A new conceptual hierarchy for identifying environmental sustainability metrics

Environmental Progress

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 291-301

  Jin, Xun ^a   High, Karen A ^a  

^a Oklahoma State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Conceptual hierarchy; Endpoint; Environmental performance assessment; Life cycle assessment (LCA); SSEIW; Stressor status effect integrality well being; Sustainability metrics

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL HIERARCHY; ENDPOINT; ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA); STRESSOR-STATUS-EFFECT-INTEGRALITY-WELL-BEING (SSEIW); SUSTAINABILITY METRICS;

CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING; LIFE CYCLE; MINING; PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY; RISK MANAGEMENT; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

METRIC SYSTEM;

LIFE CYCLE; METRIC SYSTEM; MINING; PAPER INDUSTRY; PULP INDUSTRY; RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 12444288558     PISSN: 02784491     EISSN: None     Source Type: Trade Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ep.10048     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. KPMG International. (2002). KPMG international survey of corporate sustainability reporting, Geneva, Switzerland: KPMG.
2. Hart, S.L. (1997). Strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, January-February, 67-76.
3. Watkins, K.J. (2002). Sustainability takes center stage. Chemical & Engineering News, 80, 15-22.
4. International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA). (2002). On the road to sustainability: A summary of ICCA Chemical Sector Report to United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), http://www.icca-at-wssd.org/ publications.html.
5. Ott, W.R. (1978). Environmental indices: Theory and practice, Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science Publisher.
6. Merkle, A., & Kaupenjohann, M. (2000). Derivation of ecosystemic effect indicators - Method. Ecological Modelling, 130, 39-46.
7. National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council (NAE/NRC). (1999). Industrial environmental performance metrics: Challenges and opportunities, Washington: DC: National Academy Press.
8. Mebratu, D. (1998). Sustainability and sustainable development: Historical and conceptual review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 18, 493-520.
9. Edwards, A.R. (2000). Sustainability today: A compass for the future, http://www.tew.org/publications/st.toc.html.
10. World Commission on Environmental and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11. U.S. President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). (1994). A vision for a sustainable U.S. and principles of sustainable development, Washington, DC: PCSD.
12. Farrell, A. (1998). What does sustainability really mean?: The search for useful indicators. Environment, 40, 4-12.
13. World Conservation Union, United Nations Environmental Programme, and World Wide Fund for Nature (WCU/UNEP/WWFN). (1991). Caring for the earth: A strategy for sustainable living. Gland, Switzerland: WCU/UNEP/WWFN.
14. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with folks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business, Gabriola Island, BC, Canada: New Society Publishers.
15. Gladwin, T.N., Kennelly, J.J., & Krause, T.S. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20, 874-907.
16. Parris, T.M., & Kates, R.W. (2003). Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annual Review in Environment and Resource, 28, 559-586.
17. International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD). (2000). Compendium of sustainable development indicator initiatives, http://www.iisd.org/measure/compensium.
18. Dale, V.H., & Beyeler, S.C. (2001). Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecological Indicators, 1, 3-10.
19. Center for Waste Reduction Technology (CWRT). (1998). Sustainability metrics, New York, NY: CWRT, American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
20. United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD). (1996). Indicators of sustainable development: Framework and methodologies, New York, NY: UNCSD.
21. Cabezas, H., & Fath, B.D. (2002). Towards a theory of sustainable systems. Fluid Phase Equilibria, 194-197, 3-14.
22. Tyteca, D. (1996). On the measurement of the environmental performance of firms - A literature review and a productive efficiency perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 46, 281-308.
23. Eaton, R.J. (1999). Getting the most out of environmental metrics. The Bridge, 29.
24. Bossel, H. (1999). Indicators for sustainable development: Theory, method, applications - A report to the Balaton Group. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development (USD).
25. George, C. (1999). Test for sustainable development through environmental assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 19, 175-200.
