A product or technology is not sustainable if it is maximally ecological, rather that it fulfils various criteria (such as ecological, economic, social) in a balanced relationship with one another. And then they also have to fit into the environment in which they are used. But how do you find that out without a doctorate?
With transparent pragmatism
The way is actually simple: Experts agree on the evaluation criteria that are important from their respective point of view and on indicators that can be used to determine whether the criteria have been met. And then the corresponding data for the indicators are sought which do not usually exist. Or which are incomplete. Or they don't precisely reflect what is needed.
With transparent pragmatism and the right methods, we nevertheless arrive at a resilient result:
With the multi-criteria analysis, we can present the advantages and disadvantages of different product or technology variants in a differentiated way.
With the benefit analysis, we can make it clear in the case of controversial selection decisions which interest group benefits most from which solution. And what they have to put up with in return.
This is useful for selection decisions where many different criteria have to be considered.