Evolution and Trends of Sustainable Approaches: Latest Development and Innovations in Science and Technology Applications

By Chaudhery Mustansar Hussain

Evolution and Trends of Sustainable Approaches: Latest Development and Innovations in Science and Technology Applications provides different trends and approaches within the sustainability framework to assess their impact and offer possible solutions to problems facing the global sustainability paradigm. This book evaluates sustainability assessment approaches which support different levels of both decision-making and policy processes, thereby improving the management of natural and human systems. This book explores sustainable firm solutions, the upward trend of sustainability, and its variants. At the same time, different existing approaches are analyzed. These sustainable assessment approaches can be applied to products, services and technologies as well as business models, such as the Product-Service-System (PSS), Circular Economy (CE), Industrial Symbiosis (IS), and Supply Chain (SC). Finally, the book explores Sustainability Indicators (SIs), which are widely used to measure and communicate progress towards sustainable development, along with Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA), balancing the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, social and economic).

• Explores innovative strategies and advanced trends of sustainable approaches, engineering, and industrial applications
• Analyzes sustainability assessments and their role in planning and project processes
• Reviews state-of-the-art sustainable technologies
• Evaluates approaches for organizations to achieve both sustainability assessment and sustainable solutions

• Language: English
• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Release date: Jun 12, 2024
• ISBN: 9780443216503

Book preview

Chapter 1: Introduction to—evolution and trends of sustainability

Daniel Rossit¹, and Chaudhery Mustansar Hussain²     ¹Department of Engineering, INMABB, Universidad Nacional del Sur (UNS)-CONICET, Bahía Blanca, Argentina     ²Department of Chemistry and Environmental Science, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, United States

Abstract

This book aims to provide different trends and approaches within the sustainability framework to evaluate their impact and offer possible solutions to the problems facing the global sustainability paradigm. Sustainability assessment approaches support different levels of both decision-making and policy processes, thereby improving the management of natural and human systems. Additionally, there are many different approaches to quantifying and estimating sustainability. Among the most notable are sustainability indicators (SI), as they are widely used to measure and communicate progress toward sustainable development. Additionally, another option for assessing sustainability based on the industry's life cycle is the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), which balances the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, social, and economic). This book brings together different facets and approaches of sustainable production, as well as the impact of new technologies and different climate phenomena on the processes. In the different parts of this book, there is a comprehensive and orderly approach to current problems.

Keywords

Circular economy paradigm; Decision makers; Life cycle analysis; Logistics; Obsolescence management; Sustainability assessment

This book aims to provide different trends and approaches within the sustainability framework to evaluate their impact and offer possible solutions to the problems facing the global sustainability paradigm. Sustainability assessment approaches support different levels of both decision-making and policy processes, thereby improving the management of natural and human systems. Additionally, there are many different approaches to quantifying and estimating sustainability. Among the most notable are sustainability indicators (SI), as they are widely used to measure and communicate progress toward sustainable development. Additionally, another option for assessing sustainability based on the industry's life cycle is the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), which balances the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, social, and economic). This book brings together different facets and approaches of sustainable production, as well as the impact of new technologies and different climate phenomena on the processes. In the different parts of this book, there is a comprehensive and orderly approach to current problems.

Starting with Part 1, a series of problems associated with sustainable development are presented, analyzing different issues, within which the social aspect stands out. A very valuable factor incorporated into the UN Sustainable Development Goals agenda is the consideration of the human factor as an intrinsic element of development. That is, sustainable development implies the development of a more just and inclusive society, with pillars of this development being the consideration of the need for work and the development of economic activities that do not undermine the development possibilities of future generations. Chapters 2 and 3 address the life cycle analysis of energy systems and how this analysis can provide useful information for decision makers. In this sense, energy studies and associated topics are central, as they are a transversal input to all productive sectors. Chapter 4 studies how new technologies and, particularly, the post-COVID-19 pandemic era affect the labor market. This chapter studies the new characteristics of the labor market, where labor flexibility has permeated countless work activities that were unthinkable in previous stages. Likewise, these new flexibilities, in terms of industrial activities, represent new challenges in terms of human capital management. Another key aspect of achieving sustainable human development is the emergence of new economic systems that allow the development of regional economies, which must be integrated into a globalized and competitive market. For this purpose, Chapter 5 analyzes how small businesses with an environmentally friendly business model can emerge and develop as sources of work and economic drivers of regional economies. Within the chapter, different case studies of ventures are presented, and they study what were the main strengths of these ventures that allowed them to consolidate, as well as the main weaknesses in their growth.

