slightly revised versions of the ILCD guidelines targeting different categories of products or services to be applied by companies and organisations reporting on their environmental performance. 3.5 Dissemination Early studies commissioned by companies were often not published due to confidential information on industrial processes and the difficulty of communicating results in non-technical language. The first peer-reviewed LCA-like study was the packaging study commissioned by the US EPA (see Sect. 3.2) published in 1974. After the development of the ISO 14040 series standards on LCA, starting in 1997, it became a common practice for companies to publish peer-reviewed LCA reports to document environmental claims, although full disclosure of underlying data is still rare due to confidentiality issues. Academic journals have become an important medium for the dissemination of LCA studies, whether made to support decisions in, e.g. companies, or for research purposes


Academic journals have become an important medium for the dissemination of LCA studies, whether made to support decisions in, e.g. companies, or for research purposes. In 1996, the first academic journal fully dedicated to LCA was born, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. This journal and other journals have seen a sharp increase in the number of published papers related to life cycle assessment, from less than 100 in 1998 to more than 1300 in 2013 as illustrated in Fig. 3.2, which indicates an exponential development of the number of publications in this period. The publication of LCA reports outside academic journals is difficult to map, but is likely to have seen a similar development as indicated by the increase in company use of LCA illustrated in Fig. 3.1. Fig. 3.2 Development in number of published LCA-related academic articles in English per year according to Web of Science (WoS) (Chen et al. 2014)

Hauschild et al., LCA: Theory and Practice


3.1. Fig. 3.2 Development in number of published LCA-related academic articles in English per year according to Web of Science (WoS) (Chen et al. 2014). The high R2 value for the fitted exponential function indicates an exponential development. Reprinted with permission of Springer


Figure 3.3 shows that many of the English language LCA-related academic papers originate in the US and Europe, but that countries like Japan, China and South Korea have also had a noticeable publication activity. The limited activity on LCA in most emerging economies is clearly visible. Reasons for this are discussed in Chap. 19 on Globalisation and mainstreaming of LCA. Note, however, that LCA studies published in other languages than English are not included in Fig. 3.3, which therefore may lead to an underestimation of academic publications from emerging economies. 3.6 Concluding Remarks LCA is a young discipline with 50 years of history and less than 30 years of intense development and application. Over the years, the methodology and applications have matured in the sense that scientific consensus and standards have emerged on how to perform LCA


Over the years, the methodology and applications have matured in the sense that scientific consensus and standards have emerged on how to perform LCA. The field has expanded in other ways when considering the number of publications, application domains and the geographical distribution of LCA competences. Table 3.1 summarises some of the important events in the history of LCA. Fig. 3.3 Geographical distribution of articles published from 1998 to 2013 considering primary authors only (Hou et al. 2015). Reprinted with permission of Springer LCA History


Ahbe, S., Braunschweig, A., Müller-Wenk, R.: Methodology for ecobalances based on ecological optimization. In: BUWAL (SAFEL) Environment Series No. 133, Bern (1990) Bundesamt für Umweltschutz: Ökobilanzen von Packstoffen (Life-cycle assessment of packaging materials, in German). Bern, Switzerland. (Schriftenreihe Umweltschutz No. 24) (1984) Chen, H., Yang, Y., Yang, Y., Jiang, W., Zhou, J.: A bibliometric investigation of life cycle assessment research in the web of science databases. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19(10), 1674–1685 (2014) CorporateRegister. (2016). http://www.corporateregister.com. Accessed 25 Apr 2016 EC-JRC: European Commission-Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook—General guide for Life Cycle Assessment—Detailed guidance. First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN


First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2010) EC-JRC: European Commission—Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook— Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European context—Based on Existing Environmental Impact Assessment Models and Factors. First edition 2011, EUR 24571 EN. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxemburg (2011) Ecoinvent: History. http://www.ecoinvent.org/about/history/history.html. (2016). Accessed 16 June 2016 Franke, M.: Umweltauswirkungen durch Getränkeverpackungen—Systematik zur Ermittlung der Umweltauswirkungen von komplexen Prozessen am Beispiel von Einweg-und Mehrweg-Getränkebehältern (Environmental impacts from beverage packaging—methodology for analysis of environmental impacts from complex processes with the example of oneway and returnable beverage containers, in German)


EF-Verlag für Energie- u. Umwelttechnik, Berlin, Germany (1984) Goedkoop, M.J., Spriensma, R.: Eco-indicator 99, a damage oriented method for lifecycle impact assessment, methodology report (update April 2000) (2000) Guinée, J.B., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., de Koning, A., van Oers, L., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Suh, S., Udo de Haes, H.A., de Bruijn, J.A., van Duin, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J. (eds.) Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Series: Eco-efficiency in industry and science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Hardbound. ISBN 1-4020-0228-9; Paperback, ISBN 1-4020-0557-1 (2002) Hauschild, M.Z., Potting, J.: Spatial Differentiation in LCA Impact Assessment—The EDIP 2003 Methodology, Environmental News No. 80; Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark (2005) Hauschild, M.Z., Wenzel, H.: Environmental assessment of products. Volume 2—Scientific Background, 565 pp


80; Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark (2005) Hauschild, M.Z., Wenzel, H.: Environmental assessment of products. Volume 2—Scientific Background, 565 pp. Chapman & Hall, UK/Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham. ISBN 0412 80810 2 (1998) Heijungs, R., Guinée, J.B., Huppes, G., Lankreijer, R.M., Udo de Haes, H.A., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Ansems, A.M.M., Eggels, P.G., van Duin, R., de Goede, H.P.: Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of products. Guide and Backgrounds. Centre of Environmental Science (CML), Leiden University, Leiden (1992) Hou, Q., Mao, G., Zhao, L., Du, H., Zuo, J.: Mapping the scientific research on life cycle assessment: a bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20(4), 541–555 (2015) Hunt, R.G., Sellers, J.D., Franklin, W.E.: Resource and environmental profile analysis: a life cycle environmental assessment for products and procedures. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev


Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 12(12), 245–269 (1992) ISO: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines (ISO 14044). ISO, The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2006b) Klöpffer, W.: Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int. J. Life Cycle 13(2), 89–94 (2008)


Leontief, W.: Environmental repercussions and economic structure. An input-output approach. Rev. Econ. Stat. 52, 262–271 (1970) Lindfors, L.-G., Christiansen, K., Hoffman, L., Virtanen, Y., Juntilla, V., Hanssen, O.-J., Rønning, A., Ekvall, T., Finnveden, G.: Nordic Guidelines on Life-Cycle Assessment. Nord1995:20, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen (1995) Lundholm, M.P., Sundström, G.: Resource and Environmental Impact of Tetra Brik Carton and Refillable and Non-refillable Glass Bottles. Tetra Brik Aseptic Environmental Profile, AB Tetra Pak, Malmö (1985) Mekel, O.C.L., Huppes, G.: Environmental Effects of Different Package Systems for Fresh Milk. Centrum voor Milieukunde, Rijksuniversiteit, Leiden, NL. (CML-Mededelingen no. 70) (1990) Nordic Council of Ministers: Product Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Methodology


Centrum voor Milieukunde, Rijksuniversiteit, Leiden, NL. (CML-Mededelingen no. 70) (1990) Nordic Council of Ministers: Product Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Methodology. Nord 1992:9, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen (1992) Pommer, K., Hillersborg, A.S., Hirsbak, S., Hoffman, L., Schmidt, A.: Environmental Assessment of Milk Packaging. Return Bottles in Polycarbonate Compared to Disposable Cartons (in Danish). Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. (Environmental project No. 168) (1991) PRé:. Company History. https://www.pre-sustainability.com/company-history. Accessed 16 June SETAC: In: Fava, J., Denison, R., Jones, B., Curran, M.A., Vigon, B., Selke, S., Barnum, J. (eds.) SETAC Workshop Report: A Technical Framework for Life-Cycle Assessment. Smugglers Notch, Vermont, August 18–23 1990. SETAC Press (1991) SETAC: Life-Cycle Assessment—Inventory, Classification, Valuation and Data Bases


Smugglers Notch, Vermont, August 18–23 1990. SETAC Press (1991) SETAC: Life-Cycle Assessment—Inventory, Classification, Valuation and Data Bases. 2–3 December 1991, Leiden, The Netherlands (1992) SETAC: In: Fava, J., Consoli, F., Denison, R., Dickson, K., Mohin, T., Vigon, B. (eds.) Conceptual Framework for Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Workshop Report Sandestin FL, February 1–7, 1992. SETAC Press (1993a) SETAC: Guidelines for Life-cycle Assessment: A “code of Practice”: from the SETAC Workshop Held at Sesimbra, Portugal, 31 March-3 April 1993. SETAC Brussels and Pensacola (1993b) SETAC: In: Fava, J., Jensen, A.A., Lindfors, L.-G., Pomper, S., De Smet, B., Warren, J., Vigon, B. (eds.) Life-Cycle Assessment Data Quality: A Conceptual Framework. Workshop Report Wintergreen, Virginia, October 1992. SETAC Press (1994) Smith Cooper, J., Fava, J.A.: Life-cycle assessment practitioner survey—summary of results. J. Ind. Ecol


