See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259125226

Environmental accounting: Emergy, systems

ecology, and ecological modelling

ARTICLE in ECOLOGICAL MODELLING · JANUARY 2014

Impact Factor: 2.32 · DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.10.007

CITATIONS READS

3 105

3 AUTHORS:

Pier Paolo Franzese Mark Brown

Parthenope University of Naples University of Florida
36 PUBLICATIONS 239 CITATIONS 116 PUBLICATIONS 3,677 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sergio Ulgiati
Parthenope University of Naples
183 PUBLICATIONS 4,555 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Pier Paolo Franzese
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 26 January 2016
 Ecological Modelling 271 (2014) 1–3
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ecological Modelling
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolmodel
Editorial
Environmental accounting: Emergy, systems ecology, and ecological modelling
1. Environmental accounting: the need for an integrated
perspective
The environmental performance and sustainability of human-
dominated systems supported by both natural and human-driven
flows can be explored by analysing different aspects: the envi-
ronmental sustainability, the economic profitability, and the social
desirability, all relevant to achieve a comprehensive understanding
of the system under investigation.
Energy analysis can provide a valuable perspective on the
demand for commercial energy as well as the energy returned
on energy invested (Cleveland et al., 1984; Herendeen, 2004).
The Emergy Synthesis method entails a donor-side viewpoint and
expands the system boundary to the whole biosphere by account-
ing for the global environmental support to systems and processes
(Odum, 1988, 1996). Emergy accounting therefore considers free
renewable inputs, matter and energy flows as well as direct and
indirect labour flows not in terms of the benefits that humans can
extract from them but rather in terms of the work performed by
the biosphere to make them available (Brown and Ulgiati, 2004).
Other environmental accounting methods adopt a cost of pro-
duction point of view and show so-called environmental footprints,
i.e. the amounts of land, matter, and water required by a given pro-
cess or the amount of carbon and other greenhouse gases released
per unit product (Buonocore et al., 2012; Franzese et al., 2013;
Hoekstra, 2009; Häyhä et al., 2011; Steen-Olsen et al., 2012).
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has an important role in assess-
ing the environmental impacts of producing goods and services,
avoiding the shortcomings related to the narrow perspective of
short-term benefits and impacts. LCA can be extended to also
include the indirect contribution of economic inputs, which typ-
ically fall outside the boundary of conventional analyses, by means
of hybrid approaches based on input–output analysis (Finnveden
et al., 2009; Strømman et al., 2006, 2009). Finally, other tools like
geographical information systems (GIS) are useful to map and allo-
cate resource supply, use, and impacts on reference territories
(Sacchelli et al., 2013).
All these perspectives, theories and methods should not be con-
sidered as alternative to each other but instead complementary
and all necessary to fully investigate processes and systems across
multiple scales of analysis. This is particularly important when
dealing with systems supported by natural resources and integrat-
ing human-managed ecosystems and technologies playing a crucial
role for human well-being.
0304-3800/$ – see front matter © 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.10.007
2. Integrating environmental accounting with ecological
and climate change modelling
Environmental accounting can be usefully integrated with eco-
logical and climate change modelling to provide solid scientific
information in support of policy makers committed to develop
plans and targets for the sustainable management of natural
resources and, ultimately, for the sustainable development of
human societies. When environmental accounting is employed
within the framework of environmental impact assessment and cli-
mate change modelling, the analysis should embrace the changes
that human-induced ecosystem perturbations cause to biogeo-
physical factors and global biogeochemical cycles (Hallgren et al.,
2013; Bonan, 2008). These changes can be quantified through
empirical measurements (either in situ or from satellite observa-
tions) or by means of a modelling approach (Lee et al., 2011; Bright
et al., 2013). Successful examples in this direction are given by the
formulation of site-specific characterization factors (e.g., the global
warming potential, GWP) for biogenic CO2 emissions from biomass
