Inclusion of social indicators in decision support tools for the selection of sustainable site remediation options

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 184, Issue , 2016, Pages 45-56

  Cappuyns, Valérie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Communication; Health and safety; Site remediation; Social indicators; Stakeholders; Sustainability assessment; Sustainable remediation

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ECOSYSTEMS; REMEDIATION; SITE SELECTION; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

DECISION SUPPORTS; HEALTH AND SAFETY; REMEDIATION PROJECTS; SITE REMEDIATION; SOCIAL INDICATORS; STAKEHOLDER; SUPPORT TOOL; SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; SUSTAINABLE REMEDIATION; UNITED KINGDOM;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

COMMUNICATION NETWORK; COST ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; GUIDELINE; HEALTH AND SAFETY; HOLISTIC APPROACH; LAND MANAGEMENT; REMEDIATION; SOCIAL INDICATOR; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

ARTICLE; BIOREMEDIATION; COMMUNITY INTEGRATION; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; ETHICS; EVALUATION STUDY; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; LAW; NEIGHBORHOOD; NOISE POLLUTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; SOCIAL ASPECT; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED KINGDOM; DECISION MAKING; DEMOGRAPHY; ECOSYSTEM; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; ENVIRONMENT; PROCEDURES; SOCIOECONOMICS;

UNITED KINGDOM;

CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION; HUMANS; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85002619206     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: 10958630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.035     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. CL: AIRE, Sustainable Remediation Forum. Review of Published Sustainability Indicator Sets: How Applicable Are They to Contaminated Land Remediation Indicator-set Development? Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments. SuRF-UK report, 2009, CL: AIRE, London, UK ISBN 978-1-905046-18-8, 126 pp.
2. CL: AIRE, Sustainable Remediation Forum UK. A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Soil and Groundwater Remediation. Published by Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments (CL: AIRE). SuRF-UK report, 2010, CL: AIRE, London. UK ISBN 978-1-905046-1292-5, 53p.
3. CL: AIRE, SuRF-UK. Annex 1: the SuRF-UK Indicator Set for Sustainable Remediation Assessment. Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments (CL: AIRE). SuRF-UK report, 2011, CL: AIRE, London, UK ISBN 978-1-905046-1292-5, 12 pp.
4. CL AIRE & NICOLE, A Review of the Legal and Regulatory Basis for Sustainable Remediation in the European Union and the United Kingdom. Joint SuRF-UK/NICOLE report, 2015, CL: AIRE, London, UK.
5. ARUP, SPeAR®Handbook 2012. External Version, 2012, 24 Retrieved from http://www.arup.com/Projects/smarte.aspx.
6. Balasubramaniam, A., Boyle, A.R., Voulvoulis, N., Improving petroleum contaminated land remediation decision-making through the MCA weighting process. Chemosphere 66:5 (2007), 791–798.
7. Bardos, P., Lewis, A., Nortcliff, S., Matiotti, C., Marot, F., Sullivan, T., Review of Decision Support Tools for Contaminated Land and Their Use in Europe. 2002, Austrian Federal Environment Agency 2002 on behalf of CLARINET.
8. Bardos, P., Bone, B., Boyle, R., Ellis, D., Evans, F., Haries, N.D., Smith, J.W.N., Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK. Framew. Remediat. J. 21:2 (2011), 77–100.
9. Bardos, R.P., Bone, B.D., Boyle, R., Evans, F., Harries, N.D., Howard, T., Smith, J.W.N., The rationale for simple approaches for sustainability assessment and management in contaminated land practice. Sci. Total Environ. 563–564 (2016), 755–768.
10. Beinat, E., van Drunen, M.A., Janssen, R., Nijboer, M.H., Koolenbrander, J.G.M., Okx, J.P., Schütte, A.R., The REC Decision Support System for Comparing Soil Remediation Options; a Methodology Based on Risk Reduction, Environmental Merit and Costs. September 1997, 1997, CUR/NOBIS 93 pp.
11. Bewley, R., Parkman, R., Bardos, P., van Zutphen, M., Smith, J.W.N., The regulatory basis for sustainable remediation practice in the European union and United Kingdom. 13th International UFZ-Deltares Conference on Sustainable Use and Management of Soil, Sediment and Water Resources, 2015, 9–12 June 2015, Copenhagen, Denmark.
12. Bohmholdt, A., Evaluating the triple bottom line using sustainable return on investment. Remed. J. 24:4 (2014), 53–64.
13. Bonano, E.J., Apostolakis, G.E., Salter, P.F., Ghassemi, A., Jennings, S., Application of risk assessment and decision analysis to the evaluation, ranking and selection of environmental remediation alternatives. J. Hazard. Mater 71 (2000), 35–57.
14. Burger, J., Environmental management: integrating ecological evaluation, remediation, restoration, natural resource damage assessment and long-term stewardship on contaminated lands. Sci. Total Environ. 400:1–3 (2008), 6–19.
15. Cappuyns, V., LCA based evaluation of site remediation Opportunities and limitations. Chim. Oggi Chem. Today 31:2 (2013), 18–21.
16. Cappuyns, V., Environmental impacts of soil remediation activities: quantitative and qualitative tools applied on three case studies. J. Clean. Prod. 52 (2013), 145–154.
17. Carlon, C., Critto, A., Ramieri, E., Marcomini, A., DESYRE: DEcision Support sYstem for the REhabilitation of contaminated megasites. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 3:2 (2007), 211–222.
18. Chen, J., Sun, G.X., Wang, X.X., de Lorenzo, V., Rosen, B.P., Zhu, Y.G., Volatilization of arsenic from polluted soil by Pseudomonas putida engineered for expression of the arsM Arsenic(III) S-adenosine methyltransferase gene. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48:17 (2014), 10337–10344.
19. CLARINET, Sustainable Land Management: an Overview. A Report from the Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies., 2002 113 pp. Available from: www.commonforum.eu/Documents/DOC/Clarinet/rblm_report.pdf.
20. Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 357 (1997), 254–260.
21. Döberl, G., Ortmann, W., Frühwirth, W., Introducing a goal-oriented sustainability assessment method to support decision making in contaminated site management. Environ. Sci. Policy 25 (2013), 207–217.
22. EEA, Progress in Management of Contaminated Sites. 2014 (CSI 015/LSI 003) - Assessment published May 2014, 40 pp.
23. Ellis, D.E., Hadley, P.W., (eds.) Sustainable Remediation White Paper, “Integrating Sustainable Principles, Practices, and Metrics into Remediation Projects”. Remediation, vol. 19(3), 2009, 5–114.
24. Fevre-Gautier, A.L., Colombano, S., Saada, A., Beranger, S., Merly, C., Sustainable remediation strategies: multicriteria analysis to select and compare remediation techniques in a sustainability perspective. ConSoil 2010: 11th International UFZ-Deltares/TNO Conference on Management of Soil, Groundwater and Sediment, Sep 2010, Salzburg, Austria, 2010 8 pp.
