Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorWenger, Julia
dc.contributor.authorPichler, Stefan
dc.contributor.authorNäyhä, Annukka
dc.contributor.authorStern, Tobias
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-28T10:43:13Z
dc.date.available2022-03-28T10:43:13Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationWenger, J., Pichler, S., Näyhä, A., & Stern, T. (2022). Practitioners’ Perceptions of Co-Product Allocation Methods in Biorefinery Development : A Case Study of the Austrian Pulp and Paper Industry. <i>Sustainability</i>, <i>14</i>(5), Article 2619. <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052619" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052619</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_117410681
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/80410
dc.description.abstractThe utilization of coproducts is a strategy that can be applied to increase the economic and environmental performance of industrial processes and thus reach an objective targeted in several environmental policies. In multi-output production processes, allocation needs to be performed to assess the products’ environmental and economic performance. It is crucial to choose an adequate allocation method, because this choice has been shown to strongly influence overall outcomes. Consequently, rash choices can lead to poor decision-making. Various ways to apply and combine allocation methods can be found in the academic literature, but it is often difficult to find sufficient guidance on how to choose an allocation method for a specific context. This study explores practitioners’ perceptions of the cost and environmental impact allocation methods used in biorefinery development (lignin, fiber fines) by applying the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Results indicate that professional background represents a major factor influencing individual preferences and, thus, the selection of specific allocation methods. Policy makers should be aware that practitioners with different professional backgrounds have varying preferences for different allocation methods and that this influences the overall assessments. These factors, in turn, affect the interpretation of results, further decision-making and, ultimately, the realization of environmentally sound and economically viable biorefinery projects. This issue deserves more attention in biorefineries, but also in other multi-output production processes. The findings indicate a need to consider multidisciplinary, diverse views and knowledge when conducting such assessments and to display the underlying approaches transparently.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherMDPI AG
dc.relation.ispartofseriesSustainability
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.subject.otherallocation of costs and environmental impacts
dc.subject.othercorporate environmental management
dc.subject.otherwood biorefineries
dc.subject.otherstakeholder perception
dc.subject.otheranalytic hierarchy process (AHP)
dc.subject.othermulticriteria decision-making
dc.titlePractitioners’ Perceptions of Co-Product Allocation Methods in Biorefinery Development : A Case Study of the Austrian Pulp and Paper Industry
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202203282095
dc.contributor.laitosKauppakorkeakoulufi
dc.contributor.laitosSchool of Business and Economicsen
dc.contributor.oppiaineKestävä liiketoiminta ja talous (painoala)fi
dc.contributor.oppiaineYritysten ympäristöjohtaminenfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineSustainable Businessfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineResurssiviisausyhteisöfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineBasic or discovery scholarshipfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineSustainable Business and Economy (focus area)en
dc.contributor.oppiaineCorporate Environmental Managementen
dc.contributor.oppiaineSustainable Businessen
dc.contributor.oppiaineSchool of Resource Wisdomen
dc.contributor.oppiaineBasic or discovery scholarshipen
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.relation.issn2071-1050
dc.relation.numberinseries5
dc.relation.volume14
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.subject.ysopäätöksenteko
dc.subject.ysobiojalostamot
dc.subject.ysoympäristövaikutukset
dc.subject.ysosivutuotteet
dc.subject.ysoallokointi
dc.subject.ysotaloudellisuus
dc.subject.ysoympäristöjohtaminen
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p8743
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p21126
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p9862
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2861
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1033
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4258
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p5760
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.3390/su14052619
jyx.fundinginformationOpen access funding was provided by University of Graz. Julia Wenger, Stefan Pichler and Tobias Stern received funding through the project FLIPPR2 (Future Lignin and Pulp Processing Research—PROCESS INTEGRATION; FFG project number: 861476), which is financially supported by the industrial partners Sappi Austria Produktions-GmbH & Co KG, Zellstoff Pöls AG and Mondi Frantschach GmbH, as well as the Competence Centers for Excellent Technologies (COMET), which are promoted by BMVIT, BMDW, Styria and Carinthia and managed by the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG).
dc.type.okmA1


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY 4.0