Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMANCINI LUCIAen_GB
dc.contributor.authorBENINI LORENZOen_GB
dc.contributor.authorSALA SERENELLAen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2015-10-22T00:01:37Z-
dc.date.available2015-10-21en_GB
dc.date.available2015-10-22T00:01:37Z-
dc.date.created2015-10-21en_GB
dc.date.issued2015en_GB
dc.date.submitted2014-12-23en_GB
dc.identifier.citationENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY vol. 54 p. 367–376en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1462-9011en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901115300514en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC94156-
dc.description.abstractAThe availability and accessibility of natural resources are fundamental for human well-being and the functioning of global economies. International policies have been developed with the aim to ensure resource efficiency and to respond to environmental and socio-economic concerns towards the sustainable management of natural resources. In fact, building effective resource policies requires solid methodologies and indicators for monitoring resource extraction and consumption by the economies as well as all its related environmental impacts. The present study focuses on the European context, assessing current methodologies for resources analysis towards identifying their strengths and weaknesses in supporting policies. The study analyses trends in material resource extraction within Europe and imports over the past 10 years. Three approaches are compared: (i) “mass”-based accounting (i.e. material flow analysis); (ii) “impact assessment”-based, founded on the life cycle assessment methodology, and (iii) “resource criticality”-based, building on assessment of critical raw materials for EU economy. The paper shows through some examples that this methodological choice has relevant repercussions in terms of resource prioritization. Hence, the choice of the accounting methodology and the setting of targets should be guided by the policy objective(s) (i.e. dematerialization, environmental impact reduction and security of resource supply), possibly complementing the different insights coming from the three approaches.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipJRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmenten_GB
dc.format.mediumPrinteden_GB
dc.languageENGen_GB
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCI LTDen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJRC94156en_GB
dc.titleResource footprint of Europe: Complementarity of material flow analysis and life cycle assessment for policy supporten_GB
dc.typeArticles in periodicals and booksen_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.025en_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.