IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i6p504-d71022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Four Sustainability Paradigms for Environmental Management: A Methodological Analysis and an Empirical Study Based on 30 Italian Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Fabio Zagonari

    (Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche, Università di Bologna, via Angherà 22, Rimini 47900, Italy)

Abstract

This paper develops an empirical methodology to consistently compare alternative sustainability paradigms (weak sustainability (WS), strong sustainability (SS), a-growth (AG), and de-growth (DG)) and different assessment approaches (LCA, CBA, and MCA) within alternative relationship frameworks (economic general equilibrium (EGE) and ecosystem services (ESS)). The goal is to suggest different environmental interventions (e.g., projects vs. policies) for environmental management at national, regional, or local levels. The top-down methodology is then applied to 30 interdependent industries in Italy for three pollutants and four resources during two periods. The industries were prioritized in terms of interventions to be taken to diminish pollution damage and resource depletion, whereas sustainability paradigms were compared in terms of their likelihood ( i.e. , WS > AG = DG > SS), robustness ( i.e. , AG > SS > DG > WS), effectiveness ( i.e. , SS > AG > DG > WS), and feasibility ( i.e. , SS > DG > WS > AG). Proper assessment approaches for projects are finally identified for situations when policies are infeasible (e.g., LCA in WS and SS, MCA in DG and SS within ESS, CBA in WS, and AG within EGE), by suggesting MCA in WS within ESS once ecological services are linked to sustainability criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabio Zagonari, 2016. "Four Sustainability Paradigms for Environmental Management: A Methodological Analysis and an Empirical Study Based on 30 Italian Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-34, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:6:p:504-:d:71022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/504/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/6/504/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maarten Hajer & Måns Nilsson & Kate Raworth & Peter Bakker & Frans Berkhout & Yvo De Boer & Johan Rockström & Kathrin Ludwig & Marcel Kok, 2015. "Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-10, February.
    2. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2015. "Reaping the carbon rent: Abatement and overallocation profits in the European cement industry, insights from an LMDI decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 189-205.
    3. Cairns, Robert D. & Long, Ngo Van, 2006. "Maximin: a direct approach to sustainability," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 275-300, June.
    4. Maggie Roe & Ian Mell, 2013. "Negotiating value and priorities: evaluating the demands of green infrastructure development," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(5), pages 650-673, June.
    5. Robert D. Cairns, 2011. "Accounting for Sustainability: A Dissenting Opinion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(9), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Zhenghong Tang & Nan Zhao & Lei Zhang, 2012. "Can Planners Take The Leadership In Local Environmental Management?," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-24.
    7. Frank Krysiak & Daniela Krysiak, 2006. "Sustainability with Uncertain Future Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(4), pages 511-531, April.
    8. David Benson & Andrew Jordan & Laurence Smith, 2013. "Is Environmental Management Really More Collaborative? A Comparative Analysis of Putative ‘Paradigm Shifts’ in Europe, Australia, and the United States," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(7), pages 1695-1712, July.
    9. Hattam, Caroline & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne & Börger, Tobias & Burdon, Daryl & Hadjimichael, Maria & Delaney, Alyne & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Garrard, Samantha & Austen, Melanie C., 2015. "Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 126-138.
    10. Camaren Peter & Mark Swilling, 2014. "Linking Complexity and Sustainability Theories: Implications for Modeling Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-29, March.
    11. Adrian Boos & Karin Holm‐Müller, 2012. "A theoretical overview of the relationship between the resource curse and genuine savings as an indicator for “weak” sustainability," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 0(3), pages 145-159, August.
    12. David Yeung, 2014. "Dynamically consistent collaborative environmental management with production technique choices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 181-204, September.
    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. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Fabio Zagonari & Stella Tsani & Sotiris Mavrikis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2018. "Common Environment Policies in Different Sustainability Paradigms: Evidence From the Baltic, Adriatic, and Black Seas," DEOS Working Papers 1812, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    3. Fabio Zagonari, 2019. "Responsibility, inequality, efficiency, and equity in four sustainability paradigms: insights for the global environment from a cross-development analytical model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 2733-2772, December.
    4. Virginia Barba-Sánchez & Carlos Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2016. "Environmental Proactivity and Environmental and Economic Performance: Evidence from the Winery Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Anna Pietruszka-Ortyl & Małgorzata Ćwiek, 2021. "Social Facilitators of Specialist Knowledge Dispersion in the Digital Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Rocco Furferi & Yary Volpe & Franco Mantellassi, 2022. "Circular Economy Guidelines for the Textile Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Fabio Zagonari, 2019. "Multi-Criteria, Cost-Benefit, and Life-Cycle Analyses for Decision-Making to Support Responsible, Sustainable, and Alternative Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-35, February.
    8. Pankov, Susanne & Schneckenberg, Dirk & Velamuri, Vivek K., 2021. "Advocating sustainability in entrepreneurial ecosystems: Micro-level practices of sharing ventures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    9. Fabio Zagonari, 2020. "Comparing Religious Environmental Ethics to Support Efforts to Achieve Local and Global Sustainability: Empirical Insights Based on a Theoretical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-36, March.
    10. Paweł Ziemba & Jarosław Wątróbski & Magdalena Zioło & Artur Karczmarczyk, 2017. "Using the PROSA Method in Offshore Wind Farm Location Problems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.

