presents a consistent and well-defined indicator framework for product-related benefit analyses, developed through a detailed alignment with the 2030 Agenda and comprising a set of 30 indicators. It also describes how benefit analysis can be integrated into the LCSA methodology to provide a sound, evidence-based framework for research and policy making: First, it outlines a sustainability self-assessment tool for corporate researchers and designers, embedded in a Stage-Gate process as a “voice-of-society” perspective. Second, it discusses approaches to improve regulatory impact assessment for policy making, particularly in the area of chemicals management. An illustrative case study shows how the developed benefit indicators can address current shortcomings in socio-economic analysis methodology, such as an unbalanced focus on the economic impacts and insufficient information on human and environmental impacts. Despite its limitations, such as the inherent focus on societal benefits and existing “blind spots” in the 2030 Agenda, the indicator set has the potential to enrich LCSA studies with previously neglected aspects.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据可持续发展目标简化产品效益分析:将社会呼声纳入生命周期可持续性评估
进行效益分析曾经是一项有争议的工作。在缺乏一致规范框架的情况下,必须根据具体情况确定指标,这就需要举办耗时的利益相关者研讨会。2030 年议程为将效益方面纳入生命周期可持续性评估(LCSA)提供了缺失的规范基础。然而,考虑到 17 个可持续发展目标及其 169 个具体目标,目前仍不清楚其中哪些具体目标与产品和服务相关,因此应作为效益分析的指标。在此背景下,本文提出了一个一致且定义明确的指标框架,用于与产品相关的效益分析,该框架是通过与《2030 年议程》进行详细比对而制定的,由 30 个指标组成。本文还介绍了如何将效益分析纳入 LCSA 方法,从而为研究和决策提供一个健全的、以证据为基础的框架:首先,它为企业研究人员和设计人员概述了一种可持续性自我评估工具,该工具作为一种 "社会声音 "视角嵌入到阶段--关卡流程中。其次,它讨论了改进政策制定监管影响评估的方法,特别是在化学品管理领域。一个案例研究说明了所制定的效益指标如何能够解决当前社会经济分析方法中的不足,例如对经济影响的不平衡关注以及有关人类和环境影响的信息不足。尽管存在一些局限性,例如对社会效益的固有关注以及 2030 年议程中的现有 "盲点",但这套指标仍有可能通过以前被忽视的方面来丰富 LCSA 研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Journal of Industrial Ecology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
117
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Industrial Ecology addresses a series of related topics: material and energy flows studies (''industrial metabolism'') technological change dematerialization and decarbonization life cycle planning, design and assessment design for the environment extended producer responsibility (''product stewardship'') eco-industrial parks (''industrial symbiosis'') product-oriented environmental policy eco-efficiency Journal of Industrial Ecology is open to and encourages submissions that are interdisciplinary in approach. In addition to more formal academic papers, the journal seeks to provide a forum for continuing exchange of information and opinions through contributions from scholars, environmental managers, policymakers, advocates and others involved in environmental science, management and policy.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information, Cover, and Table of Contents Prospective life cycle assessment of climate and biodiversity impacts of meat‐based and plant‐forward meals: A case study of Indonesian and German meal options Unpacking the path toward a sustainable circular economy through industrial ecology An integrated urban metabolism and ecosystem service assessment: The case study of Lima, Peru Additive inclusion in plastic life cycle assessments part I: Review of mechanical recycling studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1