No description available.

The aim of this research has been to develop an integrated life cycle methodology and assess the sustainability in the UK beverage sector considering environmental, economic and social aspects. The environmental impacts include climate change, resource depletion and emissions to air, land and water. The economic aspects considered are life cycle costs and value added. Social issues include health, labour and human rights and intergenerational issues. The environmental impacts have been assessed using life cycle assessment; economic impacts have been assessed using life cycle costing and value added analysis while social aspects have been assessed using relevant social indicators and social hot-spots analysis. The sustainability of the following beverages has been assessed: carbonated soft drinks, beer (lager), wine (red), bottled water and Scotch whisky. The environmental and economic assessments have first been carried out at the level of individual supply chains. The results have then been extrapolated using a bottom-up approach to the level of their respective sub-sectors and then, combining these results, to the UK beverage sector. This has been followed by the social assessment at the sectoral level. The results of the assessment at the sectoral level show that UK consumption of the five beverages is responsible for over 3.5 million tonnes of CO2 eq. emissions annually, with the carbonated soft drinks and beer sub-sectors accounting for 42% and 40% of the total, respectively. Total annual life cycle costs and value added are estimated at £1.3 billion and £15.8 billion, respectively. Production of packaging and raw materials are the major hot spots in the life cycle of the beverage supply chain for environmental and economic impacts. Strategies such as technological improvements, packaging optimisation as well as organic agriculture would lead to improved environmental and economic performance. The social hot spot assessment shows that China, Colombia and India are the countries likely to pose highest social risks. The findings of this study could help the government and beverage manufacturers to formulate appropriate policies and robust strategies for improving the sustainability in the UK beverage sector. The results could also help consumers to make more informed choices that contribute to sustainable development.

Sustainability means providing for the necessities of today without endangering the necessities of tomorrow within the technical, environmental, economic, social/cultural, and individual contexts. The assessment tools available to study the sustainability of the built environment are limited in their approach and lacking in their content due to several reasons: (1) differences amongst the actors within the industry; (2) fragmentation as represented by lack of communication and understanding between the industry and those whom it serves; and (3) regionalism as represented by the disconnection between the construction projects and their host community systems. The narrow focus of the currently available assessment methods does not collectively address the technical, environmental, economic, social/cultural, and individual sustainability indicators as well various aspects of sustainability. To this end, this research develops three innovative system-based concepts to assess sustainability of civil infrastructure projects: (1) work, (2) nature, and (3) flow. The “work benchmark” defines the socio-behavioral relationships amongst the products and the actors of the built environment. It also attempts to delineate how the end-product is affected by how well the producers are connected to the product. The “nature benchmark” focuses on the effects of the built process on the environment through studying the interaction between the construction actors, their associated processes, and the end-products within their host systems. The “flow benchmark” identifies the overall system changes within the host systems and the effects of these changes on the natural environment and the socio-economic setting. For testing and evaluation of “nature” and “work” on five different types of civil infrastructure projects, the author utilized a three-step methodology comprising: (1) structured survey; (2) data collection; and (3) analysis. In order to avoid being unrepresentative of the industry, the author chose projects with different scopes representing a wide spectrum of construction projects. This process provided an improved understanding of the environmental, social, and economic effects of these projects from a systems perspective. For future work, the concept of “flow” will be further explored using macro-level system dynamics modeling, micro-level agent-based simulation, and multi-objective optimization to measure the overall system change.