    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. Cairns, Robert D. & Del Campo, Stellio & Martinet, Vincent, 2019. "Sustainability of an economy relying on two reproducible assets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 145-160.
    2. Cairns, Robert D. & Martinet, Vincent, 2021. "Growth and long-run sustainability," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(4), pages 381-402, August.
    3. Gyula Dörgő & Viktor Sebestyén & János Abonyi, 2018. "Evaluating the Interconnectedness of the Sustainable Development Goals Based on the Causality Analysis of Sustainability Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Sedakov, Artem & Qiao, Han & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A model of river pollution as a dynamic game with network externalities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 1136-1153.
    5. Li, Wei & Gao, Shubin, 2018. "Prospective on energy related carbon emissions peak integrating optimized intelligent algorithm with dry process technique application for China's cement industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 33-54.
    6. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Optimal diversity: Increasing returns versus recombinant innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 565-580, December.
    7. Björn Mestdagh & Olivier Sempiga & Luc Van Liedekerke, 2023. "The Impact of External Shocks on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Linking the COVID-19 Pandemic to SDG Implementation at the Local Government Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Mohammad Soltani Delgosha & Tahereh Saheb & Nastaran Hajiheydari, 0. "Modelling the Asymmetrical Relationships between Digitalisation and Sustainable Competitiveness: A Cross-Country Configurational Analysis," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-21.
    9. Ngo Long & Vincent Martinet, 2018. "Combining rights and welfarism: a new approach to intertemporal evaluation of social alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 35-64, January.
    10. Chiara Mio & Silvia Panfilo & Benedetta Blundo, 2020. "Sustainable development goals and the strategic role of business: A systematic literature review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3220-3245, December.
    11. Stefano Clo' & Gianluca Iannucci & Alessandro Tampieri, 2024. "Emission permits and firms' environmental responsibility," Working Papers - Economics wp2024_06.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    12. Scarborough, Helen & Burton, Michael P. & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2009. "Decision-Making in a Social Welfare Context," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47622, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.
    14. Junwei Liu & Vinay Kumar Gadi & Ankit Garg & Suriya Prakash Ganesan & Anasua GuhaRay, 2019. "A Novel Approach to Interpret Soil Moisture Content for Economical Monitoring of Urban Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Raza, Muhammad Yousaf & Lin, Boqiang, 2023. "Future outlook and influencing factors analysis of natural gas consumption in Bangladesh: An economic and policy perspectives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    16. Vincent Martinet & Pedro Gajardo & Michel De Lara & Héctor Ramírez Cabrera, 2011. "Bargaining with intertemporal maximin payoffs," EconomiX Working Papers 2011-7, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    17. Jan Anton van Zanten & Rob van Tulder, 2020. "Beyond COVID-19: Applying “SDG logics” for resilient transformations," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 451-464, December.
    18. Huang, Yun-Hsun & Chang, Yi-Lin & Fleiter, Tobias, 2016. "A critical analysis of energy efficiency improvement potentials in Taiwan's cement industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-26.
    19. Frédéric Branger & Jean-Pierre Ponssard & Oliver Sartor & Misato Sato, 2015. "EU ETS, Free Allocations, and Activity Level Thresholds: The Devil Lies in the Details," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 401-437.
    20. d'Autume, Antoine & Schubert, Katheline, 2008. "Hartwick's rule and maximin paths when the exhaustible resource has an amenity value," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 260-274, November.

    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:8:y:2016:i:6:p:504-:d:71022. 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.