Combining REACH, environmental and economic performance indicators for strategic sustainable product development

Askham, Cecilia; Gade, Anne Lill; Hanssen, Ole Jørgen

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.05.015

Cited by 36 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At least US $13.6 trillion of professionally M A N U S C R I P T A C C E P T E D ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT managed assets incorporate ESG in portfolio selection and investment management (Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, 2013). Indicators have long been considered as a driver of performance but recently they have also been attributed to driving innovation (Luz, et al, 2014) and strategic product development (Askham, et al, 2012). Moreover, evaluation of ESG issues at corporate level using SIs enables a thorough review of the risks and opportunities a company encounters in the long-term, which in turns allows for better selection of securities and risk management.…”

Section: Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing a general set of sustainability indicators at the corporate level

Rahdari

Rostamy

2015

Journal of Cleaner Production

207

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing a general set of sustainability indicators at the corporate level

Rahdari

Rostamy

2015

Journal of Cleaner Production

207

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The third method is the Strategy Tool presented in Askham et al (2012). The Strategy Tool is a semi-quantitative method developed to assist a paint production company making strategic decisions in product development.…”

Section: Selection Of Methods For Toxic Footprint Benchmarkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three methods for strategic product toxicity assessment—the case of the cotton T-shirt

Roos

Peters

2015

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The use and emission of chemicals and the intrinsic toxic properties of some of these chemicals are an important topic in the textile industry. Quantitative evaluation of toxic impacts is a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach, termed Btoxic footprint^in this article. We ask whether calculation of toxic footprints is a useful method to steer the textile industry towards more sustainable use of chemicals. Methods Three different methods by which strategic product toxicity assessment can be performed within the context of LCA are illustrated and compared using a wet treatment process for a cotton T-shirt as the basis of a case study. The methods are the USEtox model chosen for the European Product Environmental Footprint work, the Score System presented in the European Commission's Reference Document on Best Available Techniques for the Textiles Industry, and the Strategy Tool presented by Askham. The methods are compared in terms of their ease of use and whether the results give a consistent evaluation of a set of chemicals. Results and discussion New USEtox characterisation factors for textile chemicals were calculated and used for this article. The results show that the three methods do not give a consistent evaluation of the different wet treatment chemicals. Both the Score System and the Strategy Tool are very concerned with persistent contaminants such as the optical brightener in this case study, which is deemed to be less important by USEtox. The calculations also show how the results generated by the USEtox model depend on whether users apply (1) only the recommended characterisation factors or (2) these and the interim characterisation factors or (3) these and the new characterisation factors calculated for this article.Conclusions and recommendations With current policy initiatives such as the Product Environmental Footprint now being applied for textile products, toxicity assessment will by default be performed in the LCA of textiles. It is important that the results are relevant and representative as the intended users are supposed to take actions based on them. Confidence in the results is crucial for a scientific method, and therefore, this exploratory comparison exercise shows how benchmarking can be a tool to make the differences in background assumptions explicit, to better understand the differences in the results, and help create such confidence.

show abstract

“…According to the differentiation of these two approaches, a consideration of the risk assessment within LCA (Askham, Gade, & Hanssen, 2012) or visa-versa (Breedveld, 2013) has potential to give additional information. Research exploit the synergetic relationship between LCA and tools on toxic assessment and to reach environmental sustainable products Hellweg et al, 2009;Walser et al, 2013).…”

Section: Lca and Toxic Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental and Safety Issues of Polymers and Polymeric Material in the Printing Industry

Radermacher

2016

Printing on Polymers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining REACH, environmental and economic performance indicators for strategic sustainable product development

Cited by 36 publications

References 25 publications

Designing a general set of sustainability indicators at the corporate level

Designing a general set of sustainability indicators at the corporate level

Three methods for strategic product toxicity assessment—the case of the cotton T-shirt

Environmental and Safety Issues of Polymers and Polymeric Material in the Printing Industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About