25. Giove, S., Agostini, P., Critto, A., Semenzin, E., Marcomini, A., Decision support systems for the management of contaminated sites. A Multi-criteria approach. Linkov, et al. (eds.) Environmental Security in Harbors and Coastal Areas, 2007, Springer, The Netherlands, 267–273.
26. Golder Associates, GoldSET User Guide: a Decision Support Tool to Embedded Sustainability into Project Planning and Design. 2012 GoldSET Version V. 12.05.03; 2012.
27. Harbottle, M., Al-Tabbaa, A., Evans, C.W., Sustainability of land remediation. Part 1: overall analysis. P.I. Civ. Eng. Geotec. 161:2 (2008), 75–92.
28. Harclerode, M.A., Lal, P., Miller, M.E., Estimating social impacts of a remediation project life cycle with environmental footprint evaluation tools. Remediation 24:1 (2013), 5–20.
29. Harclerode, M., Ridsdale, D.R., Darmendrail, D., Bardos, P., Alexandrescu, F., Nathanail, P., Pizzol, L., Rizzo, E., Integrating the social dimension in remediation decision-making: state of the practice and way forward. Remediation 26 (2015), 11–42.
30. Harclerode, M.A., Lal, P., Miller, M.E., Quantifying global impacts to society from the consumption of natural resources during environmental remediation activities. J. Ind. Ecol. 20:3 (2016), 410–422.
31. Holland, K., Lewis, R., Tipton, K., Kamis, S., Dona, C., Petrovskis, E., Bull, L.P., Taege, D., Hook, C., Framework for integrating sustainability into remediation projects. Remediation 21:3 (2011), 7–38.
32. ISO, 2016. International Standards Organization, ISO 2016 ISO/DIS 18504 Soil quality, Guidance on sustainable remediation http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=62688 Accessed June 2016.
33. ITRC, Technology Overview. Green and Sustainable Remediation: State of the Science and Practice. 2011 Prepared by The Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council Green and Sustainable Remediation Team, 43 pp.
34. Janikowski, R., Kucharski, R., Sas-Nowosielska, A., Multi-criteria and multi-perspective analysis of contaminated land management methods. Environ. Monit. Assess. 60 (2000), 89–102.
35. Kalomoiri, A., Braida, W., A process for developing a sustainable remediation assessment matrix (SRAM). Int. J. Innovation Sustain. Dev. 7:3 (2013), 252–270.
36. Kotrba, P., Najmanovaa, J., Maceka, T., Rumla, T., Mackova, M., Genetically modified plants in phytoremediation of heavy metal and metalloid soil and sediment pollution. Biotechnol. Adv. 27:6 (2009), 799–810.
37. Lemming, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Bjerg, P.L., Life cycle assessment of soil and groundwater remediation technologies: literature review. Int. J. LCA 15 (2010), 115–127.
38. Lemming, G., Friis-Hansen, P., Bjerg, P.L., Risk-based economic decision analysis of remediation options at a PCE-contaminated site. J. Environ. Manage 91:5 (2010), 1169–1182.
39. Lovley, D.R., Cleaning up with genomics: applying molecular biology to bioremediation. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 1:1 (2003), 35–44.
40. Maring, L., van Duijne, H., Sinke, A., ABC-tool: assessment of benefit and costs for industrial contaminated sites. Proceedings, ConSoil 2003, May 12–16, ICC Gent, Belgium, 8th International FZK/TNO Conference on Contaminated Soil, Ghent, Belgium, 2003, 2994–3004.
41. Morio, M., Schädler, S., Finkel, M., Applying a multi-criteria genetic algorithm framework for brownfield reuse optimization: improving redevelopment options based on stakeholder preferences. J. Environ. Manage 130 (2013), 331–346.
42. Morvai, B., Introduction to an Ongoing Technology Development Project on Complex on Site Investigation Approach: NORISC – Network Oriented Risk-assessment by In-situ Screening of Contaminated Sites. 2002 Available from: www.norisc.com/download/cm2_norisc.doc.
43. Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Knowledge Economy Indicators, Work Package 7, State of the Art Report on Simulation and Indicators., 2005, Joint Research Centre, Ispra CIS8-CT-2004–502529 KEI, 29 pp.
44. Naval facilities Engineering Command, SiteWiseTM Version 2, User Guide. 2011, Batelle Memorial Institute, Ohio 81 pp.
45. NICOLE, Sustainable Remediation Working Group Report., 2012, NICOLE secretariat, The Netherlands Available from: www.nicole.org.
46. NICOLE, Risk-informed and Sustainable Remediation. Joint Position Statement. 2013, NICOLE and Common Forum 9 June 2013. Available from: http://www.nicole.org/uploadedfiles/2013%20NICOLE-Common-Forum-Joint-Position-Sustainable-Remediation.pdf.
47. Nijkamp, P., Rodenburg, C.A., Wagtendonk, A.J., Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield development: a comparative case study approach to polluted sites. Ecol. Econ. 40 (2002), 235–252.
48. Pizzol, L., Critto, A., Marcomini, A., A spatial decision support system for the risk-based management of contaminated sites: the DESYRE DSS. Marcomini, A., Suter, G., Critto, A., (eds.) Decision Support Systems for Risk-based Management of Contaminated Sites, 2008, Springer, Dordrecht, 157–178, 10.1007/978-0-387-09722-0.
49. Pollard, S.J.T., Brookes, A., Earl, N., Lowe, J., Kearney, T., Nathanail, C.P., Integrating decision tools for the sustainable management of land contamination. Sci. Total Environ. 1–3 (2004), 15–28.