combustion, where both temporary changes in atmospheric CO2
concentration and albedo effects are taken into account (Cherubini
et al., 2012; Guest et al., 2013). Ultimately, analysts working with
different methods of environmental accounting and impact assess-
ment have the opportunity to perform a joint effort to promote the
adoption of metrics that better support the setting of global policy
targets, as it is for instance the case of temperature-based metrics
in relation to the commitment to limit global warming (Cherubini
et al., 2013; Smith et al., 2012).
Some of the articles presented in this issue show how emergy
accounting can be usefully employed to investigate systems at
different spatial and temporal scales, from specific production sys-
tems, to cities, to large scale systems and global biogeochemical
cycles, thus supporting the assessment of temporal changes and
future targets vital in the framework of climate change research
and policy.
3. Goal of this special issue
The main goal of this special issue is to present a set of articles
showing the state of the art and some theoretical and procedural
advancement in emergy theory and accounting, emphasizing the
potential for integration between the emergy synthesis method and
other methodological approaches for environmental accounting,
environmental impact assessment, and ecological modelling.
2 Editorial / Ecological Modelling 271 (2014) 1–3
4. Papers presented in the special issue
The papers gathered in this special issue were presented at the
7th Biennial Emergy Research Conference, a biennial conference
providing a venue and forum for meaningful discussion expressly
dedicated to theory, principles, and applications of the emergy
methodology.
The papers explore different aspects of emergy theory and
methodology, among which: a) the possible integration of emergy
and other environmental accounting methods; b) the integrated
use of emergy accounting and ecological modelling, with particu-
lar reference to urban metabolism, climate and land use change,
and ecosystem services assessment; c) the use of conventional
and innovative modelling techniques for spatial analysis, emergy
inputs and conversion factors calculation, and uncertainty assess-
ment.
Raugei et al. (2013) explore obstacles and potential added value
of integrating emergy into LCA, highlighting how emergy could
be used as a valuable complement, rather than an alternative, to
existing life cycle impact assessment metrics.
Buonocore et al. (2013) propose a multi-method approach to
environmental accounting by performing an assessment encom-
passing material, energy, and emergy demand as well as relevant
emissions to explore the environmental performance and sustain-
ability of forestry operations.
Lee (2013), starting from the observation that pulsing is preva-
lent in nature, investigates the relation between frequency and
pulsing of resource flows and power output maximization in a
system.
Campbell et al. (2013) calculate specific emergies of the global
flows of six biologically active elements and two compounds for
use in waste management and environmental accounting in order
to establish emergy reference values to guide environmental man-
agement policies. Further, they compare the specific emergies of
global flows of elements during the Industrial Age to those in the
Preindustrial Era to determine the extent of changes and the sen-
sitivity of the global biogeochemical system to the 5-fold increase
in the emergy use of the global system over the past 160 years.
Hudson and Tilley (2013) propose the use of Monte Carlo simu-
lations to assess the uncertainty in emergy evaluations. Their study
highlights the need for the community of emergy analysts to reg-
ularly perform an assessment of the uncertainty affecting their
results.
Giannantoni (2013) presents a real novelty in mathematical
modelling represented by the so-called “emerging solutions”. This
innovative mathematical modelling approach is discussed through
the case of smart grids, with particular reference to their large scale
“intrinsic” instability and their recognized strong vulnerability to
cyber-attacks.
Patterson (2013) describes and characterizes a new matrix alge-
bra method named “the reflexive method” capable of calculating
transformities from ecological and economic network data.
Reiss et al. (2013) apply the landscape development intensity
(LDI) index to facilitate calculation of wetland mitigation poten-
tial and credit awards for mitigation banks, also highlighting that,
regardless of the used tool, consideration of potential wetland func-
tional lift should incorporate a landscape perspective.
Liu et al. (2013) describe a forecasting model, named “emergy-
based urban dynamic model”, capable of accurately simulating the
observed resource consumption, economic growth, and environ-
