Sustainable remediation through the risk management perspective and stakeholder involvement: A systematic and bibliometric view of the literature

Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Pollution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol

Sustainable remediation through the risk management perspective and stakeholder involvement: A systematic and bibliometric view of the literature* ^ nio Thome  Adeli Beatriz Braun*, Adan William da Silva Trentin, Caroline Visentin, Anto ~o Jos Graduate Program in Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Passo Fundo, Sa e Neighborhood, BR 285, Zip Code 99052-900, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 14 May 2019 Received in revised form 5 August 2019 Accepted 7 September 2019 Available online 9 September 2019

Sustainable remediation is a new way of thinking and acting in the management of contaminated sites. This research aims to identify and structure the state-of-the-art of sustainable remediation from the risk management and stakeholder involvement perspective. A systematic and bibliometric study of scientific production was performed on scientific papers indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases with the objectives: 1) to select a bibliographic portfolio that is aligned with the perception of the researchers in regard to theme, 2) to perform a bibliometric analysis of the selected bibliographic portfolio, and 3) to conduct a thematic synthesis and identify the integration of sustainable remediation from the risk management and stakeholder involvement perspective. The results indicated that although sustainable remediation is a recent theme it presents a promising field for development worldwide, verified by the growing number of publications in recent years. A change is observed in the way risk management is considered with the rise of sustainable remediation, demonstrated by different approaches in publications. Likewise, the involvement of stakeholders is widely discussed, and the importance of their participation in decision-making processes in the field of sustainable remediation is identified. This research brings several and new contributions as it provides with a detailed overview and guidance about the main characteristics and peculiarities as well as what already exists, the form to approach, the advances and what still needs to be improved so that the perception of stakeholders and risk management are better understood within the context of sustainable remediation. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Contaminated site remediation Sustainability Impacts Decision makers Scientific production indexes

1. Introduction Decisions on the management of contaminated sites have been marked by changes in recent years; remediation alone is not sustainable because the application of corrective action can have its own environmental, economic, and social consequences (Forum, 2009; Favara and Gamlin, 2017). Traditional approaches focused on the cost and ease of project implementation, the time needed for remediation, and efficiency to meet decontamination goals (Harclerode et al., 2015a). The inclusion and dissemination of sustainability in the context of remediation, starting in 2000 (Rizzo et al., 2016), may be recent, but they are gradually taking hold

* This paper has been recommended for acceptance by Dr. Yong Sik Ok. * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (A.B. Braun).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113221 0269-7491/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

since considering cost, ease, time, and efficiency alone is no longer enough. This new perspective first arrived with the rise of the green remediation approach. Green remediation considers all environmental effects and aspects of corrective action, seeking options to maximize the environmental benefit and minimize the environmental footprint (Forum, 2009). However, green remediation alone does not comprise a complete approach since social and economic factors are not considered. Thus, the term “sustainable remediation” emerged, reflecting the perception that remediation activities can have environmental, social, and economic impacts, either positive or negative (Rizzo et al., 2016). Unlike green remediation, which addresses only environmental factors, sustainable remediation brings a broader and holistic approach to managing contaminated sites. Its objective is not only to focus on the removal results but also to balance the environmental, social, and economic impacts and benefits of

2

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

applying a remediation process with both short- and long-term evaluations. Sustainable remediation is therefore increasingly aimed at avoiding the possibility of generating problems in regard to ecosystem and human health and enabling the return of remediated sites to future uses (Pollard et al., 2004; Holland et al., 2011; Cundy et al., 2013; Reddy and Adams, 2015). In this context, some considerable progress in orientation toward sustainable remediation has already been perceived, both in the scientific milieu and by agencies and organizations from different countries (Barnett, 2001). The Sustainable Remediation Forum (SuRF), created in 2006 in the Unites States, resulted in the first coalition specifically dedicated to sustainable remediation and currently has partner groups in several countries. Considering that sustainable remediation is already an area of intense development around the world, its evaluation is pursued by a set of guiding principles, methods, indicators, metrics, and tools to be used in decision-making on the practice of more sustainable remediation r et al., 2012; Virkutyte and (DoD, 2010; SuRF-UK, 2010; Pinte Varma, 2014; Reddy and Adams, 2015). The importance of sustainable remediation is multiple. Generally related to the minimization of the secondary impacts of the remediation processes, ensuring and effectively managing risks to protect human health and the environment as a whole. In this process, the incorporation of the stakeholder’s views is already essential factor to guide about politics and socio-environmental practice to manage contaminated sites or introduce the sustainable remediation concepts into the remediation industry (Sam et al., 2017; O’Connor et al., 2019). In addition, there will always be many entities directly affected by remediation activities, and any risk analysis process that leads to the remediation of contaminated areas will be affected by individual judgments (Filipsson et al., 2013; Hou and Al-Tabbaa, 2014; Slenders et al., 2017). From the risk management perspective, in essence, the management of contaminated sites and remediation have been largely based on minimizing potential threats and preventing unacceptable risks to human health and the environment to ensure that a site is adequate for use (Moraes et al., 2014). This conception remained with the rise and adoption of sustainable remediation concepts but with a broader view on risk management. There has been an interest in including the assessment, management, elimination, and/or control, in a safe and timely manner, of significant risks to the health of the worker directly involved in the remediation process and of the community surrounding the site besides the risks to the environment in general (Bardos, 2014; Virkutyte and Varma, 2014; Slenders et al., 2017). In addition, the importance of risk management in this context is confirmed by the development of the international standard ISO 18504, in which risk management has been incorporated into policy and legislation and thus provides a standard for the control, reduction, or elimination of remediation strategies’ risks, helping decision makers choose the most sustainable path (Cappuyns, 2016; ISO, 2017; Nathanail et al., 2017). The identification and involvement of stakeholders are already identified as very important initial aspects for the selection and application of remediation technologies in order to verify the needs and acceptance of society as well as the probable associated risks (Bonano et al., 2000; Tam and Byer, 2002). According to Cundy et al. (2013), stakeholders correspond to an organization, group, or person that may be directly or indirectly affected by one or more of the remediation project stages and also to those that have an interest in solving the problem, such as local owners, neighbors, site workers, the buyer/seller of the site, consultants, project managers, administrators, regulatory agencies, researchers, and the responsible authorities (O’Connell and Hou, 2015; Harclerode et al., 2016a). However, although there have been promising advances in the sustainable remediation scenario, the challenges related to the

adoption and acceptability of its concepts in management of contaminated sites are still great. There is no universally standardized and accepted objective method for assessing the degree of sustainability; tools have imbalances in the assessment of environmental, economic, and social aspects; and there is low adoption rate of sustainable practices and behaviors, especially in developing countries (Reddy and Adams, 2015; Ridsdale and Noble, 2016; Huysegoms and Cappuyns, 2017). The scientific scenario also lacks studies that provide clear and objective guidance for assessing sustainable remediation as well as for efficiently managing all associated risks and integrating all stakeholders. Some research papers on the subject have already been published but not specifically in relation to the perspective of risk management and stakeholder involvement and not with this more systematic and bibliometric view, which concisely express all the knowledge and the advances already made. Thus, sustainable remediation has emerged as a new approach to the management of contaminated sites and is firmly based on the management of associated risks and the involvement and participation of stakeholders directly or indirectly affected by the remediation process. However, these methods are not fully consolidated, and many aspects of their effective insertion into the management process remain unknown. Therefore, a more detailed review is required to verify their relevant characteristics, key challenges, and breakthroughs. In this sense, the present study aimed to perform a systematic and bibliometric study of scientific production in the field of sustainable remediation from the perspective of risk management and stakeholder involvement, represented by the scientific papers indexed in the Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science (Thompson Reuters) databases. Thus, to develop knowledge about the present topic, production indexes are presented according to the following categories: the time distribution of publications; the authors, countries, and scientific journals that have contributed most to the theme; and the terms most evidenced in the documents. 2. Methodological procedures This study is characterized by a systematic and bibliometric study of an exploratory and descriptive nature, with qualitative and quantitative approaches, to locate and analyze existing studies related to sustainable remediation, with an aim to increase the knowledge related to the theme. The instrument of intervention used to achieve this goal consists of a process of knowledge construction based on the interests and delimitations of the researchers, according to the constructivist view known as ProKnowC (Knowledge Development Process Intervention InstrumentConstructivist), as presented by Tasca et al. (2010) and Ensslin et al. (2013). Systematic research, as opposed to traditional reviews, which rely on personal and intentional selections of material judged to be important, enables the researcher to undertake a comprehensive search of all existing publications on their topic of interest, going beyond their own horizon of experience. In addition, a systematic review reduces researcher bias since it adopts pre-defined sequential search strategies, which improves the methodological transparency adopted and consequently allows future replications (Denyer and Tranfield, 2009). In a complementary way, bibliometric research allows the selection and subsequent analysis of the most relevant studies, having as a main characteristic the elaboration of scientific knowledge production indexes, enabling the direction of new studies with more precision and reducing the margin of error in future decisionmaking (Macedo et al., 2010; Marcelo and Hayashi, 2013; Caiado et al., 2017).

