Applied Environmental System Analysis - Group Task - Aakash Project

MJ2680 - Group 2B - Aakash Project

1

KTH-Industrial Ecology

MJ2680 - Applied Environmental System

Analysis

Group Task - Aakash Project

Group 2B:

Haruya Nihei Luke Brumby

Paolo Fornaseri Shabnam Chekani

Despina Kyriakidou Group Advisor: Jagdeep Singh Course Responsible: Björn Frostell

2011-12-09


2

Abstract In this report, the decision-making frame of the computer tablet Aakash, which is going to be launched by the Indian government to improve educational facilities and opportunities and correct domestic education inequality, is taken as a case study to make reflections on the potential applicability of Environmental System Analysis tools in this specific area. The path followed starts from the general description of the system related to the decision situation, making explicit the key-decision makers, the stakeholders involved, the type of problems and the criteria used for decision-making. Taking into account this perspective, all the principal ESA tools are discussed and analysed critically in order to understand how we could implement (or not) the suggested tools into the decision-making process. After these steps, a proposal about useful tools and innovative implementations of them for the context is depicted. In particular, the Integrated Sustainability Assessment ISA, embedded in the government structure for the decision-making, can represent a good solution to support the decision process from the beginning. Some other analytical tools (MFA, LCA) are suggested to give the right technical support at the government and at the company level. Eventually the work is completed by a critical discussion of the whole report with the aim of determining the strengths and weakness of the analysis for further improvements.


3

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 2. General Description of the Decision Situation .................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Societal Level ................................................................................................................................................ 5 2.1.1 Stakeholders Involved ........................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Substantial Domain ....................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Type of Problem .................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.3 Spatial Extension ................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.4 Time Limits ............................................................................................................................................ 6

2.3 Social Aspects ............................................................................................................................................... 6 2.3.1 Key decision-makers and Participants in the decision procedure ......................................................... 6 2.3.2 Concerns and priorities ......................................................................................................................... 6

2.4 Type of Decision ............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4.1 Complexity ............................................................................................................................................. 7 2.4.2 Conflicts of Interests .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.4.3 Uncertainties ......................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4.4 Relations with other decisions .............................................................................................................. 7

2.5 Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................. 7 2.6 Criteria for Evaluation of Environmental Decisions ...................................................................................... 8

3. Most Important Environmental Aspects ............................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Air.................................................................................................................................................................. 8

3.1.1 Global warming (GW) ............................................................................................................................ 8 3.1.2 Air acidification ...................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.3 Photochemical smog ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.4 Air particulate matter (PM) ................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Water ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 3.2.1 Water eutrophication ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.2.2 Water quality: total suspended solids (TSS) .......................................................................................... 9 3.2.3 Aquatic Eco-toxicity ............................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Soil ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 3.4 Human Health ............................................................................................................................................. 10 3.5 Energy ......................................................................................................................................................... 10

4. Methods (Description and Analysis) ................................................................................................................. 10 4.1 MFA ............................................................................................................................................................. 10

4.1.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 10 4.1.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 12 4.1.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 12

4.2 LCA .............................................................................................................................................................. 13 4.2.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 13 4.2.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 13 4.2.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 14

4.3 LCCA ............................................................................................................................................................ 14 4.3.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 14 4.3.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 14 4.3.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 15

4.4 EIA ............................................................................................................................................................... 15 4.4.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 15 4.4.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 16 4.4.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 17

4.5 SEA .............................................................................................................................................................. 17 4.5.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 17 4.5.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 18 4.5.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 18

4.6 CBA .............................................................................................................................................................. 19 4.6.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 19 4.6.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 20 4.6.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 21

4.7 ISA ............................................................................................................................................................... 21


4

4.7.1 Description of the Method .................................................................................................................. 21 4.7.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method ......................................................................................... 21 4.7.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 21

5. Proposed tools for the “Aakash” project .......................................................................................................... 23 6. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................................... 25

6.1 Are the ESA tools providing all the information needed for the Decision Making? ................................... 25 6.2 Credibility of ESA tools in the specific Decision Situation ........................................................................... 25 6.3 Possible Threats to a transparent Decision Making.................................................................................... 25 6.4 Proposed Improvements of Methods and Procedures ............................................................................... 25

7. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................................... 26 8. Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................... 27 9. References ......................................................................................................................................................... 28


5

1. Introduction By developing information technology (IT), educational systems in many countries are changing rapidly. The benefits of e-learning have become increasingly identifiable as the IT industry has expanded in terms of software and hardware. Some of these benefits to education include: providing convenient, economical and active teaching, reducing instruction time. India is embracing e-learning in an active way because of the disparity in education between urban and rural areas. Poverty and lack of sufficient infrastructure can be at least partly attributed to the lack of education in rural India. However other factors such as learning gaps between the differing rural areas also contribute to disparity because education quality varies so unfairly. To solve these problems, the Indian government decided to bring the ability to access the Internet, libraries and learning tools to the students. By doing this the Indian government hopes to springboard the country into the future by modernising a system that is currently unable to meet its peoples needs. India has planned to enhance e-learning using a low cost tablet computer and by rolling it out across the country with about 12 million units. The device is called the “Aakash” and will be handed out to

the students by the end of 2012 (MobileBeat, 2011). This tablet will cost just a portion of the price of Apple's iPad and will be subsidised in order to end the digital gap between rich, poor and ordinary Indian students.

In this report, the decision situation of the Aakash is described. Environmental aspects regarding the life cycle of the tablet computer are also explored and evaluations are made on the prescribed Environmental Systems Analysis (ESA) tools in relation to the project. Our purpose is ultimately to determine which ESA tools can be most effective in implementing this kind of initiatives, and to plot the related environmental consequences.

2. General Description of the Decision Situation

2.1 Societal Level India is a large country geographically and in terms of population. For this reason India can be considered to be at the international level when it comes to the triangle that categorizes the society from individuals to the global level. However, in our specific context, the decision taken in the Indian government is addressed to a precise part of the population (i.e. the one living in the rural areas).

2.1.1 Stakeholders Involved

Because of the complexity of this situation the stakeholders that hopefully are called to share their vision and take part to the decision making process are numerous (as shown in Table 1). Starting from standard characterization, all the four main groups of stakeholders are involved:

government;

industry;

NGOs;

academia. The companies are in charge of the realization of the tools to be used in the e-learning and are the ones that decide procedures for manufacturing and materials use. Academia should be involved as well since such a program is likely going to change the education framework dramatically. Finally NGOs should try to represent the public opinion. In table 1 a more detailed list of the stakeholders is shown. Because of the number of stakeholders involved, the interrelationships are complex and potentially problematic. However, a constructive cooperation of all the parts could lead to an effective (though inefficient in regards to time) decision making process.


