A clustering approach for classifying universities in a world sustainability ranking

Sustainability indicators are increasingly recognized as a useful tool to provide policy information in support of environmental, economic or social improvement. Various approaches to sustainability have also been adopted in universities through the introduction of specific rankings. International rankings are an important communication tool that allows the comparison of universities according to combinations of different appropriately weighed parameters. The GreenMetric World University Ranking is the only worldwide ranking of universities that compares environmental sustainability across various campuses. It uses indicators involving education, research and the environment to evaluate the measures undertaken by universities to develop ecological infrastructures and stimulate improvement. The aim of this work is to analyze the individual indicators and categories used in the GreenMetric ranking in detail to verify whether they are, in fact, useful in assessing the sustainability of universities. Through the implementation of the cluster analysis, based on a selection of identified variables, all campuses were classified in homogeneous groups. The results identify four levels of sustainability and show a strong relationship between the rankings of the different categories (setting and infrastructure, energy and climate change, transportation, waste and water conservation and recycling) and specific aspects for assessing institutional policies. These results are useful information to guide universities in the research of key issues on where to invest time and resources to improve the sustainability of their structures and, therefore, their attractiveness.     

Review of sustainability indices and indicators: Towards a new City Sustainability Index (CSI)

The purpose of this paper is to discuss conceptual requirements for a City Sustainability Index (CSI) and to review existing major sustainability indices/indicators in terms of the requirements. The following indices are reviewed: Ecological Footprint (EF), Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI), Dashboard of Sustainability (DS), Welfare Index, Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, City Development Index, emergy/exergy, Human Development Index (HDI), Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI), Environmental Policy Index (EPI), Living Planet Index (LPI), Environmentally-adjusted Domestic Product (EDP), Genuine Saving (GS), and some applications of composite indices or/and multivariate indicators to local or regional context as case studies. The key conceptual requirements for an adequate CSI are: (i) to consider environmental, economic and social aspects (the triple bottom line of sustainability) from the viewpoint of strong sustainability; (ii) to capture external impacts (leakage effects) of city on other areas beyond the city boundaries particularly in terms of environmental aspects; (iii) to create indices/indicators originally for the purpose of assessing city sustainability; and (iv) to be able to assess world cities in both developed and developing countries using common axes of evaluation. Based on the review, we conclude that it is necessary to create a new CSI that enables us to assess and compare cities' sustainability performance in order to understand the global impact of cities on the environment and human life as compared with their economic contribution. In the future, the CSI will be able to provide local authorities with guidance toward sustainable paths.     

Neutrosophic multi-criteria evaluation of sustainable alternatives for the structure of single-family homes

This paper proposes a methodology for the assessment of the sustainability among three different structural design alternatives for a single-family home. The response associated with each alternative has been measured using 43 indicators considering all stages of the life cycle. A decision-making model is carried out on the basis of a neutrosophic group analytical hierarchy process (NAHP-G) capturing the maximum information in terms of credibility, inconsistency and indetermination. The 9 criteria on which an expert group intervenes are finally evaluated using VIKOR. The results show that non-probabilistic uncertainties influence the weights obtained, with maximum deviations in the criteria between 11.91% and 4.95%, if compared to conventional AHP. From the methodology it is obtained that the technological alternative with non-conventional concrete performs best in sustainable terms. Although the industrialized option has less environmental impact, only the simultaneous consideration of the economic, environmental and social pillars in a project will lead to appropriate sustainable designs.     

Healthcare Building Sustainability Assessment tool - Sustainable Effective Design criteria in the Portuguese context

Tools and methods to improve current practices and quality in the healthcare building sector are necessary to support decision-making at different building life cycle phases. Furthermore, Healthcare Building Sustainability Assessment (HBSA) Methods are based on criteria organised into different levels, such as categories and indicators. These criteria highlight aspects of significant importance when designing and operating a sustainable healthcare building. To bring more objectivity to the sustainability assessments, the standardisation bodies (CEN and ISO) proposed core indicators that should be used in the evaluation of the environmental, societal and economic performances of buildings. Nevertheless, relying on state of the art analysis, it is possible to conclude that there are aspects of major importance for the operation of healthcare buildings that are not considered in the HBSA methods.Thus, the aim of this paper is to discuss the context of sustainability assessment methods in the field of healthcare buildings and to present a proposal for the incorporation of Sustainable-Effective Design (SED) criteria in a new HBSA method. The used research method is innovative since in the development of the list of sustainability criteria it considers the opinion of main healthcare buildings' stakeholders, the existing healthcare assessment methods and the ISO and CEN standardisation works in the field of the methods to assess the sustainability of construction works. As a result, the proposed method is composed of fifty-two sustainability indicators that cover the different dimensions of the sustainability concept to support decision making during the design of a new or retrofitted healthcare building in urban areas.     