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

3

In addition to collecting data from primary sources, this type of research also allows the selection and analysis of secondary data through the elaboration of a bibliographic portfolio, which represents the perceptions and delimitations of authors regarding the relevance and representativeness of the studies according the interests of the researchers and the subject matter. 2.1. Delimitation of research The research was not delimited as to the types of documents searched nor as to the type of access (free or not). Thus, scientific papers, reviews, books and/or chapters of books, conference papers, contributions to edited volumes, and working papers were included in this review. Also included in the research were all areas of knowledge that publish on the subject. However, there was delimitation regarding the time of analysis, being considered in research the period from 1980 to May 06, 2019 - the date on which the query in the databases was performed. The decision to use the year 1980 as the starting point of the study was due to the fact that the perception of the need to face environmental problems had its first initiatives in the 1980s, where sustainable development ceased to be only an ideal and became considered a goal (IPCC, 2007). Another limitation of this research is related to the databases used, which in this case were two databases, the Scopus (scopus. com) and the Web of Science (workinfo.com). The choice to use these was due to the fact that they correspond to the most comprehensive scientific databases, having similar transparent and reliable bibliometric tools with which to follow, analyze, and visualize the research. Scopus is the largest database of abstracts and citations of the literature, including scientific journals and scholarly peer-reviewed works (Scopus, 2018), and the Web of Science (WOS) is a bibliographic reference database containing information on scientific production since 1945, with records in the main journals, conference proceedings, and books to identify the best relevant research of interest (WOS, 2014). English was selected as the language for searching in both databases; however, the methodological procedures adopted to perform the study were adapted for each database in order to meet the objective of the study. In Scopus, the search was performed using the criteria of selected keyword combinations in the “title, abstract, and keywords” of the publications. In WOS, the search criterion for keywords was in the “topic” of the publications, which corresponds to the “title, abstract, keywords of author, and keywords plus,” the latter consisting of words or phrases created or extracted from the titles of the cited papers and retrieved by search in topic field. 2.2. Procedure for selecting the bibliographic portfolio Considering the definitions and approaches performed in the introduction of this paper and the specificities of this theme, the research was carried out by combining the following words: sustainable remediation, green remediation, green and sustainable remediation, risks, and stakeholders. To do so, was used the boolean operators “AND” and “OR” to perform the combinations of words. The use of the AND operator represents that all the terms used should appear in the publications, whereas the OR operator indicates that the publications can bring any of the terms used. The quotation marks (“ ”) were also used to define the term or expression as a single search word. Thus, Fig. 1 presents the search pattern adopted in the Scopus and WOS databases. From this, the systematic research of the primary data (gross)

Fig. 1. Words and operators used in searching the databases.

was carried out in both databases, returning 192 publications, 108 publications from Scopus and 84 from WOS, which were stored in the software Nvivo (qsrinternational.com) to carry out the following filtrations and analyses. Nvivo is the most popular qualitative data analysis software used in universities as it allows the encoding and management of data and ideas, modeling visually, and generates reports, all of which facilitates the analysis of data. Then, the data were analyzed to select the documents to compose the bibliographic portfolio of this work, which followed certain main steps according to the methodology proposed by Tasca et al. (2010), Ensslin et al. (2013), Caiado et al. (2017) and Visentin et al. (2019) with some adaptations for the research in question. Fig. 2 illustrates the bibliographic portfolio selection process. The filtering of the documents for the bibliographic portfolio composition followed four steps: (i) the elimination of redundant publications; (ii) the elimination of conference proceedings, books, and chapters of books and editorials; (iii) alignment of the title and abstract with the theme; and (iv) a complete analysis of the text to verify alignment with the theme. Initially, the study began with a database of 192 documents, which was reduced to 130 publications with the elimination of redundancies. Of these, 29 items were excluded after the analysis of document types. Through the analysis of titles and abstracts, a further 38 documents were excluded, and after the complete reading of documents, 9 items were disregarded. At the end of the process, 54 papers composed the bibliographic portfolio and were considered for this review. These papers were categorized and synthesized during Section 3.3. After the composition of the bibliographic portfolio, the analysis of secondary data was started, in which the selected documents were extracted into a Microsoft Excel worksheet and analyzed in detail through the elaboration of bibliometric indexes, such as the number of publications per year and the authors, countries, and periodicals (impact factors) that contributed the most to the publications in this area. Also, an analysis of the most frequent terms used in the 54 papers composing the bibliographic portfolio was carried out through the use of Nvivo software to visualize the main topics of the publications. Also in the Nvivo software, to identify the relationship between the most frequent terms, clusters diagrams were identified and analyzed. Cluster analysis diagrams provide a graphical representation that facilitates the visualization of patterns or sources that share similarities and differences between the most frequent words. Finally, individual papers were encoded by Nvivo and analyzed in relation to each other, which allowed the detection of higherorder topics within the literature and the main considerations of this systematic and bibliometric review. This information was used to categorize and synthesize the thematic approach to risk management and stakeholder engagement within sustainable remediation, as well as identify the recent advances and main gaps in this context.

4

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

Fig. 2. Methodological structure of research in scientific literature.

3. Results and discussion Here the results are presented regarding the bibliometric indexes of the bibliographic portfolio, including the evolution of scientific production and the authors, countries, and periodicals highlighted in the theme, together with the impact factors of these journals and the most recurrent terms of the publications that compose the bibliographic portfolio as well as a categorization and thematic synthesis of them. 3.1. Evolution of scientific production In this section we present the evolution of the scientific production of the temporal cut from 1980 to 2019, both of the primary (gross) data, coming directly from the research in the databases, as well as the secondary data, derived from only the documents that make up the bibliographic portfolio. 3.1.1. Primary data Of the 192 publications extracted from the Scopus and WOS databases, about 60% corresponded exclusively to the issue of risk, 23% addressed only the stakeholder question, and 17% included both themes in their approach.