The construction of a guiding methodological framework for local sustainability assessment is a key to achieving a sustainable future. This study develops an approach to local sustainability assessment (ALSA), a methodological framework that facilitates the formulation, selection and prioritisation of key indicators to guide the assessment of city sustainability at a local level in Middle Eastern cities. Based on a literature review, this research devised a methodological framework, ALSA, which is a combination of the Commission on Sustainable Development’s (CSD)Theme Indicator Framework (2001) (themes, sub themes and indicators) and a Goal-Based Framework (indicators that most directly reflect the issues of a case study and its local communities and stakeholders). This combination framework is shown to be more appropriate in this instance than other types of frameworks, in terms of overcoming some inherent weaknesses, leading to the adoption of a top-down / bottom-up approach. Such an approach is shown to be the best way of developing indicators which are (top-down) scientifically valid and generic with (bottom-up) stakeholder and local communities needs. The ALSA methodological framework involves four steps, which are: issue identification, objective formulation, indicator formulation and indicator selecting and ranking. The first set of proposed indicators contained 98 indicators. This set of proposed indicators was revised and analysed by means of a series of shared ideas from literature and through consultation with experts from specific areas, using a workshop format. This revision stage was used to reformulate and select valid and useful indicators (comparable, measurable, and sensitive). The second set of valid and useful indicators (after the first revisions) contains 57 indicators. The indicators were ranked on the basis of priority to identify a final set of indicators that cover the four dimensions of sustainability, which are defined within this work as environmental, social, economic and institutional. The evaluation (SWOT analysis) of this framework was examined during this study. The city of Hilla, Iraq, was selected as a case study to prove the applicability of the ALSA methodological framework in a real world case study. It is argued that this study is pioneering in adding knowledge and understanding of the development of a methodological framework to provide local sustainability indicators in a post-conflict, Middle Eastern city in an oil-rich country. It is concluded that the ALSA methodological framework provides an efficient and rigorous approach for the formulation, selection and prioritization of key indicators that will measure and encapsulate the essence of a sustainable city and could help Middle Eastern cities achieve higher levels of progress towards sustainability in practice.

The remediation industry has grown exponentially in recent decades. International organizations of practitioners and remediation experts have developed several frameworks for integrating sustainability into remediation projects; however, there is no accepted definition or universal framework for sustainable remediation. Literature on sustainable remediation is only recently beginning to emerge, and there has been limited attention to how sustainability is best-integrated and operationalized in sustainable remediation frameworks and practices – or whether sustainability plays any meaningful role at all in sustainable remediation. This thesis examines the role of ‘sustainability’ in recently emerging sustainable remediation frameworks. More specifically, it presents the results of an analysis of how sustainability is defined, integrated and operationalized in sustainable remediation frameworks. Methods are based on a review of a sample of six leading remediation frameworks against a set of normative principles and criteria for sustainability integration adapted from sustainability assessments. Recommendations are made for improving the integration of sustainability in sustainable remediation frameworks, and how to better operationalize sustainability practices.

The application of Sustainability Assessment (SA) within Canadian municipalities is a recent notion, but is quickly becoming widespread. The Government of Saskatchewan alone has already released two SA checklists. However, such tools are normally aimed at communities of all sizes, ranging from rural municipalities to big cities, without considering differences in the capacity base, needs, and conditions among those types of communities. Additionally, practical implementation of SA often does not reflect the scope of scientifically established criteria for SA tools. This paper will present the analysis of the 2009 Saskatchewan Sustainability Checklist for Municipalities (comparing it to one of the most prominent frameworks for SA and other similar checklists developed in Canada and internationally) in order to identify possible areas for improvement so that the Checklist reflects established SA principles and is sensitive to a small town context. Based on the results of interviews with 16 small town administrators in Saskatchewan, this thesis demonstrates that, from a theoretical perspective, both of the existing SA tools are deficient in a number of important ways. The tools mainly focus on evaluating the municipal and service provision, rather than evaluating the sustainability of a community as a whole, including such areas as environmental conditions; social equity; livelihood sufficiency; resource maintenance; and intragenerational and intergenerational equity. However, the research reveals even if all of the above-mentioned criteria are integrated within the existing tools, it will be challenging for municipalities to perform a full sustainability assessment, since small towns’ administrations often have limited financial and human capacity to perform such exercises. Additionally, there is a lack of understanding on how to integrate the results of an assessment into decision-making, and a perceived inability to change some of the existing economic or social conditions in a town, due to the limited scope of influence that local municipalities have. There is a need for an alternative approach to sustainability assessment in the case of small towns; one that is sensitive to their unique pressures, circumstances, and capacities to enact change.

Assessing the sustainability of construction products can help to identify particular characteristics and benefits which can then assist decision makers by allowing comparisons between products. Existing mechanisms and tools to make such assessments are associated to project-level assessments or have a bias towards environmental issues, rather than incorporating social, environmental and economic aspects of sustainability. The growing popularity of sustainability rating schemes and standards has created an imbalance for product manufacturers that are increasingly seeking ways to gain competitive advantage on the basis of producing more sustainable products. Aggregate Industries, a construction products manufacturer and the Building Research Establishment (BRE) therefore instigated this Engineering Doctorate (EngD) to address this lack of a holistic sustainability assessment methodology for construction products for manufacturers. The EngD research developed a sustainability assessment framework for ready-mixed concrete. The development of the framework was influenced by existing assessment schemes such as the BRE Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) and Ceequal (The Sustainability Assessment Scheme for Civil Engineering projects). The BRE BES 6001 Framework Standard for the Responsible Sourcing of Construction Products was also a factor in this research complimented by primary research. The assessment framework addresses a range of sustainability issues such as community engagement (social), waste (environmental) and whole life cost (economic) amongst others tailored to ready-mixed concrete. These issues are assessed against three product life cycle stages; raw materials; manufacture and use. The outputs of the framework will then inform the manufacturer about areas for improvement and present a profile of each product for a given manufacturing site in a more holistic way than current methods allow. The trialling of the assessment framework both in the UK and Canada has shown that the output of the EngD is a viable mechanism to assess the sustainability of concrete from a manufacturer s perspective. This research has given Aggregate Industries an opportunity to evaluate current objectives and targets within the business and helped to shape the future sustainability strategy. Aspects of the framework are also being considered for inclusion in the future development of the BRE s BES 6001 Framework Standard for the Responsible Sourcing of Construction Products. This EngD has also identified an emergent need for a shift in future focus from individual products to a systems level assessment approach. Product sustainability tends to focus on the embodied impacts whereas the sustainability of construction systems has a much broader focus over the entire life cycle of the system. This area of work will require further research.

Humanity is facing a series of challenges, including climate change, biodiversity loss, decreasing availability of cheap fossil fuel energy and social inequality that, when taken together, constitute a sustainability crisis. Agricultural systems are vitally important for the survival of humanity and must be moved towards greater sustainability. In Vietnam, the challenges facing the agriculture sector are immediate and pressing. These challenges include the need to improve the livelihoods of millions of smallholder farmers, improve food safety and protect already heavily burdened ecosystems. In response to these challenges, a number of alternative agriculture approaches, including safe vegetable production and organic farming have emerged. While the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides are not permitted in certified organic agriculture, the requirements for safe vegetable production are not nearly as stringent. Chemical fertilizers and some low toxicity pesticides are allowed in safe vegetable production as long as pesticide residues are below proscribed limits. This research assesses the contributions that safe vegetable production and organic agriculture are making to the development of more sustainable agroecosystems in Vietnam. Organic production is still in early stages of development, with the majority of the projects directed towards production for export. Safe vegetables in contrast are produced primarily for the domestic market and demand is driven by consumer concerns over excessive pesticide use in conventional vegetable production. A sustainability assessment that explores the effect that safe vegetable production is having on eight major criteria for sustainability is applied in Cu Chi District, Ho Chi Minh City. Research methods included semi-structured interviews and group discussions with safe vegetable farmers together with interviews of other key actors from the agricultural sector in Vietnam. Along with the goal of protecting human health, farmers are interested in safe vegetable production because of improved economic returns made possible by reduced inputs and greater market access. While safe vegetable production is contributing to greater agroecosystem sustainability, further improvements are needed in some areas, specifically in the use of agrochemicals. There are encouraging signs in relation to pesticides, with some farmers reducing their pesticide use and moving towards less-toxic pesticides. Further movement towards sustainability could be fostered by a shift to the use of pesticides only as a last resort, a further shift from chemical to organic fertilizers, and improved capacity of farmers to experiment with and adapt safe vegetable production techniques.

Humanity is facing a series of challenges, including climate change, biodiversity loss, decreasing availability of cheap fossil fuel energy and social inequality that, when taken together, constitute a sustainability crisis. Agricultural systems are vitally important for the survival of humanity and must be moved towards greater sustainability. In Vietnam, the challenges facing the agriculture sector are immediate and pressing. These challenges include the need to improve the livelihoods of millions of smallholder farmers, improve food safety and protect already heavily burdened ecosystems. In response to these challenges, a number of alternative agriculture approaches, including safe vegetable production and organic farming have emerged. While the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides are not permitted in certified organic agriculture, the requirements for safe vegetable production are not nearly as stringent. Chemical fertilizers and some low toxicity pesticides are allowed in safe vegetable production as long as pesticide residues are below proscribed limits. This research assesses the contributions that safe vegetable production and organic agriculture are making to the development of more sustainable agroecosystems in Vietnam. Organic production is still in early stages of development, with the majority of the projects directed towards production for export. Safe vegetables in contrast are produced primarily for the domestic market and demand is driven by consumer concerns over excessive pesticide use in conventional vegetable production. A sustainability assessment that explores the effect that safe vegetable production is having on eight major criteria for sustainability is applied in Cu Chi District, Ho Chi Minh City. Research methods included semi-structured interviews and group discussions with safe vegetable farmers together with interviews of other key actors from the agricultural sector in Vietnam. Along with the goal of protecting human health, farmers are interested in safe vegetable production because of improved economic returns made possible by reduced inputs and greater market access. While safe vegetable production is contributing to greater agroecosystem sustainability, further improvements are needed in some areas, specifically in the use of agrochemicals. There are encouraging signs in relation to pesticides, with some farmers reducing their pesticide use and moving towards less-toxic pesticides. Further movement towards sustainability could be fostered by a shift to the use of pesticides only as a last resort, a further shift from chemical to organic fertilizers, and improved capacity of farmers to experiment with and adapt safe vegetable production techniques.

Increasing evidence of the positive correlation between sustainability performance and financial performance of companies has motivated the proliferation of tools that seek to assess corporate sustainability performance and provide guidance to companies on sustainable business practices and sustainability reporting. Despite the growing number of tools for evaluating, rating and ranking the sustainability performance of companies, the assessment methodologies and frameworks of these tools have not been fully disclosed, leaving both (socially) responsible investors and companies with little publicly available information and understanding of the sustainability issues that are relevant to business practices. This research is an exploratory study seeking to gain greater insight into corporate sustainability assessment as it is practiced within the capital markets. The research specifically examines the extent to which three prominent stock market sustainability indexes, the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes, the FTSE4Good Index Series and the Jantzi Social Index, represent the sustainability performance of companies. The study involves a comparative analysis of sustainability criteria, and an examination of the extent to which the concept of sustainable development and the theoretical perspectives on sustainability assessment are reflected in the assessment frameworks of the indexes. Furthermore, a secondary question addressed in this study is the extent to which the Global Reporting Initiative’s G3 Guidelines and the ISO 26000 standard influence the sustainability criteria used in the indexes’ assessment frameworks. The significance of this secondary question is to understand the extent of alignment between tools which provide guidance on sustainable business practices and tools which assess corporate sustainability performance. A significant finding of this research is the lack of standardization amongst the assessment and guidance tools on the core sustainability issues that are relevant to businesses across all industry sectors. While all of the tools generally follow the same model of organizing sustainability criteria according to environmental, social and economic themes, within each of those themes, a wide spectrum of issues are covered, with poor consensus amongst the tools on the core indicators that are relevant to business practices. An additional finding is that while the theoretical perspectives on sustainable development and sustainability assessment are evident in the indexes, there is significant margin for improvement in terms of developing indicators which are future-oriented and focus on a long-term perspective, as well as incorporating the notion of context in performance metrics.