IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i12p15833-16587d60691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evaluation of Holistic Sustainability Assessment Framework for Palm Oil Production in Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • Chye Ing Lim

    (Faculty of Engineering and Science, Curtin University, Miri 98009, Sarawak, Malaysia
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Wahidul Biswas

    (Sustainable Engineering Group, Curtin University, Perth WA 6845, Australia
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Palm oil based biodiesel offers an alternative energy source that can reduce current dependence on conventional fossil fuels and may reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions depending on the type of feedstock and processes used. In the Malaysian context, the palm oil industry not only provides high-yield, renewable feedstock to the world, it brings socio-economic development to the Malaysian rural community and contributes to the national income. However, the sustainability of palm oil remains controversial, due to deforestation, pollution and social conflicts associated with its production. Sustainability assessment is vital for the palm oil industry to identify weaknesses, improve its sustainability performance and improve consumer confidence. This paper proposes a holistic sustainability assessment framework for palm oil production with the aim to address the weaknesses of existing palm oil sustainability assessment methods. It identifies environmental, social and economic Headline Performance Indicators, Key Performance Indicators and their Performance Measures in crude palm oil production in a structured framework. Each quantitative/semi-quantitative performance measure is translated into Likert Scale of 1–5, where 3 is the threshold value, 5 is the ideal condition, and 1 is the worst case scenario. Calculation methods were established for the framework to provide quantitative assessment results. The framework was tested using a hypothetical example with data from existing studies. The results suggest that crude palm oil production in Malaysia is below the sustainability threshold. Evaluations of this sustainability assessment framework also demonstrate that it is a comprehensive assessment method for assessing sustainability of feedstock for biofuel production.

Suggested Citation

  • Chye Ing Lim & Wahidul Biswas, 2015. "An Evaluation of Holistic Sustainability Assessment Framework for Palm Oil Production in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-27, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:12:p:15833-16587:d:60691
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/12/15833/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/12/15833/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dimitri Devuyst, 1999. "Sustainability Assessment: The Application Of A Methodological Framework," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(04), pages 459-487.
    2. Ness, Barry & Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin & Anderberg, Stefan & Olsson, Lennart, 2007. "Categorising tools for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 498-508, January.
    3. Gallego Carrera, Diana & Mack, Alexander, 2010. "Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 1030-1039, February.
    4. Buytaert, V. & Muys, B. & Devriendt, N. & Pelkmans, L. & Kretzschmar, J.G. & Samson, R., 2011. "Towards integrated sustainability assessment for energetic use of biomass: A state of the art evaluation of assessment tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3918-3933.
    5. Yee, Kian Fei & Tan, Kok Tat & Abdullah, Ahmad Zuhairi & Lee, Keat Teong, 2009. "Life cycle assessment of palm biodiesel: Revealing facts and benefits for sustainability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(Supplemen), pages 189-196, November.
    6. Wahidul K. Biswas & David Cooling, 2013. "Sustainability Assessment of Red Sand as a Substitute for Virgin Sand and Crushed Limestone," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(5), pages 756-762, October.
    7. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    8. Kirk Stinchcombe & Robert B. Gibson, 2001. "Strategic Environmental Assessment As A Means Of Pursuing Sustainability: Ten Advantages And Ten Challenges," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(03), pages 343-372.
    9. Atakelty Hailu & Robert Chambers, 2012. "A Luenberger soil-quality indicator," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 145-154, October.
    10. Blanchet, Karl & Girois, Susan, 2013. "Selection of sustainability indicators for health services in challenging environments: Balancing scientific approach with political engagement," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 28-32.
    11. Gerbens-Leenes, P.W. & Hoekstra, A.Y. & van der Meer, Th., 2009. "The water footprint of energy from biomass: A quantitative assessment and consequences of an increasing share of bio-energy in energy supply," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1052-1060, February.
    12. Ekins, Paul & Simon, Sandrine & Deutsch, Lisa & Folke, Carl & De Groot, Rudolf, 2003. "A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 165-185, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Najmul Hoque & Wahidul Biswas & Ilyas Mazhar & Ian Howard, 2020. "Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Alternative Energy Sources for the Western Australian Transport Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-33, July.
    2. Ahmed Zainul Abideen & Veera Pandiyan Kaliani Sundram & Shahryar Sorooshian, 2023. "Scope for Sustainable Development of Small Holder Farmers in the Palm Oil Supply Chain—A Systematic Literature Review and Thematic Scientific Mapping," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Chye Ing Lim & Wahidul K. Biswas, 2019. "Sustainability Implications of the Incorporation of a Biogas Trapping System into a Conventional Crude Palm Oil Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Shu Yu & Yongtong Mu, 2022. "Sustainable Agricultural Development Assessment: A Comprehensive Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Brinkman, Marnix L.J. & Wicke, Birka & Faaij, André P.C. & van der Hilst, Floor, 2019. "Projecting socio-economic impacts of bioenergy: Current status and limitations of ex-ante quantification methods," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).