Workshop Report Wintergreen, Virginia, October 1992. SETAC Press (1994) Smith Cooper, J., Fava, J.A.: Life-cycle assessment practitioner survey—summary of results. J. Ind. Ecol. 10(4), 12–14 (2006) Steen, B.: A Systematic Approach to Environmental Priority Strategies in Product Development (EPS). Version 2000-general system characteristics; CPM report 1999:4, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (1999a) Steen, B.: A Systematic Approach to Environmental Priority Strategies in Product Development (EPS). Version 2000-Models and data of the default method; CPM report 1999:5, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (1999b) Teixeira, R., Pax, S.: A survey of life cycle assessment practitioners with a focus on the agri-food sector. J. Ind. Ecol. 15, 817–820 (2011). doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00421.x Thinkstep: A brief history of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). http://www.gabi-software.com/news/ news-detail/article/a-brief-history-of-life-cycle-assessment-lca/


doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00421.x Thinkstep: A brief history of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). http://www.gabi-software.com/news/ news-detail/article/a-brief-history-of-life-cycle-assessment-lca/. (2016). Accessed 16 June 2016 US EPA: Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Nine Beverage Container Alternatives —Final Report. EPA/530/SW-91c. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1974) Wenzel, H., Hauschild, M.Z., Alting, L.: Environmental Assessment of Products. Volume 1— Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development, 544 pp. Chapman & Hall/UK, Kluwer Academic Publishers/Hingham. ISBN 0 412 80800 5 LCA History


Author Biographies Anders Bjørn Part of the LCA community since the early 2010s. Main focus is interpretations of sustainability and integration of sustainability targets in LCA to enable absolute sustainability assessments. Mikołaj Owsianiak Involved in development and application of life cycle impact assessment methods in sustainability assessment of technologies. Has worked on issues associated with: soils (remediation), metals (toxic impact assessment), biodiesel (fate in the environment), and carbonaceous materials (biochar and hydrochar). Christine Molin Active in the field of LCA since 1992. Special interest in the development and dissemination of LCA and in the use of LCA in small and medium sized enterprises. Michael Z. Hauschild Involved in development of LCIA methodology since the early 1990s. Has led several SETAC and UNEP/SETAC working groups and participated in the development of the ISO standards and the ILCD methodological guidelines


Has led several SETAC and UNEP/SETAC working groups and participated in the development of the ISO standards and the ILCD methodological guidelines. Main LCA interests are chemical impacts, spatial differentiation and science-based boundaries in LCIA.


Chapter 4 LCA Applications Mikołaj Owsianiak, Anders Bjørn, Alexis Laurent, Christine Molin and Morten W. Ryberg Abstract The chapter gives examples of applications of LCA by the central societal actors in government, industry and citizens, and discusses major motivations and challenges for the use of LCA to support science-based decision-making from their respective perspectives. We highlight applications of LCA in policy formulation, implementation and evaluation, present different purposes of LCA application in industry at both product and corporate levels, and discuss challenges for LCA applications in small- and medium-sized enterprises. Our synthesis demonstrates the importance of LCA as a tool to quantify environmental impacts of products and systems and support decisions around production and consumption and highlights factors that prevent its even more widespread application


Learning Objectives After studying this chapter the reader should be able to: • Explain the main motivations for use of LCA by governments, industry, and citizens and their main types of LCA applications. • Demonstrate an understanding of the challenges and opportunities in the different types of LCA applications. M. Owsianiak (&)  A. Bjørn  A. Laurent  C. Molin  M.W. Ryberg Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: miow@dtu.dk A. Bjørn CIRAIG, Polytechnique Montréal, 3333 Chemin Queen-Mary, Montréal, QC, Canada © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_4


4.1 Background Recent decades have witnessed numerous applications of LCA to support decisions in an environmental sustainability context (see Chap. 3). Much efforts have been made to facilitate the application of LCA and life cycle thinking in society ranging from the regulatory and governmental level, through industry and production to the level of citizens and consumers. The dissemination of LCA has been aided by a number of initiatives for supporting and harmonizing the application of the tool. In 1997 the first version of the ISO 14040 standard (later updated as ISO 2006a) was published in an attempt to harmonize the framework and principles of LCA and to increase transparency and comparability of LCA studies. In 2001, The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) joined forces in the launch of a global Partnership to strengthen the dissemination and use of LCA worldwide, known as the Life Cycle Initiative (LCI)


The purpose of the initiative was to “enable users around the world to put life cycle thinking into effective practice”. Another initiative supporting a more widespread application of LCA was The European Commission’s project, The European Platform of Life Cycle Assessment, launched in 2005. Its objective was to “promote life cycle thinking in business and in policy making” in the European Union by focusing on underlying data and methodological needs. The homepages of these initiatives provide a wide palette of information, tools and support (http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org; http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/). In parallel, many initiatives have been launched at the national level to facilitate and support the application of LCA, often under the auspices of governmental institutions such as environmental protection agencies (see Chap. 3), inspiring numerous private and public LCA consultancies to emerge in assistance to companies or institutions without the in-house LCA expertise


3), inspiring numerous private and public LCA consultancies to emerge in assistance to companies or institutions without the in-house LCA expertise. Recent widespread LCA-related services are an elaboration of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) or performance of Greenhouse Gasaccounting. Moreover, universities, research institutions and private companies often enter into close collaboration on LCA methodology development and application of LCA via, e.g. commercial projects or industrial PhDs. Here, we present examples of applications and discuss major motivations and challenges for the use of LCA to support decision-making from the perspectives of decision-makers within governments, industry and citizens. More details are given in Part III of the book with chapters dedicated to different stakeholders and multiple examples of the use of LCA within different technology domains


More details are given in Part III of the book with chapters dedicated to different stakeholders and multiple examples of the use of LCA within different technology domains. Chapter 18 gives a more detailed introduction to the use of LCA and life cycle thinking in policymaking in different parts of the world, and Chap. 19 discusses the globalization of the use of LCA. Life cycle management (LCM) within business and industry is the topic of Chap. 22, while Chap. 24 introduces the use of LCA in the development and management of environmental labels and declarations.