6

Table 1: List of the stakeholders that participate in this project

Stakeholders Field

National government Initiative

Implementation of the structure for the decision making

Local governments Detailed situation throughout the country

Students Opinion as final users

Families of students Willingness to pay for the e-tools

Responsibility for 1st stage of disposal

Producers

Technological support

Responsibility for environmental impacts in extraction of raw materials, manufacturing, and partly in disposal (a proper design for dis-assembly can help disposal)

Waste collectors Disposal

Recycling plants Disposal

Environmental organizations Control on environmental impacts

International organizations Standards for technological equipment

Education sector Support to implement the new educational tools

2.2 Substantial Domain

2.2.1 Type of Problem

In this project all social, economic and environmental aspects might be interesting for the government as a key decision-maker. By using the two key dimensions (object of study and the impacts of interest) for the decision context determining, all these aspects could not be covered by applying just one tool.

2.2.3 Spatial Extension

The project is defined in a national region level (India), however because of its size and because of the importing of materials and disposal of waste there is an expansion of the spatial boundaries to other countries, so that we are at the international level.

2.2.4 Time Limits

Temporal boundaries of this project are determined by considering the life-cycle of the tablet computer that can be considered of about 5 years, which are important to evaluate actual improvements in learning and in order to build up capacity for end of life waste. However, some of the social impacts can be evaluated just after 10 to 15 years after the tablet has been launched.

2.3 Social Aspects

2.3.1 Key decision-makers and Participants in the decision procedure

This project has been implemented to promote information and communication technologies in the education sector by the Indian government. Therefore, the key decision-maker in this project is the Indian government. However, to proceed with this project, the government needs to consider the other stakeholders to get information or opinions.

2.3.2 Concerns and priorities

India has some problems in the education sector. In fact, 25% of adult Indians (UNESCO, 2009) are illiterate especially in the countryside. Besides, there is a big learning gap between the city and rural areas (Difference Between, 2010) because of the lack of communication. The people who live in rural area cannot always achieve a good education. To solve these education problems, the government decided to launch the tablet. However, it is not easy to achieve the goal of this project. 75% of population in India lives on less than $2 a day (Alison, 2007). This means some people, especially who live in rural areas, may not afford the tablet. Moreover, only 8% of the population has access to the


7

internet (Frank, 2011). Some villages do not have internet connection or even electricity. Since the first version of Aakash connects via wireless broadband, it is not useful in rural areas that have no Internet connection. If the government does not consider these problems, this project could even increase the gap between cities and suburbs more than before.

2.4 Type of Decision

2.4.1 Complexity

The decision situation is very complex when considering all of its parts. In fact, Aakash is at the same time:

a product realized by a company which is looking for profit, but with all the relative concerns about environmental aspects, life-cycle, use of materials;

a part of a project started by the government, with all the consequent considerations about the decision-making at this societal level, in which Aakash could be seen as an attempt to improve social welfare.

Just considering these two different perspectives, it is easy to understand how difficult it would be to carry out a decision-making process considering all the elements. For example, one of the most evident contrasts is the coexistence of profit, welfare and low environmental impact. Hence, we can say that the decision situation is definitely multifaceted, and it is unlikely that there will be easily agreed criteria, even though some of them could be traded off.

2.4.2 Conflicts of Interests

The different stakeholders have completely contrasting interests that could easily clash. As a result a conflict among the different social parts may occur. Some examples could be:

Between Government and Industry: the government has decided to pay part of the costs related to a tablet produced by just one firm;

In the Education System: with the tablets the work chances for teachers are reduced;

At the Population level: not everyone will be able to get the tablet;

In the areas where materials are mined: conflicts between local population and miners.

2.4.3 Uncertainties

Moreover, the issue is not just finding a compromise among all the stakeholders, but also about handling all the uncertainties. Here some uncertainties are listed:

On use and disposal: will the tablet be used correctly? Will it be disposed in an ethical way?

On outcomes: will the tablet be useful? Will it be successful in reducing the cultural and communication gaps among the population?

On data: are the data used in the analysis reliable?

On stability: will the project be carried out for a long time? The level of uncertainties depends also on the goals set at the beginning of the decision-making process. For sure it is easier to gather data about manufacturing than on disposal or on social effects. These uncertainties depend also on the time boundaries: the longer the forecast, the higher the uncertainties.

2.4.4 Relations with other decisions

It is very likely that such an analysis is involving a lot of decisions that are influenced by external factors. For example considering the environmental impact of this device and focusing on disposal, it could be useful to consider the building of plants to manage Aakash wastes.

2.5 Assumptions When defining the decision-making frame some assumptions are needed to address the analysis. These assumptions focus above all on the basic underlying causes of the problem. We are assuming for example that there are problems in the educational system in India, with a huge gap between cities and rural areas. In regards to the ecological consequences we are assuming that there could be big problems in the disposal of the tablet because of a lack of infrastructure for recycling.


8

2.6 Criteria for Evaluation of Environmental Decisions The process of environmental decision making is itself complex. The socio-economic impacts of this project are mentioned before in this report. For the Aakash´s case there are various environmental impacts of the decision making process. The number of tablets to be used in India is going to be massive and this will result in significant environmental changes in and out of the country. The evaluation of the environmental decisions can be seen from the view point of the procedure and from the viewpoint of the outcome. From the procedure’s perspective the criteria for evaluating the environmental decisions can be found in statistics and results of similar projects and of course from the Indian legislation. Since the tablet production and disposal are affecting more countries is it possible that legislations of other regions should be considered. This evaluation process in some cases can result in the total change of an environmental decision. For example, if the amount of mercury in the production of Aakash is ‘on the table’ the negative impacts of this decision shall be evaluated against the gains. It is possible that this evaluation will end up in a different scenario, even in the exclusion of mercury from the tablet production. On the other hand, the evaluation as far as the outcome of the Aakash project is concerned can be based only on its environmental effects. In order to account for this a significant amount of time should pass by and even then evaluating the environmental decisions might be a challenging process.

3. Most Important Environmental Aspects Energy, global warming, and chronic public health toxicity are three impact categories that are of interest to the industry and other stakeholders. It has become obvious to them, as it has too much of the general population, that the developed world´s thirst for technology is having global ramifications. It has therefore become clear that tracking impacts and product life cycles is not only environmentally conscientious but also ethical. One man´s trash is another man´s treasure. This basic proverb is a useful way to explain the importance of keeping in mind environmental impacts and explaining the current global phenomenon of electronic devices production processes. Increasingly the developing world, from Asia to Africa, is becoming the dumping ground for the first worlds discarded electronics. There is a small profit to be made in burning down these items to obtain the precious metals inside which in turn releases toxic chemicals and waste into the atmosphere. You can see the attraction for the poor in this process but it´s important for things to change and a more ethical way of dealing with electronic waste to take place. So what does all this mean in relation to the Aakash and our analysis? Well firstly, the Aakash is an electronic tablet device and it will, if not manages correctly, contribute to this phenomenon. Secondly in order to analyse environmental impacts in is important to comprehensively look at the areas in the environment that could be effected negatively. So below you will find several areas where impacts could be felt, in specific forms, from the Aakash.

