This article examines the pro-environmental behaviour of EU citizens and the potential connection with their attitudes towards common environmental legislation and environmental standards. It analyses factors of the pro-environmental behaviour of EU citizens and their attitudes towards EU environmental legislation and helping non-EU countries improve their environmental standards. The article uses cross-sectional regression analysis based on Special Eurobarometer survey. Respondents show a mostly positive view of EU environmental protection legislation and standards enforcement. Respondents with pro-environmental behaviour in their daily life are significantly more in favour to common environmental legislation and standards. Women, managers, and those interested in political affairs are more positive as well.
{"title":"Pro-Environmental Behaviour of EU Citizens","authors":"Marta Orviská, J. Huňady, Denisa Mlynarova","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2019010103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2019010103","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the pro-environmental behaviour of EU citizens and the potential connection with their attitudes towards common environmental legislation and environmental standards. It analyses factors of the pro-environmental behaviour of EU citizens and their attitudes towards EU environmental legislation and helping non-EU countries improve their environmental standards. The article uses cross-sectional regression analysis based on Special Eurobarometer survey. Respondents show a mostly positive view of EU environmental protection legislation and standards enforcement. Respondents with pro-environmental behaviour in their daily life are significantly more in favour to common environmental legislation and standards. Women, managers, and those interested in political affairs are more positive as well.","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4018/ijsr.2019010103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43095266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stefania Bracco, Ozgul Calicioglu, A. Flammini, M. S. Juan, A. Bogdanski
Bioeconomy has been proposed as a pathway to sustainable development in many countries. However, the difficulties in defining the bioeconomy boundaries at the national level might necessitate the adoption of a sectoral approach to monitor and evaluate the success of its development. In this resolution, standards, certifications and labelling (SCL) schemes for bioeconomy-related sectors might be an essential source of data. The study evaluates the potential to use SCL schemes as a source for monitoring and evaluating sustainable bioeconomy, by analysing the sustainability aspects (chain-of-custody, environmental, economic and social themes) considered in selected SCL schemes. A variety of SCL schemes for different stages of the bioeconomy value chains were subjected to analysis on whether they consider internationally agreed aspirational principles and criteria for sustainable bioeconomy. The aspects most frequently mentioned by the requirement lists of the analysed SCL schemes were identified, along with the highlights on the least-frequently mentioned sustainability topics.
{"title":"Analysis of Standards, Certifications and Labels for Bio-based Products in the Context of Sustainable Bioeconomy","authors":"Stefania Bracco, Ozgul Calicioglu, A. Flammini, M. S. Juan, A. Bogdanski","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2019010101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2019010101","url":null,"abstract":"Bioeconomy has been proposed as a pathway to sustainable development in many countries. However, the difficulties in defining the bioeconomy boundaries at the national level might necessitate the adoption of a sectoral approach to monitor and evaluate the success of its development. In this resolution, standards, certifications and labelling (SCL) schemes for bioeconomy-related sectors might be an essential source of data. The study evaluates the potential to use SCL schemes as a source for monitoring and evaluating sustainable bioeconomy, by analysing the sustainability aspects (chain-of-custody, environmental, economic and social themes) considered in selected SCL schemes. A variety of SCL schemes for different stages of the bioeconomy value chains were subjected to analysis on whether they consider internationally agreed aspirational principles and criteria for sustainable bioeconomy. The aspects most frequently mentioned by the requirement lists of the analysed SCL schemes were identified, along with the highlights on the least-frequently mentioned sustainability topics.","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4018/ijsr.2019010101","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70471544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A favourable regulatory and standardization framework is a prerequisite for establishing a cutting-edge bio-based economy in Europe. This article presents an overview of existing regulatory and standardization barriers that are hampering the market uptake of bio-based products. Among others, they include: i) the lack of a level playing field vis-à-vis biofuels and fossil-based products; ii) the lack of generally accepted end-of-life routes for bio-based products; and iii) the existence of standards designed for fossil-based materials that do not match market practises. Based on the results of a 2-round Delphi survey, proposals are formed to overcome the identified barriers. These solutions are thereafter verified by stakeholders through additional interviews and a workshop. Finally, recommendations were drafted to update the current regulatory and standardization framework. More specifically, the adoption of relevant principles for the cascading use of biomassthe use of alternative innovative feedstock (e.g. waste) and the update of existing standards (e.g. compostability) are proposed.