4.2 Government Perspective Application of LCA and life cycle based approaches can support policy formulation, policy implementation and regulation imposed by policies, and can be used to perform evaluation of policies. As part of the pan-European project CALCAS (Coordination Action for innovation in Life Cycle Analysis for Sustainability), reviews were conducted in mid-2000s to identify LCA applications to support different stages of the policy cycle, i.e. their formulation, implementation and evaluation (CALCAS 2008). Table 4.1 presents and overview of such applications. Since then, the pressing need to move towards more sustainable societies has made LCA increasingly recognized in high policy-level, and its role in the policy cycle has been formalized in some countries or regions


For example, in Europe, the European Commission has listed LCA as one of the reference models for the impact assessment of policies in the European Union (EU) within its “better regulation guidelines” document published in 2015 (European Commission 2015). This holds a potential to increase the use of LCA in retrospective assessments of existing policy frameworks (i.e. evaluations or fitness checks) and prospective assessments of future possible policy options (policy development)


Table 4.1 Examples of LCA applications at different stages of the policy cycle Topic Initiation year and/or geographical scope LCA as a knowledge tool in policy formulation Environmental technologies action plan (ETAP) 2004; EU Integrated product policy (IPP) 2003; EU Directive on the eco-design of energy using products (EuP) 2005; EU Strategy for the sustainable use of natural resources Sustainable production and consumption action plan (SCP) 2007; EU Biofuels Germany Application of pesticides Costa Rica Supporting the implementation of information based instruments: LCA & policy implementation Eco-labelling Various countries Environmental product declarations (EPD) Various countries Strategic environmental assessment directive Public procurement EU, Japan Construction products directive 1989; EU Ordinance on the avoidance and recovery of packaging wastes Germany Waste management France, Mexico, japan LCA as a tool for policy evaluation Thematic strategy on prevention and recycling


1989; EU Ordinance on the avoidance and recovery of packaging wastes Germany Waste management France, Mexico, japan LCA as a tool for policy evaluation Thematic strategy on prevention and recycling of waste & Waste framework directive 2005; EU Waste oil directive 2000; EU Based on CALCAS (2008) LCA Applications


4.2.1 Policy Formulation As an example of LCA used for policy formulation, the European Commission has promoted Integrated Product Policy (IPP) to minimize environmental impacts of products by considering all stages of their life cycle, from the cradle to grave (Mudgal 2008). The IPP comprises various instruments and tools, ranging from soft instruments that act through influencing the market (like environmental labelling or green taxation), through subsidies to industries (e.g. financial support to pioneers), to hard regulation such as the Eco-design Directive for Energy-related Products (ErP), which establishes a regulatory framework for eco-design of products that use energy and products that allow for generation, transfer and measurement of energy (Directive 2009/125/EC)


This directive is an example of how life cycle thinking has guided policymaking within the EU, where the focus has shifted from manufacturing processes, to a focus on the use of products and their disposal (Wenzel et al. 1997; Azapagic and Perdan 2000). Many other examples of the use of LCA in policy formulation are given in Chap. 18. A major challenge to the applicationof LCA in these contexts is the communication of environmental performance of products. It is often done using different approaches to life cycle inventory modelling and life cycle impact assessment, which may lead to inconsistent and sometimes misleading results. To facilitate the communication of reliable and reproducible information about the environmental performance of products and organizations, the European Commission has elaborated LCA-based methods for product environmental footprint (PEF), and organization environmental footprint (OEF) (Finkbeiner 2014; Galatola and Pant 2014) (see also Chap. 24)


24). 4.2.2 Policy Implementation and Evaluation Governments may use LCA as decision support to advice the introduction of novel technologies in the market (e.g. the use of biofuels, or introduction of electric cars) or the selection of waste management systems (e.g. EU Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC imposing “to handle waste in a way that does not have a negative impact on the environment or human health” and requiring the need for life cycle thinking in waste management) (European Parliament and Council 2008; Meylan et al. 2014). In Denmark, LCA was used in the 1990s to guide the development of the current Danish collection system for beverage containers (glass and plastic bottles and aluminium cans) and it has been used for assessment of recycling strategies for various waste fractions. The country has also operated with panels of key actors along the product life cycle who were consulted in the development of product-oriented policy initiatives