3.1 Air

3.1.1 Global warming (GW)

Global Warming is above trend increase in temperature of the planet’s surface compared to the last century, as a result of humanities continual and expanding release of greenhouse gas. A greenhouse gas is any gas in the atmosphere that has the ability to either emit or absorb radiation. The result of this process is a “green-house” like warming of the planet. The molecule that is at the fore front of this effect is CO2 however that isn’t the only contributor with water vapor, methane and ozone also contributing. The production of the Aakash will be a huge contributor to this effect as the construction of the components are typically energy intensive as are the transportation and the mining of the raw


9

materials. Furthermore in India the primary source of power is from coal, again a high CO2 emitter, so the production but also the use will both show effects in this area.

3.1.2 Air acidification

Nitrogen oxides and ammonia are two nitrates that have the largest impact when it comes to acidification. The majority of these types of pollutants originates from emissions and is typically from transportation. However an unquantified amount originates from other sectors and it would not be inaccurate to assume that a huge contribution of this type of pollutant come from the unethical burning of electronics and plastics in the developing world. Aside from this, the transportation of components and the distribution of the devises will directly result in air acidification in regards to the Aakash.

3.1.3 Photochemical smog

Photochemical smog forms when unburned gasoline meets sunlight. Any machine that uses gasoline will emit some amount of unburned fuel. Such emissions could be formed during the industrial production of electronic devices in the case of fossil fuel burning. Moreover, emissions connected with the photo chemical smog are resulting from the transportation of the devices from the production location to the consumers.

3.1.4 Air particulate matter (PM)

At the same time electronic devices’ production has as an effect on the release of particulate matter (PM) to the open air. Mining of the metals, producing the devices in industries and transporting them from the producer to the consumer are main sources of PM emissions to the atmosphere. PM have destructive consequences on the human health, flora of a region, material and historical heritage as well.

3.2 Water

3.2.1 Water eutrophication

In which a high concentration of phosphate and other nitrates are found within water bodies encouraging growth of oxygen depleting algae (as it dies-decomposing mater) and therefore the death of an entire marine ecosystem. The risk of this type of event occurring as a direct result of the Aakash is probably low however as soluble forms of nitrogen are unlikely to be used intensively within the electronics production.

3.2.2 Water quality: total suspended solids (TSS)

TSS’s are solid materials that are suspended within a water source. TSS’s could include a variety of things, some examples are silt, bacteria and of course in relation to the Aakash industrial waste. The problem is that these particles reflect light, warm the water and starve it of oxygen. Essentially they “choke” the ecosystem.

3.2.3 Aquatic Eco-toxicity

Aquatic eco-toxicity is the direct result of toxic chemicals being exposed to a Marine population. There is always a detrimental impact related to this toxicity that can range from low reproduction in fish to death of the entire ecosystem. The impact of this will depend on a variety of facts, especially the location of disposal and construction locations.

3.3 Soil Landfill has been proven to be a less than effective operation in terms of waste management and when not properly managed can be of terrible detriment to the surrounding environment. Human waste is typically transported to a site where it is dumped in excavated areas and covered with soil or in the case of some developing countries it is just dumped on the surface. Pollution to the local environment through ground water contamination is possible and soil contamination is very common. ‘Off-gassing’ can also be a huge issue for local populations. India generates about 150,000 tons of waste; electrical and electronic equipment a year, including computers, TVs, refrigerators and washing machines (Gits4u, 2010). The amount of e-waste exceeds


10

the total capacity of six regular recycling units in India. Government authorities pay no attention to the influx of tons of toxic e-waste because of lax local laws. Thus India dumps toxic organic compounds and poisonous metals in ground. E-waste recycling in India seems to be mostly unregulated thus contaminating the ambient soil with contaminants like PCDDs/Fs, PBDEs, HBCDs, PCBs and heavy metals (Annamalai, 2010). Especially, the crude e-waste processing methods employed at the backyard e-waste processing in slum areas may lead to serious environmental contamination. India has these problems even now. If the Aakash has been launched, amounts of e-waste will increase and the contamination will also increase.

3.4 Human Health The improper disposal of electronic waste, such as in the Aakash is one of the leading courses of human health issues in the developing world according to the UNEP. Most of these countries lack the facilities for waste disposal and as a result the population is exposed unnecessarily to toxic, infectious and sometimes even radioactive substances. In the case of India there is varied degrees of waste management from well planned to dumping. For those residents that live close to these poorly run dumping grounds are at great risk. For these people water, food and even living conditions expose them to all forms of dangerous electronic waste. ‘The elements that are of (greatest) concern include lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, chromium, zinc, nickel and copper.’(Njoroge G. Kimani, 2008) Furthermore some metals could potentially be released into the local area by the burning of waste which as discussed before is a problem. These toxins can travel for great distances and ‘Once deposited, these metals are not degraded and persist in the environment for many years poisoning humans through inhalation, ingestion and skin absorption’ (Njoroge G. Kimani, 2008). Exposure to any of the above toxic substances used in electronics and listed above could result in nausea, anorexia, vomiting, gastrointestinal abnormalities and dermatitis in high quantities.

3.5 Energy Over the complete life cycle of the Aakash energy is used at each stage. Like all electronics the production and resource extraction form the largest areas of energy consumption ahead of both transportation and use. This can be proven when comparing the Aakash to similar products like the iPad which show that ‘Manufacturing — including extraction of raw materials and product assembly — accounts for 46 percent of Apple’s total greenhouse gas emissions’ (APPLE, 2011). The rest of the energy use is divided between distribution of the product (10%) and the use of the product (30%). This division of energy is actually just a measure of CO2 emissions for apple, so why are these statistics of interest to us? Well India has a carbon intensive electrical grid with the majority of energy coming from dirty coal. The Aakash in reality is a product of a very carbon intensive process, not just from the energy used in the excavation of raw materials and transportation. Energy use is therefore an important environmental consideration and it could perhaps even be the biggest for our analysis from an environmental perspective.

4. Methods (Description and Analysis)

4.1 MFA

4.1.1 Description of the Method

Material Flow Accounting or Material Flow Analysis (MFA) is an analytical tool which is commonly recognized as one essential step for reducing the impact of human activities on the environment. It came out from the industrial metabolism, defined by Ayres in 1994 as “the whole integrated collection of physical processes that convert raw materials and energy, plus labor, into finished products and wastes”. MFA is used over a set period of time in order to identify points in the life-cycle where resource use is most inefficient. It is also used to track the types and quantities of wastes produced. MFA may be applied on different spatial scales, including supranational units such as the


11

EU, national economies, economic sectors, corporate organizations, regions or urban settlements (Browne et al., 2011). According to different subjects and various methods MFA covers approaches such as substance flow analysis, product flow accounts, material balancing, and bulk material flow accounts. Because of the law of conservation of matter, the results of an MFA can be controlled by a simple material balance comparing all inputs, stocks, and outputs of a process. MFA can

Provide early warnings of problems lying ahead;

Identify potentials for improvements;

Show if the economy is on the right path with respect to resource productivity;