A delphi-style approach for developing an integrated food/non-food system sustainability assessment tool

Sustainability assessment is a complex field and its uptake amongst agricultural producers limited. Furthermore, the scope of current sustainability assessment tools does not extend to systems in which food production is integrated with production of non-food biomass (e.g. agroforestry). Participatory approaches to tool development offer a means to overcome the subjectivity of researcher-led tool design and thus the potential to increase relevance and engagement. In this work we develop a Delphi-style methodology as a means to produce a sustainability assessment tool suitable to assess and feedback on an integrated food/non-food system. Using a widely accepted agricultural sustainability framework and an existing farm sustainability assessment tool as a base, stakeholders were engaged with across six countries and multiple stakeholder groups to identify key indicators to be added to the tool. The methodology developed is described in detail, framed in the setting of this tool development process but providing a novel framework applicable to any situation where indicators must be developed for a complex issue of interest across multiple perspectives and stakeholder groups. Feedback and learning from the experience is provided. It was found that, contrary to some opinion, the inclusion of a face-to-face discussion round as part of the Delphi procedure provides a valuable means for information exchange and a move towards consensus amongst stakeholders. By using a ‘snowball’ approach to the in person discussions, it appears too that the loss of the voices of more socially retiring individuals can be avoided. Final levels of agreement vary substantially across the different areas of sustainability, with indicators in some areas (e.g. environmental integrity) proving much less controversial than others (e.g. social wellbeing). Despite this, the methodology effectively reaches a level of consensus amongst diverse stakeholders sufficient to guide the selection of sustainability indicators with a good level of confidence.     

Determining significance in social impact assessments (SIA) by applying both technical and participatory approaches: Methodology development and application in a case study of the concentrated solar power plant NOORO I in Morocco

One of the main objectives of impact assessments is to identify potentially significant impacts. However, determining this significance has received very limited attention as a procedural step in social impact assessments. Consequently, only limited research and documentation exists on approaches, survey tools and evaluation methods, especially with regard to participatory approaches and combined participatory-technical approaches. This study aims to address this research gap by developing and applying a joined participatory and technical impact significance evaluation. The approach is applied in a case study which analysed the livelihood impacts of the large-scale concentrated solar power plant NOOR_O I in Ouarzazate, Morocco.The analysis shows that although different approaches and significance criteria must be applied when involving both local stakeholders and experts, the linked analysis offers more robust results and an improved basis for decision-making. Furthermore, it was observed in the case study that impacts affecting the social, cultural and political spheres were more often considered significant than impacts affecting the physical and material livelihood dimensions. Regarding sustainability assessments of large-scale renewable energy plants, these findings underline the importance (as for other large-scale infrastructure developments) of placing greater emphasis on the inclusion of social aspects in impact assessments.     

Effective monitoring of agriculture: a response

The development of effective agricultural monitoring networks is essential to track, anticipate and manage changes in the social, economic and environmental aspects of agriculture. We welcome the perspective of Lindenmayer and Likens (J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1559) as published in the Journal of Environmental Monitoring on our earlier paper, "Monitoring the World's Agriculture" (Sachs et al., Nature, 2010, 466, 558-560). In this response, we address their three main critiques labeled as 'the passive approach', 'the problem with uniform metrics' and 'the problem with composite metrics'. We expand on specific research questions at the core of the network design, on the distinction between key universal and site-specific metrics to detect change over time and across scales, and on the need for composite metrics in decision-making. We believe that simultaneously measuring indicators of the three pillars of sustainability (environmentally sound, social responsible and economically viable) in an effectively integrated monitoring system will ultimately allow scientists and land managers alike to find solutions to the most pressing problems facing global food security.     

Who cares? Don't underestimate the values of SEA monitoring!