The country has also operated with panels of key actors along the product life cycle who were consulted in the development of product-oriented policy initiatives. In Switzerland, findings from an LCA study were used to justify compensation rates to municipalities according to how waste glass packaging is collected and what disposal option is chosen by the municipality


(Meylan et al. 2014). In Sweden LCA was used to assess environmental impacts of introducing waste incineration tax, considered to “encourage waste reduction and increase materials recycling and biological treatment” (Björklund and Finnveden 2007). While the proposed design of such a tax would result in increased recycling, the LCA found that this would lead to only small environmental improvements. Thus, it was proposed that the design of the tax should include the fossil carbon content of the waste. Such examples can also be found outside Europe. In the United States, the California Oil Recycling Enhancement Act was initiated in 2009 to support management of used oil and support selection of least-polluting options (refining and reuse, distillation or combustion with energy recovery) by the state (Reed 2012)


This act “requires that the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery coordinate, with input from representatives of all used oil stakeholders, a comprehensive life cycle assessment of California’s used lubricating and industrial oil management process” (CalRecycle 2012). 4.3 Industry Perspective The application of LCA in enterprises can be classified into five main purposes: (i) decision support in product and process development; (ii) marketing purposes (e.g. Eco-labelling); (iii) development and selection of indicators used in monitoring of environmental performance of products or plants; (iv) selection of suppliers or subcontractors; and (v) strategic planning (Huang and Hunkeler 1995; Bültmann 1997; Hanssen 1999; Baumann 2000; Heiskanen 2000; Frankl and Rubik 2000; Ekvall 2012). We note that LCA applications within industry may well serve more than one purpose, and often the same LCA can be used for different purposes within acompany (e.g


We note that LCA applications within industry may well serve more than one purpose, and often the same LCA can be used for different purposes within acompany (e.g. product development is often combined with marketing efforts). Furthermore, as experience with using LCA grows in an enterprise, one application can trigger another (e.g. insights gained from an LCA into product environmental performance can lead to decisions about selection of suppliers or setting strategies). We also note that although LCA has traditionally been developed as a tool to be used at product level, and is still used as such, there is an increasing interest in using LCA at the corporate level to reflect the performance of the company or individual plants in a life cycle perspective. This is particularly relevant for (but not limited to) large enterprises and for applications related to monitoring of environmental performance and strategic planning


This is particularly relevant for (but not limited to) large enterprises and for applications related to monitoring of environmental performance and strategic planning. 4.3.1 Applications at Product Level At product level, LCA is often used during product development and for identifying environmental hotspots of a product or process either within the organization or in its supply chain. For instance, a survey showed that the German industry in the LCA Applications


1990s mainly used LCA internally, to identify hotspots in products and systems, followed by product and process optimization (Bültmann 1997; Frankl and Rubik 2000). Another survey showed that large Danish companies, represented by 39 companies considered to cover 90–100% of Danish enterprises having practical experience with LCA in the 1990s, indicated that LCA had revealed new environmental aspects of their products that they had not anticipated. In 79% of the cases, this led to setting new priorities for environmental efforts, including changes in products and processes, like saving or substituting materials (Broberg and Christensen 1999). In parallel to application in product and process development, LCA is often used for marketing purposes at different levels


In parallel to application in product and process development, LCA is often used for marketing purposes at different levels. As public concerns about the state of the environment have become increasingly pronounced and consumers more environmentally conscious, enterprises have also placed a larger focus on quantifying their environmental performance, using LCA and communicating this to the public as a way to brand their enterprise as green. Here, the major company expectations to the use of LCA are to get a competitive advantage and increase the company image or reputation (Broberg and Christensen 1999). Ecolabels or environmental product declarations (Chap. 24) can signal good environmental performance and be used to make a given product more appealing for environmentally conscious consumers


Ecolabels or environmental product declarations (Chap. 24) can signal good environmental performance and be used to make a given product more appealing for environmentally conscious consumers. 4.3.2 Applications at Corporate Level The use of LCA to document and monitor environmental performance at the corporate level is today often limited to a few selected impact categories, typically footprint indicators (see Sect. 10.4) like carbon footprint and blue water footprint. This situation may change in the future together with the development of guidelines for organization environmental footprint (OEF) (Dubois and Humbert 2015). At the corporate level, industry can also use LCA for setting strategic objectives. For example, Unilever set a target of halving their environmental impact by 2030, considering the life cycle of their products (Unilever 2015)


For example, Unilever set a target of halving their environmental impact by 2030, considering the life cycle of their products (Unilever 2015). Similarly, companies may want to carry out LCA to better understand their environmental performance in an effort to implement environmental management system (EMS) (Lewandowska et al. 2013, 2014). EMS is “a tool to implement a structured program of continual improvement in environmental performance” and “a tool to manage and communicate an enterprise’s environmental performance to internal and outside parties” (Lombardo 2012). EMS standards nowadays often require a life cycle perspective in order to avoid greenwashing by companies outsourcing parts of their production to suppliers. There is thus often a relationship between the implementation of EMS and the implementation of LCA within companies


