The Experts below are selected from a list of 7599 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Przemysław Kurczewski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Green marketing today – a mix of trust, consumer participation and Life Cycle Thinking
Management, 2017Co-Authors: Anna Lewandowska, Joanna Witczak, Przemysław KurczewskiAbstract:A transition for a green, circular economy has encouraged companies to use new tools which boost sustainability. The purpose of this article is to discuss the consideration of Life Cycle Thinking in green marketing as realized by companies. This theoretical-conceptual study aims to analyze Life Cycle assessment (LCA) as a useful tool for assessing green marketing goals. We also intend to highlight the importance of creating consumer trust for green business by displaying the green credentials of the products and activities. The article presents t he virtues and shortcomings of the LCA results relative to marketing management. As a result, the literature presents some gaps in terms of addressing Life Cycle Thinking in marketing management and linking with consumer participation and trust.
-
green marketing today a mix of trust consumer participation and Life Cycle Thinking
Management Science, 2017Co-Authors: Anna Lewandowska, Joanna Witczak, Przemysław KurczewskiAbstract:A transition for a green, circular economy has encouraged companies to use new tools which boost sustainability. The purpose of this article is to discuss the consideration of Life Cycle Thinking in green marketing as realized by companies. This theoretical-conceptual study aims to analyze Life Cycle assessment (LCA) as a useful tool for assessing green marketing goals. We also intend to highlight the importance of creating consumer trust for green business by displaying the green credentials of the products and activities. The article presents t he virtues and shortcomings of the LCA results relative to marketing management. As a result, the literature presents some gaps in terms of addressing Life Cycle Thinking in marketing management and linking with consumer participation and trust.
-
Life Cycle Thinking in small and medium enterprises: the results of research on the implementation of Life Cycle tools in Polish SMEs—part 1: background and framework
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Przemysław KurczewskiAbstract:Purpose This article is the first of a series of articles presenting the results of research on the implementation of Life Cycle management tools in small- and medium-sized companies in Poland. This work is part of a project financed by the Polish Agency for Enterprise Development (PAED) which began in February 2011. It was carried out by the Wielkopolska Quality Institute—a business environment institution associated with the Polish Centre for Life Cycle Assessment (PCLCA). The main practical objective of the project was to support small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in their business development, e.g. by expanding their horizons beyond the sphere of their operation and identifying new areas for improvement and promotion of the products and services on offer. These publications are a voice in the discussion on the opportunities and pertinence of implementing Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) in small- and medium-sized enterprises and an attempt to identify potential barriers arising from specific characteristics of SMEs which could hinder or even prevent the effective implementation of Life Cycle techniques. Part 1 presents the situation of SMEs in Poland, general objectives of the project and organisation of the survey process.
Matthias Finkbeiner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Preface—a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking: exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:PurposeThe main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA).MethodsStarting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis.Results and conclusionsTen contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.
-
Preface—a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking: exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:The main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Starting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis. Ten contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.
-
preface a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:The main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Starting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis. Ten contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.
Nils Brandt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The application of Life Cycle Thinking in the context of European waste policy
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2012Co-Authors: David Lazarevic, Nicolas Buclet, Nils BrandtAbstract:As the impetus of Life Cycle assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) in waste management policy is increasing, decision makers may face conflicting advice on the potential environmental impacts of competing end-of-Life treatment options. This paper presents a critical analysis of the current application of LCA in the context of European waste management policy. This is relevant as the European Commission has highlighted LCT as the way departure of waste streams from the waste hierarchy is to be justified. We build upon a previously presented metaphor of every product casting a shadow of environmental burden to show how waste management decisions are unique in that they are influenced by two sources of knowledge: LCA and the incumbent waste hierarchy. We show the waste hierarchy is based upon several myths that are required by society in order to progress to a common goal of sustainable waste management. We argue that the benefit of LCA lies in its ability to redefine waste management problems. Rather than using LCA to providing an authoritative justification for the best end-of-Life treatment option, the Life Cycle approach should be used to complement these myths that underlie the waste hierarchy.
-
The application of Life Cycle Thinking in the context of European waste policy
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2012Co-Authors: David Lazarevic, Nicolas Buclet, Nils BrandtAbstract:As the impetus of Life Cycle assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) in waste management policy is increasing, decision makers may face conflicting advice on the potential environmental impacts of competing end-of-Life treatment options. This paper discusses the problem posed by the Waste Framework Directive, 2008/98/EC, where LCT is required to justify the departure of waste streams from the waste hierarchy. This paper places LCA of waste management systems in the context of applying ‘normal’ science to ‘post-normal’ problems. The current application of LCT in waste policy is reviewed in order to determine the epistemic basis to such applications. Furthermore, several cases are reviewed where controversy has surrounded the a priori purpose of applying LCT; the justification of a clear-cut solution to environmental problems. We show how the excess of objectivity, the social construction of knowledge and the playing out of actors’ games may limit the ability of LCT to offer an authoritative justification for the derogation of waste streams from the waste hierarchy. However, one of the major benefits of LCT lies in its ability to change actors problem perception. Hence, the application of LCT may be better suited to both the identification of areas of environmental impact and the positioning of waste management solutions further up the waste policy agenda.
-
A conceptual framework for Life Cycle Thinking in transitions toward sustainable waste management
2011Co-Authors: David Lazarevic, Nicolas Buclet, Nils BrandtAbstract:This study investigates the application of Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle assessment (LCA) in the field of waste management from perspectives based in the social sciences. LCT is explored through the theoretical construct of regimes, drawing theoretical resources from a combination of the ‘pragmatic turn’, the economics of conventions and transition theory.This work is based on eight papers treating theoretical arguments, qualitative and quantitative analysis, case studies and semi-structured interview data. LCT is placed in the context of contemporary societies. LCA is seen as an instrument of quantification and evaluation used by actors which have both similar and disparate objectives, and who offer justifications for its use through arguments embedded in conflicting pluralities of worth. Furthermore, this work analyses LCA as a tool for the qualification of the waste hierarchy; a waste management principle articulating a convention based on closed material Cycles. This study argues that the technological trajectory of waste management regimes has been significantly influenced, inter alia, by actors’ institutional articulation of the waste hierarchy at national and territorial levels. It discusses the legitimacy of LCA, and the quantitative application of LCT, as an intermediary object used to qualify the waste hierarchy. Furthermore, LCT is placed in a prospective context which may be used to assist in the transition toward sustainable waste management.
Rehan Sadiq - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
To retrofit or not? Making energy retrofit decisions through Life Cycle Thinking for Canadian residences
Energy and Buildings, 2020Co-Authors: Tharindu Prabatha, Kasun Hewage, Hirushie Karunathilake, Rehan SadiqAbstract:Abstract Improving the energy performance of buildings has been a much-discussed topic over the past few decades. With the current focus on climate change mitigation, emissions reduction has also come to the forefront of this discussion. Retrofitting is an option to improve the energy and emissions performance of buildings. However, in the residential building stock, retrofit planning for existing buildings faces many complexities due to variations in climatic conditions and macro-environment as well as the presence of multiple stakeholder groups. Thus, in identifying solutions, it is necessary to take a holistic perspective that covers these different dimensions. In this paper, commonly used building energy retrofits were evaluated through a Life Cycle Thinking approach. The performance of various retrofit options applicable for single family detached housing were evaluated using the HOT2000 energy simulation software package under the varying climatic conditions and energy supply scenarios across Canada. The retrofits were evaluated in terms of the additional investment, energy use and cost reduction achieved over the Life Cycle, and Life Cycle emissions reduction. The findings indicate that the provincial energy mix and the heating system of the house (i.e. electric or natural gas) play a major role in determining the effectiveness of a retrofit, and this “effectiveness” changes at different stakeholder levels. However, not all retrofits that reduce emissions make economic sense and vice versa, when Life Cycle Thinking comes into play. The findings will be useful for building owners and occupants as well as for policy developers and other decision makers interested in demand side management.
-
Optimal renewable energy supply choices for net-zero ready buildings: A Life Cycle Thinking approach under uncertainty
Energy and Buildings, 2019Co-Authors: Hirushie Karunathilake, Kasun Hewage, Joshua Brinkerhoff, Rehan SadiqAbstract:Abstract The increasing concerns about the environmental and economic impacts of conventional centralised energy generation and fossil fuel usage have prompted an interest in renewable-based decentralised energy systems. Implementing such systems at building level can facilitate the development of net-zero energy buildings. Energy system planning is a multi-faceted problem that involves technical, economic, environmental, and social dimensions, and affects multiple stakeholders at different levels. A multi-objective optimisation approach is needed to identify the optimal energy choices at building level, while paying attention to stakeholder priorities and other constraints. The objective of this study is to develop a model to identify the optimal mix of renewable energy (RE) while also accounting for uncertainties, which can be integrated at building level with Life Cycle Thinking. A framework was proposed for planning an optimised hybrid RE system at building level to support the net-zero development goals. The optimisation model was developed considering the objectives of minimising energy system cost, maximising operational cost savings, minimising the Life Cycle environmental impacts, and maximising the RE fraction. A combinatorial optimisation approach was adopted to reflect the practical engineering aspects of energy planning problems based on technologies available in the market. The developed framework was demonstrated through a case study conducted for an average multi-unit residential buildings (MURB) located in British Columbia, Canada. The results indicated that under the defined stakeholder priorities and constraints, ground source heat pumps and solar photovoltaics (PV) are the optimal energy choices for MURB, and the optimal energy system combination supplied 44% of the building's energy demand through RE. The findings will inform and guide community developers and other stakeholders with an interest in residential buildings, on the most suitable clean energy options for their building project during the pre-project planning stage.
Giuseppe Ioppolo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Preface—a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking: exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:PurposeThe main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA).MethodsStarting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis.Results and conclusionsTen contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.
-
Preface—a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking: exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:The main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Starting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis. Ten contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.
-
preface a new paradigm for Life Cycle Thinking exploring sustainability in urban development scenarios
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Giuseppe Ioppolo, Marzia Traverso, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:The main goal of this special issue is to further the understanding of how to integrate Life Cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) methods and tools in the urban planning process. It is a relatively new and interdisciplinary topic that supports the integration of Life Cycle assessment techniques and expertise in urban planning and designing procedures such as strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Starting with Life Cycle Thinking, the integration of the environmental Life Cycle assessment, and also its implementation to assess economic (Life Cycle costing), and social impacts (social Life Cycle assessment) with other planning and designing methods and tools to the urban context have been analyzed and implemented in some case studies. Examples of planning and designing methods considered are urban metabolism, strategic environmental assessment, and multi-criteria decision analysis. Ten contributions draw a clear picture on the current state of the art and present gaps and further developments necessary to build a complete and harmonized framework. It is evident that the variability of methodology and expertise involved in this multidisciplinary approach is very high, and that it is very important to support its further implementation to cover the current gaps. An interdisciplinary and harmonized framework and further implementation in three dimensions of sustainability are two examples of desirable future developments that were identified.