IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i6p1781-d149558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Development and Use of Sustainability Criteria in SuRF-UK’s Sustainable Remediation Framework

Author

Listed:
  • R. Paul Bardos

    (R3 Environmental Technology Ltd., Reading RG6 6AT, UK
    School of Environment and Technology, University of Brighton, Brighton BN2 4AT, UK)

  • Hayley F. Thomas

    (Shell Global Solutions International B.V., 2288GS Rijswijk, The Netherlands)

  • Jonathan W. N. Smith

    (Shell Global Solutions (UK) Ltd., London SE1 7NA, UK
    Groundwater Protection & Restoration Group, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK)

  • Nicola D. Harries

    (CL:AIRE, London WC1B 3QJ, UK)

  • Frank Evans

    (National Grid Property, Warwick CV34 6DA, UK)

  • Richard Boyle

    (Homes England, 2 Rivergate Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6EH, UK)

  • Trevor Howard

    (Environment Agency, Bristol BS1 5AH, UK)

  • Richard Lewis

    (WSP Remediation, London WC2A 1AF, UK)

  • Alan O. Thomas

    (Environmental Resources Management, Oxford OX2 0QS, UK)

  • Angela Haslam

    (Environment Agency, Bristol BS1 5AH, UK)

Abstract

Sustainability considerations have become widely recognised in contaminated land management and are now accepted as an important component of remediation planning and implementation around the world. The Sustainable Remediation Forum for the UK (SuRF-UK) published guidance on sustainability criteria for consideration in drawing up (or framing) assessments, organised across 15 “headline” categories, five for the environment element of sustainability, five for the social, and five for the economic. This paper describes how the SuRF-UK indicator guidance was developed, and the rationale behind its structure and approach. It describes its use in remediation option appraisal in the UK, and reviews the international papers that have applied or reviewed it. It then reviews the lessons learned from its initial use and the opinions and findings of international commentators, and concludes with recommendations on how the indicator categories might be further refined in the future. The key findings of this review are that the SuRF-UK framework and indicator guidance is well adopted into practice in the UK. It is widely recognised as the most appropriate mechanism to support sustainability-based decision making in contaminated land decision making. It has influenced the development of other national and international guidance and standards on sustainable remediation. However, there is room for some fine tuning of approach based on the lessons learned during its application.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Paul Bardos & Hayley F. Thomas & Jonathan W. N. Smith & Nicola D. Harries & Frank Evans & Richard Boyle & Trevor Howard & Richard Lewis & Alan O. Thomas & Angela Haslam, 2018. "The Development and Use of Sustainability Criteria in SuRF-UK’s Sustainable Remediation Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1781-:d:149558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1781/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1781/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Dixon & Gaye Pottinger & Yasmin Pocock & Mike Waters, 2005. "A National Survey of the Role of the UK Development Industry in UK Brownfield Regeneration," ERES eres2005_159, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mancini, Susanna & Casale, Marco & Rossi, Piercarlo & Faraudello, Alessandra & Dino, Giovanna Antonella, 2023. "Operative instruments to support public authorities and industries for the supply of raw materials: A decision support tool to evaluate the sustainable exploitation of extractive waste facilities," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Xueting Shao & Feiyu Wang & R. Paul Bardos & Yimin Sang & Yong Ren & Mingyu Qin & Hairong Wang, 2021. "A Questionnaire Survey on Contaminated Site Regulators’ View of Implementing Green and Sustainable Remediation in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    3. Tiankui Li & Yi Liu & Sijie Lin & Yangze Liu & Yunfeng Xie, 2019. "Soil Pollution Management in China: A Brief Introduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Braun, Adeli Beatriz & Trentin, Adan William da Silva & Visentin, Caroline & Thomé, Antônio, 2020. "Relevance of sustainable remediation to contaminated sites manage in developed and developing countries: Case of Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tim Dixon, 2006. "Integrating Sustainability into Brownfield Regeneration: Rhetoric or Reality? -- An Analysis of the UK Development Industry," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 237-267, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1781-:d:149558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.