Indicators for Environmental Sustainability

Dong, Yan; Hauschild, Michael Zwicky

doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.173

Cited by 114 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Integrated environmental indicators for SDG were proposed to support multiple goals and targets making a network complex and difficult for everyone to understand (Camilla & Marc, 2009;Dong & Hauschild, 2017;Hák et al, 2016;Shaikh, Ji, & Fan, 2017). Good governance and effective institution SD goal was created by UN to support this complexity, because states seem often unable to administrate crucial SDGs (Asadullah & Savoia, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals: A network analysis framework

Dalampira

Nastis

2019

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainable development goals proposed by the United Nations in 2015 presented a new graphic depicting the s17 goals in a table‐like format. This overlaps with the original Venn diagram of sustainable development developed after 1987. The two graphics are used independently, often raising the question of how they are linked. The aim of this paper is to investigate how the Sustainable Development Goals graphic can be simplified as a concept and framework using the Venn diagram of sustainable development. We employ expert elicitation using a networking analysis framework to provide answers. The resulting diagrams provide an important step towards combining the two graphics into one.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals: A network analysis framework

Dalampira

Nastis

2019

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We acknowledge the importance of avoiding greenwashing and other misuses of the concept of sustainability but we argue, following other researchers Morse 2003, 2008), that the movement towards determined definitions and measurements, that is seen in, for example, the development of sustainability indicators, can have negative consequences. It might simplify social values as numbers, or, attempt to measure and define the immeasurable (see also Dong and Hauschild 2017;Hák et al 2016;Sala et al 2015), but our major point is that determining the term limits not only the possibilities of the powerful for its misuse but also might restrict the potential for the less powerful to express themselves when the conditions change, i.e. to have agency.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining sustainability? Insights from a small village in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Dogmus

Nielsen

2020

GeoJournal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term ''sustainability'' is flexible as it needs to function in many different contexts and across many issues. At the same time, this flexibility makes it difficult to assess and easy to misuse. Over the last three decades, numerous sustainability assessment tools have been developed to better define the term. In this paper, we critically address these attempts and argue that the flexibility of the term is not solely problematic, but allow people to create their own sustainability imaginaries, by which we mean a society's understanding of how environmental resources should be used. We show this through a case study, the Martin Brod village in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where, within a few years, the inhabitants changed their sustainability imaginaries in parallel with shifting external socio-economic conditions and expectations. We primarily applied qualitative research methods. Our results show that changing sustainability imaginaries was made possible due to the flexibility of the term which enabled otherwise disempowered local inhabitants to have agency. Consequently, a stricter definition of sustainability may have unintended consequences for people struggling to maintain a political voice in settings such as Bosnia and Herzegovina.

show abstract

“…Researchers therefore have begun exploring how to operationalize the SDGs within the Earth's carrying capacity, and specifically how to link them to the PBs and then to LCA [13,15]. Dong and Hauschild classified the indicators proposed in the SDGs, PBs and LCA using an DPSIR (Drivers-Pressures-State of the Environment-Impacts-Responses) impact pathway framework (see [20] for DPSIR impact pathway framework) and showed that all three approaches overlap in terms of seven impact categories (climate change, acidification, ozone depletion, eutrophication, chemical pollution, freshwater use and change in biosphere integrity) [15]. However, the study used the older version of the SDGs listed in [11] and until recently, no studies have explored the interlinkages between the latest SDGs listed in [12], the PBs and LCA.…”

Section: Operationalisation Of Sustainable Development Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Linkages Between the Environmental Sustainable Development Goals and Planetary Boundaries Using the DPSIR Impact Pathway Framework

Chandrakumar

McLaren

2018

Designing Sustainable Technologies, Products and Policies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the conventional environmental sustainability assessment methods, such as Life Cycle Assessment and environmental footprints, evaluate economic goods and services in terms of the nature or the function of the studied systems. As such, these methods overlook the variations in the overall magnitude of production and consumption patterns for the examined systems. As a result, the progress achieved in mitigating global environmental problems is likely to be slow and may be insignificant. Hence this study explores the interlinkages between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Planetary Boundaries (PBs) using an DPSIR (Drivers-Pressures-State of the Environment-Impacts-Responses) impact pathway framework-in support of developing an absolute sustainability assessment method (ASAM). The study demonstrates that there is a substantial overlap between the SDGs and PBs. The science-based thresholds listed in the PBs can therefore be adopted as a complementary set of environmental boundaries for the SDG indicators. Overall, the study lays the foundation for advancing an ASAM that can guide policy-and decision-makers to operationalize the SDGs effectively. C. Chandrakumar

show abstract

Indicators for Environmental Sustainability

Cited by 114 publications

References 5 publications

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals: A network analysis framework

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals: A network analysis framework

Defining sustainability? Insights from a small village in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Exploring the Linkages Between the Environmental Sustainable Development Goals and Planetary Boundaries Using the DPSIR Impact Pathway Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About