Development and Piloting of Sustainability Assessment Metrics for Arctic Process Industry in Finland—The Biorefinery Investment and Slag Processing Service Cases
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Aims of the Study
- To develop a novel set of environmental sustainability assessment indicators and sub-indicators;
- To update the previously developed social sustainability assessment indicators and sub-indicators;
- To carry out pilot sustainability performance assessment using the developed and updated sets of environmental and social sustainability assessment indicators and sub-indicators;
- To evaluate the effects of the planned investment on the regional economy in Lapland, considering the linkages between sectors and local markets.
- To develop a novel set of economic sustainability assessment indicators and sub-indicators encompassing a specific indicator/sub-indicators for circular economy aspects;
- To update (if additions or removals are necessary due to sector/plant/process specific reasons) the environmental and social sustainability assessment sub-indicators developed in the first case;
- To carry out pilot sustainability performance assessment using the developed and updated indicator sets.
3. Material and Methods
3.1. Sustainability Assessment Index and Indicators
- -
- Environmental aspects (A)
- -
- Economic aspects (B)
- -
- Social aspects (C)
- -
- Legal aspects (L).
- Social innovations indicator: (1) Have you made any new innovations or initiatives in the field of continuous improvement of employee well-being and satisfaction, maintenance of competence and attraction of new competence? (2) Have you made any new innovations or initiatives in the field of social risk assessment and management covering the whole supply chain, full product/service life cycle and markets/customers? and (3) Have you made any new innovations or initiatives in the field training, education or competence development?
- Labour practices indicator: (1) Can employees influence the timing of their vacations (e.g., employees with a family and single parents)? (vacation category), (2) Does the factory/company have an official system for complaints about labour practices, working conditions or terms of employment? (3) Do you monitor the well-being and satisfaction of employees and the attractiveness of the working place to maintain and attract competent people? (monitoring category), (4) Can employees influence their working time or shifts at the yearly, monthly, weekly or daily levels? (5) Is it possible to do less working hours in particular cases (e.g., childcare, health reason or commuting) and (6) are working times, shifts and possible night shifts and various challenging tasks divided equally and considering staff opinions at the yearly, monthly or weekly levels? (working time category).
- Training and skills indicator: (1) Do you encourage the sharing of best practices? (training category).
- Reporting indicator: Does your social sustainability reporting cover (1) national and international labour and human rights standards? (2) the whole supply chain (including suppliers and their suppliers)? (3) the continuous development of employee training and competence? (4) the identification, engagement and inclusion (dialogue) of local communities and key stakeholders and interest groups? and (5) communication about local risks, changes, responsibilities and impacts? (local communities category).
- Health and safety indicator: (1) are occupational health care appointments and examinations included in the working hours?
3.2. Evaluation of Regional Economic Effects
- (1)
- The construction of the plant commences in 2017, tripling forest sector investment in Lapland compared to the baseline forecast.
- (2)
- The plant becomes operational in 2019, employing 180 workers directly, and increasing the demand for lumber in Lapland by 18 per cent compared to baseline; most of the plant’s production is exported.
- (3)
- The plant will be able to get most of its raw material from local forestry, currently producing under capacity, increasing the output of Lapland’s forestry by some 8 per cent.
4. Results
4.1. The Biorefinery Investment Case
4.2. The Slag Processing Service Case
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Acknowledgements
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Indicator | Example 1 | Example 2 | Example 3 |
---|---|---|---|
Water Emissions | Total Phosphorus (P) | Total Nitrogen (N) | Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) |
Solid residues | Quality and amount of residue streams | Landfilled waste | Recycling/utilization/reuse rates |
Process and production efficiency | Consumption and production of electricity and heat energy | Share of renewable energy (production and consumption) | CO2 emissions (purchased energy and own production/consumption) |
Transport | Means of transport and use of energy/fuels sources (including individual shares) | Energy consumption | CO2 emissions (raw materials and products) |
Greenhouse gas emissions | Process emissions | Emissions from raw materials production | Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions |
Management and reporting | Continuous monitoring of environmental impacts (air, water, soil, noise, waste and animal/plants) | Reporting of all emissions (air, soil and water) | Reporting of continuous improvement of environmental performance in the supply chain and by suppliers (for example greenhouse gas emissions) |
Environmental innovations | Innovations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from production, processes and operations (within last 3 years) | Innovations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from products (within last 3 years) | Innovation to reduce supply chain and/or customer greenhouse gas emissions |
Leadership and strategy | Encouragement of sharing best environmental sustainability practices | Reaction to and clear and timely communication of major changes | Identification and assessment of uncertainties and change factors that can influence operations and the operational environment |
Legal aspects | Detailed zoning plan for the operations area (location of operations is allowed there) | Requirement for an environmental permit and environmental impact assessment for operations | Monitoring by and regular reporting to authorities |
References