There is thus often a relationship between the implementation of EMS and the implementation of LCA within companies. For example, among Spanish automotive supplier companies who have received the EMS ISO 14001 certification and have a certified eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), the use of LCA is a common practice (Gonzalez et al. 2008). Organizations who have implemented a


certified EMS impose higher demands on their suppliers to adopt environmentally friendly practices (Gonzalez et al. 2008). The contributions made by LCA to EMS range from the identification of overall environmental aspects and identification of the activities in the life cycle that have the largest environmental burdens, to a comparison of alternative manufacturing routes (Stewart et al. 1999). A major challenge in this context seems to be putting the results into practice, mainly due to lack of power or information of stakeholders along the product supply chain (Nakano and Hirao 2011). 4.3.3 Challenges of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME) can use LCA for the same reasons as large companies. Yet, small- (10–49 employees) and medium-sized (50–249 employees) enterprises generally lag behind large companies in the implementation of LCA (Johnson and Schaltegger 2015)


Yet, small- (10–49 employees) and medium-sized (50–249 employees) enterprises generally lag behind large companies in the implementation of LCA (Johnson and Schaltegger 2015). The major reasons are thought to be the cost of an LCA, the need for changes in workplace routines, perceived complexity of the LCA methodology and shortage of qualified personnel to carry out an LCA (Kurczewski 2013). A study of 10 SMEs revealed that a downside of LCA is that it becomes too comprehensive and too complex to be easily understood, leaving an impression in some companies of LCA as a ‘black box’ (Zackrisson et al. 2008). A closer collaboration with an experienced LCA practitioner and an expert was found to resolve this problem in some of the cases (Zackrisson et al. 2008)


2008). A closer collaboration with an experienced LCA practitioner and an expert was found to resolve this problem in some of the cases (Zackrisson et al. 2008). Similarly, based on a comprehensive literature review, Johnson and Schaltegger (2015) reported that major barriers for implementation of sustainability management tools (including LCA) by SMEs were (i) lack of awareness of sustainability issues; (ii) absence of perceived benefits; (iii) lack of knowledge and expertise on sustainability issues; (iv) lack of human and financial resources; (v) insufficient external drivers and incentives; (vi) unsuitability of formal management tools to fit the often informal and flexible SME structure; and (vii) complexity of tools. While the use of LCAs by SMEs was considered marginal (as of 2012), it is however reported to become more and more common (Baumann et al. 2012; Schischke et al. 2012; Kurczewski 2013)


While the use of LCAs by SMEs was considered marginal (as of 2012), it is however reported to become more and more common (Baumann et al. 2012; Schischke et al. 2012; Kurczewski 2013). This may be due to the increased legislative focus on environmental performance, and the potential market benefits from having an environmentally friendly profile, not least through a market pull from large companies that are often important costumers. This is reflected by a survey of 146 European SMEs which revealed that most SMEs have limited knowledge of LCA, and have little internal knowledge of environmental assessments and their communication (Pamminger 2011). The main drivers for SMEs to start using environmental assessment tools have been the customer demand or the pressure from legislation (Pamminger 2011; Schischke et al. 2012)


The main drivers for SMEs to start using environmental assessment tools have been the customer demand or the pressure from legislation (Pamminger 2011; Schischke et al. 2012). However, industries focusing on emerging renewable resource technologies, such as bio-based plastic, had more knowledge and were, in fact, keen on using LCA for communicating the environmental performance and benefits of their technology compared to LCA Applications


conventional technologies (Pamminger 2011). The authors’ experience with LCA application by SMEs in Western Europe shows that SMEs are eager to contribute to an LCA (e.g. through provision of data) when a dedicated and sufficient budget is available, e.g. through the involvement in a larger research project. Experience also shows that SMEs typically find interest in identifying impact reduction opportunities, particularly those stemming from activities in the life cycle on which they themselves exert some influence. Similar findings were reported in European countries where the tradition of using LCA has historically not been that strong (Kurczewski 2013; Witczak et al. 2014). 4.4 Citizen Perspective LCA results can also serve as decision support for individuals, be it in their capacity of citizens or consumers. In many cases, these decisions relate to the private consumption of goods and services