This highlight of risk management in the publications is related to the fact that the management of contaminated sites has, from the beginning, been largely based on the prevention of risks to both human health and the environment, and only recently have the interest and the importance of engaging stakeholders as a decisionmaking criterion emerged in the context of sustainable remediation (Bardos, 2014). Also, as mentioned, in relation to the first phase of the research, from the gross data, 192 publications were found (108 in Scopus and 84 in WOS), and their distribution in regard to the temporal cut between the years from 1980 to 2019 is represented in Fig. 3. It was observed that the first publications began in the year 1999 and that, starting in 2000, according to Rizzo et al. (2016), there was a growing interest in incorporating sustainability into the decisionmaking processes for the remediation of contaminated sites through the dissemination of the term “sustainable remediation,” reflecting the perception that remediation activities can have environmental, social, and economic impacts, both positive and negative. Kearney et al. (1999) are responsible for the first publication dedicated exclusively to sustainable remediation, addressing a remediation method for contaminated sites developed by the United Kingdom Environmental Agency. This method considered

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

5

Fig. 3. Time evolution of total publications in the Scopus and WOS databases.

however, in 2012 there was no such publication. It should be noted that the broader management of risks and the consideration of stakeholder involvement in the sustainable remediation approach have been highlighted since the year 2010, with the publication by Sparrevik and Breedveld (2010). The authors, by verifying the difficulty in incorporating stakeholders into the decision-making process and a sustainable management system in Norway, assessed the Norwegian system for the management of contaminated sediment for risk assessment and governance as well as stakeholder involvement. Since 2010, publications on the subject have grown gradually, with some declines. The highest peaks occurred in the last four years with an annual growth rate in publications of around 17%. This increase illustrates the relevance of the sustainability theme in the current context of managing contaminated sites and, consequently, from the perspective of risk management and stakeholder engagement within the sustainable remediation approach.

3.1.2. Secondary data (bibliographic portfolio) After analyzing the primary data, with the exclusion of duplicate documents and the verification of document types, titles, abstracts, and the full texts of the publications, there were 54 documents that composed the bibliographic portfolio of the research. Fig. 4 shows the temporal distribution of scientific production in relation to the number and cumulative frequency of publications per year of the papers in the bibliographic portfolio of this research, covering nine years and corresponding to the temporal cut from 2010 to 2019,

3.1.2.1. Most published authors on the subject. Based on the publications in the bibliographic portfolio, it was possible to identify more than 100 authors. Of these, seven had four or more publications each, seven had three publications, and the remainder, more than 85% of the authors, has only one publication related to the theme. Considering only the first two groups of authors, according to Fig. 5, the researchers Deyi Hou of Tsinghua University in Beijing of China and Paul Bardos of the University of Reading Whiteknights in the United Kingdom, with 13 and 10 publications each, respectively, together account for 43% of the total number of publications considered in the bibliographic portfolio.

Authors

comparisons between two or more techniques, allowing the analysis of the environmental effects. Between the years 2002 and 2006 there were no publications related to this specific theme. From 2007 the total number of publications began to grow gradually, with significant increases in the last four years, which alone account for more 55% of all publications on this theme, and presenting an annual growth rate of around 15%. The summit of publications, with 29, occurred in the year 2016, however, the year 2019 already has 29 publications to date, and there will probably still be several indexations in the databases by the end of the year. This shows that the concerns in this context tend to increase, since sustainability is at the peak of global discussions. In addition, by comparing the two databases used, it was verified that about 75% of the publications found in the WOS database were also indexed in the Scopus database, so it can be said that Scopus is more efficient and provides a more meaningful representation of the results on the subject.

Hou, D. Bardos, P. Smith, J.W.N. Harclerode, M. O'Connor, D. Harries, N. Tsang, D. C.W. Al-Tabbaa, A. Darmendrail, D. Evans, F. Ma, Y. Nathanail, P. Ok, Y. S. Rosén, L. 0

Fig. 4. Time distribution of refined scientific production about the subject of risks and stakeholders in sustainable remediation.

2

4

6 8 10 Number of publications

12

Fig. 5. Authors with the greatest number of publications on the subject.

14

6

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

The approach of Deyi Hou is primarily to verify the perceptions and views of different stakeholders to achieve sustainable results. Their publications have great focus on assessing the trend in and the actual adoption of sustainable behaviors in different countries as well as the role played by the decision makers involved in remediation process. Of his 13 publications is main author in six (Hou and Al-Tabbaa, 2014; Hou et al., 2014a; Hou et al., 2014b; Hou, 2016; Hou et al., 2017a; Hou et al., 2017b), with a publication alone and the rest divide between several authors. Paul Bardos is seen as the leader in contaminated soil remediation technologies and one of the innovators behind the concept of sustainable remediation since the late 1990s, which may justify the author being among those who publish the most on the subject. In this sense, for the most part, the publications of Paul Bardos present the state of the art on sustainable remediation through the propagation of concepts, principles, progress, and perspectives in the world scenario. Through these publications the author also seeks to justify the importance of involving stakeholders and the management of unacceptable risks in this context as well as to take greater account of social issues in the practice of contaminated sites remediation. Of his 10 publications he is main author in 4, with a publication alone and the rest divide between several authors (Bardos et al., 2011; Bardos, 2014; Bardos et al., 2016; Bardos et al., 2018).

Countries

3.1.2.2. Countries that stand out in number of publications. Fig. 6 shows the geographical distribution of the analyzed studies, presenting the 10 countries that stand out in number of publications, being that, the distribution corresponded to 18 involved countries. There is a visible highlight for three countries as the publications on the subject: United States, China and United Kingdom, with contributions in 21, 19 and 18 publications each, respectively. Netherlands and Sweden contributed with six and five publications each, respectively. Korea end France appear with four publications each. Three countries - Canada, Italy and New Zealand, contributed with three publications each. The other remaining countries Norway, Austria, Colombia, Belgium, Japan, Germany, Thailand, Pakistan and Brazil, contributed with two or only one publication. It is also observed that for 28 of the 54 papers analyzed, the authors of each publication originate from the same country. However, an increase in the collaboration of several countries on the same paper has been perceived. It is possible to identify that the main global economies show the most interest in the subject. While countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, for example, already have high rates of awareness and adoption of sustainable remediation, developing countries, in addition to being less aware, also have low rates of sustainability adoption in regard to contaminated sites remediation (Hou et al., 2016). It can also be pointed out that

United States China United Kingdom Netherlands Sweden Republic of Korea France Canada Italy New Zealand 0

2

4

6

8 10 12 14 16 Number of publications

18

20

Fig. 6. Countries with the highest number of contributions to the theme.

22

developed countries’ great concern with sustainable remediation is due to the existence of organizations and institutions dedicated exclusively to the introduction and diffusion of sustainability concepts in remediation activities, such as the SuRF created in 2006 in the United States, which then diffused to the United Kingdom and other countries currently involved (Ridsdale and Noble, 2016). Already, in developing countries, where sustainability actions are not yet widespread, the field of sustainable remediation remains in the initial adaptation phase, without significant progress. According Diaz-Sarachaga et al. (2017), cultural, social, and economic aspects, as well as a shortage of public policies aimed at sustainability, are factors that exert strong pressure on the adoption of sustainable remediation concepts, and these are precisely the factors that are not yet well established in emerging and developing countries. However, in this context, China appears in second place in the number of contributions in publications on the subject addressed, which visibly has greater focus in developed countries. China, although still representing a developing country, is actively involved in the development and implementation of regulatory decisions for the management of contaminated sites. Also stands out in the sustainable remediation approach, with very recent studies. One of the factors contributing to this fact is the greater knowledge of the contaminated sites in the country. In addition, according to Song et al. (2018), China, which ranks in fourth place, has one of the largest remediation markets in the world and, based on advances in sustainable remediation, is seeking to adopt these principles in the country’s remediation efforts. 3.1.2.3. Periodicals in which the documents were published and its corresponding impact factors. The papers that make up the bibliographic portfolio of this research are distributed in 26 different journals, as shown in Fig. 7. Four journals are prominent in the number of publications, the “Remediation Journal”, the “Science of the Total Environment”, the “Journal of Environmental Management” and the “Journal of Cleaner Production”, with 12, 8, 6 and 5 publications each, respectively, accounting for 57% of total publications. Two journals, “Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management” and “Land Degradation & Development”, present two publications each. The rest of the periodicals only have one publication each on the subject. The “Remediation Journal,” indexed by the Wiley Online Library, is a journal for engineers, managers, and environmental consultants, with a focus on informative, analytical, and practical papers, offering new approaches to remediation activities and issues. The “Science of the Total Environment”, indexed by Elsevier, is focused on the publication of papers related to the environment, with the superposition of at least two or three of the following topics: atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, lithosphere and anthroposphere. The “Journal of Environmental Management,” indexed by Elsevier, is more multidisciplinary, focusing on aspects of managing the use of the environment, both natural and artificial, and is directed more toward environmental managers, but anyone concerned about the sustainable use of environmental resources is targeted. The “Journal of Cleaner Production”, indexed by Elsevier too, is a transdisciplinary journal, focused on the research and practice of Cleaner Production, Environmental and Sustainable in companies, governments, educational institutions, regions and societies. The impact factor is the main metric used to evaluate the scientific journals. This metric lists the citations received for publications within the same period, usually one year. Thomson Reuters publishes the Journal Citation Report (JCR) annually with the values of the impact factors of the journals. Fig. 7 shows the impact factors

