Identification of Sustainability Tool

8/17/2019 Identification of Sustainability Tool

1/13

Identification of Sustainability Assessment Tool in Literature

Identificação das Ferramentas de Avaliação da Sustentabilidade na

literatura

Simone SARTORI ([email protected]) Doctoral student in Production

Engineering, Department of Production Engineering, Federal University of Santa Catarina

(UFSC), Florianopolis, SC, ra!il.

"ucila #aria de Sou!a CAMPOS (lucila.campos@ufsc.$r ). %ssociate Professor at

Department of Production Engineering at Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC),

Florianopolis, SC, ra!il.

Abstract

&'e importance of tools to evaluate sustaina$ility 'as $een recogni!ed t'roug'out t'e last

decades. &'e tools can 'elp clarify and refine sustaina$ilityrelated concepts, improve our

understanding among components of sustaina$ility in practical terms, and t'us promote t'e

science and practice of sustaina$le development. &'is t'eoreticalconceptual study aims to

analy!e t'e tools for assessing corporate sustaina$ility. e also intend to 'ig'lig't t'e

purpose, c'aracteristics and s'ortcomings of tools relative to &ripleottom"ine and

operations management. %s a result, t'e literature presents some gaps in terms of addressing

sustaina$ility in operations management and t'e integration naturesociety.

ey!ords" Sustaina$ility %ssessment, &riple ottom "ine, &ools for Sustaina$ility.

Resumo

% import*ncia de ferramentas para avaliar a sustenta$ilidade tem sido recon'ecida ao longo

das +ltimas dcadas. %s ferramentas a-udam esclarecer e aperfeioar os conceitos

relacionados / sustenta$ilidade e mel'ora a compreens0o das comple1as rela2es entre os

componentes da sustenta$ilidade em termos pr3ticos. Este estudo te4ricoconceitual tem por

o$-etivo identificar e analisar as ferramentas de avalia0o da sustenta$ilidade empresarial e

destacar a finalidade, caracter5sticas e lacunas das ferramentas em rela0o ao &" e a gest0o

de opera2es. Como resultado, a literatura apresenta uma srie de lacunas em termos de comoa$ordar a sustenta$ilidade na gest0o de opera2es e a integra0o nature!asociedade.

Palavrasc'ave6 %valia0o da Sustenta$ilidade, &riple ottom "ine, Ferramentas para

sustenta$ilidade.

#$ Introduction

&'e gro7ing concern 7it' climate c'anges and environmental degradation, t'e sustaina$le

production and t'e effective use of resources are $ecoming popular issues in studies a$out

sustaina$ility, as 7ell as in corporate and industrial areas (8aussin et al. 9:;9). >?). &'e economic performance

1

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/13

reflects t'e organi!ational success in t'e mar=et and 7it' t'e s'are'olders t'e environmental

performance s'o7s compliance 7it' t'e government legislation and administration to a

group of environmentally conscientious clients and, t'e social performance s'o7s t'e

sta=e'olders management, especially 7it' t'e 7or=force and local community (Srid'ar,

9:;9).

&'e sustaina$ility evaluation 7as emp'asi!ed at 9, 7'en t'e need for development 7as

discussed, as 7ell as t'e identification of sustaina$ility indicators for registry and support in

decisionma=ing regarding t'e sustaina$le development (CAU#%D, ;>>9). Even t'oug' t'e

concept of sustaina$ility is intuitively compre'ended, it is difficult to e1press it at an

operational level ("a$usc'agne et al. 9::B). %ccording to Samuel et al. (9:;) t'e use of

indicators does not ensure sustaina$le operations, $ut it guarantees t'e performance

monitoring and transparency in t'e disclosure of environmental, economic and social

sustaina$ility dimensions. &'us, t'e main role of sustaina$ility measurement is to indicate t'e

progress or retrocession regarding its goals, in order to inform and guide t'e actions of

managers and t'e pu$lic in general (Parris, ates, 9::).

Since t'en, t'e sustaina$ility measurement 'as received attention from t'e academy t'at isinvolved in a relevant num$er of researc'es, as 7ell as from organi!ations, 7'ic' are mostly

de$ating on 'o7 to ac'ieve $etter $usiness practices (Parris, ates, 9:: "a$usc'agne et al.