Until now, monitoring of large-scale regional funding programmes has been rare, although their large scope and abstract planning targets generally involve high levels of uncertainty. This study applies and examines a newly developed methodological approach for monitoring such programmes. It also critically reflects to what extent the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) contributes to a better consideration of environmental sustainability and to a learning effect among the stakeholders as well as within the decision-making process. The interviews conducted during the SEA monitoring revealed a very low recognition of the SEA, and its content, among project applicants of the transnational regional funding programme. They further show that more information on the SEA and its recommendations to mitigate negative environmental impacts would be beneficial in the future. Overall, the monitoring confirmed, however, that the institutions responsible for the programme were aware of the benefits of considering environmental sustainability. The long-term application of SEA in an iterative process provided positive learning effects on environmental sustainability and awareness for environmental aspects. This study also shows how SEA monitoring can serve as a tool to enhance visibility and foster communication among decision makers and applicants.     

Towards a more holistic sustainability assessment framework for agro-bioenergy systems — A review

The use of life cycle assessment (LCA) as a sustainability assessment tool for agro-bioenergy system usually has an industrial agriculture bias. Furthermore, LCA generally has often been criticized for being a decision maker tool which may not consider decision takers perceptions. They are lacking in spatial and temporal depth, and unable to assess sufficiently some environmental impact categories such as biodiversity, land use etc. and most economic and social impact categories, e.g. food security, water security, energy security. This study explored tools, methodologies and frameworks that can be deployed individually, as well as in combination with each other for bridging these methodological gaps in application to agro-bioenergy systems. Integrating agronomic options, e.g. alternative farm power, tillage, seed sowing options, fertilizer, pesticide, irrigation into the boundaries of LCAs for agro-bioenergy systems will not only provide an alternative agro-ecological perspective to previous LCAs, but will also lead to the derivation of indicators for assessment of some social and economic impact categories. Deploying life cycle thinking approaches such as energy return on energy invested-EROEI, human appropriation of net primary production-HANPP, net greenhouse gas or carbon balance-NCB, water footprint individually and in combination with each other will also lead to further derivation of indicators suitable for assessing relevant environmental, social and economic impact categories. Also, applying spatio-temporal simulation models has a potential for improving the spatial and temporal depths of LCA analysis.     

Technological innovation and sustainable development : Does the stage of development matter?

Technological innovation has generated much interest among scholars, practitioners, and policymakers as a critical instrument for achieving sustainable development. Although the relationship between technological innovation and sustainable development has been extensively discussed in the academic and policy circles, little studies have empirically examined the simultaneous impact of technological innovation on the three pillars of sustainable development. To fill this gap, the present study examines the ability of technological innovation to simultaneously promote economic progress and advance social and environmental conditions in the case of 75 low-, middle-, and high-income countries by demonstrating how this impact differs across the stages of economic development. From both long-run estimates and causality analysis, our findings reveal that technological innovation contributes simultaneously to the three pillars of sustainable development only in the case of rich countries; however, it only affects the economic and environmental dimensions in the middle-income countries, and no impact is found in the case of low-income countries. Future research directions, policy and managerial implications are also discussed.     

Sustainability on the urban scale: Proposal of a structure of indicators for the Spanish context

Some efforts to assess sustainability on the urban scale have been made and different tools for measuring the impact on and caused by cities have emerged. However, the sustainability concept varies from region to region, and indicators to measure it should be suitable for the context-specific conditions of the region under study. After doing a comprehensive review of the indicators included in 13 tools developed to assess urban sustainability of cities, this article proposes a new structure of indicators adapted to a Mediterranean city in Spain. The proposed structure is based on a two-level scheme that consists in 14 categories and 63 subcategories, which agglutinate urban sustainability indicators according to their purpose. This structure suggests a set of comprehensible qualitative and quantitative indicators that are easily applicable on neighbourhood or city scales. Given the similar features of Mediterranean countries in terms of environmental and socio-economic aspects, the proposed structure could be extrapolated to other countries with climatic and cultural similarities. Otherwise, the system is a useful tool in the decision-making process to help the different stakeholders involved in new urban developments and regeneration projects in existing neighbourhoods, such as developers, urban planners and public administrations.     

LCA Integrated ANP Framework for Selection of Sustainable Manufacturing Processes

In recent times, the focus of sustainable development has been shifted toward the process domain to achieve greater environmental benefits. Improved sustainability in the process domain can be achieved by selecting sustainable process or through improvement studies. In this study, sustainability performance of injection molding (IM) and selective laser sintering (SLS) processes are compared to select the sustainable process. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been widely accepted for assessing the environmental performance of manufacturing process. However, the problem with LCA is the interpretation of impact category scores when comparing alternate processes. Therefore, an effort has been made to integrate analytical network process (ANP) methodology with LCA in which LCA methodology calculates the impact score and ANP computes the Single Point Process Sustainability Score (SPPSS) to compare alternate processes. Based on the inventory data collected for higher production rates, SPPSS for IM and SLS processes are computed as 0.038 and 0.068, respectively. Based on the score, IM has been identified as a sustainable process for higher production volume. Hence, the practical usability of the proposed methodology is validated by the study. This study also appreciates the application of ANP along with LCA for decision making in the real-time scenario.     

Sustainability as the key to prioritize investments in public infrastructures

Infrastructure construction, one of the biggest driving forces of the economy nowadays, requires a huge analysis and clear transparency to decide what projects have to be executed with the few resources available. With the aim to provide the public administrations a tool with which they can make their decisions easier, the Sustainability Index of Infrastructure Projects (SIIP) has been defined, with a multi-criteria decision system called MIVES, in order to classify non-uniform investments. This index evaluates, in two inseparable stages, the contribution to the sustainable development of each infrastructure project, analyzing its social, environmental and economic impact. The result of the SIIP allows to decide the order with which projects will be prioritized. The case of study developed proves the adaptability and utility of this tool for the ordinary budget management.     

Towards sustainable settlement growth: A new multi-criteria assessment for implementing environmental targets into strategic urban planning

For nearly one decade, the German political and research-agenda has been to a large extent determined by the ongoing question of how to limit the expansion of settlement areas around cities in order to preserve natural resources, make settlement growth more sustainable and to strengthen the re-use of existing inner-urban areas (see a.o. Kötter et al. 2009a, 2010; Schetke et al. 2009, 2010b). What is already under discussion within the international literature are the recommendations of the German Council for Sustainability to quantitatively reduce the daily greenfield consumption from the current rate of over 100 ha per day to a rate of 30 ha per day in 2020 and to bring urban infill development up to a ratio of 3:1 with greenfield development (German Council for Sustainability, 2004).). This paper addresses the added value beyond those abstract political targets and presents an innovative, multi-criteria assessment (MCA) of greenfield and infill sites to evaluate their sustainability and resource efficiency. MCA development and its incorporation into a Decision Support System (DSS) were accomplished by utilising a stakeholder-driven approach. The resulting tool can be applied in preparing and revising land-use plans. The paper presents the concept and the development process of the MCA-DSS. Test runs with planners prove that the evaluation of potential housing sites using individually weighted environmental indicators helps to identify those strategies of housing development that accord most closely with sustainability goals. The tests further show that the development of greenfield sites generally exhibits less sustainability than that of infill sites.     

Index system of sustainable rural development based on the concept of ecological livability

Ecological livability points out the direction for the realization of environmental sustainability and livable sustainability. According to the interaction between ecological livability and sustainable rural development (SRD), this study deconstructed the concept of SRD and selected the corresponding indicators to construct the SRD index system with universal value. We divided SRD into two dimensions: rural ecological sustainability and rural livable sustainability. The former was described by green production and waste disposal, while the latter was represented by public service and social amenity. To demonstrate the application of the SRD index system, we chose China as an example. Through empirical measurement, this study found that the SRD in China was unbalanced and inadequate, and had the characteristics of spatial differentiation. We also explored the direction that can be improved in each region of China. The SRD index system can measure the level of SRD comprehensively and quantitatively, providing a useful reference for each country to analyze the situation of SRD. It is of practical significance to guide the development of ecological livability and achieve SRD.     

SHARE IT: Co-designing a sustainability impact assessment framework for urban food sharing initiatives

Urban food systems must undergo a significant transformation if they are to avoid impeding the achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goals. One reconfiguration with claimed sustainability benefits is ICT-mediated food sharing – an umbrella term used to refer to technologically-augmented collective or collaborative practices around growing, cooking, eating and redistributing food – which some argue improves environmental efficiencies by reducing waste, providing opportunities to make or save money, building social networks and generally enhancing well-being. However, most sustainability claims for food sharing have not been evidenced by systematically collected and presented data. In this paper we document our response to this mismatch between claims and evidence through the development of the SHARECITY sustainability Impact assessment Toolkit (SHARE IT); a novel Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) framework which has been co-designed with food sharing initiatives to better indicate the impact of food-sharing initiatives in urban food systems. We demonstrate that while several SIA frameworks have been developed to evaluate food systems at the urban scale, they contain few measures that specifically account for impacts of the sharing that initiatives undertake. The main body of the paper focuses on the co-design process undertaken with food sharing initiatives based in Dublin and London. Attention is paid to how two core goals were achieved: 1) the identification of a coherent SIA framework containing appropriate indicators for the activities of food sharing initiatives; and 2) the development of an open access online toolkit for in order to make SIA reporting accessible for food sharing initiatives. In conclusion, the co-design process revealed a number of technical and conceptual challenges, but it also stimulated creative responses to these challenges.     

