Comparing Institution Nitrogen Footprints: Metrics for Assessing and Tracking Environmental Impact.

Elizabeth A Castner, Allison M Leach, Jana E Compton, James N Galloway, Jennifer Andrews
{"title":"Comparing Institution Nitrogen Footprints: Metrics for Assessing and Tracking Environmental Impact.","authors":"Elizabeth A Castner,&nbsp;Allison M Leach,&nbsp;Jana E Compton,&nbsp;James N Galloway,&nbsp;Jennifer Andrews","doi":"10.1089/sus.2017.29090.eac","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When multiple institutions with strong sustainability initiatives use a new environmental impact assessment tool, there is an impulse to compare. The first seven institutions to calculate nitrogen footprints using the Nitrogen Footprint Tool have worked collaboratively to improve calculation methods, share resources, and suggest methods for reducing their footprints. This article compares those seven institutions' results to reveal the common and unique drivers of institution nitrogen footprints. The footprints were compared by scope and sector, and the results were normalized by multiple factors (e.g., population, amount of food served). The comparisons found many consistencies across the footprints, including the large contribution of food. The comparisons identified metrics that could be used to track progress, such as an overall indicator for the nitrogen sustainability of food purchases. The comparisons also pointed to differences in system bounds of the calculations, which are important to standardize when comparing across institutions. The footprints were influenced by factors both within and outside of the institutions' ability to control, such as size, location, population, and campus use. However, these comparisons also point to a pathway forward for standardizing nitrogen footprint tool calculations, identifying metrics that can be used to track progress, and determining a sustainable institution nitrogen footprint.</p>","PeriodicalId":92296,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","volume":"10 2","pages":"105-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/sus.2017.29090.eac","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sus.2017.29090.eac","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

When multiple institutions with strong sustainability initiatives use a new environmental impact assessment tool, there is an impulse to compare. The first seven institutions to calculate nitrogen footprints using the Nitrogen Footprint Tool have worked collaboratively to improve calculation methods, share resources, and suggest methods for reducing their footprints. This article compares those seven institutions' results to reveal the common and unique drivers of institution nitrogen footprints. The footprints were compared by scope and sector, and the results were normalized by multiple factors (e.g., population, amount of food served). The comparisons found many consistencies across the footprints, including the large contribution of food. The comparisons identified metrics that could be used to track progress, such as an overall indicator for the nitrogen sustainability of food purchases. The comparisons also pointed to differences in system bounds of the calculations, which are important to standardize when comparing across institutions. The footprints were influenced by factors both within and outside of the institutions' ability to control, such as size, location, population, and campus use. However, these comparisons also point to a pathway forward for standardizing nitrogen footprint tool calculations, identifying metrics that can be used to track progress, and determining a sustainable institution nitrogen footprint.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

比较机构氮足迹:评估和跟踪环境影响的指标。
当多家具有强有力的可持续发展倡议的机构使用一种新的环境影响评估工具时,就会有一种比较的冲动。首批使用氮足迹工具计算氮足迹的七家机构合作改进计算方法,共享资源,并提出减少足迹的方法。本文比较了这七家机构的研究结果,揭示了机构氮足迹的共同驱动因素和独特驱动因素。按范围和部门对足迹进行比较,并根据多种因素(如人口、食物供应量)对结果进行归一化处理。比较发现,足迹之间有许多一致性,包括食物的很大贡献。这些比较确定了可用于跟踪进展的指标,例如食品采购氮可持续性的总体指标。这些比较还指出了计算系统边界的差异,这对于在不同机构之间进行比较时实现标准化非常重要。这些足迹受到机构控制能力内外的因素的影响,如规模、位置、人口和校园使用。然而,这些比较也指出了标准化氮足迹工具计算的前进道路,确定可用于跟踪进展的指标,并确定可持续的机构氮足迹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信