Search

• Analysis of EU-28 countries' compliance with EU Waste Hierarchy and its targets. • Innovative composite indicator to encompass priorities and deviations from targets. • Combination of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Goal Programming Synthetic Indicator. • Including prevention for a systemic perspective of waste management performance. • Identified countries with virtuous circular strategies to help lagging countries. The focus of this paper is to evaluate how well European countries are advancing towards a Circular Economy transition and to which extent they are fulfilling the European Union (EU) requirements in terms of municipal waste management. With this aim, an innovative composite indicator is devised by integrating the Goal Programming Synthetic Indicator (GPSI) methodology with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The suggested methodology allows to encompass not only the guidelines provided by the EU directives and the EU Waste Hierarchy, but also the deviations from the EU thresholds. As a first step of the analysis, a dashboard of indicators is identified together with a set of targets that European countries are supposed to meet. Indicators, targets and their relative importance in the dashboard have been discussed and validated by a team of experts. Then, two Goal Programming Synthetic Indicators are computed taking into account two different perspectives. The first one rewards the countries with good performance in the higher level of the Waste Hierarchy, while the second one penalizes countries whose infringements are in the lower part of the Waste Hierarchy. Hence two different systems of aggregating weights are identified by means of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and accordingly two scenarios are explored. The analysis is performed using Eurostat data on 28 European countries from 2013 to 2018. For each year, countries are assessed in terms of their ability to keep the right waste management track delineated by the Waste Hierarchy principles. Countries' ranking over time is first obtained and then interpreted in light of countries policies and achievements, deriving policy suggestions to improve waste management strategy able to reach the expected results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The paper analysed a case study on the monitoring system of an Italian food company. • The study creates a tailor-made environmental Key Performance Indicators dashboard to assess corporate sustainability. • The study investigated rewards systems in the frame of Green Human Resource Management practices. • A final dashboard of around 70 indicators was then created and linked to employees' rewards. Assessing environmental performance, measuring the circular economy and quantifying decarbonization have become crucial in green management in recent years. Both scholars and practitioners have focused on different strategies to create performance indicators capable of tackling all these aspects. At the same time, companies have started connecting managers' and employees' incentives to the achievement of corporate goals. We analysed a case study of an Italian food company which uses environmental performance indicators to assess corporate sustainability and reward managers and employees. Through a series of interviews with members from all departments, we identified around 200 different key performance indicators, i.e., performance, commitment, control, reactivity, economic, consent, transversal and multifunctional. A final dashboard of around 70 indicators was then created and linked to employees' rewards. A tailor-made methodology was, thus, used to define target for the company's management by objectives, taking into account the trend of each indicator. This is the first attempt to investigate how a company can create an environmental performance indicator system to assess corporate sustainability and reward employees through management by objectives. Our study further extends not only the academic literature, but also provides a practical and operative contribution to all the companies that aim to create a new key performance indicator system. Lastly, we merged the management and strategies for promoting green practices amongst employees through a reward system with the environmental performance of each organisational department by creating a methodology to define management by objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The focus of this paper is to evaluate how well European countries are advancing towards a Circular Economy transition and to which extent they are fulfilling the European Union (EU) requirements in terms of municipal waste management. With this aim, an innovative composite indicator is devised by integrating the Goal Programming Synthetic Indicator (GPSI) methodology with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The suggested methodology allows to encompass not only the guidelines provided by the EU directives and the EU Waste Hierarchy, but also the deviations from the EU thresholds. As a first step of the analysis, a dashboard of indicators is identified together with a set of targets that European countries are supposed to meet. Indicators, targets and their relative importance in the dashboard have been discussed and validated by a team of experts. Then, two Goal Programming Synthetic Indicators are computed taking into account two different perspectives. The first one rewards the countries with good performance in the higher level of the Waste Hierarchy, while the second one penalizes countries whose infringements are in the lower part of the Waste Hierarchy. Hence two different systems of aggregating weights are identified by means of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and accordingly two scenarios are explored. The analysis is performed using Eurostat data on 28 European countries from 2013 to 2018. For each year, countries are assessed in terms of their ability to keep the right waste management track delineated by the Waste Hierarchy principles. Countries’ ranking over time is first obtained and then interpreted in light of countries policies and achievements, deriving policy suggestions to improve waste management strategy able to reach the expected results.

• Biomass Fly Ash from pulp-paper industry were used in the geopolymers production. • The energy consumption due to the innovative GC production process was calculated. • The LCA showed a lower environmental impact in respect to traditional concrete. • The use of a cogeneration system could provide a significant cost reduction. One of the key sectors for the green transition of European countries is construction, that is more and more asked to evolve towards innovative ecological binders and green cost-effective processes. The construction sector is highly energy intensive, and the cement production is one of the main sources of environmental pollution in the world. In this regard, GeoPolymers (GP) seem to be promising for a sustainable replacement of cementitious materials. Therefore, the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the industrial production of different formulations of Geopolymer Concrete (GC) was performed in this study after scaling up the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) from a laboratory scale to an industrial one. Based on LCA results, the Global Warming Potential (GWP) indicator demonstrated a lower greenhouse gas emission of the proposed GC production in respect to the CC manufacturing process, while no significant difference was observed in the GWP scores of the considered GC formulations when referring to the functional unit. Nevertheless, the usage of the innovative GC formulations, on an industrial scale, would avoid a significant reduction of sand and kaolin extracted, with a consequent decrease on the environmental impact. Finally, the economic assessment showed that the combined production of thermal and electrical energy by a cogeneration system could provide a significant cost reduction when the percentage of electricity fed into the public network is higher than 39%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The regional level has been recognized as a good scale for implementing actions towards sustainable development (SD). An important pathway to improve regional sustainability is to locally carry out long-term ecological planning. In order to reduce environmental impacts from fast economic growth, several eastern provinces of China began Ecological Province Construction (EPC) at the end of 1990s. This paper presented a case for analyzing the progress of EPC in China via both qualitative and quantitative methods. We studied Shandong Eco-province Construction (SEPC) and evaluated its outcomes with its pre-set indicators in 2003–2010. A further evaluation with eco-efficiency and de-linking indices was conducted. The results indicated the pre-set indicators could not effectively reflect of the ecological province construction. It was recommended to introduce an evaluated framework combined with eco-efficiency and de-linking indices to indicate ecological planning at the regional scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The paper raises critical concerns about universal circular economy models. • The organisational life cycle theory is located within the circular economy. • Qualitative comparative analysis is used to upgrade the firms' life cycle theory. • The study develops the circular economy configuration indicators. • Policymakers might benefit from a differentiation of firms by stage of evolution. Circular economy is a rapidly evolving economic system designed to benefit society, business and environment. However, the current circular economy policies and resulting business models are more or less universal, meaning they largely neglect the organisational specifics. Therefore, research that seeks to enhance the circular economy mindset and, at the same time, the innovativeness of firms needs to include more analyses of firm-specific characteristics and issues with a view to more quickly making the modern sustainable reality. As a response, the current study contributes to a better understanding of the role of circular economy practices at different stages of the firms' evolution. Using crisp-set qualitative comparative analysis we upgrade the organisational life cycle theory by developing 13 circular economy configuration indicators, 10 for the innovative (In1-In10) and 3 for the conservative (Co1-Co3) stage of the organisational life cycle. The various circular economy practices and (non–) financial mechanisms at work throughout the organisational life cycle reveal that a holistic approach to examining the field should be a priority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]