Traditional biomass stoves are a major global contributor to emissions that impact climate change and health. This paper reports emission factors of particulate matter (PM 2.5 ), carbon monoxide (CO), organic carbon (OC), black carbon (EC), optical absorption, and scattering from 46 South Asian, 48 Tibetan, and 4 Ugandan stoves. These measurements plus a literature review provide insight into the robustness of emission factors used in emission inventories. Tibetan dung stoves produced high average PM 2.5 emission factors (23 and 43 gkg −1 for chimney and open stoves) with low average EC (0.3 and 0.7 gkg −1 , respectively). Comparatively, PM 2.5 from South Asian stoves (7 gkg −1 ) was in the range of previous measurements and near values used in inventories. EC emission factors varied between stoves and fuels (p < 0.001), without corresponding differences in absorption; stoves that produced little EC, produced enough brown carbon to have about the same absorption as stoves with high EC emissions. In Tibetan dung stoves, for example, OC contributed over 20% of the absorption. Overall, EC emission factors were not correlated with PM 2.5 and were constrained to low values, relative to PM 2.5 , over a wide range of combustion conditions. The average measured EC emission factor (1 gkg −1 ), was near current inventory estimates.

No abstract

Monitoring progress toward sustainability goals requires a quantitative assessment method including indicators. Indicator sets and goals have typically been developed by experts, which may be scientifically robust but are often difficult to convey to society and may not include all societal values. A participatory assessment approach is emerging as a more holistic method for measuring sustainability. In this approach, local stakeholders play an integral part in the assessment process, assisted by experts. Here we reviewed 13 case studies from around the world that use a participatory approach to achieve sustainable natural resource management. Although similar in approach, most of them diverge in terms of methodology and extent of community engagement. The final set of indicators in each case is reflective of methodology, extent of community engagement, and amount of time and resources involved in the process. While the participatory approach is growing in popularity and increases the potential long-term success of the process (through increasing stakeholder literacy and ownership), the diversity of participatory methodology can complicate policy recommendations.

Recent years have witnessed an upsurge in certification schemes and sustainability assessment tools for bioenergy, however these mechanisms are often too generic, numerous and too broad for regional or local level implementation. Furthermore, these assessments are often weighted toward economic and environmental sustainability with less focus on social, cultural and institutional factors. This study was intended to overcome these limitations. We developed a community-driven regional assessment tool for forest-based bioenergy production in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (USA). Stakeholders representing local landowners, farmers, township supervisors, timberland management companies, venture capitalists, government organizations and local interest groups generated a preliminary list of criteria and indicators (C&I) in a series of focus groups and interviews, and narrowed the list using multiple criteria analysis (MCA) in a workshop. Participants ranked environmental protection as the most important and relevant sustainability criteria, although policy and governance, and institutional capacity were also weighted highly. The final set of C&I consisted of 17 criteria and 31 indicators (in parentheses): Economic (6), Environmental (7), Social (8), Policy and regulations (4) and Institutional capacity (6). This set reflected the general balance across sustainability principles valued by the stakeholders. While expert-developed sustainability assessments are routinely biased toward easily quantifiable indicators, the indicators that were considered important and relevant by our participants included both quantitative as well as qualitative indicators, in almost equal proportions. This participatory MCA method identified criteria and indicators that reflect the regional context and the concerns of local stakeholders, and data for many of these indicators are readily available.

"Our Common Future" harmonized development policies around a new sustainable development (SD) paradigm, and experts also emphasize the importance of a democratic and equitable approach to define and achieve sustainable development. However, SD targets and indicators are often defined by a suite of experts or a few stakeholder groups, far removed from on-the-ground conditions. The most common expert-led development framework, the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), promoted one set of targets and indicators for all developing countries. While progress towards these targets was routinely reported at the national scale, these targets may not reflect context-specific sustainable development. We evaluated the relevance and comprehensiveness of MDG 7 (environmental sustainability) for Nepal. Although Nepal has met most of the MDG 7 (e.g., forest cover, protected areas coverage, water and sanitation), on closer inspection these indicators do not provide adequate context for ensuring that these targets provide the intended levels of development. Simple forest cover and protected area indicators belie the dearth of ecological conservation on the ground, and water and sanitation indicators do not reflect the inequality of access based on poverty and regions. While the Millennium Development Goals align with broad sustainability concerns in Nepal, these indicators do not reveal its true development conditions.