The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard as a Framework for Eco-efficiency Analysis

To provide valuable support for successful decision-making, managers need a balanced set of financial and nonfinancial measures that represent different requirements, strategic goals, strategies, resources, and capabilities and the causal relationships between these domains. The balanced scorecard is such a measurement system. As an open system the balanced scorecard facilitates the consideration of sustainability issues. But enhanced balanced scorecards require a new type of data. This is where eco-efficiency analysis comes into play.
This article discusses the relationship between so-called sustainability balanced scorecards and eco-efficiency analysis. Eco-efficiency analysis not only provides a data source for sustainability balanced scorecards; in the perspective of environmental information systems it also serves as a link between the balanced scorecard and corporate environmental accounting systems so that eco-efficiency as a component of an environmental information system becomes an adapter with two interfaces, which are characterized in this article. The main focus is on the principle of cause and effect, its different forms, and the implications for the design of appropriate information system components.     

A Framework for Quantified Eco-efficiency Analysis

Eco-efficiency is an instrument for sustainability analysis, indicating an empirical relation in economic activities between environmental cost or value and environmental impact. This empirical relation can be matched against normative considerations as to how much environmental quality or improvement society would like to offer in exchange for economic welfare, or what the trade-off between the economy and the environment should be if society is to realize a certain level of environmental quality. Its relevance lies in the fact that relations between economy and environment are not self-evident, not at a micro level and not at the macro level resulting from micro-level decisions for society as a whole. Clarifying the why and what of eco-efficiency is a first step toward decision support on these two aspects of sustainability. With the main analytic framework established, filling in the actual economic and environmental relations requires further choices in modeling. Also, the integration of different environmental effects into a single score requires a clear definition of approach, because several partly overlapping methods exist. Some scaling problems accompany the specification of numerator and denominator, which need a solution and some standardization before eco-efficiency analysis can become more widely used. With a method established, the final decision is how to embed it in practical decision making. In getting the details of eco-efficiency better specified, its strengths, but also its weaknesses and limitations, need to be indicated more clearly.     

基于物质流分析和数据包络分析的区域生态效率评价——以江苏省为例

区域生态效率(eco-efficiency)评价是考量区域可持发展的重要内容.基于物质流分析(material flow analysis, MFA)构建区域生态效率评价指标体系,并将污染物排放作为一种非期望输入引入到数据包络分析(data envelopment analysis, DEA)模型中,以江苏省(1990～2005年)为例进行生态效率分析评价.结果表明,江苏省的区域生态效率在1990～2005年期间呈现逐步上升的趋势.但是,同期的总物质投入(total material input, TMI)、物质需求总量(total material requirement, TMR)和污染物排放量也呈上升趋势.因此,江苏省社会经济发展和环境影响总体上呈现"弱脱钩(weak de-link)".     

How Can the Eco‐efficiency of a Region be Measured and Monitored?

The concept of eco-efficiency is commonly referred to as a business link to sustainable development. In this article, ecoefficiency is examined at a regional level as an approach to promoting the competitiveness of economic activities in the Finnish Kymenlaakso region and mitigating their harmful impacts on the environment. The aim is to develop appropriate indicators for monitoring changes in the eco-efficiency of the region. A starting point is to produce indicators for the environmental and economic dimensions of regional development and use them for measuring regional eco-efficiency. The environmental impact indicators are based on a life-cycle assessment method, producing different types of environmental impact indicators: pressure indicators (e.g., emissions of CO₂), impact category indicators (e.g., CO₂ equivalents in the case of climate change), and a total impact indicator (aggregating different impact category indicator results into a single value). Environmental impact indicators based on direct material input, total material input, and total material requirement of the Kymenlaakso region are also assessed. The economic indicators used are the gross domestic product, the value added, and the output of the main economic sectors of Kymenlaakso. In the eco-efficiency assessment, the economic and environmental impact indicators are monitored in the same graph. In a few cases eco-efficiency ratios can also be calculated (the economic indicators are divided by the environmental indicators). Output (= value added + intermediate consumption) is used as an economic indicator related to the environmental impact indicators, which also cover the upstream processes of the region's activities. In the article, we also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of using the different environmental impact indicators.     

企业生态创新的研究脉络、内涵澄清与测量

生态创新因具有"双重正外部性"而得到实践界和理论界的双重青睐,与此形成鲜明对照的是,现有研究对生态创新概念的适用层次、理论定位、内涵与测量等基本理论问题的理解模糊而缺乏一致性。回顾了企业社会责任、环境管理和创新管理三大领域的相关研究成果,辨析了企业生态创新的内涵特征与外延,进一步梳理了企业生态创新的维度划分与测量,对企业生态创新的未来研究给出了展望。     

基于混合生命周期评价的生活垃圾处理系统生态效率分析

基于混合生命周期评价(Hybrid life cycle assessment,HLCA)提出一种改进生态效率模型,系统评价卫生填埋、卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用、焚烧发电、堆肥+卫生填埋和堆肥+焚烧发电5种我国典型生活垃圾处理情景的生态效率,并探究可持续性包含的环境、经济和社会多维权衡关系。结果表明,具有最大生态效率的生活垃圾处理情景因可持续性维度选取不同而异,如考虑人体健康损害影响,焚烧发电情景具有最大经济生态效率,而卫生填埋⁃填埋气利用情景具有最大社会生态效率。生活垃圾处理系统的可持续性评价维度之间具有显著的权衡关系,忽略某些影响类型可能带来问题转移。5种生活垃圾处理情景的环境影响各异,非焚烧情景气候变化影响和焚烧情景人体毒性影响突出。机器设备和燃料使用对资源消耗影响贡献最大,而生活垃圾处理过程对经济效益和其他环境影响贡献最大。本文提出的改进生态效率模型可以定量评价生活垃圾管理系统生态效率及权衡关系,为有效制定生活垃圾管理政策提供全面的信息支持。     

Eco-efficiency and Its xsTerminology

Eco-efficiency has been defined as a general goal of creating value while decreasing environmental impact. Leaving out the normative part of this concept, the empirical part refers to a ratio between environmental impact and economic cost or value. Two basic choices must be made in defining practical eco-efficiency: which variable is in the denominator and which is in the numerator; and whether to specify environmental impact or improvement and value created or cost. Distinguishing between two situations, the general one of value creation and the specific one of environmental improvement efforts, and leaving the numerator-denominator choice to the user, as diverging practices have developed, four basic types of ecoefficiency result: environmental intensity and environmental productivity in the realm of value creation; and environmental improvement cost and environmental cost-effectiveness in the realm of environmental improvement measures.     

The economic and environmental efficiency assessment in EU cross-country: Evidence from DEA and quantile regression approach

This article aims to estimate the efficiency of 26 different European Countries over 2001 and 2012 comparing their performance. Data Envelopment Analysis technique is used in a first step to evaluate the performance of each European country. The output-oriented model was used with two specifications (Variable and Constant Returns to Scale) including as inputs labour and capital productivity, the weight of fossil energy and the share of renewable energy in GDP (gross domestic product), being the output GDP per GHG (greenhouse gases) emissions. In a second step, the quantile regression technique was used, to explain different efficiency scores through variables as Environmental Taxes Revenues, Resources Productivity and Domestic Material Consumption. Results indicate that share of renewables and non-renewable energy sources are important to explain differences in emissions. They suggest a significant change in the trend of economic and environmental efficiency in European countries and put forward the high disparities existing among them. Policy recommendations point for the need of higher steps if the goal is to equal countries efficiency scores. Moreover, environmental tax revenue effects are negatively stronger in less efficient countries, whereas also exerting negative influence over those more eco-efficient. Transport taxes affect negatively more eco-efficient countries and positively less eco-efficient countries. Energy taxes only seem to positively influence the lower eco-efficient countries. There is also evidence for a negative premium of efficiency considering domestic materials consumption. Finally, resources productivity shows a positive and significant influence independently of the country technical eco-efficiency level.     

生态产业共生网络形成机理及其系统解析框架

生态产业共生网络是由各种类型的企业通过经济、社会和环境方面的密切合作而形成的企业及企业间关系的复杂系统,其基本出发点是企业间必须具备环境合作,根本目的是提高资源生产力和生态效率。从形成生态产业共生网络的微观要素——企业环境责任入手,从环境伦理的角度阐释生态产业共生网络中企业的五类环境责任,并探讨其形成和运作机制——企业环境责任的市场化运作模式及约束机制。在此基础上,提出了基于技术可行性分析、经济可行性分析和社会环境可行性分析的生态产业共生网络三级解析框架,并对其解析方法做了探讨。     