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

7

Fig. 7. Periodicals that publish on the theme and its respective impact factors.

of the journals in this study, based on the most recent year available (2018). It can be observed that the first four journals with an expressive number of publications are not the ones with the greatest impact factor. The greatest disparity is observed in relation to the “Remediation Journal,” which appears in first place in number of publications, but appears in penultimate position in relation to impact factor, which is below one. Already, the journal “Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology”, with one publication only, presents the greatest impact factor among the magazines that publish on the subject. This suggests that there are journals with higher acceptance in regard to publication of the theme and that there is greater difficulty in publishing in journals with a high impact factor. 3.2. Frequency of terms and clusters formed An interesting way to evaluate the bibliographic portfolio is by analyzing the frequency of words in the publications, as shown in Fig. 8, through the elaboration of a “word cloud,” as it is commonly called. This word cloud represents the frequency of terms that appear most in the documents analyzed, and the font size of the word is proportional to its frequency in the text. The word “remediation”, and its synonyms, is the most frequent in the publications, with more than 6500 counts. Next is the term “sustainable”, and its synonyms such as the word “sustainability”, with more than 5000 counts. Together these two words representing alone 21% of the total of the 30 most frequent words with four or more letters in their composition. The significance of these two words is justified by the fact that the central theme of this research is sustainable remediation. Following is the word “assessment,” which is linked to the processes of sustainability assessment in the remediation of contaminated sites as well as the assessment of associated risks and stakeholders. The words “risk” and “stakeholders” appear in the eighth and 19th positions, respectively, which demonstrates the emphasis given in this study. It can be seen that the risk approach still stands out in relation to the incorporation of stakeholders in the context of

Fig. 8. Word cloud of the most frequent words in the publications of the bibliographic portfolio.

the management of contaminated areas, including sustainable remediation. But, in general, all the words present in the word cloud relate to the main questions about the concept of sustainable remediation. To evaluate the relationships between the most frequent terms identified, an analysis diagram of formed clusters was created. The type of diagram generated and used for the analysis was the horizontal branching dendrogram, where similar items are grouped together in the same branch and differing items are separated - that is, fonts or words that appear together are more similar than those that are distant from each other. Table 1 shows the categorization of the dendrograms generated in the clustering process and the existing relationships.

8

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

Table 1 Analysis and relationships of dendrograms of branches formed in the clustering process. Dendograms of branches generated in the clustering process

Existing relationships Concern about the degradation processes of contaminated soils and water is visible, and these need some intervention. In this context it is verified that the choice of the remediation/ cleaning technique to be chosen and applied in the contaminated site, soil or water, is still quite intertwined with risk management and analysis. The associated risks determine the need for remediation as well as the choice of technique. There is also a strong relationship between green remediation and the development of contaminated sites and the redevelopment of brownfields, being that, this latter action generates large expenditures for the public sector. Therefore, this ramification suggests a correlation between the associated environmental issues, remediation of orphan sites and related costs. Another important relationship occurs between evaluation and decision-making towards sustainable remediation and its application in remediation projects. Currently, its application is performed through frameworks and/or methods that present orientation steps, besides the involvement and participation of different stakeholders in this process, which provides greater visibility to the social aspects of the whole process. It can be verified that the main motivation both to perform the remediation of a traditional contaminated site and to apply sustainable remediation consists of the associated environmental impacts and those that affect human life and health. Therefore, although social aspects have been gaining ground in this context, this consideration is still deficient when compared to economic and mainly environmental aspects.

3.3. Categorization and thematic synthesis Of the 54 papers that make up the bibliographic portfolio, 26 studies have an approach focused on risk management and 28 on stakeholder involvement. A synthesis and analysis of each of these perspectives is covered below. 3.3.1. Approach to risk The management of risks associated with remediation has undergone changes and advances in recent years with the incorporation of sustainability in this context and the elaboration of policies, legislation, and norms for its orientation (Nathanail et al., 2017; Slenders et al., 2017). The studies demonstrate different approaches to risk management. In recent studies, there is a strong relationship between the risk approach and the primary impacts of contamination on the environment and human health, especially by potentially toxic elements such as heavy metals (Martins et al., 2018; He et al., 2019; Sun et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2019), persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as petroleum hydrocarbons (Varjani, 2017; Lee et al., 2019), pesticides (Sun et al.,

2018) and radioactive materials (Mobbs et al., 2019). In this approach, the potential risks remaining in the contaminated environment are also often evaluated after the application of the remediation technique(s), which may serve as an indication of the efficiency of the action (Tara et al., 2019). Or the risks associated with the products generated during the remediation, which will determine what can be done with them and with the remaining site, for example the transformation of contaminated sediments into building materials to be used as fill, partition blocks and paving blocks (Wang et al., 2018). However, there are already studies that go beyond this approach. In some studies, it is performed the assessment and calculation of risks associated with human health and occupational risks of death and injury of workers involved in the remediation process. For that purpose they used green and sustainable tools, statistical methods, and estimates of deaths and injuries, and comparing ex situ and in situ remediation techniques with the n, 2013; option “without intervention/treatment” (Ferdos and Rose Herman, 2014). In the same direction Huang et al. (2019) evaluated the risks of fatal accidents and injuries to workers and local residents during

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

the remediation process, and minimizing them after applying sustainable remediation. Boroumand et al. (2017) assessed and calculated of environmental impacts and the occupational hazards of deaths and injuries related to the transit of workers and community members during the remediation and final disposal of waste, with the removal or the closure of the local. Already Song et al. (2019) and Li et al. (2019) demonstrate in their studies the concern about the risks associated with brownfields, both in relation to the contamination and the future use of these sites towards achieving sustainability. Structural proposals that combine life cycle assessment with health risk assessment are presented by Hou et al. (2017b) to aid in the selection of the “greener and more sustainable” remediation option. Bardos (2014) draws to the concerns that go beyond the prevention of unacceptable risks but which include the environmental, social, and economic consequences of management activities, and also the opportunities for a broader benefit, going beyond just reaching risk reduction goals. The incorporation of resilience into the oversight of managing the long-term potential risks of a remediation process, which has recently emerged as a new approach to risk management. This perspective aims to design remediation solutions with the capacity to adapt to the conditions of climate change since their effects create risks and opportunities that must be considered during the planning of the remediation process and also over the long term (O’Connell and Hou, 2015; Maco et al., 2018). Although most studies focus on risk or stakeholder involvement alone, Zheng et al. (2019) developed a method for evaluating the sustainability of remediation techniques applying both concepts. A human health risk assessment (HHRA) of the site contamination before the remediation and a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) was carried out through an expert survey to evaluate the environmental, social and economic aspects of the remediation technologies. Bardos et al. (2018) presents and evaluates the SuRFUK sustainable remediation framework, which recognizes the risks and dialogue and engagement of stakeholders as key factors in its approach, the latter being explicitly included in the method. Given this context, Fig. 9 clarifies the main approaches provided by researchers in their studies regarding risk management. In addition, it summarizes how these approaches drive, assess, address and relate to risks. It can be observed that there are two approaches that stand out significantly in relation to the others. Addressing environmental and human health risks associated with site contamination, which correspond to primary impacts, is the largest approach among studies (38% of all studies addressing risk management). Another highlighted approach is related to the occupational and health risks of the workers and local communities during remediation processes, whether they are accidents, injuries or death. It is of utmost importance in sustainable remediation that both primary (associated with the contaminated site) and secondary (arising from the remediation process) risks are considered and evaluated. However, analysis of portfolio studies has shown that sustainable remediation from the perspective of risk management is still addressed with greater focus on human health impacts, often ignoring other important social aspects in addition to the broader environmental and economic risks. 3.3.2. Approach to stakeholder Regarding stakeholder involvement, this approach has already been widely discussed and contextualized in the literature, being identified and described as an important step in the decisionmaking process in relation to remediation, especially in the current state of sustainable remediation (Cappuyns, 2011; Kalomoiri and Braida, 2013; Bardos et al., 2016).

