522
A. J. Chapman and Y. Shigetomi
Additionally, although the goal of the research is to determine social inequity
outcomes based on domestic household footprints and preferences, underpinning
assumptions rely on global norms in some cases (Miller and Blair 2009) and precedential research identifies a potential footprint quantification variance of around
20%, dependent on the model employed (Min and Rao 2018). Finally, the method
employed to determine stakeholder proactiveness based on preferences expressed in
a national survey is in the early stages of development and we recognize that environmental awareness does not necessarily translate into pro-environmental behavior
(Wang et al. 2011).
34.5 Conclusions
The IOSEF is a novel sustainability assessment framework which considers both
energy justice and lifecycle perspectives, allowing for the evaluation of policy implications to improve social equity with respect to both demographic structures and
household consumption patterns. By estimating virtual household footprints for GHG
emissions, industrial waste generation, green and blue water, the mining risk for critical materials needed for low-carbon technologies and primary particulate matter
(PM 2.5 ) this study confirmed that social inequity derived from these footprints might
be better mitigated in line with stakeholders’ participation and probable behavior
preferences. The approach outlined in this study offers multiple benefits to policy
makers, as follows:
First, it allows for the identification of future consumption trends, footprint quantification, an evaluation of overall social inequity levels and allocation of household
consumption burdens.
Second, the twin dimensions of social inequity and consumption burden score
expression allow for comprehensive policy making cognizant not only of the benefit
derived from reduced footprints, but also of a societally desirable level of public bad
origin and subsequent burden allocation. Toward improving social equity, typically a
burden allocation toward households in higher income brackets is considered desirable in order to reduce the gap between rich and poor (vertical equity; (Mooney and
Stephen 1997)), subject to stakeholder preferences.
Third, in combination with stakeholder input, key environmental policy issues can
be clarified relevant to people’s lifestyles. Further, by combining the outputs of the
IOSEF (namely social inequity and consumption burden scores) with environmental
footprints and their respective make-up, hot spots for policy redress can be identified
alongside priority SDGs.
Fourth, considering the linkages between footprints, demographic trends and
stakeholder preferences, issues of urgency in terms of specific footprint actions or
undesirable demographic shifts which cause imbalance can be identified.
Considering the evidence base investigated, input-output analysis can be applied
to dig deeper into footprints and identify specific products and services which impair
social equity or cause inequitable allocation of burdens, particularly toward lower
A. J. Chapman and Y. Shigetomi
Additionally, although the goal of the research is to determine social inequity
outcomes based on domestic household footprints and preferences, underpinning
assumptions rely on global norms in some cases (Miller and Blair 2009) and precedential research identifies a potential footprint quantification variance of around
20%, dependent on the model employed (Min and Rao 2018). Finally, the method
employed to determine stakeholder proactiveness based on preferences expressed in
a national survey is in the early stages of development and we recognize that environmental awareness does not necessarily translate into pro-environmental behavior
(Wang et al. 2011).
34.5 Conclusions
The IOSEF is a novel sustainability assessment framework which considers both
energy justice and lifecycle perspectives, allowing for the evaluation of policy implications to improve social equity with respect to both demographic structures and
household consumption patterns. By estimating virtual household footprints for GHG
emissions, industrial waste generation, green and blue water, the mining risk for critical materials needed for low-carbon technologies and primary particulate matter
(PM 2.5 ) this study confirmed that social inequity derived from these footprints might
be better mitigated in line with stakeholders’ participation and probable behavior
preferences. The approach outlined in this study offers multiple benefits to policy
makers, as follows:
First, it allows for the identification of future consumption trends, footprint quantification, an evaluation of overall social inequity levels and allocation of household
consumption burdens.
Second, the twin dimensions of social inequity and consumption burden score
expression allow for comprehensive policy making cognizant not only of the benefit
derived from reduced footprints, but also of a societally desirable level of public bad
origin and subsequent burden allocation. Toward improving social equity, typically a
burden allocation toward households in higher income brackets is considered desirable in order to reduce the gap between rich and poor (vertical equity; (Mooney and
Stephen 1997)), subject to stakeholder preferences.
Third, in combination with stakeholder input, key environmental policy issues can
be clarified relevant to people’s lifestyles. Further, by combining the outputs of the
IOSEF (namely social inequity and consumption burden scores) with environmental
footprints and their respective make-up, hot spots for policy redress can be identified
alongside priority SDGs.
Fourth, considering the linkages between footprints, demographic trends and
stakeholder preferences, issues of urgency in terms of specific footprint actions or
undesirable demographic shifts which cause imbalance can be identified.
Considering the evidence base investigated, input-output analysis can be applied
to dig deeper into footprints and identify specific products and services which impair
social equity or cause inequitable allocation of burdens, particularly toward lower