Is the nitrogen footprint fit for purpose? An assessment of models and proposed uses

Is the nitrogen footprint fit for purpose? An assessment of models and proposed uses The nitrogen footprint has been proposed as an environmental indicator to quantify and highlight how individuals, organizations, or countries contribute to nitrogen pollution. While some footprint indicators have been successful in raising awareness of environmental pressures among the public and policy-makers, they have also attracted criticism from members of the life cycle assessment (LCA) community who find some footprints confusing and misleading as they measure substance and energy flows without considering their environmental impacts. However, there are also legitimate reasons to defend footprints as a useful class of indicators despite their incompatibility with LCA principles. Here, in light of this previous research and debate, we critically assess models and proposed uses for the nitrogen footprint, and explore options for further development. As the nitrogen footprint merely quantifies gross nitrogen emissions irrespective of time, location, and chemical form, it is a crude proxy of environmental and health impacts compared to other, more sophisticated environmental impact indicators. However, developing the nitrogen footprint toward LCA-compatible impact assessment would imply more uncertainty, more complexity, and more work. Furthermore, we emphasize that impact assessment has an unavoidable subjective dimension that should be recognized in any development toward impact assessment. We argue that the nitrogen footprint in its present form is already fit for some purposes, and therefore further development towards impact assessment may be unnecessary or even undesirable. For some uses it seems more important that the footprint has a clear physical meaning. We conclude that the best way forward for the nitrogen footprint depends crucially on what story it is used to tell. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Environmental Management Elsevier

Is the nitrogen footprint fit for purpose? An assessment of models and proposed uses

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/is-the-nitrogen-footprint-fit-for-purpose-an-assessment-of-models-and-zW9una4zDK
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors
ISSN
0301-4797
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.083
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The nitrogen footprint has been proposed as an environmental indicator to quantify and highlight how individuals, organizations, or countries contribute to nitrogen pollution. While some footprint indicators have been successful in raising awareness of environmental pressures among the public and policy-makers, they have also attracted criticism from members of the life cycle assessment (LCA) community who find some footprints confusing and misleading as they measure substance and energy flows without considering their environmental impacts. However, there are also legitimate reasons to defend footprints as a useful class of indicators despite their incompatibility with LCA principles. Here, in light of this previous research and debate, we critically assess models and proposed uses for the nitrogen footprint, and explore options for further development. As the nitrogen footprint merely quantifies gross nitrogen emissions irrespective of time, location, and chemical form, it is a crude proxy of environmental and health impacts compared to other, more sophisticated environmental impact indicators. However, developing the nitrogen footprint toward LCA-compatible impact assessment would imply more uncertainty, more complexity, and more work. Furthermore, we emphasize that impact assessment has an unavoidable subjective dimension that should be recognized in any development toward impact assessment. We argue that the nitrogen footprint in its present form is already fit for some purposes, and therefore further development towards impact assessment may be unnecessary or even undesirable. For some uses it seems more important that the footprint has a clear physical meaning. We conclude that the best way forward for the nitrogen footprint depends crucially on what story it is used to tell.

Journal

Journal of Environmental ManagementElsevier

Published: Jun 15, 2019

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off