基于Super-SBM模型的中国省域城市工业用地生态效率时空演变及影响因素研究

研究城市工业用地生态效率能够准确认识当前城市工业用地可持续发展水平,对节约和集约用地具有重要意义。以省域为单位,运用Super-SBM模型测算2000—2016年中国30个省(市、区)城市工业用地生态效率,分析其时空演变特征,并运用面板数据模型对其影响因素进行实证分析。结果表明:(1) 2000—2016年中国城市工业用地生态效率总体呈下降趋势,总体下降5.81%,年均下降0.35%,其过程呈现"先下降后上升"两阶段变化特征;(2)工业用地生态效率均值相对无效率城市远多于相对有效率城市,生态效率均值最高的是海南,其次为北京和上海,排在最后三位的是四川、江西、山西;(3)生态效率有效的省(市、区)个数先大幅度减少后小幅度增多,有效区域由东部地区、西北、东北地区向东南地区、东北经济发达沿海地区、西北地区、华北地区转移;(4) 2000—2016年城市工业用地生态效率均值按从大到小排序依次为华南地区、华北地区、华东地区、西北地区、东北地区、西南地区和华中地区,区域间城市工业用地生态效率存在较为显著的差异,且随着城市工业的发展区域差异呈增大趋势;(5)环境管制力度、工业行业集聚程度、工业对外开...     

国外旅游生态效率优化与管理

旅游生态效率概念采用定量化方法对旅游业经济、环境影响进行分析,成为旅游业可持续发展评价的重要工具。基于可持续理论的旅游生态效率优化管理方案不断涌现,相关利益主体应用较多的有环境管理系统、旅游生态标签、清洁生产理念、旅游生态效率中心、21世纪地方议程等。在旅游企业日常运营中积极推动生态效率优化管理,是贯彻绿色发展理念,提高目的地旅游经济、环境绩效的一种新思路。从可持续背景下旅游生态效率优化模型入手,系统化分析了国外旅游生态效率优化管理方案的内容与特征。其中,环境管理系统在目的地层面为旅游生态效率优化设计了一套评估管理流程,旅游生态标签为目的地生态效率水平提供了可视化标志符号,21世纪地方议程为旅游可持续发展提供一致性整合方案,清洁生产理念是一种基于生态效率优化的长期战略,旅游生态效率中心作为非营利性机构有利于中小企业获得较好的环境绩效表现。国外旅游生态效率优化管理方案特征明显、设计合理、管理科学,对我国目的地旅游生态效率优化提升具有重要的借鉴作用。     

Supply Curves for Eco-efficient Environmental Improvements Using Different Weighting Methods

Eco-efficiency implies environmental improvement at the lowest possible cost. When several environmental measures are possible, these can be ranked according to their cost per unit of environmental improvement, after which an eco-efficient set of measures can be selected that yields a given level of environmental improvement at least cost. This procedure can be visualized as a supply curve for environmental improvement. Such a curve plots cumulative cost or cost per unit of environmental improvement against cumulative environmental improvement, with measures ordered according to increasing cost per unit of environmental improvement. This paper presents supply curves for environmental improvement on the basis of a set of possible environmental measures for a company in the Dutch oil and gas producing industry.
To measure aggregated potential environmental improvement for a given measure, different environmental impacts are lumped together using weighting factors. We compare five methods for weighting environmental impacts, covering a wide range of current practices.
The supply curves that were determined for each of the five weighting methods show relatively small differences, except for one (the distance-to-target method). The ranking of measures differs significantly, though, and as a result, so do the measures that are selected if total costs are restricted to a certain budget. Also, the consequent reduction in emissions of specific substances, in particular nitrogen oxides (NO x ), depends on the weighting method selected.     

Eco-efficient approaches to land management: a case for increased integration of crop and animal production systems

Eco-efficiency is concerned with the efficient and sustainable use of resources in farm production and land management. It can be increased either by altering the management of individual crop and livestock enterprises or by altering the land-use system. This paper concentrates on the effects of crop sequence and rotation on soil fertility and nutrient use efficiency. The potential importance of mixed farming involving both crops and livestock is stressed, particularly when the systems incorporate biological nitrogen fixation and manure recycling. There is, however, little evidence that the trend in developed countries to farm-level specialization is being reduced. In some circumstances legislation to restrict diffuse pollution may provide incentives for more diverse eco-efficient farming and in other circumstances price premia for produce from eco-efficient systems, such as organic farming, and subsidies for the provision of environmental services may provide economic incentives for the adoption of such systems. However, change is likely to be most rapid where the present systems lead to obvious reductions in the productive potential of the land, such as in areas experiencing salinization. In other situations, there is promise that eco-efficiency could be increased on an area-wide basis by the establishment of linkages between farms of contrasting type, particularly between specialist crop and livestock farms, with contracts for the transfer of manures and, to a lesser extent, feeds.     

