IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v3y2011i2p469-499d11435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Halog

    (Research Group for Industrial Ecology, LCA and Systems Sustainability (IELCASS), School of Forest Resources, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, USA)

  • Yosef Manik

    (Research Group for Industrial Ecology, LCA and Systems Sustainability (IELCASS), School of Forest Resources, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469, USA)

Abstract

The need for integrated methodological framework for sustainability assessment has been widely discussed and is urgent due to increasingly complex environmental system problems. These problems have impacts on ecosystems and human well-being which represent a threat to economic performance of countries and corporations. Integrated assessment crosses issues; spans spatial and temporal scales; looks forward and backward; and incorporates multi-stakeholder inputs. This study aims to develop an integrated methodology by capitalizing the complementary strengths of different methods used by industrial ecologists and biophysical economists. The computational methodology proposed here is systems perspective, integrative, and holistic approach for sustainability assessment which attempts to link basic science and technology to policy formulation. The framework adopts life cycle thinking methods—LCA, LCC, and SLCA; stakeholders analysis supported by multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA); and dynamic system modelling. Following Pareto principle, the critical sustainability criteria, indicators and metrics ( i.e. , hotspots) can be identified and further modelled using system dynamics or agent based modelling and improved by data envelopment analysis (DEA) and sustainability network theory (SNT). The framework is being applied to development of biofuel supply chain networks. The framework can provide new ways of integrating knowledge across the divides between social and natural sciences as well as between critical and problem-solving research.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Halog & Yosef Manik, 2011. "Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-31, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:469-499:d:11435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/2/469/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/2/469/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony Halog, 2011. "Sustainable development of bioenergy sector: an integrated methodological framework," International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 338-361.
    2. Giuseppe Munda, 2006. "A NAIADE based approach for sustainability benchmarking," International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1/2), pages 65-78.
    3. Timo Kuosmanen & Mika Kortelainen, 2004. "Data Envelopment Analysis in Environmental Valuation: Environmental Performance, Eco-efficiency and Cost-Benefit Analysis," Others 0409004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    5. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    6. Brad Allenby, 2007. "Creating economic, social and environmental value: an information infrastructure perspective," International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(5/6), pages 618-631.
    7. Bouman, Mathijs & Heijungs, Reinout & van der Voet, Ester & van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Huppes, Gjalt, 2000. "Material flows and economic models: an analytical comparison of SFA, LCA and partial equilibrium models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 195-216, February.
    8. Matthias Finkbeiner & Erwin M. Schau & Annekatrin Lehmann & Marzia Traverso, 2010. "Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(10), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Timo Kuosmanen & Mika Kortelainen, 2005. "Measuring Eco‐efficiency of Production with Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 59-72, October.
    10. Por, Andras & Stahl, Janos & Temesi, Jozsef, 1990. "Decision support system for production control: Multiple criteria decision making in practice," Engineering Costs and Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 213-218, October.
    11. Liang Liang & Feng Yang & Wade Cook & Joe Zhu, 2006. "DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 35-49, July.
    12. Anthony Halog, 2009. "Models for evaluating energy, environmental and sustainability performance of biofuels value chain," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 32(1/2), pages 83-101.
    13. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    14. Pleanjai, Somporn & Gheewala, Shabbir H., 2009. "Full chain energy analysis of biodiesel production from palm oil in Thailand," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(Supplemen), pages 209-214, November.
    15. Daniel Tyteca, 1997. "Linear Programming Models for the Measurement of Environmental Performance of Firms—Concepts and Empirical Results," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 183-197, May.
    16. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    17. Emrouznejad, Ali & Parker, Barnett R. & Tavares, Gabriel, 2008. "Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: A survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 151-157, September.
    18. Ruby Pineda‐Henson & Alvin B. Culaba & Guillermo A. Mendoza, 2002. "Evaluating Environmental Performance of Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Life‐Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 6(1), pages 15-28, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    2. Kuosmanen, Timo & Kortelainen, Mika, 2007. "Valuing environmental factors in cost-benefit analysis using data envelopment analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 56-65, April.
    3. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    4. Mahlberg, Bernhard & Luptacik, Mikulas & Sahoo, Biresh K., 2011. "Examining the drivers of total factor productivity change with an illustrative example of 14 EU countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 60-69.
    5. Feng Li & Qingyuan Zhu & Liang Liang, 2019. "A new data envelopment analysis based approach for fixed cost allocation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 347-372, March.
    6. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Emrouznejad, Ali & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "A taxonomy and review of the fuzzy data envelopment analysis literature: Two decades in the making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(3), pages 457-472, November.
    7. Behrouz Arabi & Susila Munisamy Doraisamy & Ali Emrouznejad & Alireza Khoshroo, 2017. "Eco-efficiency measurement and material balance principle: an application in power plants Malmquist Luenberger Index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 221-239, August.
    8. Ji, Xiang & Li, Guo & Wang, Zhaohua, 2017. "Impact of emission regulation policies on Chinese power firms’ reusable environmental investments and sustainable operations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 163-177.
    9. Fukuyama, Hirofumi & Weber, William L., 2010. "A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 398-409, October.
    10. José Carlos Romero & Pedro Linares, 2021. "Multiple Criteria Decision-Making as an Operational Conceptualization of Energy Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    11. Thies, Christian & Kieckhäfer, Karsten & Spengler, Thomas S. & Sodhi, Manbir S., 2019. "Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 1-21.
    12. Georgios Tsaples & Jason Papathanasiou & Andreas C. Georgiou, 2022. "An Exploratory DEA and Machine Learning Framework for the Evaluation and Analysis of Sustainability Composite Indicators in the EU," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(13), pages 1-27, June.
    13. Zhou, Haibo & Yang, Yi & Chen, Yao & Zhu, Joe, 2018. "Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: The origins, development and future directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 1-16.
    14. OA Carboni & P. Russu, 2014. "Measuring Environmental and Economic Efficiency in Italy: an Application of the Malmquist-DEA and Grey Forecasting Model," Working Paper CRENoS 201401, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    15. Xiang Ji & Jiasen Sun & Qunwei Wang & Qianqian Yuan, 2019. "Revealing Energy Over-Consumption and Pollutant Over-Emission Behind GDP: A New Multi-criteria Sustainable Measure," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 54(4), pages 1391-1421, December.
    16. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    17. Managi, Shunsuke & Kaneko, Shinji, 2009. "Environmental performance and returns to pollution abatement in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1643-1651, April.
    18. Halkos, George & Petrou, Kleoniki Natalia, 2018. "A critical review of the main methods to treat undesirable outputs in DEA," MPRA Paper 90374, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Ang, Sheng & Chen, Chien-Ming, 2016. "Pitfalls of decomposition weights in the additive multi-stage DEA model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 139-153.
    20. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.

    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:3:y:2011:i:2:p:469-499:d:11435. 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.