By the same authors

From the same journal

A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality. / Hool, Alessandra; Schrijvers, Dieuwertje; Blengini, Gian Andrea; Chen, Wei-Qiang; Dewulf, Jo; Eggert, Roderick; van Ellen, Layla; Gauss, Roland; Goddin, James; Habib, Komal; Hagelüken, Christian; Hirohata, Atsufumi; Hofmann-Amtenbrink, Margarethe; Kosmol, Jan; Le Gleuher, Maïté; Grohol, Milan; Ku, Anthony; Lee, Min-Ha; Liu, Gang; Nansai, Keisuke; Nuss, Philip; Peck, David; Reller, Armin; Sonnemann, Guido; Tercero, Luis; Thorenz, Andrea; Wäger, Patrick.

In: Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 27.01.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Hool, A, Schrijvers, D, Blengini, GA, Chen, W-Q, Dewulf, J, Eggert, R, van Ellen, L, Gauss, R, Goddin, J, Habib, K, Hagelüken, C, Hirohata, A, Hofmann-Amtenbrink, M, Kosmol, J, Le Gleuher, M, Grohol, M, Ku, A, Lee, M-H, Liu, G, Nansai, K, Nuss, P, Peck, D, Reller, A, Sonnemann, G, Tercero, L, Thorenz, A & Wäger, P 2020, 'A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality', Resources, Conservation and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617

APA

Hool, A., Schrijvers, D., Blengini, G. A., Chen, W-Q., Dewulf, J., Eggert, R., van Ellen, L., Gauss, R., Goddin, J., Habib, K., Hagelüken, C., Hirohata, A., Hofmann-Amtenbrink, M., Kosmol, J., Le Gleuher, M., Grohol, M., Ku, A., Lee, M-H., Liu, G., ... Wäger, P. (2020). A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617

Vancouver

Hool A, Schrijvers D, Blengini GA, Chen W-Q, Dewulf J, Eggert R et al. A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020 Jan 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617

Author

Hool, Alessandra ; Schrijvers, Dieuwertje ; Blengini, Gian Andrea ; Chen, Wei-Qiang ; Dewulf, Jo ; Eggert, Roderick ; van Ellen, Layla ; Gauss, Roland ; Goddin, James ; Habib, Komal ; Hagelüken, Christian ; Hirohata, Atsufumi ; Hofmann-Amtenbrink, Margarethe ; Kosmol, Jan ; Le Gleuher, Maïté ; Grohol, Milan ; Ku, Anthony ; Lee, Min-Ha ; Liu, Gang ; Nansai, Keisuke ; Nuss, Philip ; Peck, David ; Reller, Armin ; Sonnemann, Guido ; Tercero, Luis ; Thorenz, Andrea ; Wäger, Patrick. / A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality. In: Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020.

Bibtex - Download

@article{4c7c1947d12a498caf0044b50ebd36c1,
title = "A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality",
abstract = "The assessment of the criticality of raw materials allows the identification of the likelihood of a supply disruption of a material and the vulnerability of a system (e.g. a national economy, technology, or company) to this disruption. Inconclusive outcomes of various studies suggest that criticality assessments would benefit from the identification of best practices. To prepare the field for such guidance, this paper aims to clarify the mechanisms that affect methodological choices which influence the results of a study. This is achieved via literature review and round table discussions among international experts. The paper demonstrates that criticality studies are divergent in the system under study, the anticipated risk, the purpose of the study, and material selection. These differences in goal and scope naturally result in different choices regarding indicator selection, the required level of aggregation as well as the subsequent choice of aggregation method, and the need for a threshold value. However, this link is often weak, which suggests a lack of understanding of cause-and-effect mechanisms of indicators and outcomes. Data availability is a key factor that limits the evaluation of criticality. Furthermore, data quality, including both data uncertainty and data representativeness, is rarely addressed in the interpretation and communication of results. Clear guidance in the formulation of goals and scopes of criticality studies, the selection of adequate indicators and aggregation methods, and the interpretation of the outcomes, are important initial steps in improving the quality of criticality assessments.",
author = "Alessandra Hool and Dieuwertje Schrijvers and Blengini, {Gian Andrea} and Wei-Qiang Chen and Jo Dewulf and Roderick Eggert and {van Ellen}, Layla and Roland Gauss and James Goddin and Komal Habib and Christian Hagel{\"u}ken and Atsufumi Hirohata and Margarethe Hofmann-Amtenbrink and Jan Kosmol and {Le Gleuher}, Ma{\"i}t{\'e} and Milan Grohol and Anthony Ku and Min-Ha Lee and Gang Liu and Keisuke Nansai and Philip Nuss and David Peck and Armin Reller and Guido Sonnemann and Luis Tercero and Andrea Thorenz and Patrick W{\"a}ger",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.",
year = "2020",
month = jan,
day = "27",
doi = "10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617",
language = "English",
journal = "Resources, Conservation and Recycling",
issn = "0921-3449",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality

AU - Hool, Alessandra

AU - Schrijvers, Dieuwertje

AU - Blengini, Gian Andrea

AU - Chen, Wei-Qiang

AU - Dewulf, Jo

AU - Eggert, Roderick

AU - van Ellen, Layla

AU - Gauss, Roland

AU - Goddin, James

AU - Habib, Komal

AU - Hagelüken, Christian

AU - Hirohata, Atsufumi

AU - Hofmann-Amtenbrink, Margarethe

AU - Kosmol, Jan

AU - Le Gleuher, Maïté

AU - Grohol, Milan

AU - Ku, Anthony

AU - Lee, Min-Ha

AU - Liu, Gang

AU - Nansai, Keisuke

AU - Nuss, Philip

AU - Peck, David

AU - Reller, Armin

AU - Sonnemann, Guido

AU - Tercero, Luis

AU - Thorenz, Andrea

AU - Wäger, Patrick

N1 - © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2020/1/27

Y1 - 2020/1/27

N2 - The assessment of the criticality of raw materials allows the identification of the likelihood of a supply disruption of a material and the vulnerability of a system (e.g. a national economy, technology, or company) to this disruption. Inconclusive outcomes of various studies suggest that criticality assessments would benefit from the identification of best practices. To prepare the field for such guidance, this paper aims to clarify the mechanisms that affect methodological choices which influence the results of a study. This is achieved via literature review and round table discussions among international experts. The paper demonstrates that criticality studies are divergent in the system under study, the anticipated risk, the purpose of the study, and material selection. These differences in goal and scope naturally result in different choices regarding indicator selection, the required level of aggregation as well as the subsequent choice of aggregation method, and the need for a threshold value. However, this link is often weak, which suggests a lack of understanding of cause-and-effect mechanisms of indicators and outcomes. Data availability is a key factor that limits the evaluation of criticality. Furthermore, data quality, including both data uncertainty and data representativeness, is rarely addressed in the interpretation and communication of results. Clear guidance in the formulation of goals and scopes of criticality studies, the selection of adequate indicators and aggregation methods, and the interpretation of the outcomes, are important initial steps in improving the quality of criticality assessments.

AB - The assessment of the criticality of raw materials allows the identification of the likelihood of a supply disruption of a material and the vulnerability of a system (e.g. a national economy, technology, or company) to this disruption. Inconclusive outcomes of various studies suggest that criticality assessments would benefit from the identification of best practices. To prepare the field for such guidance, this paper aims to clarify the mechanisms that affect methodological choices which influence the results of a study. This is achieved via literature review and round table discussions among international experts. The paper demonstrates that criticality studies are divergent in the system under study, the anticipated risk, the purpose of the study, and material selection. These differences in goal and scope naturally result in different choices regarding indicator selection, the required level of aggregation as well as the subsequent choice of aggregation method, and the need for a threshold value. However, this link is often weak, which suggests a lack of understanding of cause-and-effect mechanisms of indicators and outcomes. Data availability is a key factor that limits the evaluation of criticality. Furthermore, data quality, including both data uncertainty and data representativeness, is rarely addressed in the interpretation and communication of results. Clear guidance in the formulation of goals and scopes of criticality studies, the selection of adequate indicators and aggregation methods, and the interpretation of the outcomes, are important initial steps in improving the quality of criticality assessments.

U2 - 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617

DO - 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104617

M3 - Article

JO - Resources, Conservation and Recycling

JF - Resources, Conservation and Recycling

SN - 0921-3449

ER -