    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. Buytaert, V. & Muys, B. & Devriendt, N. & Pelkmans, L. & Kretzschmar, J.G. & Samson, R., 2011. "Towards integrated sustainability assessment for energetic use of biomass: A state of the art evaluation of assessment tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3918-3933.
    2. Luthra, Sunil & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Kharb, Ravinder K., 2015. "Sustainable assessment in energy planning and management in Indian perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 58-73.
    3. Lähtinen, Katja & Myllyviita, Tanja & Leskinen, Pekka & Pitkänen, Sari K., 2014. "A systematic literature review on indicators to assess local sustainability of forest energy production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1202-1216.
    4. Diana Tuomasjukka & Staffan Berg & Marcus Lindner, 2013. "Managing Sustainability of Fennoscandian Forests and Their Use by Law and/or Agreement: For Whom and Which Purpose?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    5. Georgiadou, Maria Christina & Hacking, Theophilus & Guthrie, Peter, 2012. "A conceptual framework for future-proofing the energy performance of buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 145-155.
    6. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    7. Schilling, Markus & Chiang, Lichun, 2011. "The effect of natural resources on a sustainable development policy: The approach of non-sustainable externalities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 990-998, February.
    8. Margherita Casini & Francesca Gagliardi & Gianni Betti, 2018. "Sustainable Development Goals indicators: a methodological proposal for a fuzzy Super Index in the Mediterranean area," Department of Economics University of Siena 782, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    9. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Quaas, Martin F., 2009. "Ecological-economic viability as a criterion of strong sustainability under uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 2008-2020, May.
    10. Peura, Pekka, 2013. "From Malthus to sustainable energy—Theoretical orientations to reforming the energy sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 309-327.
    11. Holmatov, B. & Hoekstra, A.Y. & Krol, M.S., 2019. "Land, water and carbon footprints of circular bioenergy production systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 224-235.
    12. Jean-François Ruault & Alice Dupré La Tour & André Evette & Sandrine Allain & Jean-Marc Callois, 2022. "A biodiversity-employment framework to protect biodiversity," Post-Print hal-03365820, HAL.
    13. Carlo Carraro & Lorenza Campagnolo & Fabio Eboli & Elisa Lanzi & Ramiro Parrado & Elisa Portale, 2012. "Quantifying Sustainability: A New Approach and World Ranking," Working Papers 2012.94, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    14. Mikelis Grivins & Talis Tisenkopfs & Zaklina Stojanovic & Bojan Ristic, 2016. "A Comparative Analysis of the Social Performance of Global and Local Berry Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Gray, Rob, 2010. "Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability...and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 47-62, January.
    16. Thomassen, M.A. & Dolman, M.A. & van Calker, K.J. & de Boer, I.J.M., 2009. "Relating life cycle assessment indicators to gross value added for Dutch dairy farms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2278-2284, June.
    17. Armando Cartenì & Ilaria Henke & Clorinda Molitierno & Luigi Di Francesco, 2020. "Strong Sustainability in Public Transport Policies: An e-Mobility Bus Fleet Application in Sorrento Peninsula (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Child, Michael & Koskinen, Otto & Linnanen, Lassi & Breyer, Christian, 2018. "Sustainability guardrails for energy scenarios of the global energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 321-334.
    19. Mähönen Jukka, 2020. "Integrated Reporting and Sustainable Corporate Governance from European Perspective," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-40, July.
    20. Lhermie, Guillaume & Wernli, Didier & Jørgensen, Peter Søgaard & Kenkel, Donald & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia & Tauer, Loren William & Gröhn, Yrjo Tapio, 2019. "Tradeoffs between resistance to antimicrobials in public health and their use in agriculture: Moving towards sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:12:p:15833-16587:d:60691. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.