50. Praamstra, T., Carbon footprint of soil remediation. Proceedings of the Green Remediation Conference; 2009 9–10 November 2009; Copenhagen, Denmark, 2009.
51. Rosén, L., Back, P.E., Söderqvist, T., Norrman, J., Brinkhoff, P., Norberg, T., Volchko, Y., Norin, M., Bergknut, M., Döberl, G., SCORE: a novel multi-criteria decision analysis approach to assessing the sustainability of contaminated land remediation. Sci. Total Environ. 511 (2015), 621–638.
52. Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York.
53. Schädler, S., Morio, M., Bartke, S., Rohr-Zänker, R., Finkel, M., Designing sustainable and economically attractive brownfield revitalization options using an integrated assessment model. J. Environ. Manage 92:3 (2011), 827–837.
54. Schädler, S., Morio, M., Bartke, S., Finkel, M., Integrated planning and spatial evaluation of megasite remediation and reuse options. J. Contam. Hydrol. 127:1–4 (2012), 88–100.
55. Scholz, R.W., Schnabel, U., Decision making under uncertainty in case of soil remediation. J. Environ. Manage 80:2 (2006), 132–147.
56. Smith, J.W.N., Kerrison, G., Benchmarking of decision-support tools used for tiered sustainable remediation appraisal. Water, air. Soil Pollut., 224, 2013, 1706.
57. Sorvari, J., Seppälä, J., A decision support tool to prioritize risk management options for contaminated sites. Sci. Total Environ. 408 (2010), 1786–1799.
58. Stewart, R.N., Purucker, S.T., An environmental decision support system for spatial assessment and selective remediation. Environ. Modell. Softw. 26:6 (2011), 751–760.
59. Sullivan, T., Yatsalo, B., Grebenkov, A., Linkov, I., Decision evaluation for complex risk network systems (DECERNS) software tool. Marcomini, A., et al. (eds.) Decision Support Systems for Risk-based Management of Contaminated Sites, 2009, Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 257–274, 10.1007/978-0-387-09722-0_12.
60. SURF, Sustainable remediation forum. Retrieved from http://www.sustainableremediation.org/about/, 2016 www.sustainableremediation.org/water/.
61. Tam, E.K., Byer, P.H., Remediation of contaminated lands: a decision methodology for site owners. J. Environ. Manage 64 (2002), 387–400.
62. US AF Centre for Engineering and the Environment, SRT, Sustainable Remediation Tool, User Guide. 2010 San Antonio, Texas, 143 pp http://www.afcee.af.mil/resources/technologytransfer/programsandinitiatives/sustainableremediation/srt/index.asp.
63. US EPA, Cleaning up the Nation's Waste Sites: Markets and Technology Trends: 2004 Edition, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. 2004 EPA 542-R-04–015, September 2004. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/pdf/PropertyStudy.pdf.
64. US EPA, Green Remediation: Incorporating Sustainable Environmental Practices into Remediation of Contaminated Sites. 2008 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA 542-R-08–002, April 2008. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/green-remediation-primer.pdf.
65. US EPA, Methodology for Understanding and Reducing a Project's Environmental Footprint. US U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. 2012 EPA 542-R-12–002, July 2012. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oswer/greenercleanups.
66. US EPA, Superfund Community Involvement Handbook. 2016 United States Office of Land and EPA 540-K-02-015, January 2016, 143 pp. Available from: https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/100000070.pdf.
67. van Drunen, M.A., Beinat, E., Nijboer, M., Okx, J.P., Multi-objective decision-making for soil remediation problems. Land Contam. Reclam. 13:4 (2005), 349–359.
68. Van Gestel, G., Flanders integrates sustainable soil remediation into other policies. 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Remediation, 2014, Soil Management Department, OVAM, Flanders, Belgium Ferrara (Italy) September 17-19, 2014.
69. Vega, A., Argus, R., Stockton, T., Black, P., Black, K., Stiber, N., SMARTe: an MCDA approach to revitalize communities and restore the environment. Marcomini, A., Suter, G., Critto, A., (eds.) Decision Support Systems for Risk-based Management of Contaminated Sites, 2008, Springer, Dordrecht, 179–204, 10.1007/978-0-387-09722-0.
70. Vegter, J.J., Lowe, J., Kasamas, H., (eds.) Sustainable Management of Contaminated Land: an Overview, 2002, Austrian Federal Environment Agency 2002 on behalf of CLARINET, 113 pp.
71. Volchko, Y., Bergknut, M., Rosén, L., Norrman, J., Söderqvist, T., Incorporating the soil function concept into sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives. J. Environ. Manage 129 (2013), 367–376.
72. Wedding, G.C., Crawford-Brown, D., Measuring site-level success in brownfield redevelopments: a focus on sustainability and green building. J. Environ. Manage 85 (2007), 483–495.
73. Weth, D., Case study: cost benefit analysis/multi-criteria analysis for a remediation project. ATO/CCMS Pilot Study: Evaluation of Demonstrated and Emerging Technologies for the Treatment and Clean up of Contaminated Land and Groundwater (Phase III) – Special Session on Decision Support Tools, 2000 Available from: http://www.cluin.info/download/partner/2000specialreport.pdf#page=73.
74. Zinovyev, S., Lodolo, A., Miertus, S., ICS-UNIDO: promoting sustainable POPs disposal and remediation technologies. Remediation Methods and Control Techniques. Organohalogen Comd 66 (2004), 1211–1215.