Sustainability Assessment Model

  • Claudio R. Boër
  • Paolo Pedrazzoli
  • Andrea Bettoni
  • Marzio Sorlini


The concept of sustainability, in the way we understand the term now, first appeared in 1987, within the Brundtland Report, defined as “to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Later, as the concept gained popularity, hundreds of definitions were proposed, in academic debates and business arenas, referring to a more ethical, more green, and more transparent way of doing business. Today, the label of “sustainable” is a bottom-line requirement: as a matter of fact, Sustainability has become a common basic goal for many national and international organizations including industries, governments, NGOs, and universities. However, in spite of the nearly universal recognition that Sustainability has received, companies still struggle with the full understanding of the concept and with its financial viability.


  1. Azapagic A, Perdan S (2000) Indicators of sustainable development for industry: a general framework. IChemE 78(4): 243–261Google Scholar
  2. Bare J, Norris G, Pennington D, McKone T (2003) TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6(3–4):49–78Google Scholar
  3. Benoît C, Bernard M (eds) (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. UNEP, ParisGoogle Scholar
  4. Brent AC (2004) A life cycle impact assessment procedure with resource groups as areas of protection. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(3):172–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Centre of Environmental Science (CML) and University of Technology (TUD/TB), Fuels and Raw Material Bureau (Bureau B&G), University of Amsterdam (UVA), IVAM-Environmental Research (IVAM-ER), & Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) (2001a). Life cycle assessment: an operational guide to the ISO standards - part 1: LCA in perspective [online]. Available from:
  6. Centre of Environmental Science (CML) and University of Technology (TUD/TB), Fuels and Raw Material Bureau (Bureau B&G), University of Amsterdam (UVA), IVAM-Environmental Research (IVAM-ER), & Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) (2001b). Life cycle assessment: an operational guide to the ISO standard—Part 2a: Guide [online]. Available from:
  7. Corbiere NT, Blanc I, Erkman S (2011) Towards a global criteria based framework for the sustainability assessment of bioethanol supply chains application to the Swiss dilemma: Is local produced bioethanol more sustainable than bioethanol imported from brazil. Ecol Ind 11(5):1447–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (DJSI) Guide Book (2010) Retrieved from
  9. Dreyer L (2009). Inclusion of social aspects in life cycle assessment of products development of a methodology for social life cycle assessment, PhD Thesis, DTU Management Engineering, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  10. Dreyer L, Hauschild Z, Schierbeck J (2010a) Characterization of social impacts in LCA part 1: Development of indicators for labour rights. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(3):247–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dreyer L, Hauschild Z, Schierbeck J (2010b) Characterization of social impacts in LCA part 2: implementation in six company case studies 15(4): 385–402Google Scholar
  12. Eco-indicator 95 Report (1999) Retrieved from
  13. Eco-indicator 99 Report (1999) Retrieved from
  14. Ecoinvent Overview and Methodology (2007) Retrieved from
  15. Ecoinvent Code of Practice (2009) Retrieved from
  16. Ecoinvent Implementation of LCIA Methods (2010) Retrieved from
  17. Ecoinvent Technical Documentation of the Ecoinvent Database (2003) Retrieved from
  18. EIME Indicators Manual (2009) Retrieved from
  19. EPD Program (2007) Retrieved from
  20. Fiksel J (1996) Design for environment. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. FTSE4Good Index Series—Inclusion Criteria. Retrieved from
  22. Global Reporting Initiative (2002) Sustainability reporting guidelines. Global Reporting Initiative, BostonGoogle Scholar
  23. Global Reporting Initiative (2000–2011) Sustainability reporting guidelines G3.1Google Scholar
  24. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2006) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines V3.0. GRI, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  25. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2006) The sustainability reporting guidelines. Retrieved from
  26. Guinèe JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn H, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ, Lindeijer E, Roorda AAH, Weidema BP (2001) Life cycle assessment; An operational guide to the ISO standards. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM) and Centre of Environmental Science (CML), Den Haag and Leiden, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  27. Guinée JB (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  28. Gungor A, Gupta SM (1999) Issues in environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery: a survey. Comput Ind Eng 36:811–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hang Y, Qu M, & Zhao F (2011) Economical and environmental assessment of an optimized solar cooling system for a medium-sized benchmark office building in Los Angeles, California. To appear 36(2):648–658Google Scholar
  30. Hauschild M, Potting J (2005) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment—the EDIP2003 methodology. In: Environmental news of the Danish ministry of environment, p 80Google Scholar
  31. Introduction to GreenSCOR. Retrieved from
  32. Jensen AA, Remmen A (eds) (2006) Background report for a UNEP guide to life cycle management—a bridge to sustainable products. UNEP, ParisGoogle Scholar
  33. Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Rosenbaum R (2003) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jorgensen A, Le Bocq A, Nazarkina L, Hauschild M (2008) Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Krajnc D, Glavic P (2003) Indicators of sustainable production. Clean Tech Environ Policy 5:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kruse S, Flysjö A, Kasperczyk N, Scholz AJ (2009) Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycle assessment—an application to salmon production systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(1):8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mascle C, Zhao HP (2008) Integrating environmental consciousness in product/process development based on life-cycle thinking. Int J Prod Econ 112(1): 5–17Google Scholar
  38. ReCiPe Report (2009) Retrieved from
  39. Solidworks sustainability indexes. Retrieved from
  40. Veleva V, Ellenbecker M (2001) Indicators of sustainable production: framework and methodology. J Cleaner Prod 9:519–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI 1997) Cumulative energy demand—terms, definitions, methods of calculation. VDI-Richtlinien 4600. Düsseldorf, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  42. WCED: World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. Wright M, Allen D, Clift R, Sas H (1997) Measuring corporate environmental performance: the ICI environmental burden system. J Ind Ecol 1(4):117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudio R. Boër
    • 1
  • Paolo Pedrazzoli
    • 2
  • Andrea Bettoni
    • 2
  • Marzio Sorlini
    • 2
  1. 1.DTIICIMSI-SUPSIMannoSwitzerland
  2. 2.ISTePSICIMSI-SUPSIMannoSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations