{"title":"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","authors":"Martin Möller, 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":"{\"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, 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}","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}
Streamlined benefit analysis of products based on the Sustainable Development Goals: Integrating the voice of society into life cycle sustainability assessment
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.
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.