Comprehensive approach for evaluating different resource types – Case study of abiotic and biotic resource use assessment methodologies
Comprehensive approach for evaluating different resource types – Case study of abiotic and biotic resource use assessment methodologies
复制标题
评估不同资源类型的综合方法 â 非生物和生物资源利用评估方法的案例研究
DOI：
10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.049
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Matthias Finkbeiner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vanessa Bach;Markus Berger;Silvia Forin;Matthias Finkbeiner
由于对资源的需求不断增加，公众意识也随之提高，过去几年公布了各种评估资源使用及其后果的评估方法。现有方法通常是考虑到某一特定资源类型的具体特点而制定的，因此不适合对不同资源类型进行跨领域评估。本文提出了一个3步的方法，结合不同的资源使用评估方法，允许使用不同的资源类型的产品系统进行一致的评估。第一步是评估所考虑的维度、类别、指标、指标模型和基础数据是否一致。在这种情况下，可将其纳入合并方法，而无需进一步调整。同时确定差异并在后续步骤中解决。在这些步骤中，就如何调整这些方法的层面、类别和指标以适应综合方法提供了指导。在一个案例研究中，所提出的方法适用于两种方法的作者评估非生物（ESSENZ方法）和生物资源和原材料（BIRD方法）。ESSENZ方法由四个维度组成，通过21个类别和指标进行量化。BIRD方法考虑到五个方面和24个相应的类别和指标。由于两种方法的考虑维度都不匹配，因此无法比较所考虑的资源类型以及案例研究中的应用。通过采用拟议的办法，所有五个层面和总共27个类别和指标中的25个都可以纳入综合办法，以便对非生物和生物资源及原材料进行一致的评估。然后将获得的组合方法应用于由金属、木材和塑料制成的三个架子。可以表明，所采用的方法为如何将不同的资源使用评估方法联合收割机结合起来提供了有意义的指导，并增加了从综合和一致的评估中获得的结果。
Due to steadily increasing resource demand and accompanying raising public awareness, a variety of assessment methodologies evaluating resource use and its consequences were published in the last years. Existing methodologies are typically developed considering the specific characteristics of one particular resource type and as consequence are not suitable for cross-cutting assessment of different resource types. This paper proposes an 3-step approach for combining different resource use assessment methodologies allowing for a consistent assessment of product systems using different resource types. The first steps evaluate if the considered dimensions, categories, indicators, indicator models and underlying data are consistent. When this is the case, they can be included in the combined methodology without further adjustments. Differences are identified simultaneously and addressed in the subsequent steps. Within the steps guidance is provided on how the dimensions, categories and indicators of the methodologies can be adjusted to fit in the combined methodology. In a case study the proposed approach is applied to two methodologies developed by the authors assessing abiotic (ESSENZ method) and biotic resources and raw materials (BIRD method). The ESSENZ method consists of four dimensions, which are quantified by overall 21 categories and indicators. The BIRD method takes into account five dimensions and 24 corresponding categories and indicators. As none of the considered dimension of the two methodologies match, comparison of the considered resource types as well as application in a case study is not possible. By applying the proposed approach all five dimensions and 25 of the overall 27 categories and indicators can be integrated in the combined approach for a consistent assessment of abiotic and biotic resources and raw materials. The obtained combined methodology is then applied to three shelves made out of metal, wood and plastic. It could be shown that the introduced approach provides meaningful guidance on how to combine different resource use assessment methodologies and increases the findings gained from a combined and consistent assessment.
登录
查看更多内容
资源效率评估的 LCA 视角
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Laura Schneider;Vanessa Bach;M. Finkbeiner
通讯作者：
M. Finkbeiner
火用作为生命周期评估和其他可持续性评估工具中资源使用的衡量标准
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Göran Finnveden;Y. Arushanyan;M. Brandão
通讯作者：
M. Brandão
水的重要性：协调水和矿产资源评估。
影响因子：
11.4
作者：
T. Sonderegger;S. Pfister;S. Hellweg
通讯作者：
S. Hellweg
DOI：
10.1007/978-94-017-8697-3_7
发表时间：
2014-01-01
期刊：
BACKGROUND AND FUTURE PROSPECTS IN LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
影响因子：
--
作者：
Finkbeiner, Matthias;Ackermann, Robert;Wolf, Kirana
通讯作者：
Wolf, Kirana
产品环境评估：第 2 卷：科学背景
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1997
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
M. Hauschild;H. Wenzel
通讯作者：
H. Wenzel