|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. termine "best" modes of action when the consequences of the alternatives expose conflicting objectives and values within the group of decision makers. In these cases, no amount of analysis will directly resolve the conflict. Rather, the role of LCA should be to clearly articulate the consequences of each alternative and to provide a framework for the necessary negotiations. ReferencesDyer, R. F., and E. H. Forman. 1992. Group decision support with the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Support Systems 8:99-124. Fava, J. A., R. Denison, B. Jones, M. Curran, B. Vigon, S. Selke, and J. Barnum, eds. 1990. A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessments: Workshop Report. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Foundation for Environmental Education. Smuggler's Notch, Vt., August 18-23, 1990. Goicoechea, A., D. R. Hansen, and L. Duckstein. 1982. Multiobjective Decision Analysis with Engineering and Business Applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Keeney, R. L., and H. Raiffa. 1976. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Steen, B., and S. O. Ryding. 1992. The EPS Enviro-Accounting Method: An Application of Environmental Accounting Principles for Evaluation and Valuation of Environmental Impact in Production Design. IVL Report B 1080. Göteborg, Sweden: Swedish Environmental Research Institute. Vigon, B. W., D. A. Tolle, B. W. Cornaby, H. C. Lathan, C. L. Harrison, T. L. Boguski, R. G. Hunt, and J. D. Sellers. 1993. Life-Cycle Impact Assessment: Inventory Guidelines and Principles. EPA/600/R-95/245. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
|
|
|||||||||||||||
