References of "Hild, Paula 50009535"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDas Versprechen der Zirkularität
Hild, Paula UL; Schulz, Christian UL

in Standort (2022)

Against the backdrop of the recent political dynamics in the EU and in many of its member states regarding the Circular Economy, the present article discusses the impact of the concept so far and the ... [more ▼]

Against the backdrop of the recent political dynamics in the EU and in many of its member states regarding the Circular Economy, the present article discusses the impact of the concept so far and the challenges related to its implementation. In particular, it sheds a critical light on the following three aspects: first, the selective reception of the approach by key actors in industry and politics; second, the obvious implementation problems in trade and industry; and third, the underlying, growth-fixated economic model. Results from our own empirical work on the Luxembourg construction industry illustrate the reasoning. The article argues for a holistic and growth-critical understanding of circularity that not only gives space to orientation of efficiency and consistency but above all also to considerations of sufficiency. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 59 (8 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAnalysis of complementary methodologies to assess the environmental impact of Luxembourg’s net consumption
Jury, Colin; Rugani, Benedetto; Hild, Paula UL et al

in Environmental Science and Policy (2013), 27

The choice of accounting methods and indicators to support national stakeholders and public authorities in environmental decision-making policies is made difficult by the extensive number of available ... [more ▼]

The choice of accounting methods and indicators to support national stakeholders and public authorities in environmental decision-making policies is made difficult by the extensive number of available tools and the general divergence of scientific opinions on their effectiveness. In this paper, a set of life cycle-based approaches are compared and a methodological framework is recommended to support policy makers in the evaluation and choice of environmental impact mitigation strategies. The net consumption (=production + imports exports) of Luxembourg, taken as a case study, is inventoried based on different Environmentally Extended Input–Output (EE-IO) scenarios and further assessed using the Ecological Footprint (EF), ReCiPe and Solar Energy Demand (SED). All the compartments of resources extraction and pollutant emissions and the main environmental impacts gener- ated by the Luxembourgish economic trade-offs are evaluated. Results highlight the need for higher consistency in the use of EE-IO tables mainly because of the uncertainty affecting the environmental extensions (EEs). This aspect plays a major role when applying different assessment methods and relevant changes in terms of overall environmental impact are observed according to different sets of resources and emissions inventoried. These changes, however, do not substantially influence the results at the level of single economic sector’s contribution. Regardless the consumption scenario and the indicator considered, the financial and banking sectors contribute to more than 40% to the total EF, SED and ReCiPe results. Strengths and weaknesses of each indicator are discussed, and direct and indirect contribution analyses by sector allowed outlining strategies for impact mitigation. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 149 (3 UL)
Full Text
See detailtrend Analysis and interpretation of Luxembourg’s consumption Footprint NFA 2010 edition, data years 2000 – 2007
Hild, Paula UL; Takagi, Aya; Schmitt, Bianca

Report (2012)

The Ecological Footprint methodology by Global Footprint Network measures human consumption of products and services from different ecosystems in terms of the amount of bioproductive land and sea area ... [more ▼]

The Ecological Footprint methodology by Global Footprint Network measures human consumption of products and services from different ecosystems in terms of the amount of bioproductive land and sea area needed to supply these products and services. In other words, the Ecological Footprint calculates the land area needed to produce food, provide resources, produce energy, and absorb the CO2 emissions generated by the supply chains within one year at country level. For the calculations of Luxembourg’s Ecological Footprint, international statistical databases are used to identify the quantities of produced, imported and exported goods and services. Then, Global Footprint Network applies different factors to the quantities to assess the area needed to supply these products and services. Finally, the Consumption Footprint of a nation is divided by the number of inhabitants and compared to other countries at a per capita level (global hectares per capita). This means that the Ecological Footprint can be used as an indicator for the sustainability of a national consumption by assessing human land uses. In the following paragraph, Luxembourg’s Ecological Footprint is discussed in the framework of the environmental indicators of Luxembourg’s competitiveness scoreboard (see Table 9) [MECE, 2010]. Luxembourg’s ranking is rather low for all of the scoreboard indicators: number of ISO 9001 certifications per billion of inhabitants (21 out of 27); number of ISO 14001 certifications per billion of inhabitants (15 out of 27); total greenhouse gas emissions (15 out of 27); renewable energy ration (23 out of 27); quantity of municipal waste per capita per year (24 out of 27); energetic intensity (8 out of 27); transport by car (17 out of 27); Ecological Footprint in gha per capita per year (27 out of 27). Based on the environmental competiveness scoreboard indicators, it can be concluded that in general, Luxembourg’s environmental performance is low compared to the other countries of the European Union. With respect to Luxembourg’s Ecological Footprint, it can be said that Luxembourg’s consumption is not sustainable. The number of planets that would be needed if the world's population lived like the population of Luxembourg in 2007 is about six. However, per year, the biocapacity (bioproductive land) of the planet can only regenerate once. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 133 (4 UL)
Full Text
See detailA web-based tool for efficient carbon footprint calculations: Lux screen CO2
Hild, Paula UL; Guiton, Mélanie; Pieropan, Julien et al

Scientific Conference (2011, August 30)

Several commercial software tools for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are already available on the market and recently included ad-hoc extensions to calculate carbon footprints. Unfortunately, these software ... [more ▼]

Several commercial software tools for Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are already available on the market and recently included ad-hoc extensions to calculate carbon footprints. Unfortunately, these software tools are often too complex and require too much specific expertise to be used by SMEs, consultants and others. For companies without any experience in the field of environmental assessment, the analysis of company-related CO2 emissions within a regional context is often an impossible task. The presented easy-to-use CO2 screening tool, adapted to their needs, was designed to support these companies. The web-based tool, ‘Lux screen CO2’ is able to assess and report site related direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions, including the whole supply chain of the company and food-related impacts of the company restaurant. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 140 (1 UL)
Full Text
See detailAn agenda for establishing the Ecological Footprint as communication instrument and indicator for sustainable development in small countries: Case study Luxembourg
Hild, Paula UL; Schmitt, Bianca; Morgane, Mey et al

Poster (2010, June)

The Ecological Footprint methodology proposed by the Global Footprint Network (GFN) seems to be not entirely appropriate for small countries with less than one million inhabitants [Ewing et al., 2008 ... [more ▼]

The Ecological Footprint methodology proposed by the Global Footprint Network (GFN) seems to be not entirely appropriate for small countries with less than one million inhabitants [Ewing et al., 2008]. This may be a reason why e.g. results for Luxembourg, a country with 470,000 inhabitants, have never been included into official country Footprint comparisons. Therefore, the methodology needs to be adapted to be used for communication purpose in Luxembourg. This contribution presents Luxembourg’s approach for illustrating the national consumption impacts to finally discuss the integration of the Ecological Footprint as an indicator for sustainable development in the national indicator system. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 103 (2 UL)