IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v114y2015icp117-127.html

Applications of aggregation theory to sustainability assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Pollesch, N.
  • Dale, V.H.

Abstract

In order to aid operations that promote sustainability goals, researchers and stakeholders use sustainability assessments. Although assessments take various forms, many utilize diverse sets of indicators numbering anywhere from two to over 2000. Indices, composite indicators, or aggregate values are used to simplify high dimensional and complex data sets and to clarify assessment results. Although the choice of aggregation function is a key component in the development of the assessment, there are few literature examples to guide appropriate aggregation function selection. This paper applies the mathematical study of aggregation functions to sustainability assessment in order to aid in providing criteria for aggregation function selection. Relevant mathematical properties of aggregation functions are presented and interpreted. Cases of these properties and their relation to previous sustainability assessment research are provided. Examples show that mathematical aggregation properties can be used to address the topics of compensatory behavior and weak versus strong sustainability, aggregation of data under varying units of measurements, multiple site multiple indicator aggregation, and the determination of error bounds in aggregate output for normalized and non-normalized indicator measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Pollesch, N. & Dale, V.H., 2015. "Applications of aggregation theory to sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 117-127.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:114:y:2015:i:c:p:117-127
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915000968
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fuad Aleskerov & Boris Goldengorin & Panos M. Pardalos (ed.), 2014. "Clusters, Orders, and Trees: Methods and Applications," Springer Optimization and Its Applications, Springer, edition 127, number 978-1-4939-0742-7, August.
    2. Marin, Giovanni & Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna, 2012. "Linking NAMEA and Input output for ‘consumption vs. production perspective’ analyses," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 71-84.
    3. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    4. Diaz-Balteiro, Luis & Romero, Carlos, 2004. "In search of a natural systems sustainability index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 401-405, July.
    5. Bohringer, Christoph & Jochem, Patrick E.P., 2007. "Measuring the immeasurable -- A survey of sustainability indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-8, June.
    6. Kopmann, Angela & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2013. "A human well-being approach for assessing the value of natural land areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 20-33.
    7. Aczel, Janos & Roberts, Fred S., 1989. "On the possible merging functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 205-243, June.
    8. Lenzen, Manfred, 2007. "Aggregation (in-)variance of shared responsibility: A case study of Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 19-24, October.
    9. Lele, Sharachchandra & Srinivasan, Veena, 2013. "Disaggregated economic impact analysis incorporating ecological and social trade-offs and techno-institutional context: A case from the Western Ghats of India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 98-112.
    10. Fred S. Roberts, 2014. "Meaningful and Meaningless Statements in Landscape Ecology and Environmental Sustainability," Springer Optimization and Its Applications, in: Fuad Aleskerov & Boris Goldengorin & Panos M. Pardalos (ed.), Clusters, Orders, and Trees: Methods and Applications, edition 127, pages 297-312, Springer.
    11. Michel Grabisch & Jean-Luc Marichal & Radko Mesiar & Endre Pap, 2009. "Aggregation functions," Post-Print halshs-00445120, HAL.
    12. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Sanchez-Fernandez, Gabriela, 2010. "Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1062-1075, March.
    13. Winands, Sarah & Holm-Müller, Karin & Weikard, Hans-Peter, 2013. "The biodiversity conservation game with heterogeneous countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 14-23.
    14. Tait, Peter & Baskaran, Ramesh & Cullen, Ross & Bicknell, Kathryn, 2012. "Nonmarket valuation of water quality: Addressing spatially heterogeneous preferences using GIS and a random parameter logit model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 15-21.
    15. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of spatial aggregation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 10-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pollesch, N.L. & Dale, V.H., 2016. "Normalization in sustainability assessment: Methods and implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 195-208.
    2. Ernest Reig‐Martínez & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, 2011. "Ranking farms with a composite indicator of sustainability," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(5), pages 561-575, September.
    3. Rubén Raedo, 2021. "Urban Sustainability Deficits: The Urban Non-Sustainability Index (UNSI) as a Tool for Urban Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Sanchez-Fernandez, Gabriela, 2010. "Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1062-1075, March.
    5. Carrillo, Marianela & Jorge, Jesús M., 2017. "Multidimensional Analysis of Regional Tourism Sustainability in Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 89-98.
    6. Xavier, António & Fragoso, Rui & Freitas, Maria de Belém Costa, 2025. "Building sustainability composite indicators using a multi-criteria approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 326(2), pages 326-342.
    7. Barnes, Andrew Peter, 2012. "A method for constructing an index of sustainable intensification within the developed country context," Working Papers 131466, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    8. Zhang, L.P. & Zhou, P., 2018. "A non-compensatory composite indicator approach to assessing low-carbon performance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 352-361.
    9. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    10. Piñero, Pablo & Heikkinen, Mari & Mäenpää, Ilmo & Pongrácz, Eva, 2015. "Sector aggregation bias in environmentally extended input output modeling of raw material flows in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 217-229.
    11. Rickels, Wilfried & Weigand, Christian & Grasse, Patricia & Schmidt, Jörn Oliver & Voss, Rüdiger, 2018. "Does the European Union achieve comprehensive blue growth? Progress of EU coastal states in the Baltic and North Sea, and the Atlantic Ocean against sustainable development Goal 14," Kiel Working Papers 2112, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    12. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Comparing aggregating methods for constructing the composite environmental index: An objective measure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 305-311, September.
    13. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    14. Athanassoglou, Stergios, "undated". "Revisiting Worst-case DEA for Composite Indicators," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 198712, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Zhou, P. & Delmas, M.A. & Kohli, A., 2017. "Constructing meaningful environmental indices: A nonparametric frontier approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 21-34.
    16. Samir Mili & Javier Martínez-Vega, 2019. "Accounting for Regional Heterogeneity of Agricultural Sustainability in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    17. Hatefi, S.M. & Torabi, S.A., 2010. "A common weight MCDA-DEA approach to construct composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 114-120, November.
    18. Milica Maricic & Marija Jankovic & Veljko Jeremic, 2014. "Towards a Framework for Evaluating Sustainable Society Index," Romanian Statistical Review, Romanian Statistical Review, vol. 62(3), pages 49-62, September.
    19. Khosravi, Faramarz & Izbirak, Gokhan & Shavarani, Seyed Mahdi, 2021. "Application of bootstrap re-sampling method in statistical measurement of sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    20. Riccardo Natoli & Simon Feeny & Junde Li & Segu Zuhair, 2024. "Aggregating the Human Development Index: A Non-compensatory Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 172(2), pages 499-515, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:114:y:2015:i:c:p:117-127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.