A triple bottom line evaluation of solid waste management strategies: a case study for an arid Gulf State, Kuwait

Aleisa, Esra; Al-Jarallah, Rawa

doi:10.1007/s11367-017-1410-z

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, 60% of the studies apply a normalization method and 4% use a ranking approach. In some studies, it is not clear what is done [121,125,202,203], but it is obvious that something is done. One study [126] discusses a ranking approach as well as normalization and Gencturk, et al [181] normalize only the environmental indicators and leave the other indicators in their original state.…”

Section: Normalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many different approaches have been developed to quantify and evaluate sustainability. Here a review is performed on sustainability assessment based on Life Cycle Thinking, which mostly means Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). Until the end of 2018, 258 publications can be found, from which 146 include a case study. The highest number of publications appeared between 2016 and 2018 and, compared to the years before 2016, the number of authors has increased. However, in recent years the focus has been more on case studies than on methodological aspects of LCSA. The presented holistic approaches for LCSA are either too broad or too narrow for scientific guidance. Therefore, many questions concerning LCSA are still open, e.g., regarding definition of sustainability dimensions and the desire or need for multi-criteria decision-analysis. An underlying problem is the lack of discussion about sustainability concepts. The momentum in the community to perform case studies for LCSA should be used to also develop more guiding principles.

show abstract

Section: Normalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Al Lahou and M. Alsabbagh realistic findings. The same results for waste composition were also used to inform the conduct of another lifecycle assessment based on the three pillars of sustainability: environment, finance, and society in [10]. Despite the existing literature on the MSW in Kuwait, literature that used performance indicators to assess its management was lacking.…”

Section: Assessment Of Municipal Solid Waste Management In the State mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste Management in the State of Kuwait

Lahou¹,

Alsabbagh²

2019

IJESD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The management of municipal solid waste (MSW) appears as a challenge for many countries in the world. The rapidly increasing amounts of waste and the consequent potential impacts necessitate proper planning and management. This paper assesses the management of the MSW in Kuwait using the driving forces-pressures-state-impacts-responses (DPSIR) framework. Applying the DPSIR method allows for understanding the causes behind the current state related to MSW along with the potential impacts and responses undertaken so far. The results of the analysis show that the generation of MSW is highly correlated with the population and economic growth in Kuwait. The per capita MSW is relatively high reaching 1.6 kg/capita/year. There are several potential impacts associated with the current practices of MSWM in Kuwait. Yet, only few of them have been assessed. Kuwait has enacted the Environmental Protection Law No. 42 in 2014 where the management of the MSW is emphasized. This paper recommends the calculation of a number of waste-related performance indicators. It also recommends the conduct of a social survey for a better understanding of the consumption patterns and variations associated with the different population groups and seasons. Finally, the initiation of a regional waste-related network is highly recommended to foster collaboration and share best practices with other Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

show abstract

“…As Aleisa and Al-Jarallah (2017) and Cardoso et al (2018) have observed, E-LCA needs to be compounded with S-LCA and LCC as the financial and social aspects of any system cannot be overlooked if an analyst wishes to prove feasibility and credibility at a strategic level to decision-makers. In other words, S-LCA helps to set up what could be labelled as an 'inclusive business model' (Thomas et al 2014) which would assume responsibility for the health, safety and wellbeing of workers, the local community, society, the environment and economic development.…”

Section: Strengths and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also necessary to be aware of the fact that the uncertainties associated with S-LCA results vary widely across ideologies, cultures and degrees of socio-economic development (Aleisa and Al-Jarallah 2017), and this is quite obvious, as just like E-LCA, the results obtained are dependent on the system boundaries one chooses for oneself. This is not a threat as such, but failure to appreciate this may distort one's understanding of comparative S-LCA results.…”

Section: Weaknesses and Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%