{"title":"Supportive Regulations and Standards to Encourage a Level Playing Field for the Bio-based Economy","authors":"L. Ladu, Minique Vrins","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2019010104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2019010104","url":null,"abstract":"A favourable regulatory and standardization framework is a prerequisite for establishing a cutting-edge bio-based economy in Europe. This article presents an overview of existing regulatory and standardization barriers that are hampering the market uptake of bio-based products. Among others, they include: i) the lack of a level playing field vis-à-vis biofuels and fossil-based products; ii) the lack of generally accepted end-of-life routes for bio-based products; and iii) the existence of standards designed for fossil-based materials that do not match market practises. Based on the results of a 2-round Delphi survey, proposals are formed to overcome the identified barriers. These solutions are thereafter verified by stakeholders through additional interviews and a workshop. Finally, recommendations were drafted to update the current regulatory and standardization framework. More specifically, the adoption of relevant principles for the cascading use of biomassthe use of alternative innovative feedstock (e.g. waste) and the update of existing standards (e.g. compostability) are proposed.","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46368298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A problem survey, including 34 semantic standard setting organizations (SSOs), gives the evidence that quality of standards can be improved, but for the improvement of a quality measurement an instrument is needed. The main research question in this work is: What are the characteristics of an instrument to measure the quality of semantic standards that will aid standard developers in improving their standards? The presented quality model consists of in total 100 quality aspects structured within three hierarchical trees; product quality (intrinsic), process quality (the organization of the standard), and quality in practice (application of the standard).
{"title":"Extensive Quality Model of Semantic Standards","authors":"E. Folmer","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2018070102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2018070102","url":null,"abstract":"A problem survey, including 34 semantic standard setting organizations (SSOs), gives the evidence that quality of standards can be improved, but for the improvement of a quality measurement an instrument is needed. The main research question in this work is: What are the characteristics of an instrument to measure the quality of semantic standards that will aid standard developers in improving their standards? The presented quality model consists of in total 100 quality aspects structured within three hierarchical trees; product quality (intrinsic), process quality (the organization of the standard), and quality in practice (application of the standard).","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41466571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Certain influential innovation impact studies do not sharply distinguish standards from regulation. Is differentiation needed? In what way do they differ in how they work and work out? This article applies and extends a framework of regulatory modalities to open up the black box of direct innovation effects. It includes standards as a separate regulatory modality following careful consideration of alternatives, i.e., accommodating them as a special instance or as a hybrid of law, norm, market and architecture. The authors capture the essential differences between standards and law. They reconcile Lessig's emphasis on constraints with findings of enabling and constraining effects in innovation research by differentiating direct inherently constraining effects of regulatory modalities and modality-specific direct generic effects - as opposed to indirect effects. They conclude that standards and law merit separate treatment in innovation research, and recommend complementary frameworks to uncover unaddressed issues.
{"title":"Distinguishing Standards and Regulation for Innovation Research","authors":"T. Egyedi, Arjan Widlak, J. Ortt","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2018070101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2018070101","url":null,"abstract":"Certain influential innovation impact studies do not sharply distinguish standards from regulation. Is differentiation needed? In what way do they differ in how they work and work out? This article applies and extends a framework of regulatory modalities to open up the black box of direct innovation effects. It includes standards as a separate regulatory modality following careful consideration of alternatives, i.e., accommodating them as a special instance or as a hybrid of law, norm, market and architecture. The authors capture the essential differences between standards and law. They reconcile Lessig's emphasis on constraints with findings of enabling and constraining effects in innovation research by differentiating direct inherently constraining effects of regulatory modalities and modality-specific direct generic effects - as opposed to indirect effects. They conclude that standards and law merit separate treatment in innovation research, and recommend complementary frameworks to uncover unaddressed issues.","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44550731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When establishing a new technological standard, multiple actors often have to build coalitions to overcome the inertia of the emergent collaboration network and to mobilize decisive levels of support. The authors suggest that the emergence of a standard in a networked field can be strategically influenced by focusing only on a subset of all actors. The study defined the choice of a specific set of standard-initializing organizations as the trigger strategy. A conceptual model was developed from interorganizational collaboration as a network comprised of a set of heterogeneous, interconnected nodes, qualified by their group membership and size. The authors employed network simulations identifying the value of different trigger strategies. Data on a network of airline collaboration was used to illustrate the model. Under most conditions considered, the study found a strong triggering potential of interrelated core cliques in comparison to other trigger strategies. The results suggest that this strategy should receive more attention in the future.
{"title":"Trigger Strategies for Standard Diffusion in Interorganizational Networks","authors":"Daniel Fürstenau, Catherine Cleophas, N. Kliewer","doi":"10.4018/ijsr.2018070103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijsr.2018070103","url":null,"abstract":"When establishing a new technological standard, multiple actors often have to build coalitions to overcome the inertia of the emergent collaboration network and to mobilize decisive levels of support. The authors suggest that the emergence of a standard in a networked field can be strategically influenced by focusing only on a subset of all actors. The study defined the choice of a specific set of standard-initializing organizations as the trigger strategy. A conceptual model was developed from interorganizational collaboration as a network comprised of a set of heterogeneous, interconnected nodes, qualified by their group membership and size. The authors employed network simulations identifying the value of different trigger strategies. Data on a network of airline collaboration was used to illustrate the model. Under most conditions considered, the study found a strong triggering potential of interrelated core cliques in comparison to other trigger strategies. The results suggest that this strategy should receive more attention in the future.","PeriodicalId":53146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Standardization Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4018/ijsr.2018070103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44736915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：