2. Proposed list of impact categories with their chain of causalities or effects
As stated in Wäger (2006), the impact categories shall together enable an encompassing assessment of relevant impacts, which are known today (completeness), but at the same time should have the least overlap as possible (independence). In a first step (analysis step), we propose here to design the categories to be independent and to cover all the impacts. We analyse in detail the impact chains (from the source to the final impacts) in order to show the differences. The impacts differentiation is made by using the following parameters: type of source, main scientific disciplines involved in the chain of impact, time and distance scales between the source and the final impacts, type of final target (see Table 9). Other parameters could be added.
In a second step, we try to find or to design impact indicator(s) per impact category: Potential indicators are given in Table 10.
The aggregation of impacts is possible when the knowledge necessary to build impact indicators is similar and if the main characteristics of the chain are similar. As, to be practical, the number of categories should amount to a not too high number, and considering the importance of each impact and the availability of indicators, some impacts could be merged. The correspondences between initial impact categories of Table 1 and the categories proposed in Table 9 are given in Table 10 and in Table 11.
The importance of each sources is indicated by * to *** and coloured when important (***) as shown Table 7. The proposed typology of targets is given Table 8.
Sources
|
IB
|
infrastructure building
|
VP
|
vehicle production
|
EPD
|
energy production and distribution
|
T
|
traffic
|
VID
|
vehicle and infrastructure destruction
|
Table 7: Description of the sources.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
