Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSALA SERENELLAen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGORALCZYK MALGORZATAen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2014-01-03T01:01:32Z-
dc.date.available2014-01-02en_GB
dc.date.available2014-01-03T01:01:32Z-
dc.date.created2013-12-16en_GB
dc.date.issued2013en_GB
dc.date.submitted2013-01-10en_GB
dc.identifier.citationINTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT vol. 9 no. 4 p. 623-632en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1551-3777en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ieam.1471/abstracten_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC78677-
dc.description.abstractThe development and use of footprint methodologies for environmental assessment are increasingly important for both the scientific and political communities. Starting from the ecological footprint, developed at the beginning of the 90s, several other footprints were defined, namely carbon and water footprint. These footprints - even though based on different meaning of “footprint” - integrate life cycle thinking, and focus on some challenging environmental impacts, namely: resource consumption, CO2 emission leading to climate change, and water consumption. However, they usually neglect a relevant sources of impact, as those related to the production and use of chemicals. This paper presents and discusses the need and relevance of developing a methodology for assessing the chemical footprint, coupling a life cycle-based approach with methodologies developed in other contexts, such as ecological risk assessment and sustainability science. Furthermore, different concepts underpin existing footprint and this could be the case also of chemical footprint. At least two different approaches and steps to chemical footprint could be envisaged, applicable at the micro as well as at the meso and macro scale. The first step (1) is related to the account of chemicals use and emissions along the life cycle of a product, sector or entire economy, in order to assess potential impacts on ecosystems and human health. The second step (2) aims at assessing to which extent actual emission of chemicals harm the ecosystems above their capability to recover (carrying capacity of the system). The latter step might contribute to the wide discussion on planetary boundaries for chemical pollution, the thresholds that should not be surpassed in order to guarantee a sustainable use of chemicals from an environmental safety perspective. The definition of what the planetary boundaries for chemical pollution are and how the boundaries should be identified is an on-going scientific challenge for ecotoxicology and ecology. In the present paper, we present a case study at macro scale for European Union, in which the chemical footprint according to step (1) is calculated for the year 2005. A proposal for extending this approach towards step (2) is presented and discussed, complemented by a discussion on the challenges and the utility of appropriate methodologies for assessing chemical footprint in order to stimulate further research and discussion on the topic.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipJRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmenten_GB
dc.format.mediumPrinteden_GB
dc.languageENGen_GB
dc.publisherSOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRYen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJRC78677en_GB
dc.titleChemical Footprint: A Methodological Framework for bridging life cycle assessment and planetary boundaries for chemical pollutionen_GB
dc.typeArticles in periodicals and booksen_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ieam.1471en_GB
JRC Directorate:Sustainable Resources

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.