9

8%

7%

8% 4% 4% 8%

38%

15% 4% 4% Risks in his generic approach Risks associated with the contaminated site Risks that remained in the site due to the application of remediation Risks associated with products generated during remediation Risks of accidents, injuries and deaths during remediation Risks associated with brownfields Risks from the perspective of life cycle assessment (LCA) Risks about environmental, social and economic aspects Risks from the perspective of resilience concepts Risks and stakeholder involvement Fig. 9. Frequency of studies with the major approaches related to risk management.

Stakeholder participation becomes useful and is of paramount importance in the various phases of the management of contaminated sites. For each stage the number and type of participating stakeholders must be carefully chosen. For example, Ma et al. (2018) applied a questionnaire to remediation professionals working throughout China to determine the current status of site remediation contaminated in China. Similarly, to understand the factors that drive organizational behavior in the adoption of sustainable practices in remediation, it is observed that stakeholders have a significant influence on sustainability adoption (Hou et al., 2014a). The awareness of residents about contamination is already quite clear, but how to recover these sites still requires more in-depth knowledge. The study developed by Liu et al. (2018) suggested that farmers were well aware of land degradation, but had difficulty in choosing the best strategy to reverse this situation, with the main concern about the costs involved. In this same sense, Prior (2018) elucidates that there is a great lack of understanding and acceptance of the residents near the contaminated sites as to remediation techniques. In addition, considering and evaluating the social aspects of the sustainable remediation process is still a challenge. In this way, for social evaluation to become less frightening and more objective, it is necessary to engage and consult with the most different stakeholders, that is, all those capable of evaluating whether an activity close to them or the community in general would be beneficial, neutral or harmful (Smith, 2019). In general, the opinions and participation of the various stakeholders, such as experts, professionals, and politicians, are already widely used in decision-making regarding the determination and

10

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

integration of sustainability in the most varied issues in the field of remediation, such as the following: i. To verify the perceptions of different stakeholders in different countries regarding the adoption of and behavior toward sustainable remediation (Hou et al., 2014b) or to verify their demands in regard to remediation sustainability considerations, in the study by Hou and Al-Tabbaa (2014), the protection of workers’ health and safety was more prominent, although it was considered a social issue. ii. To examine the perceptions of the various decision makers regarding sustainable remediation behaviors, the use of empirical experiments, questionnaire surveys, and qualitative interviews indicates that there are wide divergences in perceptions, mainly due to organizational factors, access to information, and self-perception (Hou, 2016). iii. For the selection and weighting of sustainability indicators to be used to evaluate a remediation structure of agricultural sites (Hou et al., 2017a). iv. To perform, by means of a multicriteria analysis, a costbenefit evaluation of remediation alternatives in order to € derqvist classify them in terms of sustainability achieved (So et al., 2015). v. To examine the predictors and factors that contribute to and encourage the redevelopment/recovery of brownfields (Green, 2018). Reddy et al. (2018) evaluated quantitatively the global sustainability of different remediation techniques through the application of a tool that uses the preference of the stakeholders, which assign weights to the three pillars - environmental, social and economic, previously defined, depending on the importance considered. In this context of stakeholder integration, the multicriteria analysis is already a widely used tool for decision-making in the analysis of sustainability in remediation projects. It enables the inclusion and participation of various stakeholders and experts on the subject in search of sustainable results or in evaluating the sustainability of different remediation techniques. It also allows the verification of the main interests and the stakeholders’ perspectives through the weighting of defined criteria, which express a certain n et al., 2015; Gill et al., 2016; Chen et al., 2017). theme (Rose It is also found in the literature that the management, assessment, and governance of risk and stakeholder involvement are performed jointly and in a complementary manner in order to verify the approach of the two criteria in sustainable remediation initiatives (Sparrevik and Breedveld, 2010; Harclerode et al., 2016b; Rizzo et al., 2016). In addition, it is verified that the identification and management of risks associated with the remediation process are affected by the individual judgments and perceptions of stakeholders, promoting preventive measures so that vulnerable populations are no longer affected by unsustainable practices (Filipsson et al., 2013; Harclerode et al., 2016a). This risk assessment and stakeholder engagement already correspond to criteria widely discussed and considered in the methods and tools that apply sustainability in the remediation of contaminated sites. The method developed by SuRF highlights the approach to protecting human health and the environment in general and involving stakeholders throughout the remediation project, from the beginning to the future use of the site (Holland et al., 2011). It is designed specifically to guide and assist practitioners and stakeholders in understanding and evaluating the potential impacts of remediation activities so that unacceptable risks can be mitigated (Favara et al., 2011). SuRF-UK also provides a framework based on risk analysis and the opportunity for stakeholder integration in the sustainability assessment process in the

management of contaminated sites (Bardos et al., 2011). However, the tools for sustainable remediation have still given more attention to assessing environmental and economic aspects to reduce human and environmental risks compared to social aspects (Cappuyns, 2016). In this sense, some guidelines for the integration of the social dimension in decision-making for remediation have been put forth, with the identification of methodologies and the development of social indicators such as health and safety, stakeholder collaboration, and benefits to the community at large (Harclerode et al., 2015b). In this way, the involvement of stakeholders from the early stages of the remediation process is imperative so that adequate inclusion of social aspects occurs, and all associated risks are taken into account. Given this context and also considering risk management, Table 2 elucidates the stakeholder groups that are most influential in the sustainable remediation context and that receive greater attention in the studies analyzed, in addition to bringing the objectives of their involvement and role in the context addressed, as well as the means used to perform this engagement. 3.4. Recent advances and main gaps Smith (2019) points to a reality that still hinders the concise application of the concepts of sustainable remediation. The traditional aspects with which the remediation industry is most familiar continue to be dealt with more effectively compared to those recently introduced through the sustainable remediation approach (O’Connor et al., 2019). In reference of risk management, it is clearly noticeable that all remediation process has an intrinsic risk assessment to guide the need for remediation, its urgency, and the choice of technique to be applied (Reddy et al., 2018). The risk approach focuses much on the preliminary phases of the management of contaminated sites, associated to the risks of contamination and very little to those from the application of the remediation technique. Therefore, the risk approach still prevails over sustainability objectives to trigger corrective actions. Yet it is sustainability that manages and optimizes unacceptable risks. In relation to the stakeholders, there are still no clear and concise guidelines on how to involve all stakeholders in the sustainable remediation process, that is not only the views of the experts, but of all those who are affected in some way by the application of the remediation technique. This gap can be fulfilled when this involvement becomes an integral part of remediation policy and practice (Prior, 2018; Smith, 2019). Besides this, according to O’Connor et al. (2019), in developing countries, the practice of involving stakeholders is still quite limited, requiring greater attention and guidance in policy and remediation processes. In addition to the participation of stakeholders during the remediation process, in the choice of ecologically correct, economically viable and socially inclusive strategies, this involvement and their opinion should also be considered in relation to what will be done with the site after remediation, in order to obtain a good public acceptance for reuse (Song et al., 2019). 4. Conclusions The results of this systematic and bibliometric study revealed solid and growing databases at Scopus and WOS on the subject of sustainable remediation. The research data reported in this study allowed us to understand, expand our knowledge on, and demonstrate the importance of developing academic research around the use of sustainable remediation in the management of contaminated sites and from the perspective of risk management and stakeholder involvement in this context.