mental impact of Beijing from 1999 to 2039.
Mellino et al. (2013) use emergy accounting integrated in a GIS
framework to quantify and map the regional distribution of envi-
ronmental flows (solar radiation, rainfall, wind, and geothermal
heat), thus offering an emergy perspective of the spatial distribu-
tion of natural flows within a regional boundary.
Watanabe and Ortega (2013), considering the importance of
climate change, freshwater scarcity, soil erosion and other envi-
ronmental issues, present a model that simulates the impact of
land-use change on the ecosystem services related to water and
carbon biogeochemical processes in the Taquarizinho river basin
(Brazil).
Ghisellini et al. (2013) assess the environmental performance
of the Italian agricultural system over a time series of 25 years
coupling emergy accounting method and decomposition analy-
sis technique, thus identifying the major drivers of performance
changes to be used as the basis for future policy scenarios.
Morandi et al. (2013) propose an innovative approach to the
evaluation of the main emergy flows entering a system using set
theory.
5. Concluding remarks
The Guest Editors hope that this volume will boost a construc-
tive and collaborative interaction among the analysts committed to
integration and synergic use of different methods of environmental
accounting.
Acknowledgements
A special thank is due to all the reviewers who contributed their
time and valuable effort. Without their work and scientific support
this special issue would not have been possible.
References
Bright, R.M., Astrup, R., Strømman, A.H., 2013. Empirical models of monthly and
annual albedo in managed boreal forests of interior Norway. Clim. Change 120
(1–2), 183–196.
Brown, M.T., Ulgiati, S., 2004. Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: H.T. Odum’s
contribution to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecol. Model. 178,
201–213.
Bonan, G.B., 2008. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate
benefits of forests. Science 320 (5882), 1444–1449.
Buonocore, E., Franzese, P.P., Ulgiati, S., 2012. Assessing the environmental per-
formance and sustainability of bioenergy production in Sweden: a life cycle
assessment perspective. Energy 37, 69–78.
Buonocore, E., Häyhä, T., Paletto, A., Franzese, P.P., 2013. Assessing environmental
costs and impacts of forestry activities: a multi-method approach to environ-
mental accounting. Ecol. Model., this volume.
Campbell, D.E., Lu, H., Linc, B.L., 2013. Emergy evaluations of the global biogeochem-
ical cycles of six biologically active elements and two compounds. Ecol. Model.,
this volume.
Cherubini, F., Bright, R.M., Strømman, A.H., 2012. Site-specific global warming poten-
tials of biogenic CO2 for bioenergy: contributions from carbon fluxes and albedo
dynamics. Environ. Res. Lett. 7, 1–11.
Cherubini, F., Bright, R.M., Strømman, A.H., 2013. Global climate impacts of forest
bioenergy: what, when and how to measure? Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 1–12.
Cleveland, C.J., Costanza, R., Hall, C.A.S., Kaufmann, R., 1984. Energy and the U.S.
economy: a biophysical perspective. Science 225, 890–897.
Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler,
A., Pennington, D., Suh, S., 2009. Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment.
J. Environ. Manage. 91, 1–21.
Franzese, P.P., Cavalett, O., Häyhä, T., D’Angelo, S., 2013. Integrated Environmental
Assessment of Agricultural and Farming Production Systems in the Toledo River
Basin (Brazil). The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organiza-
tion (UNESCO), 71 pp., ISBN 978-92-3-001138-3.
Ghisellini, P., Zucaro, A., Viglia, S., Ulgiati, S., 2013. Monitoring and evaluating the
sustainability of Italian agricultural system. An emergy decomposition analysis.
Ecol. Model., this volume.
Giannantoni, C., 2013. The relevance of emerging solutions for thinking, decision
making and acting. The case of smart grids. Ecol. Model., this volume.
Guest, G., Bright, R.M., Cherubini, F., Strømman, A.H., 2013. Consistent quantification
of climate impacts due to biogenic carbon storage across a range of bio-product
systems. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 43, 21–30.
Hallgren, W., Schlosser, A., Monier, E., Kicklighter, D., Sokolov, A., Melillo, J., 2013.
Climate impacts of a large-scale biofuels expansion. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40,
1624–1630.
Herendeen, R., 2004. Net energy analysis: concepts and methods. In: Cleveland, C.J.
(Ed.), Encyclopedia of Energy. Elsevier, pp. 283–289.
Hoekstra, A.Y., 2009. Human appropriation of natural capital: a comparison of eco-
logical footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecol. Econ. 68 (7), 1963–1974.
 Editorial / Ecological Modelling 271 (2014) 1–3 3