国内外生态效率核算方法及其应用研究述评

生态效率由于具有突出的定量化分析优势,在可持续发展的评价与量化分析中起着重要作用,且在全世界范围内得到广泛推广和应用。参阅近十年国内外相关文献的基础上,系统总结了生态效率的核算方法及其在不同尺度的应用,侧重于国内外对比分析,研究表明:(1)国外已从简单评价转向生态效率驱动机制的探究。(2)对于生态效率测算,国外开始借助会计、金融以及管理学中的理论和模型对现有的经济/环境比值法以及模型法进行改良和修正;我国则侧重于生态效率评价指标体系构建以及生产率模型的应用。(3)在应用层次上,国外侧重于企业及其产品系统的生态效率分析,并且开始将生态效率同产品的生态设计、关键问题辨识、系统开发等融合起来,而区域等大尺度的研究则处于尝试阶段;我国在企业尺度的研究甚少,主要集中在行业、生态园区、城市及区域等大尺度的生态效率评价。(4)国外开始将生态效率同全球生态问题(全球变暖、生物多样性、食物安全)等结合起来;而我国生态效率研究侧重于污染物分析。(5)由于社会维度定量分析难度较大,目前绝大部分研究都很少涉及。最后,文章提出:我国应加大生态效率的宣传与推广,推动生态效率在微观(企业)以及宏观(全球生态问题)上的研究和应用;借助经济、管理、会计等学科的理论和方法完善生态效率核算方法体系;综合利用全排列多边形图示法,反映社会-经济-自然复合生态系统的各个方面。     

Eco-efficiency

Goal, Scope and Background The eco-efficiency analysis and portfolio is a powerful decision support tool for various strategic and marketing issues. Since its original academic development, the approach has been refined during the last decade and applied to a multitude of projects. BASF, as possibly the most prominent company using and developing this tool, has applied the eco-efficiency approach to more than 300 projects in the last 7 years. One of the greatest difficulties is to cover both dimensions of eco-efficiency (costs or value added and environmental impact) in a comparable manner. This is particularly a challenge for the eco-efficiency analyses of products. Methods In this publication, an important approach and field of application dealing with product decisions based on the combination of Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is described in detail. Special emphasis is put on the quantitative assessment of the relation of costs and environmental impacts. In conventional LCA an assessment of environmental impact categories is often made by normalization with inhabitant equivalents. This is necessary to be able to compare the different environmental impact categories, because of each different unit. For the proposed eco-efficiency analysis, the costs of products or processes are also normalized with adapted gross domestic product figures. Results and Discussion The ratio between normalized environmental impact categories and normalized costs (R_E,C) is used for the graphical presentation of the results in an eco-efficiency portfolio. For the interpretation of the results of an eco-efficiency analysis, it is important to distinguish ratios R_E,C which are higher than one from ratios lower than one. In the first case, the environmental impact is higher than the cost impact, while the inverse is true in the second case. This is very important for defining which kind of improvement is needed and defining strategic management decisions. The paper shows a statistical evaluation of the R_E,C factor based on the results of different eco-efficiency analyses made by BASF. For industries based on large material flows (e.g. chemicals, steel, metals, agriculture), the R_E,C factor is typically higher than one. Conclusions and Recommendations This contribution shows that LCC and LCA may be combined in a way that they mirror the concept of eco-efficiency. LCAs that do not consider LCC may be of very limited use for company management. For that very reason, corporations should install a data management system that ensures equal information on both sides of the eco-efficiency coin.     

旅游地生态效率测度的SBM-DEA模型及实证分析

旅游地是典型的人地关系相互作用的特殊区域,旅游地的生态效率研究是其制定与实施包容性、持续性发展政策与措施的基础。采用基于时间序列、包含非期望产出的SBM-DEA模型方法,构建旅游地生态效率测度模型及评价指标体系,以黄山风景区为例,利用1981—2014年的投入产出数据,测度旅游地复合系统的生态效率,分析其演化特征和阶段,并利用Tobit回归模型对其影响因素进行实证检验。结果表明:(1)34年来,黄山风景区旅游生态效率(综合效率)不断提升,且具较大发展潜力,在分解效率中,技术效率较高,规模效率次之,规模效率是决定综合效率的关键因素;(2)旅游生态效率的演化经历了初期低效、快速成长、成熟高效、下行风险四个阶段,不同阶段效率的特征不同,影响因素也存在差异;(3)旅游生态效率完成了由规模报酬递增向递减的过渡,资源要素的投入冗余已成为现阶段阻碍生态效率的进一步提高的关键因素;(4)旅游发展水平、产业结构和技术水平对生态效率产生显著的正向影响,投资水平产生显著的负向影响,以废弃物末端治理为表征的环保规制对生态效率的提升作用并不显著。文章最后提出,在山岳型风景区发展初期,应尽可能扩大资源要素投入规模,进入成熟阶段后,则转向逐渐控制投入规模,改善技术能力和资源配置能力,摒弃过度依靠资源消耗和环境污染的粗放式发展模式,走精细化、可持续的发展道路。     