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

11

Table 2 Main roles and means of involvement of the stakeholder groups with most influential in the context of sustainable remediation. Type of stakeholders

Objectives of involvement

Experts, practitioners and legislators on remediation Workers Neighboring community, owners and society at large Researchers

Verify the status of remediation processes in a region, municipality, state or country Questionnaires, interviews, qualitative and Verify the demand and behavior regarding the adoption of sustainable remediation quantitative methods and multicriteria analysis Check the level of awareness of the associated risks of applying a remediation process Check the level of awareness and report on the benefits and impacts of applying a particular remediation process, for greater understanding and acceptance

Means for engagement

Select and consider sustainability indicators to assess different remediation technologies

The bibliometrics made possible the creation of a bibliographic portfolio which allowed an overview and the mapping of the main indexes of scientific production, such as the evolution and temporal distribution of publications; the contributing authors, countries, and periodicals; and the terms used in the subject studied. Thus, this type of analysis fulfilled the purpose of the study, allowing readers to broaden their knowledge on and understanding of the evolution and contribution of publications related to the subject. Therefore, although this type of research has some restrictions defined by the authors regarding the total coverage of publications, it is extremely important, since it allows a deeper study of a specific theme. Moreover, this type of study allows researchers to direct their future studies in order to fill the knowledge gaps on the subject and thus contribute more effectively to science. Research has shown that sustainable remediation from the perspective of risk management and stakeholder engagement is a relatively new issue that is growing in importance. From these more specific perspectives and from the careful analysis of the documents, the first publication occurred in 2010 but with the highest peak of publications in 2019, which already has the largest number of publications, and probably more will be indexed until the end of the year. These data reinforce the trend that sustainability in soil remediation is a matter of relevant scientific interest, and, according to the analyzed data, the Scopus database is more efficient than WOS in representing the results in relation to this theme. It was verified that developed countries are still prominent in regard to this theme and that there is an absence of Latin American countries in the indicators and a lack of developing countries in general involved in this subject. This indicates one of the major challenges to be overcome in the field of sustainable remediation: the remaining discrepancies on the world scene regarding awareness and practice in adopting sustainable corrective measures, especially between developed and developing countries. However, on the other hand, this issue presents a promising area for the development of research and publications involving the application of sustainable remediation measures in developing regions. In general, on the subject the studies addressed, there is a change in the approach to risk management, with an increasing consideration of the involvement of stakeholders in sustainable remediation processes. Some important deficiencies in this context can be identified, such as: the recent approach to sustainable remediation; their greater attention in developed countries compared to developing countries; and considerably low impact factor of the journals that most published on the subject. Therefore, for sustainable remediation to continue to advance and for its approach to become increasingly consolidated, it should be seen, above all by managers and researchers, as a new way of thinking about the management of contaminated sites and a key factor in decision-making. Moreover, as part of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2018), sustainable remediation aims

to meet the 15th objective on the agenda: “Life on land”. Thus, sustainable remediation presents a new approach to the management of contaminated areas, contributing to achieving the major global goals of sustainable development. Acknowledgement Thanks are extended to the Environmental Geotechnics Research Group of the University of Passo Fundo and to the Coordination for Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) for providing scholarships to the main authors. References Bardos, P., 2014. Progress in sustainable remediation. Remediat. J. 25, 23e32. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21412. Bardos, P., Bone, B., Boyle, R., Ellis, D., Evans, F., Harries, N.D., Smith, J.W.N., 2011. Applying sustainable development principles to contaminated land management using the SuRF-UK framework. Remediat. J. 21, 77e100. https://doi.org/10. 1002/rem.20283. Bardos, R.P., Bone, B.D., Boyle, R., Evans, F., Harries, N.D., Howard, T., Smith, J.W.N., 2016. The rationale for simple approaches for sustainability assessment and management in contaminated land practice. Sci. Total Environ. 563 (564), 755e768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.001. Bardos, R., Thomas, H.F., Smith, J.W.N., Harries, N.D., Evans, F., Boyle, R., Howard, T., Lewis, R., Thomas, A.O., Haslam, A., 2018. The development and use of sustainability criteria in SuRF-UK’s sustainable remediation framework. Sustainability 10, 1781e1803. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061781. Barnett, J., 2001. The Meaning of Environmental Security, Ecological Politics and Policy in the New Security Era. Zed Books, London. Bonano, E.J., Apostolakis, G.E., Salter, P.F., Ghassemi, A., Jennings, S., 2000. Application of risk assessment and decision analysis to the evaluation, ranking and selection of environmental remediation alternatives. J. Hazard Mater. 71, 35e57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(99)00071-0. Boroumand, A., Greenberg, G., Herman, K., Lewis, A., 2017. Incorporating green and sustainable remediation analysis in coal combustion residuals (CCR) surface impoundment closure decision making. Remediat. J. 27, 29e38. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/rem.21527. Caiado, R.G.G., Dias, R.F., Mattos, L.V., Quelhas, O.L.G., Filho, W.L., 2017. Towards sustainable development through the perspective of eco-efficiency e a systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 165, 890e904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2017.07.166. Cappuyns, V., 2011. Possibilities and limitations of LCA for the evaluation of soil remediation and cleanup. Sustain. Chem. 213e223. https://doi.org/10.2495/ chem110201. Cappuyns, V., 2016. Inclusion of social indicators in decision support tools for the selection of sustainable site remediation options. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 45e56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.035. Chen, S.S., Taylor, J.S., Baek, K., Khan, E., Tsang, D.C.W., Ok, Y.S., 2017. Sustainability likelihood of remediation options for metal-contaminated soil/sediment. Chemosphere 174, 421e442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.02.005. Cundy, A.B., Bardos, R.P., Church, A., Puschenreiter, M., Friesl-Hanl, W., Müller, I., Neu, S., Mench, M., Witters, N., Vangronsveld, J., 2013. Developing principles of sustainability and stakeholder engagement for “gentle” remediation approaches: the European context. J. Environ. Manag. 129, 283e291. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.07.032. Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., 2009. Producing a systematic review. In: Buchanan, D.A., Bryman, A. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods. SAGE Publications Ltd., London, pp. 671e689. Department of Defense (DoD), 2010. Guidelines for consideration of sustainability in remediation of contaminated sites. http://www.defence.gov.au/ estatemanagement/governance/Policy/Environment/Contamination/Docs/ Toolbox/SustainabilityRemediationGuidelines.pdf. Diaz-Sarachaga, J.M., Jato-Espino, D., Castro-Fresno, D., 2017. Application of the

