Decision aid systems for evaluating sustainability: a critical survey

Brunner, Norbert; Starkl, Markus

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2003.12.001

Cited by 62 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to understand, for what reasons the considered stakeholders would support river water treatment, the above partial assessments in terms of the individual criteria were aggregated to an overall assessment: As the expected costs for the public and the health and environmental benefits could not be quantified with sufficient accuracy, only such aggregations could be used, that remain meaningful with ordinal data [46]. Therefore a simple outranking method, weighted voting, was used.…”

Section: Rationale For Treating Irrigation Water Prior To Its Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder Views, Financing and Policy Implications for Reuse of Wastewater for Irrigation: A Case from Hyderabad, India

Starkl

Brunner

Amerasinghe³

et al. 2015

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When flowing through Hyderabad, the capital of Telangana, India, the Musi River picks up (partially) treated and untreated sewage from the city. Downstream of the city, farmers use this water for the irrigation of rice and vegetables. Treatment of the river water before it is used for irrigation would address the resulting risks for health and the environment. To keep the costs and operational efforts low for the farmers, the use of constructed wetlands is viewed as a suitable option. Towards this end, the paper investigates the interests and perceptions of government stakeholders and famers on the treatment of wastewater for irrigation and further explores the consumer willingness to pay a higher price for cleaner produced vegetables. Full cost recovery from farmers and consumers cannot be expected, if mass scale treatment of irrigation water is implemented. OPEN ACCESSWater 2015, 7 301Instead, both consumers and farmers would expect that the government supports treatment of irrigation water. Most stakeholders associated with the government weigh health and environment so high, that these criteria outweigh cost concerns. They also support the banning of irrigation with polluted water. However, fining farmers for using untreated river water would penalize them for pollution caused by others. Therefore public funding of irrigation water treatment is recommended.

show abstract

Section: Rationale For Treating Irrigation Water Prior To Its Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder Views, Financing and Policy Implications for Reuse of Wastewater for Irrigation: A Case from Hyderabad, India

Starkl

Brunner

Amerasinghe³

et al. 2015

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further analysis and comparison of highly aggregated indices can be found in several earlier reviews (Krotscheck, 1997;Hertwic et al, 1997;Brunner and Starkl, 2004;Wrisberg et al, 2002).…”

Section: Environmental Sustainability Assessment By Environmental Prementioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Performance Indicators

Lapkin

2006

Renewables‐Based Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To define the most appropriate ECS as part of a collective policy-making and implementation process becomes complex and intuitive reasoning and expert judgement may not be sufficient to achieve a decision that satisfies all stakeholders (Brunner and Starkl, 2004). One approach for ensuring transparency and accountability in reaching a decision is the use of multi-criteria analysis (MCA) in which the performances of several options are assessed against a range of established criteria.…”

Section: Emission Control Strategies (Ecs)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of pollutant emission control strategies for cadmium and mercury in urban water systems using substance flow analysis

Revitt

Lundy

Eriksson

et al. 2013

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires Member States to protect inland surface and groundwater bodies but does not directly stipulate how the associated environmental quality standards should be achieved. This paper develops and assesses the performance of a series of urban emission control strategies (ECS) with an emphasis on the scientific and technological benefits which can be achieved. Data from the literature, in combination with expert judgement, have been used to develop two different semi-hypothetical case cities (SHCC), which represent virtual platforms for the evaluation of ECS using substance flow analysis (SFA). The results indicate that the full implementation of existing EU legislation is capable of reducing the total emissions of cadmium (Cd) and mercury (Hg) by between 11% and 20%. The ability to apply voluntary reduction practices is shown to be particularly effective for Cd with the potential to further lower the overall emissions by between 16% and 27%. The most efficient protection of the receiving surface water environment is strongly influenced by the city characteristics with the introduction of stormwater treatment practices being particularly effective for one city (59% reduction of Hg; 39% reduction of Cd) and the other city being most influenced by the presence of efficient advanced wastewater treatment processes (63% reduction of Hg; 43% reduction of Cd). These reductions in receiving water loads are necessarily accompanied by either increases in stormwater sediment loadings (2.6 to 14.9 kg/year or 0.6 to 2.4 kg/year for Hg) or wastewater sludge loadings (45.8 to 57.2 kg/year or 42.0 to 57.4 kg/year for Cd).

show abstract

Decision aid systems for evaluating sustainability: a critical survey

Cited by 62 publications

References 12 publications

Stakeholder Views, Financing and Policy Implications for Reuse of Wastewater for Irrigation: A Case from Hyderabad, India

Stakeholder Views, Financing and Policy Implications for Reuse of Wastewater for Irrigation: A Case from Hyderabad, India

Sustainability Performance Indicators

Comparison of pollutant emission control strategies for cadmium and mercury in urban water systems using substance flow analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About