Achieving sustainable biomaterials by maximising waste recovery

Waste Management

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1499-1508

  Glew, David ^a   Stringer, Lindsay C ^b   McQueen Mason, Simon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biomaterial; Expert focus group; Interviews; Legislation; Policy; Waste

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIALS INDUSTRY; CERTIFICATION STANDARDS; FOCUS GROUPS; INTERVIEWS; POLICY MAKERS; RECOVERY TECHNOLOGY; WASTE HIERARCHIES; WASTE RECOVERIES;

BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; PUBLIC POLICY; RECOVERY; WASTES;

BIOMATERIALS;

BIOMATERIAL; BIOPLAST; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

LOGISTICS; POLICY MAKING; RECOVERY; RECYCLING; STANDARD (REGULATION); SUSTAINABILITY; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

ARTICLE; FIBER; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; PAPER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCT RECOVERY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RECYCLING; STANDARD; WASTE DISPOSAL;

BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; BIOTECHNOLOGY; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84881258985     PISSN: 0956053X     EISSN: 18792456     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2013.03.005     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Billson, J.M. 2006. Conducting Focus Group Research Across Cultures: Consistency and Comparability. WeD Working Paper 27. Economic and Social Research Council.
2. Black M.J., Whittaker C., Hosseini S.A., Diaz-chavez R., Woods J., Murphy R.J. Life cycle assessment and sustainability methodologies for assessing industrial crops, processes and end products. Industrial Crops and Products 2011, 45:12.
3. Boer J.D. Sustainability labelling schemes: the logic of their claims and their functions for stakeholders. Business Strategy and the Environment 2003, 12:254-264.
4. Brenner M., Brown J., Canter D. Interviewing and Representation in Qualitative Research 1985, Academic Press, London.
5. de Lange W.J., Stafford W.H.L., Forsyth G.G., le Maitre D.C. Incorporating stakeholder preferences in the selection of technologies for using invasive alien plants as a bio-energy feedstock: applying the analytical hierarchy process. Journal of Environmental Management 2012, 99:76-83.
6. European Commission, 2000. Directive on the End of Life Vehicles. European Commission.
7. European Commission, 2003. Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), European Commission.
8. European Commission, 2009. In: Studies, I.F.P.T. (Ed.), Study on the Selection of Waste Streams for End of Waste Assessment. Seville: Joint Research Centre.
9. European Commission, 2011. Buying green! Green public procurement in Europe, a summary. In: Environment (Ed.), European Commission.
10. Flowerdew, R., Martin, D., 2005. Methods in Human Geography: A Guide for Students Doing a Research Project, Harlow, Pearson Education Limited.
11. Gallagher E. The Gallagher review of the indirect effects of biofuels. Renewable Fuels Agency 2008, 42:21.
12. Gillham B. Research Interviewing: The Range of Techniques 2005, Open University Press, Maidenhead.
13. Glew D., Stringer L.C., Acquaye A.A., McQueen-Mason S. How do end of life scenarios influence the environmental impact of product supply chains? Comparing biomaterial and petrochemical products. Journal of Cleaner Production 2012, 29-30:122-131.
14. Golden J.S., Dooley K.J., Anderies J.M., Thompson B.H., Gereffi G., Pratson L. Sustainable product indexing: navigating the challenge of ecolabeling. Ecology and Society 2010, 15.
15. Hocking J.S., Lim M.S.C., Read T., Hellard M. Postal surveys of physicians gave superior response rates over telephone interviews in a randomized trial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006, 59:521-524.
16. Holsti O.R. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities 1969, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
17. Lieten, I., 2010. Turning challenges into opportunities. In: The Knowledge Based Bio-Economy Towards 2020, 2010 Square Conference Centre Brussels.
18. Luiten E., van Lente H., Blok K. Slow technologies and government intervention: energy efficiency in industrial process technologies. Technovation 2006, 26:1029-1044.
19. Lynes J.K., Andrachuk M. Motivations for corporate social and environmental responsibility: a case study of Scandinavian Airlines. Journal of International Management 2008, 14:377-390.
20. Morgan-Davies C., Waterhouse T. Future of the hills of Scotland: Stakeholders' preferences for policy priorities. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:387-398.
21. Nemoto J., Goto M. Technological externalities and economies of vertical integration in the electric utility industry. International Journal of Industrial Organization 2004, 22:67-81.
22. Neuman L. Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches 2004, Pearson Education Inc., Boston.
23. Nicolli F., Johnstone N., Söderholm P. Resolving failures in recycling markets: the role of technological innovation. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 2012, 14:261-288.
24. NNFCC, 2012. Market Review, Bio-based Products, April 2012. National Non Food Crops Centre.
25. OECD, 2001. The Application of Biotechnology to Industrial Sustainability. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
26. Office of Fair Trading, 2009. Government in markets: why competition matters - a guide for policy makers. In: Copyright, C. (Ed.), Office of Fair Trading.
27. Pagell M. Understanding the factors that enable and inhibit the integration of operations, purchasing and logistics. Journal of Operations Management 2004, 22:459-487.
28. Regula-Herzog A., Rodgers W.L. Age and response rates to interview sample surveys. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences 1988, 43:200-205.
29. Ross S., Evans D. The environmental effect of reusing and recycling a plastic-based packaging system. Journal of Cleaner Production 2003, 11:561-571.
30. Sacramento-Rivero J.C. A methodology for evaluating the sustainability of biorefineries: framework and indicators. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2012, 6:32-44.
31. Schmitt E., Bura R., Gustafson R., Cooper J., Vajzovic A. Converting lignocellulosic solid waste into ethanol for the State of Washington: an investigation of treatment technologies and environmental impacts. Bioresource Technology 2012, 104:400-409.
32. Searchinger T.D., Hamburg S.P., Melillo J., Chameides W., Havlik P., Kammen D.M., Likens G.E., Obersteiner M., Oppenheimer M., Robertson G.P., Schlesinger W.H., Tilman G.D., Lubowski R. Carbon calculations to consider - response. Science 2010, 327. 781-a.
33. Shen L., Worrell E., Patel M.K. Open-loop recycling: a LCA case study of PET bottle-to-fibre recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2010, 55:34-52.
34. Tang K., Davis A. Critical factors in the determination of focus group size. Family Practice 1995, 12:474-475.
35. Tilman D., Socolow R., Foley J.A., Hill J., Larson E., Lynd L., Pacala S., Reilly J., Searchinger T., Somerville C., Williams R. Beneficial biofuels - the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 2009, 325:270-271.
36. Tompkins E.L., Few R., Brown K. Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change. Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 88:1580-1592.
37. Vandermeulen V., Van der Steen M., Stevens C.V., Van Huylenbroeck G. Industry expectations regarding the transition toward a biobased economy. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2012, 6:453-464.