26. Characklis, G.W., & Richards, D.J. (1999). The evolution of industrial environmental performance metrics: Trends and challenges. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 6, 3-13.
27. Frosch, R.A. (1999). Sustainability engineering (Editorial). The Bridge, 29.
28. Jin, X., & High, K.A. (2003a). Towards the best practice environmental sustainability metrics for chemical engineers: Using a hierarchical life cycle impact assessment, Proceedings of Annual AICHE Meeting, November, San Francisco, CA.
29. Derwent, R.G., & Jenkin, M.E. (1991). Hydrocarbons and the long-range transport of ozone and PAN across Europe. Atmospheric Environment, 25, 1661-1678.
30. Cater, W.P.L. (1994). Development of ozone reactivity scales for volatile organic compounds. Journal of Air & Waste Management Association, 44, 881-899.
31. Cater, W.P.L. (1998). Updated maximum incremental reactivity scale for regulatory applications. Preliminary Report to California Air Resources Board (ARE), Sacramento, CA: California ARB.
32. Bergin, M.S., Russell, A.G., & Milford, J.B. (1995). Quantification of individual VOC reactivity using a chemically-detailed, three-dimensional photochemical model. Environmental Science and Technology, 29, 3029-3037.
33. Murray, C.L., & Lopez, A. (1996). The global burden of disease, World Health Organization, World Bank, and Harvard School of Public Health (Boston, MA).
34. Jin, X., & High, K.A. (2003b). Towards the current best practice metric for assessing environmental sustainability of manufacturing processes, Proceedings of the 7th Annual Green Chemistry and Engineering Conference, June 23-26, Washington, DC.
35. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). (1991). OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews. A synthesis report by the Group on the State of the Environment, Paris: OECD.
36. Pykh, Y. A., Kennedy, E.T., & Grant, W.E. (2000). An overview of systems analysis methods in delineating environmental quality indices. Ecological Modelling, 130, 25-38.
37. De Kruijf, H.A.M., & Vuuren, D.P.V. (1998). Following sustainable development in relation to the north-south dialogue: Ecosystem health and sustainability indicators. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 40, 4-14.
38. Wenzel, H., Hauschild, M., & Alting, L. (1997). Environmental assessment of products (Volumes 1 and 2), London: Chapman & Hall.
39. Heijungs, R. (Final Editor), Guinée J.B., Huppes G., Lamkreijer R.M., Udo de Haes H.A., Wegener Sleeswijk A., Ansems A.M.M., Eggels P.G., van Duin R., de Goede H.P. (1992). Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Products. Guide (Part 1) and Backgrounds (Part 2), Leiden, The Netherlands: CML (Centre of Environmental Science).
40. Guinee, J.B. (2002). Handbook on life cycle assessment: Operational guide to the ISO standards, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
41. Goedkoop, M., & Spriensma, R. (2000), The Ecoindicator 99: A damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessment - Methodology report, http://www.pre.nl.
42. Saling, P., & Wall, C. (2002). Eco-efficiency analysis as a decision-making tool in the design of sustainable chemical processes. Proceedings of the 2002 AICHE Annual Meeting, Indianapolis, IN.
43. Bare, J.C., Norris, G.A., Pennington, D.W., & Mckone, T. (2003). TRACI: The tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 6, 49-78.
44. Culaba, A.B., & Purvis, M.R.I. (1999), A methodol ogy for the life cycle and sustainability analysis of manufacturing processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 7, 435-445.
45. Lankey, R.L., & Anastas, P.T. (2002). Life-cycle approaches for assessing green chemistry technologies. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 41, 4498-4502.
46. Jensen, A.A., Ekington, J., Christiansen, K., Hoffmann L., Miller, B.T., Schmidt, A. & van Dijk, F. (2002). Life cycle assessment (LCA): A guide to approaches, experiences and information sources, Copenhagen, Denmark: European Environment Agency (EEA).
47. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (1996). ISO 14040: Life cycle assessment general principles and practices, Geneva, Switzerland: ISO.
48. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Europe. (1997). Life cycle assessment and conceptually related programmes, Brussels, Belgium: SETAC Europe.
49. Bare, J.C., Hofstetter, P., Pennington, D.W., & Udo de Haes, H.A. (2000). Life cycle impact assessment workshop summary; Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5, 319-326.
50. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Europe. (1999). Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle assessment. International Journal of LCA, 4, 66-74, 167-174.
51. Lenz, R., Malkina-Pykh, I.G., & Pykh, Y. (2000). Introduction and overview. Ecological Modelling, 130, 1-11.
52. Malkina-Pykh, I.G. (2002). Integrated assessment models and response function models: Pros and cons for sustainable development indices design. Ecological Modeling, 2, 93-108.