% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Harzendorf:912487,
      author       = {Harzendorf, Freia and Wulf, Christina and Haase, Martina
                      and Baumann, Manuel and Ersoy, Hüseyin and Zapp, Petra},
      title        = {{D}omestic value added as an indicator for sustainability
                      assessment: {A} case study on alternative drivetrains in the
                      passenger car sector},
      journal      = {Clean technologies and environmental policy},
      volume       = {24},
      issn         = {1435-2974},
      address      = {Heidelberg},
      publisher    = {Springer},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2022-05666},
      pages        = {3145–3169},
      year         = {2022},
      abstract     = {To strengthen the economic pillar in sustainability
                      assessment, the indicator ‘domestic value added’ is
                      introduced. It aims at comparing established and less
                      developed technologies regarding their prospective value
                      added in a country. This is done by classifying a
                      technology’s value added to the developed categories:
                      domestic, potential domestic and non-domestic. Within this
                      paper, two methods for assessing this indicator are
                      introduced focussing on their applicability in a
                      sustainability assessment context. Both methods are tested
                      on a case study comparing two alternative drivetrain
                      technologies for the passenger car sector (battery and fuel
                      cell electric vehicle) to the conventionally used internal
                      combustion engine. The first method is life cycle cost-based
                      whereas the second is based on Input Output analysis. If a
                      life cycle cost assessment is already available for the
                      technology under assessment, the easier to implement life
                      cycle cost-based approach is recommended, as the results are
                      similar to the more complex Input Output-based approach.
                      From the ‘domestic value added’ perspective, the battery
                      electric vehicle is already more advantageous than the
                      conventional internal combustion engine over the lifecycle.
                      Fuel cell electric vehicles have the highest potential to
                      increase their ‘domestic value added’ share in the
                      future. This paper broadens the economic pillar in
                      sustainability assessment by introducing a new indicator
                      ‘domestic value added’ and giving practical information
                      on how to prospectively assess it for existing and less
                      developed technologies or innovations.},
      cin          = {IEK-STE},
      ddc          = {690},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
      pnm          = {1112 - Societally Feasible Transformation Pathways
                      (POF4-111)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1112},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      doi          = {10.1007/s10098-022-02402-1},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/912487},
}