9::B Searcy et al. 9::


3/13

or in similar roles at suppliers) t'in= a$out t'e elements of sustaina$ilityM and (ii) do

operational managersK cognitions regarding t'e elements of sustaina$ility matter in terms of

operational performance outcomesM

Net, for t'is transition to sustaina$ility to 'appen, t'e goals must $e evaluated, and t'is 'as

imposed important c'allenges on t'e scientific community in terms of providing trust7ort'y

and efficient tools (Aess et al. 9::). %s a response, t'e sustaina$ility evaluation area 'as

uic=ly developed, along 7it' t'e evaluation tools (indicators and inde1es, frame7or=s,

standards).

&'e tools are intended for providing a structure to evaluate t'e sustaina$ility and its results

(ec=er, 9::B). %ccording to "o!ano (9:;9), t'e sustaina$ility evaluation tools 'ave t7o

main purposes6 to evaluate t'e organi!ationsK progress and, to communicate t'e sta=e'olders

a$out t'e efforts in economic, environmental and social dimensions.

Defining and measuring t'e sustaina$ility involves decision ma=ing as 'o7 to define and

uantify t'e developments, 7'at is $eing supported and for 'o7 long (Parris, ates, 9::). On

t'is perspective, t'e possi$ility of comparisons is, usually, vital for sustaina$ility

comparisons $et7een t'e current and previous developments, t'e progress of certain

development goals or comparisons $et7een companies, regions and countries.

&'e purpose of sustaina$ility evaluation is to provide a glo$al evaluation to decision ma=ers

in terms of naturesociety integration in s'ort and long term perspectives, in order to 'elp t'e

esta$lis' actions t'at must or must not $e ta=en to7ards creating a sustaina$le society (Aess

et al. 9::). Still in t'is conte1t, t'e sustaina$ility evaluation ena$les people to estimate t'e

conditions and trends, to give 7arnings to7ards avoiding economic, social and environmental

damages, to formulate strategies and communicate ideas (er=, #anta ;>>>).

&$ Met'odolo(ical Procedures

&'is study is composed of four main stages6 (i) identification of t'e selected articles (ii)

analysis of t'e selected articlesK content (iii) description and classification of t'e identified

approac'es and, (iv) identification of t'e approac'esK limitations.

%t t'e initial stage, t'e scientific articles 7ere identified $y means of a searc' for =ey 7ords

on t'e data$ases e$ of no7ledge (OSO), iley, Science Direct and Engineering illage.

ey 7ords as QindicatorsRR, RRmet'ods, Qmodeling, Qperformance evaluation, Qcorporate

Q&riple ottom "ine 7ere com$ined 7it' Qsustaina$ility t'e terms Qeconomics

sustaina$ility, Qsocial sustaina$ility, Qenvironmental sustaina$ility and Qsustaina$le

operations 7ere also searc'ed.

&'e =ey 7ords 7ere used to recover editions containing at least one of t'e 7ords in t'e title,

a$stract or =ey 7ords. &'e ;>.T> editions 7ere analy!ed regarding t'e follo7ing aspects6 (i)


4/13

&a$le ; Sustaina$ility evaluation tools

Sustaina$ility

Evaluation

Sources


5/13

&'e $asic criteria for c'oosing tools are t'e purpose of use, t'e reuired data and t'e

e1ecution support tec'niues. On t'is section, ten tools t'at 7ere identified in t'e literature

revie7 are presented.

a, -t'os IndicatorsCreated in ;>>J, t'e Et'os Onstitute of usiness and Social >) can $e very useful for comparative analysis among t'e different

organi!ations or departments.

Ot is a ualitative met'od, 7it' uestionnaire$ased evaluation. % total of T; uestions

represent ;T elements of t'e Onternational C'am$er of CommerceKs principles, divided into

four levels6 i) conformity ('ealt', safety and environmental reuirements) ii) Development

and Omplantation of Environmental #anagement Systems iii) Ontegration of t'e $usinessK

general functions 7it' environmental concerns iv) &otal Zuality %pproac' [ t'e

environmental management integrated systems are glo$ally applied in operations and are

constantly evaluated for improvement.

d, Ic'em-

&'e Onstitution of C'emical Engineers (Oc'emE) developed a group of indicators to measure

t'e industrial processesK sustaina$le performance. %ccording to t'is initiative, sustaina$ility

may $e summari!ed in t'e &riple ottom "ine covering t'e t'ree components6 environmental

responsi$ility, economic return (7ealt' creation) and social development (Oc'emE, 9::B).