生命周期管理研究述评

生命周期管理起源于生命周期思想,它是生命周期思想在实践中的具体应用,是面向可持续生产和消费,对产品、工艺和服务的全生命周期环境影响进行的综合管理,是解决复合生态系统中结构无序、效率不高和代谢冗余的有效途径,是基于生命周期评价原则与框架的一种环境管理手段或环境管理体系。全面回顾了生命周期管理的起源与内涵,阐述了生命周期管理与生命周期评价的区别与联系,梳理了生命周期管理与环境管理体系的关系。对生命周期管理在产品、企业、行业及城市等层次上的具体应用进行了总结与述评,并对其今后需深入研究的方向进行了展望。     

The Eco-efficiency of Lead in China's Lead-Acid Battery System

Improving eco-efficiency can contribute to sustainable development. This article defines the societal services and environmental impacts of the lead-acid battery (LAB) system and offers definitions of eco-efficiency, resource efficiency, and environmental efficiency in the context of LAB systems. Based on the actual lead-flow in the LAB system, we develop a model that considers changes in production, the time interval between production and disposal, direct linkages between the final product and the societal service it provides, and the fiscal year as the statistical period. From this model, equations for eco-efficiency are derived and changes in eco-efficiency are predicted.
The results show, not surprisingly, that increased lead recycling and reduced lead emissions will both improve ecoefficiency. The resource and environmental efficiencies for LAB in China are 119 and 131 kilowatt-hour-years per metric tonne (kWh. yr/t), respectively, versus a value for both of 15, 800 kWh. yr/t in Sweden. The difference results from a lower lead recycling rate (only 0.312 tonne/tonne, which means that nearly 70% of the old lead scrap is not recycled based on official statistics) and higher lead emissions (0.324 tonne/tonne, which means that nearly 33% of the lead inputs used in the LAB system were lost into the environment) in China. Further analysis shows that these problems result from inefficient management of lead scrap, poor quality lead ore, and an abundance of small-scale lead-related plants. Ways to improve eco-efficiency are proposed.     

绿色发展背景下区域旅游生态效率影响因素——以西部地区为例

旅游生态效率是评估区域绿色全要素生产率和可持续发展水平的绩效依据。基于西部各省（市、自治区）2000-2017年的面板数据,用"自下而上"法测算西部地区旅游业碳排放量并运用比值法计算旅游生态效率,分析旅游生态效率的时空演变特征及影响因素。首先构建由旅游生态效率、规模效应、结构效应、技术效应共同组成的PVAR模型,探究3种效应对旅游生态效率的影响。然后在考虑各地区能源消费结构差异的基础上构建面板门槛模型,对旅游业发展水平与旅游生态效率的非线性关系进行实证检验。研究结果表明：（1）西部地区旅游生态效率自2000年西部大开发战略实施以来呈逐步提高的趋势,绿色发展水平持续提高。（2）旅游生态效率受自身滞后因素以及技术效应因素的影响较大,游客规模的扩大、产业结构优化以及技术水平的提高均有利于旅游生态效率的提高。（3）旅游业发展水平对旅游生态效率的影响存在门槛效应,经济发展水平、规模效应、结构效应对旅游生态效率有显著的正向作用,城镇化对旅游生态效率有显著的负向作用。最后根据实证分析的结果,提出西部地区实现旅游业绿色、低碳发展的相关对策。     

Measuring Eco-efficiency of Production with Data Envelopment Analysis

Aggregation of environmental pressures into a single environmental damage index is a major challenge of eco-efficiency measurement. This article examines how the data envelopment analysis (DEA) method can be adapted for this purpose. DEA accounts for substitution possibilities between different natural resources and emissions and does not require subjective judgment about the weights. Although DEA does not require subjective or normative judgment, soft weight restrictions can be incorporated into the framework. The proposed approach is illustrated by an application to assessing ecoefficiency of road transportation in the three largest towns of eastern Finland.