- United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Azapagic, A. Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2004, 12, 639–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azapagic, A.; Perdan, S. An integrated sustainability decision-support framework, Part 1—Problem structuring. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Ecol. 2005, 12, 98–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.K.; Murty, H.R.; Gupta, S.K.; Dikshit, A.K. Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry. Ecol. Indic. 2007, 7, 565–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.K.; Murty, H.R.; Gupta, S.K.; Dikshit, A.K. An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 15, 281–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maas, K.; Schaltegger, S.; Crutzen, N. Integrating corporate sustainability assessment, management accounting, control, and reporting. Special Volume: The Integration of Corporate Sustainability Assessment, Management Accounting, Control, and Reporting. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 136, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maas, K.; Schaltegger, S.; Crutzen, N. Advancing the integration of corporate sustainability measurement, management and reporting. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 859–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seuring, S.; Gold, S. Sustainability management beyond corporate boundaries: From stakeholders to performance. Special Volume: Sustainability management beyond corporate boundaries. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 56, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haapio, A.; Viitaniemi, P. A critical review of building environmental assessment tools. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2008, 28, 469–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sierra, L.A.; Pellicerb, E.; Yepesc, V. Method for estimating the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2017, 65, 41–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mateus, R.; Braganca, L. Sustainability assessment and rating of buildings: Developing the methodology SBTool PT-H. Build. Environ. 2011, 46, 1962–1971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Towards a Circular Economy: A Zero Waste Programme for Europe. COM/2014/0398 Final. Available online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0398R(01) (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- European Commission. Circular Economy. 2017. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Closing the Loop—An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy. COM (2015)614 Final. Available online: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614 (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Norden-Nordic Council of Ministers. Nordic Bioeconomy 25 Cases of Sustainable Change. 2017. Available online: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1065456/FULLTEXT01.pdf (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Lapin Luotsi. Regional Council of Lapland: Foresight Work in Lapland. 2016. Available online: http://luotsi.lappi.fi/arctic-industry-and-circular-economy (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Green Growth in Nordic Regions-50 Ways to Make It Happen. Nordregio, 2016. Available online: http://www.nordregio.se/en/Publications/Publications-2016/GREEN-GROWTH-IN-NORDIC-REGIONS-50-ways-to-make-it-happen/Circular-economy-/An-ecosystem-of-arctic-industries-in-Kemi-Tornio-/ (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- European Cluster Observatory (ECO). Newsletter. 2014. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/16524/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/pdf (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Sitra Studies 121. Leading the Cycle-Finnish Road Map to a Circular Economy 2016–2025. 2016. Available online: http://www.sitra.fi/sites/default/files/sitra_leading_the_cycle_report.pdf (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Sitra Studies 100. The Opportunities of a Circular Economy for Finland. 2015. Available online: https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/28142449/Selvityksia100.pdf (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Li, Y.; Ma, C. Circular economy of a papermaking park in China: A case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 92, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, B.; Heshmati, A.; Geng, Y.; Yu, X. A review of the circular economy in china: Moving from rhetoric to implementation. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 42, 215–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghiselli, P.; Cialani, C.; Ulgiati, S. A review on circular economy: The expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 114, 11–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boreal Bioref Biorefinery. 2017. Available online: http://www.borealbioref.fi/en/ (accessed on 11 July 2017).
- Tapojärvi Oy. 2017. Available online: http://www.tapojarvi.com/en/services/factory-services/valorisation-of-stainless-steel-slag.html (accessed on 11 July 2017).
- Husgafvel, R.; Pajunen, N.; Dahl, O.; Heiskanen, K.; Ekroos, A.; Virtanen, K. Development of Environmental and Economic Sustainability Metrics for the Metal Production Industry—Experiences From University-Industry Cooperation. Front. Sustain. 2017. Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/books/pdfdownload/article/349/1 (accessed on 20 September 2017). [CrossRef]
- Husgafvel, R.; Pajunen, N.; Päällysaho, M.; Paavola, I.-L.; Inkinen, V.; Heiskanen, K.; Dahl, O.; Ekroos, A. Social metrics in the process industry—Background, theory and development work. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2014, 7, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Husgafvel, R.; Pajunen, N.; Virtanen, K.; Paavola, I.-L.; Päällysaho, M.; Inkinen, V.; Heiskanen, K.; Dahl, O.; Ekroos, A. Social sustainability performance indicators—Experiences from process industry. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2015, 8, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Worldwide Governance Indicators; Description of Methodology; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2017; Available online: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/#doc (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Sweco. Boreal Bioref Oy, Kemijärven Biojalostamon Ympäristövaikutusten Arviointiohjelma. 2016. Available online: http://www.ymparisto.fi/download/noname/%7B358D9024-B7E8–452E-8D4A-25430A1B1145%7D/121117 (accessed on 25 May 2017).
- Honkatukia, J. The VATTAGE Regional Model VERM: A Dynamic, Regional, Applied General Equilibrium Model of The Finnish Economy; VATT Research Reports No. 171; Government of the Republic of Finland-Government Institute for Economic Research (VATT): Helsinki, Finland, 2013.
