liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Weighting and valuation in selected environmental systems analysis tools - suggestions for further developments
Royal Institute of Technology.
Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI).
Royal Institute of Technology.
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för ekonomisk och industriell utveckling, Industriell miljöteknik. Linköpings universitet, Tekniska högskolan.
Vise andre og tillknytning
2011 (engelsk)Inngår i: Journal of Cleaner Production, ISSN 0959-6526, E-ISSN 1879-1786, Vol. 19, nr 2-3, s. 145-156Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

In environmental systems analysis tools like Life Cycle Assessment, strategic environmental assessment, cost–benefit analysis and environmental management systems, results need to be presented in a comprehensible way to make alternatives easily comparable. One way of doing this is to aggregate results to a manageable set by using weighting methods. In this paper, we explore how weighting methods are used in some selected Environmental Systems Analysis Tools (ESATs), and suggest possible developments of their use. We examine the differences in current use patterns, discuss the reasons for and implications of such differences, and investigate whether observed differences in use are necessary. The result of our survey shows that weighting and valuation is broadly used in the examined ESATs. The use of weighting/valuation methods is different in different tools, but these differences are not always related to the application; rather, they are related to traditions and views on valuation and weighting. Also, although the requirements on the weights/values may differ between tools, there are intersections where they coincide. Monetary weights, using either endpoint or midpoint methods, are found to be useful in all the selected tools. Furthermore, the inventory shows that that there is a common need for generic sets of weights. There is a need for further research focusing on the development of consistent value sets derived with a wide range of methods. In parallel to the development of weighting methods it is important with critical evaluations of the weighting sets with regard to scientific quality, consistency and data gaps.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Elsevier , 2011. Vol. 19, nr 2-3, s. 145-156
Emneord [en]
Impact assessment, Costebenefit analysis, Strategic environmental assessment, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life cycle cost (LCC), Environmental management systems
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-62686DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.04.016ISI: 000285227800006OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-62686DiVA, id: diva2:374001
Tilgjengelig fra: 2010-12-02 Laget: 2010-12-02 Sist oppdatert: 2017-12-12

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekst

Personposter BETA

Hjelm, Olof

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Hjelm, Olof
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Journal of Cleaner Production

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 342 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf