Methods for Measuring and Evaluating Sustainability: State-of-the Art, Challenges, and Future Developments

作者: Kirstin Kleeberg , Katja Schneider , Michael Nippa

DOI: 10.1002/9781118991978.HCES174

关键词: Field (computer science)Variety (cybernetics)SustainabilityPersonalizationDefragmentationValue (ethics)Specialization (logic)EngineeringManagement scienceNovelty

摘要: By now, the term sustainability suffers from being degenerated into a buzzword resulting in an exceptionally large amount and variety of literature. Likely due to this, dispersal descriptions, perspectives, facets regarding sustainability-assessing methods reveals deficits terms theoretical methodological rigor, novelty, practical usefulness. Against this background, article contains overview eight selected tools for assessment. The qualitative review current research articles concerning energy technologies highlights objectives purposes, origins, main procedures, fields application, examples as well critical acclaim each method. Next several considerations general such role principles, criteria, indicators are illustrated important challenges measuring sustainability. Thereby, we develop six-stage model that supports choice appropriate method In doing so, derive two fundamental namely “content-related” features “performance-related” features. At same time, underlines coexistence various different, highly complex methods, approaches, assess We evidence increasing defragmentation specialization on our findings likely foster further theoretical, conceptual, analytical developments field. This also promotes customization value assessment methods. Keywords: sustainability methods; selection methodologies; sustainability principles; criteria indicators; references

参考文章(121)
Robert G. Hunt, William E. Franklin, R. G. Hunt, LCA — How it came about International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. ,vol. 1, pp. 4- 7 ,(1996) , 10.1007/BF02978624
Thomas Bruckner, Robbie Morrison, Tobias Wittmann, Public policy modeling of distributed energy technologies: strategies, attributes, and challenges Ecological Economics. ,vol. 54, pp. 328- 345 ,(2005) , 10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2004.12.032
Andrea Masini, Emanuela Menichetti, Investment decisions in the renewable energy sector: An analysis of non-financial drivers Technological Forecasting and Social Change. ,vol. 80, pp. 510- 524 ,(2013) , 10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2012.08.003
Andrea Herbst, Felipe Toro, Felix Reitze, Eberhard Jochem, Introduction to Energy Systems Modelling Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics. ,vol. 148, pp. 111- 135 ,(2012) , 10.1007/BF03399363
Gerald Rebitzer, Shinichiro Nakamura, Environmental Life Cycle Costing CRC Press. pp. 35- 58 ,(2008) , 10.1201/9781420054736
Walter Kloepffer, Life cycle sustainability assessment of products International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. ,vol. 13, pp. 89- 95 ,(2008) , 10.1065/LCA2008.02.376
G. Rebitzer, T. Ekvall, R. Frischknecht, D. Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W.-P. Schmidt, S. Suh, B.P. Weidema, D.W. Pennington, Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications Environment International. ,vol. 30, pp. 701- 720 ,(2004) , 10.1016/J.ENVINT.2003.11.005
Henrik Lund, Tool: The EnergyPLAN Energy System Analysis Model Renewable Energy Systems#R##N#The Choice and Modeling of 100% Renewable Solutions. pp. 51- 73 ,(2010) , 10.1016/B978-0-12-375028-0.00004-2
C.W. Caulfield, S.P. Maj, A case for systems thinking and system dynamics systems man and cybernetics. ,vol. 5, pp. 2793- 2798 ,(2001) , 10.1109/ICSMC.2001.971932
James A. Scott, William Ho, Prasanta K. Dey, A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems Energy. ,vol. 42, pp. 146- 156 ,(2012) , 10.1016/J.ENERGY.2012.03.074