Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: nanotechnology
Description
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a powerful framework for environmental decision making because the broad boundaries called for prevent shifting of burden from one life-cycle phase to another. Numerous experts and policy setting organizations call for the application of LCA to developing nanotechnologies. Early application of LCA to nanotechnology may identify environmentally problematic processes and supply chain components before large investments contribute to technology lock in, and thereby promote integration of environmental concerns into technology development and scale-up (enviro-technical integration). However, application of LCA to nanotechnology is problematic due to limitations in LCA methods (e.g., reliance on data from existing industries at scale, ambiguity regarding proper boundary selection), and because social drivers of technology development and environmental preservation are not identified in LCA. This thesis proposes two methodological advances that augment current capabilities of LCA by incorporating knowledge from technical and social domains. Specifically, this thesis advances the capacity for LCA to yield enviro-technical integration through inclusion of scenario development, thermodynamic modeling, and use-phase performance bounding to overcome the paucity of data describing emerging nanotechnologies. With regard to socio-technical integration, this thesis demonstrates that social values are implicit in LCA, and explores the extent to which these values impact LCA practice and results. There are numerous paths of entry through which social values are contained in LCA, for example functional unit selection, impact category selection, and system boundary definition - decisions which embody particular values and determine LCA results. Explicit identification of how social values are embedded in LCA promotes integration of social and environmental concerns into technology development (socio-enviro-technical integration), and may contribute to the development of socially-responsive and environmentally preferable nanotechnologies. In this way, tailoring LCA to promote socio-enviro-technical integration is a tangible and meaningful step towards responsible innovation processes.
ContributorsWender, Ben A. (Author) / Seager, Thomas P (Thesis advisor) / Crozier, Peter (Committee member) / Fraser, Matthew (Committee member) / Guston, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Cities around the globe struggle with socio-economic disparities, resource inefficiency, environmental contamination, and quality-of-life challenges. Technological innovation, as one prominent approach to problem solving, promises to address these challenges; yet, introducing new technologies, such as nanotechnology, into society and cities has often resulted in negative consequences. Recent research has conceptually linked anticipatory governance and sustainability science: to understand the role of technology in complex problems our societies face; to anticipate negative consequences of technological innovation; and to promote long-term oriented and responsible governance of technologies. This dissertation advances this link conceptually and empirically, focusing on nanotechnology and urban sustainability challenges. The guiding question for this dissertation research is: How can nanotechnology be innovated and governed in responsible ways and with sustainable outcomes? The dissertation: analyzes the nanotechnology innovation process from an actor- and activities-oriented perspective (Chapter 2); assesses this innovation process from a comprehensive perspective on sustainable governance (Chapter 3); constructs a small set of future scenarios to consider future implications of different nanotechnology governance models (Chapter 4); and appraises the amenability of sustainability problems to nanotechnological interventions (Chapter 5). The four studies are based on data collected through literature review, document analysis, participant observation, interviews, workshops, and walking audits, as part of process analysis, scenario construction, and technology assessment. Research was conducted in collaboration with representatives from industry, government agencies, and civic organizations. The empirical parts of the four studies focus on Metropolitan Phoenix. Findings suggest that: predefined mandates and economic goals dominate the nanotechnology innovation process; normative responsibilities identified by risk governance, sustainability-oriented governance, and anticipatory governance are infrequently considered in the nanotechnology innovation process; different governance models will have major impacts on the role and effects of nanotechnology in cities in the future; and nanotechnologies, currently, do not effectively address the root causes of urban sustainability challenges and require complementary solution approaches. This dissertation contributes to the concepts of anticipatory governance and sustainability science on how to constructively guide nanotechnological innovation in order to harvest its positive potential and safeguard against negative consequences.
ContributorsFoley, Rider Williams (Author) / Wiek, Arnim (Thesis advisor) / Guston, David H. (Committee member) / Seager, Thomas P (Committee member) / Minteer, Ben A (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Advancing sustainable food systems requires holistic understanding and solutions-oriented approaches that transcend disciplines, so expertise in a variety of subjects is necessary. Proposed solutions are usually technically or socially oriented, but disagreement over the best approach to the future of food dominates the dialogue. Technological optimists argue that scientific advances are necessary to feed the world, but environmental purists believe that reductions in consumption and waste are sufficient and less risky. Life cycle assessment (LCA) helps resolve debates through quantitative analysis of environmental impacts from products which serve the same function. LCA used to compare dietary choices reveals that simple plant-based diets are better for the environment than diets that include animal products. However, analysis of soy protein isolate (SPI) demonstrates that certain plant-based proteins may be less preferable for the environment than some unprocessed meats in several categories due to additional impacts that come from industrial processing. LCAs' focus on production risks ignoring consumers, but the food system exists to serve consumers, who can be major drivers of change. Therefore, the path to a sustainable food system requires addressing consumption issues as well. Existing methods for advancing sustainable food systems that equate more information with better behavior or performance are insufficient to create change. Addressing food system issues requires sufficient tacit knowledge to understand how arguments are framed, what the supporting content is, the findings of primary sources, and complex and controversial dialogue surrounding innovations and interventions for food system sustainability. This level of expertise is called interactional competence and it is necessary to drive and maintain holistic progress towards sustainability. Development strategies for interactional competence are informed by studying the motivations and strategies utilized by vegans. A new methodology helps advance understanding of expertise development by assessing levels of expertise and reveals insights into how vegans maintain commitment to a principle that influences their daily lives. The study of veganism and expertise reveals that while providing information to debunk fallacies is important, the development of tacit knowledge is fundamental to advance to a stage of competence.
ContributorsBerardy, Andrew (Author) / Seager, Thomas P (Thesis advisor) / Hannah, Mark (Committee member) / Costello, Christine (Committee member) / Landis, Amy (Committee member) / Wharton, Christopher (Christopher Mack), 1977- (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015