Provide a basis for determining the environmental impact of resource use. (Dessau, et. al.,

2009)

All the material flows from extraction of resources (domestic extraction or imports into the system) until the final disposal of waste are considered. It includes all solid materials, displaced by human activities and liquid or gaseous in term of energy flows (Browne, et. al., 2011). They are generally given in load (ton/year) or coefficient (mg/ton product). The economic structure of a system is the driving force for material flows. For example, strong economic growth will rapidly increase the rate of resource extraction. Material outputs include solid wastes, gaseous emissions (both direct and fugitive), material loads of wastewater and dissipative loss of products. They are reported in mass unit, in the case of other physical data (m3 for water emission) mass unit are derived by the use of density. In the case of air emissions, the result of a published approach is used (like Corinair). Moreover, theoretically the waste amounts could be derived from the difference between raw materials and products. In practice a lot of non-reported inputs and outputs affect the difference and prevent this possibility (Bringezu, et. al., 1997). The relationships between environmental pressure and economic growth are undoubtedly complex. For analyzing this relationship, some researchers have adapted input-output approach and use NAMEA data for under investigation pollutants. In NAMEA, environmental information is compiled so that it is compatible with the presentation of economic activities in national accounts (Roka, et. al., 2007). Aspects considered in our decision situation are depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Flowchart for MFA method


12

4.1.2 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Method

MFA is a family of different methods, some advantages and disadvantages are briefly mentioned in table below: (Wrisberg, et al.,2002) and (Binder, et al.,2004) Table 2: Advantages and disadvantages of MFA methods.

Methods in MFA

Advantage Disadvantage

MIPS Calculating all material inputs to the system, including both direct and hidden inputs

Can be used to monitor progress in dematerialization

Evaluate all direct material impacts

Using one unit for mass and energy

Only looks at the input side of the system

Only looking at the weight of material used might not be appropriate estimate for environmental impacts, like toxic impacts, like toxic impacts and impacts on biodiversity

Hidden weighting

SFA Is a robust tool for a number for a number of policy question

Applying in both accounting and change-orientated studies

Focus on substance within a region or from cradle-to-grave

The SFA variant is useful as basis for substance oriented environmental policy

input-related modelling on intervention level with uncertain relation to environmental

Env. IOA Links economic and ecological impacts

Can be used for assessment of background processes in LCA

Results can be presented for sectors or product groups

Considerable data problems

Env. IOA suffers from limitations of high levels of aggregation in international input-output tables

4.1.3 Analysis

In Aakash, all social, economic and environmental aspects could not be covered by applying the MFA tools. We can roughly translate the material values into economic and environmental emissions with high uncertainties. But the Indian government, might directly perceive the benefits of changing the internal production structure when implementing MFA results, at the regional level (India) or along the product chain (producing the tablet computer), where various stakeholders with various interests and goals are involved, it has been proven to be difficult to implement the results of material flow analysis without combing the MFA with other methods to make the results relevant for the government as a key policy-maker (R. Binder,2007). In addition MFA is a time consuming method because on one hand all material flows from cradle to grave should be considered, on the other hand by improvement in technology especially in production stage the result of MFA should be upgraded to be reliable. But, due to the fact that the life-cycle of the Aakash tablet is limited to five years maybe it is a good assumption that keep the material flow results stable during these five years.


13

4.2 LCA


Life cycle analysis (LCA) is an effective analytical tool for the investigation of impacts that could potentially do harm to the environment. There is a strong emphasis on determining environmental impacts and resources used over a products complete life and is typically coined as a form of ‘cradle to grave’ analysis as it comprehensively looks at all stages in a products life. The information collected by this form of tool also allows for evaluation, comparison and improvement of products which would explain its popularity within many societal levels. Interestingly LCA has been standardised by the ISO. This isn’t the case for most tools, and specific framework has been created for continuity within application. The diagram could be very similar to the one for MFA, with the focus on the environmental impacts of energy use, emissions and wastes.

Figure 2. Flowchart for LCA Method


LCA can be extremely powerful but its inherent complexity often results in simplifications of the model/scope due to cost and time constrains by the issuer. While considering limitations it can also be observed that restrictions exist in the tools ability to consider future changes in technology, demand and unquantified environmental impacts which are not considered (at least effectively) in its analysis.


14

Table 3: Strengths and weaknesses of LCA method.

Strengths Weaknesses

Determining environmental impacts

Analysis resource use

allows for evaluation, comparisons and improvements of products

ISO recognised

can be complex to calculate

can require scope limitations

expensive

time intensive

doesn’t consider future changes in technology or demand

unquantified environmental impacts not considered in analysis

4.2.3 Analysis

Potentially there is an interest from all stakeholders in the analysis of the Aakash’s environmental impact on India and the wider environment however initially there are two prominent groups. Government and Business both at the early stages of this project have a specific interest in LCA because they are the parties that tendered and designed the product. The government has a responsibility to the people that elected them to do their due diligence and analyse how this product will impact on the Indian environment. In contrast business will be interested in the evaluation aspect of this tool and will be eager to see if improvements can be made to the product that are advantageous in terms of cost/packaging. Realistically the application of this tool will be both time intensive and expensive. The cost of using LCA can be prohibitive which is why large businesses and Governments tend to be the majority of applicators. This is a shame because smaller business and other groups who could benefit greatly from this type of environmental analysis are excluded due to their lack of monetary muscle. Specifically for LCA in relation to the Aakash project we can draw a few conclusions. Initially it can be said that that wealth of analytical data that LCA collects will result in a simplification of decision making for the Indian government because the tool effectively measures environmental impacts from cradle to grave. Secondly it can be said that the required information is readily available for a third (unbiased) party to apply this tool and retrieve a accurate result. Thirdly the tool despite its continuity and well-rounded design does not allow for a salubrious environmental system analysis response, as discussed further later in the report.

4.3 LCCA


Life cycle costing (LCC) is widely believed to sit somewhere between environmental and social analysis which is to say that it contains aspects of social analysis which LCA avoids. ‘LCC is not a method for financial accounting. It ‘evaluates’ internal and external cost due to a product and provides its conclusions with a singular indicator’ (Gerald Rebitzer & David Hunkeler 2003) No comprehensive model yet exists for LCC and this may lead to questions surrounding the accuracy of stated environmental impacts because of a lack of agreement with the valuation method, something that an ISO designed LCA does not have to worry about. Also LCC is often bases its findings on a series of assumptions, many more than in LCA.


Life cycle costing (LCC) is widely believed to sit somewhere between environmental and social analysis which is to say that it contains aspects of social analysis which LCA avoids. ‘LCC is not a method for financial accounting. Rather, it is a cost management method with the goal of estimating the costs associated with the existence of a product’ (Gerald Rebitzer & David Hunkeler 2003) which is an important distinction. So it ‘evaluates’ internal and external cost due to a product and provides its conclusions with a singular indicator. LCC is often bases its findings on a series of assumptions, many more than in LCA.


