Progress in sustainability science: lessons learnt from current methodologies for sustainability assessment: Part 1

Abstract

Purpose Sustainability Science (SS) is considered an emerging discipline, applicative and solution-oriented whose aim is to handle environmental, social and economic issues in light of cultural, historic and institutional perspectives. The challenges of the discipline are not only related to better identifying the problems affecting sustainability but to the actual transition towards solutions adopting an integrated, comprehensive and participatory approach. This requires the definition of a common scientific paradigm in which integration and interaction amongst sectorial disciplines is of paramount relevance. In this context, life cycle thinking (LCT) and, in particular, life cycle-based methodologies and life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) may play a crucial role. The paper illustrates the main challenges posed to sustainability assessment methodologies and related methods in terms of ontology, epistemology and methodology of SS. The aims of the analysis are twofold: (1) to identify the main features of methodologies for sustainability assessment and (2) to present key aspects for the development of robust and comprehensive sustainability assessment. Methods The current debate on SS addressing ontological, epistemological and methodological aspects has been reviewed, leading to the proposal of a conceptual framework for SS. In addition, a meta-review of recent studies on sustainability assessment methodologies and methods, focusing those life cycle based, supports the discussion on the main challenges for a comprehensive and robust approach to sustainability assessment. Starting from the results of the meta-review, we identified specific features of sustainable development-oriented methods: firstly, highlighting key issues towards robust methods for SS and, secondly, capitalising on the findings of each review’s paper. For each issue, a recommendation towards a robust sustainability assessment method is given. Existing limitations of sectorial academic inquiries and proposal for better integration and mainstreaming of SS are the key points under discussion. Discussion In the reviewed papers, LCT and its basic principles are acknowledged as relevant for sustainability assessment. Nevertheless, LCT is not considered as a reference approach in which other methods could also find a place. This aspect has to be further explored, addressing the lack of multi-disciplinary exchange and putting the mainstreaming of LCT as a priority on the agenda of both life cycle assessment and sustainability assessment experts. Crucial issues for further developing sustainability assessment methodologies and methods have been identified and can be summarised as follows: holistic and system wide approaches, shift from multi- towards trans-disciplinarity; multi-scale (temporal and geographical) perspectives; and better involvement and participation of stakeholders. Conclusions Those are also the main challenges posed to LCSA in terms of progress of ontology, epistemology and methodology in line with the progress of SS. The life...

Fully integrated modelling for sustainability assessment of resource recovery from waste

“…Moreover, they may determine where in the lifecycle of products waste reduction interventions are applied and at what actors they are aimed (households, businesses, etc.). Such values may also affect the design of sustainability assessments more broadly via the choices made when selecting methods, metrics, system boundaries, and allocation coefficients for secondary products (Hanes et al, 2015;Sala et al, 2013b). For example, the monetising of environmental and social impacts in ECBA (Kallis et al, 2013;McCauley, 2006;Millward-Hopkins, 2016) is a contentious approach that opponents have argued is fundamentally incompatible with sustainability science (Anderson et al, 2015).…”

“…Accordingly, a number of methods have been developed (Sala et al, 2013b) that typically apply techniques similar to LCA in other domains, such as Social Life Cycle Assessment (sLCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). Over the past decade, researchers and practitioners have worked to unify these into Lifecycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) (Guinée et al, 2011;Kloepffer, 2008;Sala et al, 2015).…”

“…The operationalisation of LCSA frameworks remains an ongoing project with relatively few practical implementations (Onat et al, 2017;Sala et al, 2013aSala et al, , 2013b.…”

From LCA to Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: concept, practice and future directions

“…The role of LCT is discussed also by Sala et al (2012a), who frame the overall discussion in the context of Sustainability Science (SS). SS emerged as a discipline in which the sustainability concepts has its roots and provided a vision of what a sustainability assessment should entail.…”

Methods for assessing future scenarios from a sustainability perspective

“…A number of methods can be used for sustainability assessments (SAs), depending on the purpose, focus and scope [2][3][4][5]. Important features of many methodologies under the umbrella of SAs are, among others, the importance of considering both environmental and social aspects, of acknowledging values brought into the assessment, consideration of how sustainability is viewed, uncertainty and transparency handled and the importance of participatory approaches [6][7][8][9]. The role of scenarios in different sustainability assessment methods has been discussed (e.g.…”