Hudson, A., Tilley, D.R., 2013. Assessment of uncertainty in emergy evaluations using Steen-Olsen, K., Weinzettel, J., Cranston, G., Ercin, A.E., Hertwich, E.G., 2012. Carbon,
Monte Carlo simulations. Ecol. Model., this volume. land, and water footprint accounts for the European union: consumption, pro-
Häyhä, T., Franzese, P.P., Ulgiati, S., 2011. Economic and environmental performance duction, and displacements through international trade. Environ. Sci. Technol.
of electricity production in Finland: a multicriteria assessment framework. Ecol. 46 (20), 10883–10891.
Model. 223, 81–90. Strømman, A.H., Solli, C., Hertwich, E.G., 2006. Hybrid life-cycle assessment of nat-
Lee, S., 2013. Resource pulses can increase power acquisition of an ecosystem. Ecol. ural gas based fuel chains for transportation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (8),
Model., this volume. 2797–2804.
Lee, X., Goulden, M.L., Hollinger, D.Y., Barr, A., Black, T.A., Bohrer, G., Bracho, R., Strømman, A.H., Peters, G.P., Hertwich, E.G., 2009. Approaches to correct for double
Drake, B., Goldstein, A., Gu, L., Katul, G., Kolb, T., Law, B.E., Margolis, H., Meyers, counting in tiered hybrid life cycle inventories. J. Clean. Prod. 17 (2), 248–254.
T., Monson, R., Munger, W., Oren, R., Paw, U., Richardson, K.Y., Schmid, A.D., Watanabe, M.D.B., Ortega, E., 2013. Dynamic emergy accounting of water and carbon
Staebler, H.P., Wofsy, R., Zhao, S.L., 2011. Observed increase in local cooling effect ecosystem services: a model to simulate the impacts of land-use change. Ecol.
of deforestation at higher latitudes. Nature 479, 384–387. Model., this volume.
Liu, G., Yang, Z., Chen, B., Ulgiati, S., 2013. Emergy-based dynamic mechanisms of
urban development, resource consumption and environmental impacts. Ecol.
Model., this volume. Pier Paolo Franzese ∗
Mellino, S., Ripa, M., Zucaro, A., Ulgiati, S., 2013. An emergy–GIS approach to the Industrial Ecology Programme, Norwegian University
evaluation of renewable resource flows: a case study of Campania Region, Italy. of Science and Technology, Norway
Ecol. Model., this volume.
Morandi, F., Campbell, D.E., Bastianoni, S., 2013. Set theory applied to uniquely define Mark T. Brown
the inputs to territorial systems in emergy analyses. Ecol. Model., this volume.
Odum, H.T., 1988. Self organization, transformity and information. Science 242,
Department of Environmental Engineering Science,
1132–1139. University of Florida, USA
Odum, H.T., 1996. Environmental Accounting. Emergy and Environmental Decision
Making. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA. Sergio Ulgiati
Patterson, M., 2013. Evaluation of matrix algebra methods for calculating transfor- Department of Science and Technology, Parthenope
mities from ecological and economic network data. Ecol. Model., this volume.
University of Naples, Italy
Raugei, M., Rugani, B., Benetto, E., Ingwersene, W.W., 2013. Integrating emergy into
LCA: potential added value and lingering obstacles. Ecol. Model., this volume.
Reiss, K.C., Hernandez, E., Brown, M.T., 2013. Application of the landscape devel- ∗ Corresponding
author.
opment intensity (LDI) index in wetland mitigation banking. Ecol. Model., this E-mail addresses: pierpaolo.franzese@ntnu.no
volume.
Sacchelli, S., De Meo, I., Paletto, A., 2013. Bioenergy production and forest multifunc- (P.P. Franzese), mtb@ufl.edu (M.T. Brown),
tionality: a trade-off analysis using multiscale GIS model in a case study in Italy. sergio.ulgiati@uniparthenope.it (S. Ulgiati)
Appl. Energy 104, 10–20.
Smith, S.M., Lowe, J.A., Bowerman, N.H.A., Gohar, L.K., Huntingford, C., Allen, M.R.,
2012. Equivalence of greenhouse-gas emissions for peak temperature limits.
Nat. Clim. Change 2, 535–538.