12

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221

sustainable infrastructure rating system for developing countries (SIRSDEC) to a case study. Environ. Sci. Policy 69, 73e80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016. 12.011. Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S.R., Pinto, H.M., 2013. Research process and bibliometric analysis: evaluation of the quality of banking services. Rev. Adm. Contemp. 17, 325e349. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-65552013000300005 (In Portuguese). Favara, P., Gamlin, J., 2017. Utilization of waste materials, non-refined materials, and renewable energy in in situ remediation and their sustainability benefits. J. Environ. Manag. 204, 730e737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.097. Favara, P.J., Krieger, T.M., Boughton, B., Fisher, A.S., Bhargava, M., 2011. Guidance for performing footprint analyses and life-cycle assessments for the remediation industry. Remediat. J. 21, 39e79. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.20289. n, L., 2013. Quantitative environmental footprints and sustainability Ferdos, F., Rose evaluation of contaminated land remediation alternatives for two case studies. Remediat. J. 24, 77e98. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21379. € Filipsson, M., Ljunggren, L., Oberg, T., 2013. Gender differences in risk management of contaminated land at a Swedish authority. J. Risk Res. 17, 353e365. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2013.808690. Forum, U.S., 2009. Sustainable remediation. Sustainable Remediation white paper e integrating sustainable principles, practices, and metrics into remediation projects. Remediat. J. 19, 5e114. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.20210. Gill, R.T., Thornton, S.F., Harbottle, M.J., Smith, J.W.N., 2016. Sustainability assessment of electrokinetic bioremediation compared with alternative remediation options for a petroleum release site. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 120e131. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.036. Green, T.L., 2018. Evaluating predictors for brownfield redevelopment. Land Use Policy 73, 299e319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.008. Harclerode, M.A., Lal, P., Miller, M.E., 2015a. Quantifying global impacts to society from the consumption of natural resources during environmental remediation activities. J. Ind. Ecol. 20, 410e422. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12380. Harclerode, M., Ridsdale, D.R., Darmendrail, D., Bardos, P., Alexandrescu, F., Nathanail, P., Pizzol, L., Rizzo, E., 2015b. Integrating the social dimension in remediation decision-making: state of the practice and way forward. Remediat. J. 26, 11e42. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21447. Harclerode, M., Macbeth, T.W., Miller, M.E., Gurr, C.J., Myers, T.S., 2016a. Early decision framework for integrating sustainable risk management for complex remediation sites: drivers, barriers, and performance metrics. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 57e66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.087. Harclerode, M.A., Lal, P., Vedwan, N., Wolde, B., Miller, M.E., 2016b. Evaluation of the role of risk perception in stakeholder engagement to prevent lead exposure in an urban setting. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 132e142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2016.07.045. He, M., Shen, H., Li, Z., Wang, L., Wang, F., Zhao, K., Liu, X., Wendroth, O., Xu, J., 2019. Ten-year regional monitoring of soil-rice grain contamination by heavy metals with implications for target remediation and food safety. Environ. Pollut. 244, 431e439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.070. Herman, K., 2014. Actuarial risk analysis to promote National Contingency Plan (NCP) e consistent remediation. Remediat. J. 24, 11e19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ rem.21392. Holland, K.S., Lewis, R.E., Tipton, K., Karnis, S., Dona, C., Petrovski, E., Bull, L.P., Taege, D., Hook, C., 2011. Framework for integrating sustainability into remediation projects. Remediat. J. 21, 7e38. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.20288. Hou, D., 2016. Divergence in stakeholder perception of sustainable remediation. Sustain. Sci. 11, 215e230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0346-0. Hou, D., Al-Tabbaa, A., 2014. Sustainability: a new imperative in contaminated land remediation. Environ. Sci. Policy 39, 25e34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci. 2014.02.003. Hou, D., Al-Tabbaa, A., Chen, H., Mamic, I., 2014a. Factor analysis and structural equation modelling of sustainable behaviour in contaminated land remediation. J. Clean. Prod. 84, 439e449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.054. Hou, D., Al-Tabbaa, A., Guthrie, P., 2014b. The adoption of sustainable remediation behaviour in the US and UK: a cross country comparison and determinant analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 490, 905e913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2014.05.059. Hou, D., Ding, Z., Li, G., Wu, L., Hu, P., Guo, G., Wang, X., Ma, Y., O’Connor, D., Wang, W., 2017a. A sustainability assessment framework for agricultural land remediation in China. Land Degrad. Dev. 29, 1005e1018. https://doi.org/10. 1002/ldr.2748. Hou, D., Guthrie, P., Rigby, M., 2016. Assessing the trend in sustainable remediation: a questionnaire survey of remediation professionals in various countries. J. Environ. Manag. 15, 18e26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.045. Hou, D., Qi, S., Zhao, B., Rigby, M., O’Connor, D., 2017b. Incorporating life cycle assessment with health risk assessment to select the ‘greenest’ cleanup level for Pb contaminated soil. J. Clean. Prod. 162, 1157e1168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2017.06.135. Huang, S., Tan, X., Zhu, Y., 2019. Implementation of a green and sustainable concept to evaluate footprint and optimize contaminated site remediation in China: a case study. Environ. Eng. Sci. 1e12. https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2018.0505. Huysegoms, L., Cappuyns, V., 2017. Critical review of decision support tools for sustainability assessment of site remediation options. J. Environ. Manag. 196, 278e296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.002. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2007. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (U.K.). International Standards Organization (ISO), 2017. Soil quality e guidance on sustainable remediation. ISO/DIS 18504. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:

18504:dis:ed-1:v1:en. Kalomoiri, A., Braida, W., 2013. Promoting decision making through a sustainable remediation assessment matrix (SRAM). Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 7, 252e270. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISD.2013.056943. Kearney, T., Martin, I., Herbert, S., 1999. Sustainable remediation of land contamination. In: Battelle Memorial Institute International In Situ and On-Site Bioreclamation Symposium Proceedings, vol. 5, p. 6. Lee, T.H., Cao, W.Z., Tsang, D.C.W., Sheu, Y.T., Shia, K.F., Kao, C.M., 2019. Emulsified polycolloid substrate biobarrier for benzene and petroleum-hydrocarbon plume containment and migration control e a field-scale study. Sci. Total Environ. 666, 839e848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.160. Li, X., Bardos, P., Cundy, A.B., Harder, M.K., Doick, K.J., Norrman, J., Williams, S., Chen, W., 2019. Using a conceptual site model for assessing the sustainability of brownfield regeneration for a soft reuse: a case study of Port Sunlight River Park (U.K.). Sci. Total Environ. 652, 810e821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2018.10.278. Liu, K., Huisingh, D., Zhu, J., Ma, Y., O’Connor, D., Hou, D., 2018. Farmers’ perceptions and adaptation behaviours concerning land degradation: a theoretical framework and a case-study in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau of China. Land Degrad. Dev. 29, 2460e2471. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3011. Ma, Y., Dong, B., Bai, Y., Zhang, M., Xie, Y., Shi, Y., Du, X., 2018. Remediation status and practices for contaminated sites in China: survey-based analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25, 33216e33224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3294-2. Maco, B., Bardos, P., Coulon, F., Erickson-Mulanax, E., Hansen, L.J., Harclerode, M., Hou, D., Mielbrecht, E., Wainwright, H.M., Yasutaka, T., Wick, W.D., 2018. Resilient remediation: addressing extreme weather and climate change, creating community value. Remediat. J. 29, 7e18. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem. 21585. Macedo, M., Botelho, L.L.R., Duarte, M.A.T., 2010. Bibliometric review on scientific ~o e Soc. 4, 619e639. https://doi.org/10. production in managerial learning. Gesta 21171/ges.v4i8.999 (In Portuguese). Marcelo, J.F., Hayashi, M.C.P.I., 2013. Bibliometric study on scientific production in the field of sociology of science. Rev. Inf. Inf. 18, 138e153. https://doi.org/10. 5433/1981-8920.2013v18n3p138 (In Portuguese). Martins, G.C., Penido, E.S., Alvarenga, I.F.S., Teodoro, J.C., Bianchi, M.L., Guilherme, L.R.G., 2018. Amending potential of organic and industrial byproducts applied to heavy metal-rich mining soils. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 162, 581e590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.07.040. Mobbs, S., Orr, P., Weber, I., 2019. Strategic considerations for the sustainable remediation of nuclear installations. J. Environ. Radioact. 196, 153e163. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2017.07.018. Moraes, S.L., Teixeira, C.E., Maximiano, A.M.S., 2014. Guide to Elaboration of Intervention Plans for the Management of Contaminated Areas, first ed. Rev. S~ ao Paulo: Institute of Technological Research (IPT), Government of the state of S~ ao Paulo and BNDES (In Portuguese). Nathanail, C.P., Bakker, L.M.M., Bardos, P., Furukawa, Y., Nardella, A., Smith, G., Smith, J.W.N., Goetsche, G., 2017. Towards an international standard: the ISO/ DIS 18504 standard on sustainable remediation. Remediat. J. 28, 9e15. https:// doi.org/10.1002/rem.21538. O’Connell, S., Hou, D., 2015. Resilience: a new consideration for environmental remediation in an era of climate change. Remediat. J. 26, 57e67. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/rem.21449. O’Connor, D., Müller-Grabherr, D., Hou, D., 2019. Strengthening socialenvironmental management at contaminated sites to bolster Green and Sustainable Remediation via a survey. Chemosphere 225, 295e303. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.03.035. r, L., Hardi, P., Martinuzzi, A., Hall, J., 2012. Bellagio STAMP: principles for Pinte sustainability assessment and measurement. Ecol. Indicat. 17, 20e28. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.07.001. Pollard, S.J.T., Brookes, A., Earl, N., Lowe, J., Kearney, T., Nathanail, C.P., 2004. Integrating decision tools for the sustainable management of land contamination. Sci. Total Environ. 325, 15e28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.11.017. Prior, J., 2018. Factors influencing residents’ acceptance (support) of remediation technologies. Sci. Total Environ. 624, 1369e1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. scitotenv.2017.12.133. Reddy, K.R., Adams, J.A., 2015. Sustainable Remediation of Contaminated Sites. Momentum Press, LLC, New York. Reddy, K.R., Chetri, J.K., Kiser, K., 2018. Quantitative sustainability assessment of various remediation alternatives for contaminated lake sediments: case study. Sustain. J. Rec. 11, 307e321. https://doi.org/10.1089/sus.2018.0021. Ridsdale, D.R., Noble, B.F., 2016. Assessing sustainable remediation frameworks using sustainability principles. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 36e44. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.015. Rizzo, E., Bardos, P., Pizzol, L., Critto, A., Giubilato, E., Marcomini, A., Albano, C., €berl, G., Harclerode, M., Harries, N., Nathanail, P., Pachon, C., Darmendrail, D., Do Rodriguez, A., Slenders, H., Smith, G., 2016. Comparison of international approaches to sustainable remediation. J. Environ. Manag. 184, 4e17. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.07.062. n, L., Back, P.E., So €derqvis, T., Norrman, J., Brinkhoff, P., Norberg, T., Volchko, Y., Rose €berl, D., 2015. SCORE: a novel multi-criteria decision Norin, M., Bergknut, M., Do analysis approach to assessing the sustainability of contaminated land remediation. Sci. Total Environ. 511, 621e638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2014.12.058. Sam, K., Coulon, F., Prpich, G., 2017. Use of stakeholder engagement to support policy transfer: a case of contaminated land management in Nigeria. Environ.