In many cases, these decisions relate to the private consumption of goods and services. Consumers are knowingly or unknowingly exposed to LCA results, or conclusions drawn from LCA results, through ecolabels (see Chap. 24) or other consumer information from producers (e.g. printed on packaging) and media reporting academic findings, and they hold some power through their influence in the market of consumer products. Consumer decisions that may be supported by an LCA can range from choosing the product with the lowest environmental impact amongst a group of similar products (e.g. the more environmentally friendly vacuum cleaner), over choosing the most environmentally sound way of fulfilling a function (e.g. washing dishes by hand or in a dishwasher) to most effectively reducing the total personal environmental impact (e.g. reduce meat consumption, hot showers or car driving)


washing dishes by hand or in a dishwasher) to most effectively reducing the total personal environmental impact (e.g. reduce meat consumption, hot showers or car driving). Besides decisions related to private consumption, citizens may also indirectly be affected by LCA results when following political discussions on large infrastructure-related decisions where LCA provides the underlying decision support. For example, municipalities often use LCA to support decisions on waste management infrastructure (European Commission 2008). If a political decision is made about increasing recycling and reducing landfilling or incineration, this will affect citizens, as they will have to sort their waste into recyclable fractions rather than throw all their waste into the same bin. Chapter 35 deals with the use of LCA in waste management


Chapter 35 deals with the use of LCA in waste management. 4.5 Concluding Remarks LCA is an important and useful tool to map environmental impacts and support policy development and concrete decisions, and for a company it can support the development of a positive image. There are, however, factors that hamper its more widespread application. This chapter has mainly addressed LCA applications in


developed countries because this is where LCA has been applied the most and the needed data has been most available. However, large differences exist in the application of LCA between developed and developing countries in terms of both frequency and incentives. These differences and the challenges that they pose for a global dissemination of LCA and life cycle thinking are discussed in Chap. 19 on globalization and mainstreaming of LCA. The next chapter takes a closer look at the relationship between LCA and sustainable development. Azapagic, A., Perdan, S.: Indicators of sustainable development for industry: a general framework. Trans. IChemE 78, 243–261 (2000). doi:10.1205/095758200530763 Baumann, H.: Introduction and organisation of LCA activities in industry. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 5, 363–368 (2000). doi:10.1007/BF02978673 Baumann, M., Held, M., Herrmann, C., et al.: Ecodesign tool for SMEs in the electronics sector


Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 5, 363–368 (2000). doi:10.1007/BF02978673 Baumann, M., Held, M., Herrmann, C., et al.: Ecodesign tool for SMEs in the electronics sector. In: Electronics Goes Green 2012+, ECG 2012—Joint International Conference Exhibition Proceedings (2012) Björklund, A.E., Finnveden, G.: Life cycle assessment of a national policy proposal—the case of a Swedish waste incineration tax. Waste Manag. 27, 1046–1058 (2007). doi:10.1016/j.wasman. 2007.02.027 Broberg, O., Christensen, P.: LCA experiences in Danish industry—results of a survey. Int. J. LCA 4, 257–262 (1999) Bültmann, A.: Produktökobilanzen und ihre Anwendung in Deutschen Unternehmen. Schriftenreihe des IÖW. 112, 97 (1997) CALCAS (Co-ordination Action for Innovation in Life-Cycle Analysis for Sustainability): Critical Review of the Current Research Needs and Limitations Related to ISO-LCA Practice: Deliverable D7 of CALCAS Work Package 5, by Zamagni, A., P. Buttol, P. L. Porta, R Buonamici, P. Masoni, J. Guinée, R


Buttol, P. L. Porta, R Buonamici, P. Masoni, J. Guinée, R. Heijungs, T. Ekvall, R. Bersani, A. Bieńkowska, and U. Pretato (2008). http://www.calcasproject.net/ CalRecycle: Used oil recycling program (2012) Directive 2009/125/EC: Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (recast). Off J Eur Union 10–35. doi:10.1016/j.cirp.2012.03.121 (2009) Dubois, C., Humbert, S.: How to calculate the LCA of a retailer. LCA Discuss. Forum 31(03), 2015 (2015) Ekvall, T.: Life cycle assessment. In: Ahmed K (ed) Getting to green: a sourcebook of pollution management policy tools for growth and competitiveness. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/560021468330349857/Getting-to-green-asourcebook-of-pollution-management-policy-tools-for-growth-and-competitiveness (2012) European Commission: Better Regulation Guidelines


Commission staff working document. COM (2015) 215 final; SWD(2015) 111 final. May 2015. EU Commission. Strasbourg, FR. http://ec. europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/docs/swd_br_guidelines_en.pdf (better regulation guidelines; accessed 26/10/2015) and http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/toc_tool_ en.htm (better regulation “toolbox”; accessed 26/10/2015) (2015) European Commission: Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Text with EEA relevance) (2008) European Parliament and Council: Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste and repealing certain Directives (2008) LCA Applications


Finkbeiner, M.: Product environmental footprint—breakthrough or breakdown for policy implementation of life cycle assessment? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19, 266–271 (2014). doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0678-x Frankl, P., Rubik, F.: Life cycle assessment in industry and business. Adoption patterns, applications and implications. In: IGARSS 2014 (2000). doi:10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2 Galatola, M., Pant, R.: Reply to the editorial “product environmental footprint—breakthrough or breakdown for policy implementation of life cycle assessment?” Written by Prof. Finkbeiner (Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(2):266–271). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19, 1356–1360 (2014). doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0740-3 Gonzalez, P., Sarkis, J., Adenso-Diaz, B.: Environmental management system certification and its influence on corporate practices. Evidence from the automotive industry. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 28, 1021–1041 (2008) Hanssen, O.J.: Status of life cycle assessment (LCA) activities in the nordic region. Int. J