In the second part of the book, operations management is analyzed in depth within the framework of sustainable development. This part presents a compendium of central themes to understand operations management as a tool to promote sustainable industrial development. These topics include maintenance management, product and obsolescence management, extended producer responsibility, and logistics operations. Regarding maintenance management, Chapter 6 presents a very interesting study on the approach to this management, where a paradigm is proposed that allows including the obsolescence of assets and spare parts, to ensure levels of operability. In Chapter 7, the obsolescence criterion is extended to other consumer products and not production assets; in this case, strategies are considered to implement a circular economy paradigm in the use of consumer products, considering a strategy of product as a service. To do this, the furniture within educational institutions is taken as a case study and a plan is developed to manage this furniture through a circular economy paradigm. Later, in Chapter 8, the concept of extended producer responsibility is introduced, where the producer must be responsible for the final impact that their products will have on the environment once their useful life has ended. In this particular case, the authors study strategies and models to manage the recovery of finished products, so that the correct disposal of these products is facilitated for the consumer. Chapter 9 analyzes the literature related to reverse logistics and remanufacturing processes associated with extended producer responsibility. This literature review presents a compendium and in-depth analysis of the literature, showing different models (mainly mathematical programming) that addressed different case studies and the particularities of each case. In Chapter 10, optimization tools for efficient energy management in very high-density energy systems are proposed. Finally, in Chapter 11, the last of Part 3 of the book, an innovative approach is addressed in the management of waste that has already taken the path of final disposal. These wastes, impossible to avoid in any human process, are important to address appropriately and efficiently, so that the management of operations, mainly logistics, has as little impact as possible.

In the final part of the book, Part 3, innovative and cutting-edge technologies that contribute to sustainable development are presented. Within these technologies, given the book's focus on operations management, digital technologies that allow information and operational orders to be managed in a more agile and direct way are of special interest. However, this part also incorporates studies in innovative energy management both at the basic technology and management levels. Chapter 12 analyzes how the digitalization of supply chains impacts in terms of sustainability, that is, how digital technologies contribute to improving the sustainable development of activities. As a particular case, they consider the construction supply chain. In Chapter 13, a more general study than the previous one is presented, and it analyzes how industrial logistics processes are enhanced by the incorporation of cyber-physical systems. These technologies, typical of Industry 4.0, allow physical systems to be integrated with digital systems directly, and for both systems to behave as a single system. Specifically, the chapter addresses a case study of the implementation of these technologies, and how they contribute to improving awareness about sustainable development. Chapter 14 presents a holistic approach to how digital technologies based on Industry 4.0 impact sustainable development, and how, through the adoption of these technologies, production processes can contribute to improving the sustainable development of society as a whole. Finally, the last Chapter 15 presents an interesting and innovative study in the energy sector considering hydrogen as a source and means of energy storage. This technology has acquired notable weight in recent years due to its potential zero impact on the environment, as it does not generate greenhouse gases. This chapter analyzes what the value chain of said technology is like and the management tools that are used, to indicate which are still the gaps that traditional value chain management tools fail to meet in desired levels of performance.

Part 1

Approaches to sustainable solutions

Outline

Chapter 2. Integrating life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making methods

Chapter 3. Life cycle sustainability assessment of concentrating solar power technologies: A comparison between solar tower power and thermal parabolic trough generations in Brazil

Chapter 4. Exploring sustainable workforce management: Trends, solution approaches, and practices

Chapter 5. The challenges of undertaking and innovating with sustainable socio-environmental impact businesses: Analysis of narratives from socio-environmental entrepreneurs in southern Bahia

Chapter 2: Integrating life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making methods

João Gabriel Lassio¹,², David Castelo Branco¹, Alessandra Magrini¹, and Denise Matos¹,²     ¹Energy Planning Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil     ²Cepel - Electrical Energy Research Center, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Abstract

With sustainability taking on a more prominent role on the international agenda, life cycle assessment has expanded to encompass economic and social issues, leading to the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). However, LCSA still needs an internationally standardized or widely accepted methodological structure. Consequently, conducting an LCSA poses several challenges, and some authors have advocated using multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. By focusing on the integration of MCDM methods and LCSA, this chapter discusses the challenges in applying LCSA and provides an overview of MCDM methods. It delves into using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy logic, analyzing their effectiveness in addressing current LCSA obstacles. The AHP method has often been used to define weights for aggregation criteria according to the experts’ and interested parties' opinions. Fuzzy logic aligns with established socioenvironmental quality standards, and it is more suitable for situations where sustainability issues cannot a priori be quantified.