A.B. Braun et al. / Environmental Pollution 255 (2019) 113221 Dev. 24, 50e62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2017.06.005. Scopus, 2018. All solutions-scopus. https://www.elsevier.com. Slenders, H.L., Bakker, L., Bardos, P., Verburg, R., Alphenaar, A., Darmendrail, D., Nadebaum, P., 2017. There are more than three reasons to consider sustainable remediation, a Dutch perspective. Remediat. J. 27, 77e97. https://doi.org/10. 1002/rem.21509. Smith, J.W.N., 2019. Debunking myths about sustainable remediation. Remediat. J. 29, 7e15. https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21587. €derqvist, T., Brinkhoff, P., Norberg, T., Rose n, L., Back, P.E., Norrman, J., 2015. CostSo benefit analysis as a part of sustainability assessment of remediation alternatives for contaminated land. J. Environ. Manag. 157, 267e278. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.024. Song, Y., Hou, D., Zhang, J., O’Connor, D., Li, G., Gu, G., Li, S., Liu, P., 2018. Environmental and socio-economic sustainability appraisal of contaminated land remediation strategies: a case study at a mega-site in China. Sci. Total Environ. 610e611, 391e401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.016. Song, Y., Kirkwood, N., Maksimovi c, C., Zheng, X., O’Connor, D., Jin, Y., Hou, D., 2019. Nature based solutions for contaminated land remediation and brownfield redevelopment in cities: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 663, 568e579. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.347. Sparrevik, M., Breedveld, G.D., 2010. From ecological risk assessments to risk governance. Evaluation of the Norwegian management system for contaminated sediments. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 6 (2), 240e248. https://doi. org/10.1897/ieam_2009-049.1. Sun, S., Sidhu, V., Rong, Y., Zheng, Y., 2018. Pesticide pollution in agricultural soils and sustainable remediation methods: a review. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 4, 240e250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40726-018-0092-x. Sun, Y., Wang, D., Tsang, D.C.W., Wang, L., Ok, Y.S., Feng, Y., 2019. A critical review of risks, characteristics, and treatment strategies for potentially toxic elements in wastewater from shale gas extraction. Environ. Int. 125, 452e469. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.02.019. Sustainable Remediation Forum from United Kingdom (SuRF-UK), 2010. A Framework for Assessing the Sustainability of Soil and Groundwater Remediation. CL:aire, London. www.claire.co.uk/SuRFuk. Tam, E.K.L., Byer, P.H., 2002. Remediation of contaminated lands: a decision methodology for site owners. J. Environ. Manag. 64, 387e400. https://doi.org/ 10.1006/jema.2001.0506. Tara, N., Arslan, M., Hussain, Z., Iqbal, M., Khan, Q.M., Afzal, M., 2019. On-site performance of floating treatment wetland macrocosms augmented with dye-

13

degrading bacteria for the remediation of textile industry wastewater. J. Clean. Prod. 217, 541e548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.258. Tasca, J.E., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S.R., Alves, M.B.M., 2010. An approach for selecting a theoretical framework for the evaluation of training programs. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 34, 631e655. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591011070761. United Nations, 2018. Sustainable development goals. https://www.un.org/ sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/. Varjani, S.J., 2017. Microbial degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons. Bioresour. Technol. 223, 277e286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.037. Virkutyte, J., Varma, R.S., 2014. Greener and sustainable remediation using iron nanomaterials. ACS Symp. Ser. 1e21. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2014-1184. ch001. , A., 2019. Application of life cycle Visentin, C., Trentin, A.W.S., Braun, A.B., Thome assessment as a tool for evaluating the sustainability of contaminated sites remediation: a systematic and bibliographic analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 672, 893e905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.034. Wang, L., Chen, L., Tsang, D.C.W., Li, J.S., Baek, K., Hou, D., Ding, S., Poon, C.S., 2018. Recycling dredged sediment into fill materials, partition blocks, and paving blocks: technical and economic assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 199, 69e76. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.165. Wang, L., Chen, S.S., Sun, Y., Tsang, D.C.W., Yip, A.C.K., Ding, S., Hou, D., Baek, K., Ok, Y.S., 2019. Efficacy and limitations of low-cost adsorbents for in-situ stabilisation of contaminated marine sediment. J. Clean. Prod. 212, 420e427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.056. Web of Science, 2014. Quick reference guide. http://www.ip-science.thomsonreuter. com (In Portuguese). Zhang, Y., Hou, D., O’Connor, D., Shen, Z., Shi, P., Ok, Y.S., Tsang, D.C.W., Wen, Y., Luo, M., 2019. Lead contamination in Chinese surface soils: source identification, spatial-temporal distribution and associated health risks. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1e38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2019.1571354. Zhao, T., Zhang, K., Chen, J., Shi, X., Li, W., Ma, Y., Fang, G., Xu, S., 2019. Changes in heavy metal mobility and availability in contaminated wet-land soil remediated using lignin-based poly (acrylic acid). J. Hazard Mater. 368, 459e467. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.01.061. Zheng, Z.J., Lin, M.Y., Chiueh, P.T., Lo, S.L., 2019. Framework for determining optimal strategy for sustainable remediation of contaminated sediment: a case study in Northern Taiwan. Sci. Total Environ. 654, 822e831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. scitotenv.2018.11.152.