15

No comprehensive model yet exists for LCC and this may lead to questions surrounding the accuracy of stated environmental impacts because of a lack of agreement with the valuation method, something that an ISO designed LCA does not have to worry about. Table 4: Strengths and weaknesses of LCCA method.


Evaluates internal and external costs over the life of the product

Provides a single indicator

Many assumptions needed

No comprehensive model

4.3.3 Analysis

Essentially what is of interests to stakeholders who use this tool is the is the assessment of costs over the life cycle of their product. Stakeholders with a financial interest in the product are the most likely to be interested with business and Government the prominent users. This tool is data intensive and in some areas must rely on calculated assumptions so it can be expensive in terms of time but perhaps less so in cost compared to other methods. In relation to the Aakash and in light of the environmental emphasis of this report and our chosen context LCC would not be sufficient enough to tackle all aspects of a sound system analysis. However if this tool was to be implemented singularly an early stage in the project before production of the tablet would be an effective way to track costs and make informed decisions based on those findings. In terms of information, as mentioned before, some of the calculations based on this method require assumptions. However this does not mean that there isn’t the required information to run the tool and there is inherent value found within the conclusions that this tool draws.

4.4 EIA


Environmental Impact Assessment is a change-orientated procedural tool. EIA was created during the 1970´s in USA in order to raise the awareness of the environmental impacts of projects. It can be called a site-specific tool. The locations of the planned project and associated emissions are often known and an EIA is often used to evaluate alternative locations. It is required in different regulations in many countries. The role of EIA is to help the procedure of decision making, to aid the formulation of development actions, promote the interdisciplinary cooperation, since EIA requires interaction between different occupations, and raise a public involvement, fact that makes it a democratic tool. EIA is an instrument for sustainable development since it takes into consideration both environmental and social aspects (Pölönen et al, 2011). EIA cannot always guarantee the best decision making but it can provide with all the information about the impacts to the environment, we can say EIA is all about `thinking in advance´. It is applied early in a process, before a decision is made. It takes into consideration the plan alternatives to that plan and helps to make comparisons for the different scenarios. While using EIA one should consider also the 0-alternative, meaning the scenario in which no changes are made and the situation is left put. This ESA method compared to other procedural tools tends to be a more quantitative tool. EIA doesn’t follow any ISO standard, thus it is carried out under legislation and actually there are different legislations in different countries. According to the EU EIA directive 85/337 when such a method is used what needs to be analysed is impacts to

humans, fauna, flora

soil, water, air

climate, landscape

material, cultural heritage

the interactions between the factors mentioned above


16

The input data in the case of EIA method can be both quantitative and qualitative. They include sufficient, reliable and usable information that affect the environment. Moreover, the system boundaries should be set. For the evaluation part of the method more input data are needed such as the expert’s knowledge for the problem and relevant biophysical and social balances information. After carrying out an EIA based on the input data, the scientists’ knowledge, EIA legislations and public participation the output of this method will be in the first place an EIA report. If based on correct data and a good technical analysis the resulting report should explain very well the problem and analyse the environmental impacts of the process suggested. It is important to mention that EIA does not always provide with the best decision making, but if carried out properly it provides with the knowledge needed. The basic goal of EIA is to inform the decision makers for the environmental consequences of their actions (Eccleston, 2011).

Figure 3: Flowchart for MFA method


Table 4: Strengths and weaknesses of EIA tool.


focuses on a specific project site

focuses on site-specific impacts

allows public participation

considers all environmental impacts

on local basis

uncertainty on future

lack of know-how

lack of data

subjectivity

difficulty on comparing impacts

contradiction between goals


17

4.4.3 Analysis

Environmental Impact Assessment operates within a framework established by national institutional arrangements. Although, in the Aakash project case a third party will carry out the EIA, the Indian government and the producing company will be affected from the EIA report. From the one hand, the result can affect the government’s transparency and reliability depending on the environmental impact of the project in India. From the other hand the EIA report could cause the company to prevent the company from an action and change their perspective on a production matter (Jay et al 2007). As mentioned before the EIA legislation differs between countries but anyhow there is a respective cost and timeframe for the application of such an ESA tool. In order to shorten the timeframe and reduce the cost of EIA data from previous researchers or other organizations could be used about electronic devices’ production, as long as they are consistent and reliable. In any case the cost of such a study cannot be compared with the environmental cost of its non-application. An EIA takes into consideration all the environmental impacts of different alternatives for the procedure in India. It excludes the social-economic consequences of the respective alternatives. Furthermore EIA lacks the concern for the material flows outside India. This is a major gap of the method for this case, since the extraction of materials, such as gold, silver and copper, are taking place in our countries as well as the tablet’s disposal procedures. For this matter, other ESA tools need to be applied within the frame of the EIA method. The use of this method for the Aakash project cannot guarantee a decision making to solve the problem but it can certainly provide with a wide knowledge about the environmental impacts of the launching in the country. Hence, EIA can simplify the decision making of such initiatives and it could even have a preventive role for some parts of the decision making process. A major disadvantage of this ESA tool and especially in the electronic devices’ case is the difficulty of data collecting. The extraction data are difficult to be precise and the emission information as well. In this case some approximations need to be made in order for conclusions to be reached.

4.5 SEA


SEA is a systematic decision support process, aiming to ensure that environmental aspects are considered in policy, plan, and program making. Therefore it can provide for a structured decision framework and support more effective and efficient decision-making. This framework consists of screening, scoping, assessment and report, decision-making and monitoring. This method is used for all plans and programs which are prepared for agriculture, forestry, fisheries, energy, industry, transport, waste management, telecommunications, tourism, town and county planning or land use. Table 5: Required information for SEA

General In our case

formal requirements legislation, norms

clear goals for assessment to assess the environmental impacts

proper funding and time the money for assessment, a few years

cooperation ability companies + government + education (environmental point of view)

setting clear boundaries India + countries involved in disposal and production of raw materials

acknowledging and dealing with uncertainties

company + academia (technological know-how), government+NGO Key data sources are mainly from sustainable development strategies, state of the environmental reports or vision.


18

The output of SEA is a support of strategic environmental thinking and suggestion of better governance and sustainable development in decision-making.

Figure 4: Process diagram of SEA


Table 6: Advantages and disadvantages of the SEA method

Advantages Disadvantages

Address cumulative impacts

Address alternative developments or mitigation measures due to earlier decisions

Address impacts of strategic actions

Discuss the need for the action

Not support site-specific construction and operational activities

Great degree of uncertainty

In our case, these advantages are very useful in the beginning of decision-making process. This method, however, deal with only environmental aspect. Although the government needs to consider also economic and social aspects, this method cannot analyse them.

4.5.3 Analysis

The Indian government could use SEA in the early stage of decision-making in order to make better policy, plan and programme decisions. As mentioned before, this method starts with screening and ends with monitoring. Hence, judging from case studies, it would take around 3-5 years for assessment to be completed.