&'e tool 'as an internal focus, providing standardi!ed forms and conversion ta$les, and

ena$les progress monitoring yearonyear ("a$usc'agne et al. 9::B).

&'ere is not a general agreement a$out environmental issues t'at must $e measured, yet t'ereis some agreement a$out t'e main aspects presented in t'e literature [ air, 7ater, land, energy

5


6/13

and materials (WECD ;>>). Some important matters as $iodiversity, 'a!ardous material and

generation of 'a!ardous 7aste, ris=s to 'uman 'ealt', to air and 7ater uality are addressed

$y Oc'emE (Delai, &a=a'as'i, 9:;;).

e, Sustainability Assessment Model&'e tool QSustaina$ility %ssessment #odel (S%#) 7as created in ;>>> $y t'e oil company

P 7it' %$erdeen University and 8as and Wil Consultants. &'e purpose 7as 'elping

organi!ations to develop sustaina$le forms of operation (e$$ington, Frame, 9::), to

standardi!e and evaluate t'e pro-ects development (Iasna, 9::J).

&'is tool is $ased on t'e costs accounta$ility tec'niue and ta=es into consideration t'e

economic impacts (dividends, ta1es, investments etc), environmental impacts (atmosp'ere

emissions, 7aste etc), social impacts (la$or, 'ealt' and safety, social impact of products) and

resources impacts (gas and oil, energy, 7ater etc) (e$$ington et al. 9::) in monetary terms.

f, Sustainability Cost Accountin(

&'e tool QSustaina$ility Cost %ccounting (SC%), developed $y rent, an Erc= and

"a$usc'agne (9::B) evaluates, in monetary terms, t'e environmental and social costs

(e1ternal costs or society and environment deterioration) and $enefits (internal and e1ternal

contri$utions) of a ne7 industrial tec'nology (rent et al. 9::T).

&'e procedure is $ased on Full Cost %ccounting (FC%) and &otal Cost %ssessment (&C%)

met'ods 'o7ever, t'e approac' is different for considering social and environmental

impacts. y means of a common denominator, t'e e1ternal effects can $e incorporated into an

internal evaluation (financial) of a ne7 tec'nology performance. SC% 'as several

sustaina$ility criteria t'at may $e used to evaluate production systems or t'e company as a7'ole.

(, Sustainable /alue Added

&'e tool QSustaina$le alue %dded (S%) developed $y Figge and Ia'n (9::?) aims at

measuring corporate sustaina$ility performance, increasing t'e use of resources $ased on

opportunity costs, 7'ic' s'all $e measured.

S% defines t'e corporate sustaina$ility performance in monetary terms for a group of

different economic, environmental and social resources. On t'is sense, t'e approac' is $ased

on financial economic principles6 t'e company generates value 7'enever it ma=es a moreefficient use of resources 7'en compared 7it' anot'er company (Ia'n et al. 9:;).

&'e tool is $ased on a strong sustaina$ility t'eory and confers a price to e1ternalities caused

$y a specific activity $y means of t'e value paid $y t'e pro$lem causer to t'e victims, so t'at

t'ey accept t'e e1ternality. &'erefore, t'e tool does not reflect a capital su$stitution $ut a

compensation (transaction t'at re7ards a certain class in e1c'ange for t'e resources

consumption).

', Manufacturin( -cosystems Model

&'ere is a relevant potential to improve effectiveness of resources $y considering t'e factoryas an ecosystem. &'us, Despeisse et al. (9:;9) presented t'e Q#anufacturing Ecosystems

6


7/13


8/13

$e in accordance 7it' t'e conte1t and c'aracteristics t'at t'e sta=e'olders 7is' to evaluate

(8asparatos et al. 9::J). &a$le 9 summari!es t'e sustaina$ility evaluation tools t'at are

identified in t'e literature.

&a$le 9 [ Summary of t'e sustaina$ility evaluation tools.

Tools Factors-4ecution su++ort

tec'ni5ues.a+s

Frame7or=

to assess t'e

sustaina$ilit

y

of

operational

initiatives

Environmental

Economic

Social

Criteria t'at 7or= as

starting point for creation

of t'e performance

indicators.

