Environmental decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts: applicability of life cycle thinking in development planning and implementation

According to the targets set for sustainability, integrating the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs is one of the main goals for development projects. A major challenge in the development field is cross-sectoral integrated planning and achieving multi-stakeholder consensus for collaborative joint projects, especially when sustainability is a goal. This increases the complexity of the multi-stakeholder interaction in decision making and requires enhanced mechanisms for stakeholder participation, coordination, and commitment beyond narrow self-interest. A critical aspect in the decision making process is to enable stakeholders to not only interpret and make decisions based on expert judgments, but also to appropriately involve the relevant parties in the research and decision making process. Therefore, scientific analyses in multi-stakeholder contexts have to be more transparent, participatory, and stakeholder-based in order to provide useful information to assist responsible decision making.This paper presents an outline of a stakeholder-based life cycle assessment approach that can be used to support sustainable decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts. The framework is discussed and compared to other common methods used to support environmental decision making in development projects. We argue that the fundamental concept of life cycle thinking can be effectively used to incorporate stakeholders in the research and decision making process, which can lead to more comprehensive, yet achievable assessments in collaboration with stakeholders. Life cycle thinking is not just a way to examine environmental impacts of activities, but also a way to comprehend and visualize a broader set of upstream and downstream consequences of decisions in development planning and implementation. A life cycle framework including the mapping of stakeholder involvement at each activity in upstream and downstream stages would give stakeholders a holistic view that they otherwise may not have.     

Using triple bottom line metrics and multi-criteria methodology in corporate settings

With the growing importance of environmental sustainability in the corporate sector, businesses are compelled to progress from assessing and benchmarking their environmental impact to making decisions on how to prioritize impact reduction alternatives. Most often, business decisions are driven by financial metrics, but with sustainability improvements becoming a business goal, it is also important to assess metrics from environmental and social spheres; nevertheless, practically and systematically performing such an assessment is challenging. We present an application of a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method that addresses the aforementioned challenges in a corporate setting. Our case study company – one of the largest inland marine freight carriers in the United States – promotes a business culture focused on financially viable, yet socially and environmentally responsible solutions. Thus, we combine life cycle analysis (LCA), financial calculation methods, and corporate surveys to quantify environmental, economic, and social performance measures, respectively. Multiattribute utility theory is integrated with analytic hierarchy processes (AHPs) and fuzzy analysis to create a carefully designed framework for corporations with diverse groups of stakeholders. With company leadership, implementation is feasible and successful at prioritizing alternatives among diverse stakeholders. The process provides a platform for negotiation and promotes discussions on decision drivers. The use of MCDA methodologies promoted the inclusion of a suite of metrics that aligned with the company's sense of social and environmental responsibility, generating an in-depth analysis of the alternatives that factored in other things besides economics. Return-on-investments (ROI) calculations, the typical approach used in the corporate setting, would have required significantly less time and effort from the company, but the results of our MCDA application indicated that inclusion of triple bottom line metrics delve deeper into stakeholder preferences. Thus, our case study company gained a holistic view of the candidate alternatives, in addition to creating a platform for structured discussions about company goals and priorities.