19

This project has been already decided and launched. Since SEA support a policy or program in decision-making, it is not useful at the moment. But, it could be useful if this method was used in the early stage of decision-making. In this case, the early stage would indicate the stage of choosing a product for promoting information and communication technologies in the education sector. SEA does not simplify decision making in this case because this method addresses cumulative impacts and alternative developments or mitigation measures, the analysis could be complicated. Almost all information about the tablet could be collected. However, it would be difficult to estimate the environmental impact of products. Therefore this method requires reliable analysis of the environmental impact by using tools which can assess the environmental impact of a product, such as LCA or MFA.

4.6 CBA


Cost-Benefit Analysis is an analytical tool for determining the total costs and benefits of a planned project. Cost-Benefit analysis comes from the common sense way of proceeding in everyday life of comparing pros and cons of each decision. In economic terms this evaluation is quite easy because all the elements to be valued have a common unit of measure that is money. However, talking about society and environment, the market prices and the private costs and benefits are rarely suitable to describe completely the subsystems and the components of the system involved in the decision-making situation, above all if many different actors are involved. At the government level, the private costs and benefits are replaced by the social ones. In this way it is possible to evaluate and compare planned programs or projects, regarding for example infrastructures, incentives, subsidies. (Ness, et. al., 2007) In this kind of activities, the distributional effects are valued more than the efficiency effects. For example the benefits for poor people (e.g. use of the tablet for education) are considered more important than the costs for rich ones (e.g. increase of taxes to pay the incentives). In other words, an increase in social welfare and relative benefits are valued more than the related costs. And since, from the CBA perspective a project is worth realizing if benefits are higher than costs, in the basic formula B - C > 0 can be added some coefficients to take into account the social value of these costs and benefits:

a2B - a1C > 0 In which a1 < a2 if the benefits are considered more important than the costs from the social/environmental point of view. (Brent, 2006) CBA is gathering information from almost all the components of the system. The nature of this data is variable, so all the data in input must be at the end converted in numbers (fiscal unit) to fit the CBA formula. To take into account the social and environmental aspects, all benefits and costs are to be included, private and social, direct and indirect, tangible and intangible. Since, as said before, the market prices are not always good reference points on a social scale, benefits are based on the consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for the project, while costs are what the people are giving up the resources to realize the project are willing to receive as compensation (willingness to accept a decline in utility, WTA). (Hanley & Barbier, 2009) Hence CBA is using economic, physical and social information, and when this is not quantitative or not strictly related to the costs or benefits of the project, its effect is taken into account in the coefficients a1 and a2. (Brent, 2006)

The output of CBA is just a number that represents the difference between benefits and costs. Because of this, CBA is useful to compare several projects: the one with the score should be the more convenient to realize. (Brent, 2006)


20

Figure 5: Process diagram of CBA. (Nicol D., et al., 2002; Barker, 2005)


Table 7: Advantages / so and so / Disadvantages in a quite general way

Advantages Neutral Disadvantages

Comprehensive (environment, economy, society)

Distribution of resources highly valued

Projects approved even if inefficient from the economic point of view

No judgment on the effectiveness of the programs

High demanding in informational terms

Problems in non-market valuations

In relation to our case, the weakest point is maybe that with a CBA there is no warranty that the project will effectively reach the main goal (improvement of education, information and communication in rural areas). Even if a coefficient takes into account the use of the tablet as a social benefit, this does not mean that the tablet will meet the needs of the population. However it remains the strength of this method in giving a neat result (maybe based on wrong evaluations though), that could be used easily by the government in decision making. Moreover it is appreciable how CBA is trying to give a value to the distribution effects on the society as social equity is linked with sustainability (Espinosa, 2000).


21

4.6.3 Analysis

The Indian government could do a CBA to compare this project with other ones with the same aim, or with different specific aim but almost equal social priority. In fact, CBA can be a good method to decide which project should be realized before from a welfare perspective. The academia is indirectly interested because this tool could be used to set the government contribute in paying the tablets. The pieces of information needed for the CBA, related to social and economic field should be somehow available from the national institute of statistics. From the environmental point of view specific information about the product itself is needed. In any case the elaboration of this information is not obvious and requires experts in the field. Since CBA can just compare existing alternatives, you may need other tools to suggest the different alternatives (procedural tools). Moreover, to have the right data before starting the analysis, it could be useful for example a MFA and a LCA/LCC relative to the product to know materials use (and related environmental effects) and monetary costs and benefits. Going deeper, a CBA, if done by a national government, works at the national level but not worldwide. How could the effects on the populations where the materials are mined be related to benefits or costs of the project? It is unlikely that the Indian government would care so much about these elements to count them in a CBA. Talking about input data for CBA, the most critical ones are about the environmental effects, usually are hard to commensurate and hence highly uncertain. Also the non-market values are not easily determinable, and the related level of uncertainty is quite high. Since a CBA is highly sensitive to these parameters, the quality of its results will decrease with the increasing of the number of these uncertain values, not strictly related to monetary costs. (Nicol D., et al., 2002)

4.7 ISA


The ISA represents one of the novelties of the last years in the ESA world. This method is very similar to the Strategic Environmental Assessment SEA, but it is trying to consider also the socio-economic aspects. Moreover, there is an enhancing of the “social learning” role, of the public participation in the decision-making. (Weaver & Rotmans, 2006) The Inputs are related to the general characteristics of the system that is considered to be affected by the changing discussed in the decision-making process. In this method it is not only important the kind of inputs but the source. All the stakeholders should be involved in order to get ideas and data from everyone. This is a very good point in our situation, because it would be useful to know the opinion of the population regarding this project. This method is thought to be able to widen the perspectives in solving a certain issue, and hence the output will be a better understanding of the system, diverse strategies and alternatives to get out from the ordinary framework. (Rotmans, 2009)


Table 8: Advantages and disadvantages of the ISA method.

Advantages Neutral Disadvantages

Comprehensive (environment, economy, society)

Useful to get out from standard schemes

Not Standardized Complexity

Difficulty of Public Participation

4.7.3 Analysis


22

The government could be interested if it had the resources and the willingness to increase the level of democracy in decision-making. This could end up in diverse thinking and in a change of perspective in considering the issue. From the point of view of the receivers of this plan it could be very good to express their opinion. This process is very expensive in terms of cost and time implement because of public participation. This method is supposed to be applied from the very beginning of a decision-making process, to generate new ideas about possible alternatives and strategies. However these alternatives must be evaluated and for this reason ISA can include some other procedural and analytical tools to assess the different impacts of the proposed solutions.


23

5. Proposed tools for the “Aakash” project To make a policy at the level of the Indian government, the best method to be applied could be ISA. This is because of the complexity of the system. The policy aims to reduce the distance between the evidently different living conditions within the country, by giving more people the chance to have good education. However this project will inevitably affect the economy and the environment. Therefore a holistic tool is needed in this case. ISA also has some other peculiarities that are influencing our choice. First of all the importance of public participation in the decision-making process, and in this context the public opinion can’t be neglected since the population is the direct receiver of this policy. Related to this aspect, there is a second important feature, this is the cyclical nature of ISA. There is a trial and error procedure that is always reconsidering the final goal of the decision activity, reshaping the problem in function of the discoveries along the process. It is like admitting that there is no specific path and direction which is always working, in any situation, in any context. On the contrary the procedure must be adapted on the decision environment and on the nature of the problem. In this broad and flexible picture, the Integrated Sustainability Assessment must be supported by some analytical tools, and for instance, aiming to investigate on the ecological consequences of this plan. MFA could be good to make a preliminary evaluation to identify potential critical points of a certain activity. However, to make sensible considerations, it is necessary to try to delineate a possible path for the decision making in this particular situation that we can collocate into the frame of ISA. From our previous analysis we have come to realise that the Aakash situation is a complex problem and as a result the decision-making process will also be a complex one. For this reason an algorithm (as shown in Figure 6) is used to explain the ‘dream’ decision-making process. It is assumed almost always that the point of view of this analysis is through the government’s ‘eyes’, since they are key-decision maker. At the governmental level there are a series of issues that have come to light over the course of this analysis and they have needed lengthy discussion. The reality has been that even for a perfect government, there is limited availability of money and it is very likely that for any specific issue that is considered there will be a direct connection in a budget for a possible for that possible solution. From our initial data, possible interventions need to be discussed, involving opinions of experts in the field (above all from academia), and asking for suggestions from the population, that eventually will be the beneficiary of the plan. Thus a draft proposal will be preferable to the others (in our specific context, the proposal chosen by the Indian government is the launch and the incentive of the Aakash tablet, but the government could have chosen another way to improve the education system), and to carry on with this idea, further studies are needed to understand the feasibility of this proposal. Above all it is of great importance that we check that the plan meets the basic requirements of the government´s original tender. For example, at this stage it could be useful for a rough CBA to be compared with the initial set budget. If the plan passes this first test, then, above all in this case, the government needs the cooperation of industries to realize the technological tool. In reality the Indian government has chosen just one company (“Datawind”) to produce the Aakash and therefore it is likely that the best proposal on the economic side (lowest pricing) was the tender that was selected. Hence the different companies that want to compete to realize the plan must first do a evaluation of the cost of the tablet with a Full Costing Account (FCA) approach, or with a traditional LCC. Again, since government considers only the best possible avenue, the politicians want to have warranties on the environmental impacts of the tender so they don’t stone wall themselves in regards to their electorate. Hence the companies should supply information on this aspect of analysis, specifically looking at the necessary material flows (kind of MFA) to produce the tablets. After the best proposal from one of the companies is chosen, the company must proceed in its analysis to come up with a precise plan in the manufacturing process for the Aakash. From the companies perspective this stage will have to use EIA (required by law) and eventually LCA to evaluate the environmental impacts of the actual life-cycle. It is very important to highlight that only


24

at this stage it is possible to make a reliable quantification of the environmental impacts and therefore of the ecological consequences of the e-tool. In fact, at this point of the process, the company should have already precisely defined all the steps of the life-cycle. It is essential, at this point, to have the confidence in producing a document that is giving accurate information about the impacts of each of these tablets.

Pu

bli

c P

art

icip

ati

on

Issues to be solved + Budget available

Cooperation between

government and scientists

Plan/Policy

Proposal for the

solution

Evaluation of expenses from the government side to implement the

related policy (CBA?):· Infrastructures· Support Services· Incentives

Expenses <= Budget?(Economic Evaluation)

No

Proposal of different companies, supported by:

· Pricing (traditional LCC, FCA)

· 1st estimation of Environmental impacts (MFA?)

Yes

Is there a proposal satisfying the initial requirements?(Technological, Environmental, Economical Evaluation)

At the company level further analysis to design the whole process

Cleaner production approachEIA, LCA (MFA)

Yes

No

So and So

Realization + Distribution

Is it working in the actual context?

(Social Evaluation)

No

Thinking about further projects

taking into account the gained knowledge

Yes

New issue

Government support with infrastructures and

incentives

ISA

Figure 6: Algorithm showing the proposed decision making process.


25

Finally the product has to be realised and distributed. This will occur by following the pre-defined policy mentioned before, it is important to take into consideration the opinion of all the involved stakeholders. Just at this stage, or even more precisely, just after a certain period from the beginning of the distribution, it will be possible to evaluate the effects on the society. The real value you will be in asking receivers of the project and seeing the consequences in the whole system. Eventually it is evident that the importance of realising the project so we are able to evaluate it. Even a good decision-making process could lead to an ineffective proposal. However, we must place significance emphasis on public participation, with a good cooperation at each stage of the decision-making process, the likelihood of failures at the application stage are lower than with a blind and unidirectional decision-making process.

6. Discussion

6.1 Are the ESA tools providing all the information needed for the Decision Making? The Environmental Systems Analysis tools do not provide the best decision themselves. However, if all the tools are used in the best possible way and also used combined with each other, they can provide the analysts some pieces of information to help the decision making. Systems thinking in general can assist with seeing the broader picture and the use of different ESA methods can indicate the possible socio-economic and environmental impacts of each scenario. For sure there are aspects that cannot easily be foreseen. But anyhow, with the knowledge available from the ESA tools the quality of decision making could be improved.

6.2 Credibility of ESA tools in the specific Decision Situation ESA tools, above all the procedural ones, shouldn’t have credibility themselves. On the contrary, who is using them should always be aware that there is no tool that can give a sharp result without being doubtful. Talking about analytical tools, even if they usually give a precise result at the end, this result must be interpreted, and the uncertainties in data considered. For example, doing a LCA, some simplifications are needed and some data depends on future events (change of technology, huge change in the amount of tablet produced due to rebound effect) and on human behaviors (disposal). Hence, after the product is launched, there should be a monitoring of the actual performances on the environment side, to verify the results of the previous analysis.

6.3 Possible Threats to a transparent Decision Making The public participation underneath transparency in decision-making is an important part of sound environmental systems analysis. If the people involved in the discussion are not aware of all the data and results of each analysis and tool used, their contribution can’t be useful. Besides this, when ESA tools are applied at lower societal levels (companies), a third part should carry out these analyses, to avoid ‘cheating’ in the writing of the documentation required by legislation. Even in this case the fairness is not guaranteed.

6.4 Proposed Improvements of Methods and Procedures NGOs are a good starting point since they try to embody the opinion of the population. However their actual power and influence are still too low. Moreover, talking about ESA tools, in order to make the MFA results relevant for policymakers, combination of MFA with socioeconomic and assessment methods like structural agent analysis (SAA), a newly developed method could be applied. SSA provides a basis for understanding the impact of social structural control strategies for managing material flows.