Sustainability impact assessment to improve food security of smallholders in Tanzania

The objective of this paper was to assess the sustainability impacts of planned agricultural development interventions, so called upgrading strategies (UPS), to enhance food security and to identify what advantages and risks are assessed from the farmer's point of view in regards to social life, the economy and the environment. We developed a participatory methodological procedure that links food security and sustainable development. Farmers in four different case study villages in rural Tanzania chose their priority UPS. For these UPS, they assessed the impacts on locally relevant food security criteria. The positive impacts identified were mainly attributed to increased agricultural production and its related positive impacts such as increased income and improved access to necessary means to diversify the diet. However, several risks of certain UPS were also indicated by farmers, such as increased workload, high maintenance costs, higher competition among farmers, loss of traditional knowledge and social conflicts. We discussed the strong interdependence of socio-economic and environmental criteria to improve food security for small-scale farmers and analysed several trade-offs in regards to UPS choices and food security criteria. We also identified and discussed the advantages and challenges of our methodological approach. In conclusion, the participatory impact assessment on the farmer level allowed a locally specific analysis of the various positive and negative impacts of UPS on social life, the economy and the environment. We emphasize that only a development approach that considers social, economic and environmental challenges simultaneously can enhance food security.     

Brazilian LTER: Ecosystem and Biodiversity Information in Support of Decision-Making

Brazil officially joined the International Long Term Ecological Research (ILTER) network in January 2000, when nine research sites were created and funded by the Brazilian Council for Science and Technology (CNPq). Two-years later some positive signs already emerge of the scientific, social and political achievements of the Brazilian LTER program. We discuss examples of how ecosystem and biodiversity information gathered within a long-term research approach are currently subsidizing decision-making as regards biodiversity conservation and watershed management at local and regional scales. Success in this respect has often been related to satisfactory communication between scientists, private companies, government and local citizens. Environmental education programs in the LTER sites are playing an important role in social and political integration. Most examples of integration of ecological research to decision-making in Brazil derive from case studies at local or regional scale. Despite the predominance of a bottom-up integrative pathway (from case studies to models; from local to national scale), some top-down initiatives are also in order, such as the construction of a model to estimate the inpact of different macroeconomic policies and growth trajectories on land use. We believe science and society in Brazil will benefit of the coexistence of bottom-up and top-down integrative approaches.     

Conceptualising and managing trade-offs in sustainability assessment

One of the defining characteristics of sustainability assessment as a form of impact assessment is that it provides a forum for the explicit consideration of the trade-offs that are inherent in complex decision-making processes. Few sustainability assessments have achieved this goal though, and none has considered trade-offs in a holistic fashion throughout the process. Recent contributions such as the Gibson trade-off rules have significantly progressed thinking in this area by suggesting appropriate acceptability criteria for evaluating substantive trade-offs arising from proposed development, as well as process rules for how evaluations of acceptability should occur. However, there has been negligible uptake of these rules in practice. Overall, we argue that there is inadequate consideration of trade-offs, both process and substantive, throughout the sustainability assessment process, and insufficient considerations of how process decisions and compromises influence substantive outcomes. This paper presents a framework for understanding and managing both process and substantive trade-offs within each step of a typical sustainability assessment process. The framework draws together previously published literature and offers case studies that illustrate aspects of the practical application of the framework. The framing and design of sustainability assessment are vitally important, as process compromises or trade-offs can have substantive consequences in terms of sustainability outcomes delivered, with the choice of alternatives considered being a particularly significant determinant of substantive outcomes. The demarcation of acceptable from unacceptable impacts is a key aspect of managing trade-offs. Offsets can be considered as a form of trade-off within a category of sustainability that are utilised to enhance preferred alternatives once conditions of impact acceptability have been met. In this way they may enable net gains to be delivered; another imperative for progress to sustainability. Understanding the nature and implications of trade-offs within sustainability assessment is essential to improving practice.