Life cycle costing of waste management systems: Overview, calculation principles and case studies

Martinez-Sanchez, Veronica; Kromann, Mikkel; Astrup, Thomas Fruergaard

doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.10.033

Cited by 161 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is difficult to employ economic incentives here because our focus is on resourceconstrained environments. Most of the other studies usually focus on reputation (Hoejmose et al, 2014;Nguyen and Shi, 2012), liability concerns (Ogishi et al, 2003;Wilson et al, 2009), and the costs (Martinez-Sanchez et al, 2015;Parthan et al, 2012;Soares et al, 2013) associated with effective waste management. We will also focus on these three aspects in this paper.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating motivating factors for sound hospital waste management

Ali

Wang

Chaudhry

2016

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable management of hospital waste requires an active involvement of all key players. This study aims to test the hypothesis that three motivating factors, namely, Reputation, Liability, and Expense, influence hospital waste management. The survey for this study was conducted in two phases, with the pilot study used for exploratory factor analysis and the subsequent main survey used for cross-validation using confirmatory factor analysis. The hypotheses were validated through one-sample t tests. Correlations were established between the three motivating factors and organizational characteristics of hospital type, location, category, and size. The hypotheses were validated, and it was found that the factors of Liability and Expense varied considerably with respect to location and size of a hospital. The factor of Reputation, however, did not exhibit significant variation. In conclusion, concerns about the reputation of a facility and an apprehension of liability act as incentives for sound hospital waste management, whereas concerns about financial costs and perceived overburden on staff act as disincentives.Implications: This paper identifies the non economic motivating factors that can be used to encourage behavioral changes regarding waste management at hospitals in resource constrained environments. This study discovered that organizational characteristics such as hospital size and location cause the responses to vary among the subjects. Hence a policy maker must take into account the institutional setting before introducing a change geared towards better waste management outcomes across hospitals. This study covers a topic that has hitherto been neglected in resource constrained countries. Thus it can be used as one of the first steps to highlight and tackle the issue. PAPER HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating motivating factors for sound hospital waste management

Ali

Wang

Chaudhry

2016

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An LCC may also be conducted to inform decision making on the cost borne by a particular actor present in the system. When performing LCC and LCA together, it is very important to avoid double counting: as explained in [83,84], LCC can be distinguished into conventional, environmental, and societal. While conventional LCC only accounts for the financial costs (i.e., internal budget costs and transfers, i.e., taxes, fees, and pecuniary externalities), environmental LCC consists of a conventional LCC analysis complemented with a parallel (classic) LCA analysis where environmental impacts are separately accounted for and reported.…”

Section: B Life Cycle Costing (Lcc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Economic life-cycle inventory faces many of the same data access and quality issues faced in LCA. Notably, robust data on shadow prices are lacking and only exist for a limited number of environmental emissions [83]. For this reason, we retain only environmental LCC (ELCC) in our proposed framework.…”

Section: B Life Cycle Costing (Lcc)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Holistic Sustainability Framework for Waste Management in European Cities: Concept Development

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waste management represents a challenge for public authorities due to many reasons such as increased waste generation following urban population growth, economic burdens imposed on the municipal budget, and nuisances inevitably caused to the environment and local inhabitants. To optimize the system from a sustainability perspective, moving the transition towards a more circular economy, a better understanding of the different stages of waste management is necessary. A review of recently developed sustainability frameworks for waste management showed that no single framework captures all the instruments needed to ultimately provide a solid basis for comprehensive analyses of the potential burdens associated with urban waste management. Bearing this limitation in mind, the objective of this research is to propose a conceptual and comprehensive sustainability framework to support decision-making in waste management of European cities. The framework comprises a combination of methods capable of identifying future strategies and scenarios, to assess different types of impacts based on a life cycle perspective, and considers the value of waste streams, the actors involved, and possible constraints of implementing scenarios. The social, economic, environmental, technical and political domains are covered, and special attention is paid to impacts affecting foremost the local population.

show abstract

“…The environmental LCC include an LCA perspective and enables to include all costs incurred by all stakeholders. Finally, the societal LCC includes also externalities, by internalizing environmental and social costs (Martinez-Sanchez et al, 2015).…”

Section: Life Cycle Costing: An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%