26

7. Conclusions It is not an easy process to summarise the main results and outcomes of this work, since our thoughts evolved and changed a lot during all the steps of this group task. At first we struggled to understand the goals of this project and on the object of our study. For example, was the “Aakash” a product or a project, a plan or a policy? Eventually we came to the conclusion that this tablet was a device that embodied both these forms at the same time, and that both policy and project were inseparable. Within that framework it became clear that Environmental System Analysis is more than just applying a tool to solve a problem. It represents an approach to improve the understanding of the considered system; these tools should be taken as fabric to be tailored to the problem. There is no easy way to do this, no industrialized, standardized procedure to carry on this process. When considering the broadness and complexity of this task we realised that we couldn’t exclude any tool from our analysis, since each of them could be useful to carry out the decision-making process. Therefore we can only propose some different possible positions in the process where each tool can be useful, in function of the societal level (government or company) and of the elements to be considered as predominant at a certain stage of the decision(economy, environment, society or combination of them together). All these tools are then eventually gathered under the ISA label. The process is multifaceted, cyclical, cooperative, and we think that Integrated Sustainability Assessment is at the end of the day the best suit for our combination of tool proposed. However, even if we considered a dream government, we cannot forget how in the real world the implementation of an ISA is still very difficult. One of the basic principles of ISA is cooperation among stakeholders. In other words ISA represents an advanced application of democracy. Thus, the lack of “real” democracy is still a big obstacle for the realisation of a good and “true” Integrated Sustainability Assessment. The context should be inherently transparent to enable a reciprocally trustful cooperation. We are talking about very slow processes that cannot happen all of the sudden. However a lot can be done to fasten the reaction a little bit, or at least to not walk in the opposite direction. In this light, the “Aakash” project, with its aims to improve education and communication can be considered one of the useful steps to accelerate the pace towards equality and democracy.


27

8. Acknowledgements This report has been the product of hours of consultation, research and debate between the group members, our supervisor and even the class. Our group consists of five members. For the work distribution of the two reports and two presentations for this course our group coordinator designated the tasks to all as shown Table 8. For the final report each of us was in charge of supervising the outcomes of a chapter and in charge of writing a part of the report. Other than that, we all participated in long conversations in order to reach decisions and also, all worked on correcting the report in the last stage. Table 9: Task distribution of the final report amongst the group members.

In charge of

Writing

Ch. 2 Ch. 3 Ch. 4 Chapters 1,5-7

Despina chapter 4

Criteria for Evaluation of

Environmental Decisions

Air EIA 6.1

Haruya

chapter 5

Social Aspects for the

Environmental Decision

Soil SEA Abstract, 6.2

Luke chapter 2,7 Introduction

Water Energy

LCA/LCC

Chapter 1, 7

Shabnam chapter 3 Substantial

Domain Health MFA Chapter 1, 6.4

Paolo chapter 6

-Type of decision and Assumptions

-Societal Level of the

Environmental Decision

CBA/ISA

Abstract, chapter 5, 6.3, 6.4, chapter 7


28

9. References Barker, K. C. (2005). Linking Adult Literacy and eLearning - A National Study conducted for ABC CANADA Literacy Foundation - Return on Investment in eLearning: Discussion and ROI Tool. Futured Consulting Education Futurists Inc. Brent, R.J. (2006). Introduction to CBA, chapter 1. In: Applied Cost-Benefit Analysis, Second Edition. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar, pp. 3-31. Bringezu, S. (1997) Analysis for action: Support for Policy towards Sustainability by Material Flow Accounting, ConAccount Conference, Wuppertal, Germany. Browne, D., O’Regan, B. (2011) Material flow accounting in an Irish city-region 1992–2002, Journal of Cleaner Production, 19: 967-976. Eccleston, C.H. (2011) The international environmental impact assessment process, chapter 5. In: Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Best Professional Practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press, pp. 201-227. Espinosa, C. (2000). Policy on Social Equity in Conservation and Sustainable Use of Natural Resources - Adopted by IUCN Council Meeting, Switzerland Finnveden, G., Moberg, A. (2004). Environmental system analysis tools- an overview, Journal of Cleaner Production, 13: 1165-1173. Fischer, T.B. (2007). What is Strategic Environmental Assessment? chapter 1.In: Theory and Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment: Towards a More Systematic Approach. London: Earthscan, pp. 1-25. Rebitzer G.. and Hunkeler D. (2003), ‘Life Cycle Costing in LCM: Ambitions, Opportunities, and Limitations’, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Hanley, N. and Barbier, E.B., (2009). CBA in developing countries: what’s different? chapter 8. In: Pricing Nature: Cost-Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 167-202. Jay S., Jones C., Slinn P., Wood C., (2007), Environmental impact assessment: Retrospect and prospect, Environmental Impact Assessment Review 27 287–300 Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S. and L. Olsson , (2007). Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 60(3): 498-508. Nicol D., Kay N., Gordon G. and Coen C., (2002). Model for Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of ICT in Teaching and Learning. Roca, J., Serrano, M. (2007). Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: An input–output approach, ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 63:230 –242. Wisberg, N., A. Udo De Haes, H. (2002) Analytical tools for environmental design and management in a system perspective, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/strathclyde.pdf




























29

Pölönen I., Hokkanen P., Jalava K. (2011). The effectiveness of the Finnish EIA system — What works, what doesn't, and what could be improved? Environmental Impact Assessment Review 31 120–128 Runhaar, H. and Driessen, P.J. (2007). What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25(1): 2-14. Rotmans, J. (2009) Integrated Sustainability Assessment: a transformative approach, Brussels, EPOS conference, 15-06-2009 Weaver, P.M. & Rotmans, J. (2006) Integrated sustainability assessment: what is it, why do it and how? International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1(4): 284–303. Annamalai, S. , (2010). Contamination Associated with E-waste Recycling in India, [online] Available at:<http://bfr2010.com/abstract-download/2010/90148.pdf> [Accessed 7 December 2011] Apple, 2011. [online] Available <http://www.apple.com/environment> Njoroge G. Kimani, Impacts on Public Health, 2008, [online] Available www.unep.org/urban_environment/pdfs/dandorawastedump-reportsummary.pdf [accessed 5/12/2011] Ayres, R., (1994), Industrial Metabolism: Theory and Policy, The Greening of Industrial Ecosystems, National Academy Press, Washington, DC Binder, C. (2007) From material flow analysis to material flow management, Journal of cleaner production, 15: 1605-1617 UNESCO INSTITUTE for STATISTICS

<http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=210> (Accessed 7 December 2011) Difference Between

<http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-urban-and-rural-india/> (Accessed 7 December 2011) Alison, G. , (2007). 80% of Indians live on less than $2 a day: WB, [online] Available at:<http://www.livemint.com/articles/2007/10/16235421/80-of-Indians-live-on-less-th.html> (Accessed 7 December 2011) Frank, J.D. , (2011). India launches "world's cheapest" tablet computer, [online] Available

at:<http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-india-tablet-idUSTRE7940YV20111005> (Accessed 7 December 2011)

http://bfr2010.com/abstract-download/2010/90148.pdf











http://www.apple.com/environment/









http://www.unep.org/urban_environment/pdfs/dandorawastedump-reportsummary.pdf

















about:blank

about:blank

about:blank

about:blank

about:blank