Keywords

Catalytic hierarchy process; Fuzzy logic; Life cycle sustainability assessment; Multicriteria decision making; Sustainability

1. Introduction

The sustainability paradigm has assumed a prominent role on the international agenda, primarily driven by the global climate crisis, increasing public awareness, and the most recent international agreements and commitments, such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This inaugural international consensus on addressing global challenges corresponds to an ambitious framework focused on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) prioritizing people and the planet (Sanyé-Mengual and Sala, 2022; UN, 2015).

In this context, life cycle assessment (LCA) emerges as an interesting tool to actively support the environmental ambitions of the SDGs (Sanyé-Mengual and Sala, 2022). This technique falls under the umbrella of environmental assessment tools that aim to guide the latest policies and corporate decision making toward environmentally friendly products and practices. Only by a life cycle thinking lens is it possible to comprehensively observe the environmental implications associated with all stages of the value chain of produced goods and services. Hence, LCA facilitates recognizing and avoiding environmental trade-offs among various geographical areas, life cycle stages, and impact categories (Moltesen and Bjørn, 2018; Owsianiak et al., 2018).

However, the single focus of LCA on the environmental dimension of sustainability neglects the economic and social aspects linked with the SDG agenda (UN, 2015). Consequently, it is imperative for life cycle thinking to acknowledge that sustainability encompasses more than just environmental considerations. It should also incorporate social issues, such as human health, labor conditions, and community impacts, as well as economic concerns, including cost-effectiveness and resource efficiency (Zanni et al., 2020).

This implicit call for aligning LCA's scope with the multidimensional sustainability goals more effectively requires a broader outlook that also encompasses social and economic dimensions, such as the perspective offered by the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). This comprehensive approach is often associated with the triple bottom line (TBL) concept (Elkington, 1998), providing a more holistic understanding of a product or service's overall sustainability performance. Accordingly, LCSA enhances decision making by offering a complete picture of the sustainability impacts and enabling stakeholders to identify burden-shifting and synergies between different sustainability dimensions (Guinée, 2016; Kloepffer, 2008; UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2011).

Nevertheless, unlike LCA, LCSA still needs an internationally standardized or widely accepted methodological structure (Guinée, 2016; Kalbar and Das, 2020; Kloepffer, 2008). As a result, conducting an LCSA poses several methodological and practical challenges. Some of the most common concerns include the need for more input data, methodological proposals, and effective strategies for reporting results; the integration of environmental, social, and economic indicators to translate the product or service sustainability degree; and the subjectivity inherent to the sustainability concept and its qualitative metrics, especially in the social dimension (Guinée et al., 2011; Kalbar and Das, 2020; Lassio et al., 2021). In response to this situation, considerable efforts have been undertaken to enhance the LCSA framework, and some authors have advocated using multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (Guinée et al., 2011; Kalbar and Das, 2020).

In light of this preamble, this chapter focuses on integrating MCDM methods and LCSA. Firstly, it discusses the challenges in applying LCSA and provides an overview of MCDM methods based on their theoretical references and practical studies in the literature. Then, it delves into using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy logic in combination with LCSA, evaluating their effectiveness in addressing current LCSA obstacles and proposing a framework for their integration with LCSA.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Life cycle sustainability assessment

Following the global debate about sustainable development, the LCA scope has expanded to encompass the social and economic domains, leading to the development of LCSA. While this comprehensive approach is suitable for integrating environmental, social, and economic aspects into sustainability-oriented decision-making processes, the need for a standardized and widely accepted methodology for its application remains (UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2011).

One prominent resource currently available to guide the application of LCSA is the research project Coordination Action for Innovation in Life Cycle Analysis for Sustainability (CALCAS). CALCAS offers an integrated framework and roadmap for LCSA, guiding the incorporation of sustainability's environmental, social, and economic dimensions (CALCAS, 2009; Guinée, 2016). Furthermore, a noteworthy collaboration between the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) has resulted in a report titled Toward a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. This publication illustrates the utilization and integration of LCA, life cycle costing (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (SLCA) (Eq. 2.1) as starting points for the LCSA application (UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2011).

Equation 2.1. (2.1)

LCA is used to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with the entire life cycle of a product or service, starting from the extraction and processing of raw materials to waste recycling and final waste disposal. This environmental assessment tool adheres to standardized guidelines outlined in ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006) and ISO 14044 (ISO, 2006), which establish a four-step methodology for its application: (i) goal and scope definition, (ii) life cycle inventory (LCI), (iii) life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), and (iv) interpretation. Presently, various LCI databases and LCIA methods are available to analyze elemental flows and their corresponding environmental impacts across different categories. Ecoinvent (Wernet et al., 2016) stands out as the most comprehensive and widely employed LCI database (Bjørn et al., 2018). Additionally, notable LCIA methods include Eco-Indicator 99 (Goedkoop and Spriensma, 2000), ReCiPe 2016 (Huijbregts et al., 2017), and USEtox (Rosenbaum et al., 2008).