&'e operational and social initiatives are

considered separately ("a$uscc'agne et al

9::B).

Et'osOndicators

SocialSystem description) presents over t'an ;::

indicators, not all of t'em are easy to

evaluate ("a$uscc'agne et al 9::B).

Ondicators of

sustaina$le

development

for industry

EnvironmentalOnformative frame7or=

Aormali!ation esta$lis'es

a num$er of indicators.

Does not allo7 su$stitution of t'e

indicators t'at 7ere previously defined $y

t'e tool.

8


9/13

mar=et and communication) or 'o7 eac' element contri$utes to sustaina$ility ("o!ano,

9:;9).

8reat part of t'e corporate sustaina$ility researc' is focused on management of t'e

sta=e'olders and de$ates on t'e impact of sustaina$le practices in t'e companyKs financial

performance. Ot is noted, also, t'at t'e corporate sustaina$ility is not included in de$ates on

climate c'anges and resources e1'austion ("innenluec=e, 8riffit's, 9:;). "ee and Saen

(9:;9) report t'e lac= of availa$le tools to monitor and evaluate t'e corporate activitiesK

impacts on t'e environment and society. "i=e7ise, it is not clear 'o7 t'ese tools can 'elp

evaluate t'e different activities of t'e company in a concrete and operational 7ay

(riassoulis, 9::; "o!ano, 9:;9).

Currently, t'ere is no clear description of 'o7 to implement t'e tools in a certain organi!ation

(Estampe et al. 9:;) vindicating t'e tool scope analysis and support 7'en deciding 7'ic'

tool to use. &'erefore, $esides t'e lac= of strategies or tools, t'e main $arrier is not =no7ing

'o7 to meet t'e sustaina$ility purposes and, more important, 'o7 to insert t'em in ordinary

activities (Parisi, 9:;).

Ondicators are largely used to evaluate sustaina$ility. Io7ever, t'ey can $e very su$-ective.

&'erefore, progress 'as $een made in developing evaluation instruments, some of t'en in a

uantitative perspective. &'e sustaina$ility ualitative formulation ta=es into consideration

t'e present generation and emp'asi!es concerns a$out t'e future, $ut 7it' not specific

timeliness (#oldan et al. 9:;9). &'e ne7 scientific approac'es for uantitative sustaina$ility

evaluation are only $eginning to arise (&odorova, #arinova, 9::>).

&'e sustaina$ility performance measurement is immature 7'en compared 7it' t'e

environmental impact evaluation tools (). 8oyal and

8upta (9:;9) reinforce t'e sustaina$ility evaluation need $y comparing studies on different

sectors (manufacture and services) and t'eir relation 7it' t'e companyKs performance.

%ccording to &ang and \'ou (9:;9) t'ere are fe7 uantitative models treating social and

environmental responsi$ility matters. On practice, t'e companies 'ave implemented purc'ase

policies to assure t'at suppliers meet certain environmental and social standards.


10/13

c'aracteristics and current support tec'niues, 7it' t'e purpose of defining t'e most relevant

tool for a specific goal.

%ll tools presented are via$le in term of evaluating and contri$uting 7it' a corporate,

regional or national conte1t. %s t'e tools are recogni!ed, tested and accepted, t'ey may

$ecome important elements of pu$lic and corporate agendas. Finally, a tool selection must $e

$ased on t'e evaluation purpose.

For future studies, it is possi$le to suggest6 i) studies on t'e evolution of disclosed indicators

ii) studies on t'e toolsK advantages and disadvantages studies comparing t'e use of tools in

t'e pu$lic and private sectors studies evaluating t'e servicesK sustaina$ility.

On t'is study, $oundaries defined $y t'e researc'ers influenced t'e results some'o7, suc' as6

a) t'e data sources 7ere restricted to Portal Capes data$ase and, $) t'e articles considered are

t'eoreticalempirical studies.

Ac0no!led(ment

&'e aut'ors 7ould li=e to t'an= t'e Aational Council of Scientific and &ec'nological

Development (CAPZ) for t'e financial support.

References

%!apagic, %. Perdan, S. (9:::) QOndicators of sustaina$le development for industry6 %

general frame7or=, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, J(?), 9?9T;.

e$$ington, H ro7n, H. Frame, . (9::) Q%ccounting tec'nologies and sustaina$ility

assessment models, Ecological Economics, T;(9), 99?9T.

e$$ington, H. Frame, . (9::) Q#oving from SD reporting to evaluation6 t'esustaina$ility assessment model, Chartered Accounting Journal of New Zealand , J9(), ;;

;.

ec=er, H. (9::B). Q#easuring progress to7ards sustaina$le development6 an ecological

frame7or= for selecting indicators, Local Environment , ;:(;), J;:.

G'ringer, C. Hoc'em, P. (9::) Q#easuring t'e immeasura$le % survey of sustaina$ility

indices, Ecological Economics, T, ;J.

rent, %. C. an Erc=,


11/13

Despeisse, #. all, P.D. Evans, S. "evers, %. (9:;9) QOndustrial ecology at factory level [

a conceptual model, Journal of Cleaner Production, ;, :>.

Eagan, P.D Hoeres, E. (;>>) QDevelopment of a facility$ased environmental performance

indicator related to sustaina$le development, Journal of Cleaner Production, B(?), 9T>9J.

El=ington, H. (;>>?) Q&o7ards t'e sustaina$le corporation6 in7in7in $usiness strategiesfor sustaina$le development, California Management eview, T(9), >:;::.

El=ington, H. (9:;9) Sustentabilidade8 canibais com (arfo e faca, S0o Paulo, #. oo=s do

rasil "tda, S0o Paulo.

Estampe, D. "amouri, S. Paris, H.". ra'imD-elloul, S. (9:;) Q% frame7or= for

analysing supply c'ain performance evaluation models, International Journal of Production

Economics, ;?9(9), 9?9BJ.

Et'os (9:;;) Indicadores -t'os. %vaila$le at6

'ttp6LL777;.et'os.org.$rLEt'ose$LaruivoL:%dJe9:;;]OndicadoresEt'os]PW9.

"a$usc'agne, C. rent, %. C. an Erc=, 99T.

11

http://www1.ethos.org.br/EthosWeb/arquivo/0-A-d8e2011_IndicadoresEthos_PORT.pdfhttp://www.icheme.org/communities/subject_groups/sustainability/~/media/Documents/Subject%20Groups/Sustainability/Newsletters/Sustainability%20Metrics.ashxhttp://www.icheme.org/communities/subject_groups/sustainability/~/media/Documents/Subject%20Groups/Sustainability/Newsletters/Sustainability%20Metrics.ashxhttp://www.icheme.org/communities/subject_groups/sustainability/~/media/Documents/Subject%20Groups/Sustainability/Newsletters/Sustainability%20Metrics.ashxhttp://www1.ethos.org.br/EthosWeb/arquivo/0-A-d8e2011_IndicadoresEthos_PORT.pdfhttp://www.icheme.org/communities/subject_groups/sustainability/~/media/Documents/Subject%20Groups/Sustainability/Newsletters/Sustainability%20Metrics.ashxhttp://www.icheme.org/communities/subject_groups/sustainability/~/media/Documents/Subject%20Groups/Sustainability/Newsletters/Sustainability%20Metrics.ashx


12/13

"o!ano, JB:J.

Ayo=a, #. rent, %. (9::) Q%pplication of an environmental valuation approac' t'at

incorporates e1ternality costs in sustaina$ility decisionma=ing of t'e metallurgical sector,

Journal(South African Institute 'f Mining And Metallurgy, ;:(;:), TT.

WECD (;>>) QO-C3 Core Set of Indicators for -nvironmental Performance Revie!s"

A Synt'esis Re+ort by t'e .rou+ on t'e State of t'e -nvironment, Wrganisation for

Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, .

Pagell, #. 8o$eli, D. (9::>) QIo7 Plant #anagersR E1periences and %ttitudes &o7ard

Sustaina$ility


13/13

&odorova, . #arinova, D. (9:;;) Q#odelling sustaina$ility, Mathematics and Com!uters

in Simulation J;(), ;>;?:J.

oolman, &. es'ag', %. (9::) QDevelopment of a #anagement &ool for %ssessing

Environmental Performance in S#EsK Design and Production, &a=ata, S., Umeda, N. (Ed.),

%dvances in "ife Cycle Engineering for Sustaina$le #anufacturing usinesses, Springer

"ondon, cap. TT, JJJ.

13