- De Vet, J.M.; Roy, S.; Schneider, H.; Thio, V.; van Bork, G. Review of Methodologies Applied for the Assessment of Employment and Social Impacts; IZA Research Report No. 28; ECORYS Brussels NV: Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
- Bergström, O.; Broughton, A.; Triomphe, C.E. EU Synthesis Report, 27 National Seminars, Anticipating and Managing Restructuring; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Arodudu, O.; Helming, K.; Wiggering, H.; Voinov, A. Towards a more holistic sustainability assessment framework for agro-bioenergy systems—A review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2017, 62, 61–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, D.; Thiede, S.; Schudeleit, T.; Herrmann, C. A holistic and rapid sustainability assessment tool for manufacturing SMEs. CIRP Ann. 2014, 63, 437–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santoyo-Castelazo, E.; Azapagic, A. Sustainability assessment of energy systems: Integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 80, 119–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, A.L. Strengths and weaknesses of common sustainability indices for multidimensional systems. Environ. Int. 2008, 34, 277–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Parahelia, R.; Dalgaard, T.; Jørgensen, U.; Adamsen, A.P.S.; Knudsen, M.T.; Birkved, M.; Gylling, M.; Schjørring, J.K. Biorefining in the prevailing energy and materials crisis: A review of sustainable pathways for biorefinery value chains and sustainability assessment methodologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 43, 244–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Evans, A.; Strezov, V.; Evans, T.J. Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 1082–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raman, S.; Mohr, A.; Helliwell, R.; Ribeiro, B.; Shortall, O.; Smith, R.; Millar, K. Integrating social and value dimensions into sustainability assessment of lignocellulosic biofuels. Biomass Bioenergy 2015, 82, 49–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jeswani, H.K.; Azapagic, A.; Schepelmann, P.; Ritthoff, M. Options for broadening and deepening the LCA approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lieder, M.; Rashid, A. Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 115, 36–51. [Google Scholar]
- Morrison-Saunders, A.; Pope, J. Conceptualizing and managing trade-offs in sustainability assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2013, 38, 54–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Honkatukia, J.; Törmä, H. Stora Enso Oyj:n Kemijärven Sellutehtaan 40-Vuotisen Toiminnan Alueellinen Kokonaisvaikuttavuus; Translated by Government Institute for Economic Research; Valtion Taloudellinen Tutkimuskeskus (VATT): Helsinki, Finland, 2005.
Environmental Indicators | Social Indicators | Economic Indicators | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Indicator | Number of Sub-Indicators | Indicator | Number of Sub-Indicators | Indicator | Number of Sub-Indicators |
Air emissions | 5 1 | Location 2 | 6 | Leadership and strategy | 19 |
Water emissions | 8 | Supply chain | 19 | Management and reporting | 19 |
Solid residues | 6 | Social innovations | 8 | Economic performance | 10 |
Process and production efficiency | 17 | Labour practices | 40 | Economic impacts | 10 |
Transport | 14 | Training and skills | 14 | Investments and markets | 15 |
Greenhouse gas emissions | 7 | Reporting | 14 | Circular economy | 20 |
Management and reporting | 29 | Health and safety | 16 | Supply chain | 10 |
Environmental innovations | 18 | Legal aspects | 29 | Code of conduct | 10 |
Leadership and strategy | 14 | Operational environment and risks | 12 | ||
Legal aspects | 49 | Research and development | 10 | ||
Economic innovations and competitiveness | 10 | ||||
Legal aspects | 23 |
Questionnaire Sheet Answer | Score | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Yes | −5 | The right/correct answer for that specific question (depends on the formulation of the questions in the particular sub-indicator) indicating (1) that the matter is duly addressed/managed and (2) best performance in the field of that sub-indicator and competent management |
Yes/Not known | −2.5 | This answer indicates (1) that the matter is partially addressed and (2) fair/good performance level requiring management attention |
Not known | 0 | This question cannot be answered due to lack of information/data indicating neutral performance (not positive or negative in both cases) |
No/Not known | 2.5 | This answer indicates (1) that the matter is not addressed and that there is some relevant information/data missing and (2) low level of performance requiring management attention |
No | 5 | The wrong/incorrect answer for that specific question (depends on the formulation of the questions in the particular sub-indicator) indicating (1) that the matter is not addressed/managed and (2) poor/lowest level of performance in the field of that sub-indicator requiring urgent management attention |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Husgafvel, R.; Poikela, K.; Honkatukia, J.; Dahl, O. Development and Piloting of Sustainability Assessment Metrics for Arctic Process Industry in Finland—The Biorefinery Investment and Slag Processing Service Cases. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1693. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101693
Husgafvel R, Poikela K, Honkatukia J, Dahl O. Development and Piloting of Sustainability Assessment Metrics for Arctic Process Industry in Finland—The Biorefinery Investment and Slag Processing Service Cases. Sustainability. 2017; 9(10):1693. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101693
Chicago/Turabian StyleHusgafvel, Roope, Kari Poikela, Juha Honkatukia, and Olli Dahl. 2017. "Development and Piloting of Sustainability Assessment Metrics for Arctic Process Industry in Finland—The Biorefinery Investment and Slag Processing Service Cases" Sustainability 9, no. 10: 1693. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101693