SLCA is a relatively new methodology compared to LCA; as such, its methodological development, practical implementation, and consensus are still in the early stages. This technique aims to evaluate the impacts of a product or service's life cycle on the well-being of stakeholders (UNEP, 2020). To guide practitioners in SLCA studies, UNEP/SETAC provides a framework that outlines key elements and offers specific guidance (UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2009; UNEP, 2020). This international collaborative effort also defines both generic and specific social indicators and proposes potential data sources for their collection (UNEP, 2021). In the realm of SLCA studies, two central databases stand out: the Social Hotspot Database (SHDB) (Benoit-Norris et al., 2012) and the Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database (Ciroth and Eisfeldt, 2016). These databases compile pertinent social information and exclusively address social performance at the country or sector level (Kühnen and Hahn, 2017; Toniolo et al., 2020).

Finally, LCC is related to the first mention of the life cycle thinking at the end of the 1950s when Novick (1959) analyzed investments in military weaponry through a lifecycle-based method. Like LCA and SLCA, LCC enables the comprehensive evaluation of a product's costs throughout its life cycle, considering its interactions within the economic domain (Rödger et al., 2018). This allows for more informed decision making and supports identifying cost-saving opportunities (Hunkeler et al., 2008; Toniolo et al., 2020). However, even though the industry already uses it, it still lacks an agreed methodology consistent with the LCSA. What comes closest to this is the methodology provided by Hunkeler et al. (2008) that aligns LCC with the LCA framework, ensuring a cohesive analysis of economic and environmental aspects in lifecycle-based analysis.

To establish an overarching LCSA, it is imperative that the perspectives and aims of these three key techniques, namely LCA, SLCA, and LCC, are aligned (UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, 2011). While the ISO 14040 (ISO, 2006) series predominantly focuses on environmental aspects and does not encompass social and economic concerns, it can serve as a valuable reference framework for implementing LCSA. Nevertheless, a growing body of literature highlights the challenges encountered in this process. In this context, two prominent issues arise: the integration of indicators and the subjectivity inherent to sustainability, as well as its qualitative metrics, especially social ones (Guinée, 2016). In light of this, the integration of LCSA with MCDM methods has emerged as an approach to overcome these challenges (Kalbar and Das, 2020).

2.2. Multicriteria decision making

2.2.1. Brief overview of MCDM methods in the sustainable context

In the decision-making process, it is common to consider various criteria that may potentially conflict with one another (Kalbar and Das, 2020). Within this context, MCDM methods are effective tools for dealing with this problem as they encompass many data, relationships, and objectives typically inherent in a particular real-world problem (Munda, 2005). These methods can be categorized into two main groups: (i) multiattribute decision making (MADM) and (ii) multiobjective decision making (MODM). MADM methods are employed when confronting decision-making problems that involve a finite number of alternatives (discrete variables). In contrast, MODM methods are specifically suited for problems encompassing an infinite range of alternatives (continuous variables) (Hwang and Yoon, 1981). It is worth noting that there are other classifications, including those based on different schools of thought, such as the French and American approaches.

To support sustainability-oriented decision making, MADM methods have gained prominence (Kalbar and Das, 2020; Kazimieras Zavadskas et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2009). Within this group, there are various MCDM methods. Selecting the most suitable method requires a thorough analysis of the convenience of adopting a compensatory approach (Gomes and Gomes, 2019; Munda, 2005). The reasoning behind this is that using a compensatory approach allows for formulating a measure of global merit for the analyzed alternatives. Conversely, a noncompensatory approach ranks the alternatives in relative terms without indicating their global merits. Compensatory approaches have gained preference due to the benefits of a single synthesis measure, such as simplifying systems and communicating complex information.

In this context, the AHP method is currently the most employed MADM method. On the other hand, fuzzy logic has been increasingly applied and shown a potential to support sustainability-oriented decision making (Martín-Gamboa et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2009; Wulf et al., 2019; Zanghelini et al., 2018). In both cases, decision makers must be aware of the burden-shifting (or trade-off) between different indicators due to the aggregation process. Note that it allows interchange between natural and anthropogenic capital, implying a weak sustainability approach. It is crucial to acknowledge that compensatory MADM methods may lead to imbalanced actions. While these actions may exhibit exceptional performance in specific areas, they may also encounter shortcomings in other aspects (Gomes and Gomes, 2019; Kalbar and Das,