Affiliation:
1. Sustainable Products and Material Flows Division Oeko‐Institut e.V.–Institute for Applied Ecology Freiburg Germany
2. Cluster of Excellence livMatS @ FIT Freiburg Center for Interactive Materials and Bioinspired Technologies University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany
3. Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany
Abstract
AbstractConducting 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.
Funder
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Reference54 articles.
1. Pricing the Priceless: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Protection
2. Berkhout F. &Hertin J.(2001).Impacts of information and communication technologies on environmental sustainability: Speculations and evidence(Report to the OECD).http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/6/1897156.pdf
3. Design thinking for sustainability: Why and how design thinking can foster sustainability-oriented innovation development
4. ChemSec—International Chemical Secretariat. (2019).Lost at SEA—The information policymakers actually need from applicants and SEAC opinions.https://chemsec.org/app/uploads/2023/04/Lost-at-SEA-ChemSec-2019.pdf
5. ChemSec & Client Earth. (2018).How to find and analyse alternatives in the authorisation process.https://www.clientearth.org/media/wc0nv3lz/how-to-find-and-analyse-alternatives-in-the-authorisation-process-coll-en.pdf
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献