Evidence from the automotive industry. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 28, 1021–1041 (2008) Hanssen, O.J.: Status of life cycle assessment (LCA) activities in the nordic region. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 4, 262–262 (1999). doi:10.1007/BF02979177 Heiskanen, E.: Managers’ interpretations of LCA: enlightenment and responsibility or confusion and denial? Bus. Strateg. Environ. 9, 239–254 (2000). doi:10.1002/1099-0836(200007/08)9: 4<239:AID-BSE250>3.0.CO;2-6 Huang, E., Hunkeler, D.: Life cycle analysis: summary of a fortune 500 survey and a Japanese comparison. In: Vanderbilt Univ. US–Japan Cent (1995) ISO: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework (ISO 14040). ISO, the International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2006a) Johnson, M.P., Schaltegger, S.: Two decades of sustainability management tools for SMEs: how far have we come? J. Small Bus. Manag. (2015)


Small Bus. Manag. (2015). doi:10.1111/jsbm.12154 Kurczewski, P.: Life cycle thinking in small and medium enterprises: the results of research on the implementation of life cycle tools in Polish SMEs-part 1: background and framework. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. (2013). doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0675-0 Lewandowska, A., Kurczewski, P., Kulczycka, J., Joachimiak, K., Matuszak-Flejszman, A., Baumann, H., Ciroth, A.: LCA as an element in environmental management systems— comparison of conditions in selected organisations in Poland, Sweden and Germany: part 1: background and initial assumptions. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 472–480 (2013). doi:10. 1007/s11367-012-0480-1 Lewandowska, A., Matuszak-Flejszman, A.: Eco-design as a normative element of Environmental Management Systems—the context of the revised ISO 14001:2015. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19, 1794–1798 (2014). doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0787-1 Lombardo, P.: Environmental management systems. In: Ahmed, K


Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19, 1794–1798 (2014). doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0787-1 Lombardo, P.: Environmental management systems. In: Ahmed, K. Getting to Green: A Sourcebook of Pollution Management Policy Tools for Growth and Competitiveness. World Bank, Washington, DC (2012). http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/560021468330 349857/Getting-to-green-a-sourcebook-of-pollution-management-policy-tools-for-growth-andcompetitiveness Meylan, G., Stauffacher, M., Krütli, P., et al.: Identifying stakeholders’ views on the eco-efficiency assessment of a municipal solid waste management system. J. Ind. Ecol. (2014). doi:10.1111/ jiec.12192 Mudgal, S.: Reporting on the Implementation of Integrated Product Policy (IPP). European Commission, DG Environment. Service Contract 0703307/2007/481297/G.4. http://ec.europa. eu/environment/ipp/pdf/bio_ipp.pdf. (2008)


European Commission, DG Environment. Service Contract 0703307/2007/481297/G.4. http://ec.europa. eu/environment/ipp/pdf/bio_ipp.pdf. (2008). Accessed 11 August 2017 Nakano, K., Hirao, M.: Collaborative activity with business partners for improvement of product environmental performance using LCA. J. Clean. Prod. 19, 1189–1197 (2011). doi:10.1016/j. jclepro.2011.03.007 Pamminger, R.: Technical report on needs and demands of SMEs. Deliverable D1.1 LCA to go project within the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme. http://www. LCA2go.eu. (2011). Accessed 11 August 2017 Reed, D.L.: Life-Cycle Assessment in Government Policy in the United States. PhD Thesis. University of Tennessee. http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1394. (2012). Accessed 11 August 2017


Schischke, K., Nissen, N.F., Sherry, J. et al.: Life cycle thinking in small and medium sized enterprises—status quo and strategic needs in the electronics sector. In: Electronics Go Green 2012 (2012) Stewart, J.R., Collins, M.W., Anderson, R., Murphy, W.R.: Life Cycle Assessment as a tool for environmental management. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 1, 73–81 (1999). doi:10.1007/ s100980050013 Unilever: Unilever sustainable living plan. Summary of progress 2015. Mobilising Collective Action. https://www.unilever.com/Images/uslp-mobilising-collective-action-summary-ofprogress-2015_tcm244-424809_en.pdf. (2015). Accessed 11 August 2017 Wenzel, H., Hauschild, M.Z., Alting, L.: Environmental assessment of products. In: Vol. 1— Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, p. 544


In: Vol. 1— Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, p. 544. ISBN 0 412 80800 5 (1997) Witczak, J., Kasprzak, J., Klos, Z., et al.: Life cycle thinking in small and medium enterprises: the results of research on the implementation of life cycle tools in Polish SMEs-part 2: LCA related aspects. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. (2014). doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0687-9 Zackrisson, M., Rocha, C., Christiansen, K., Jarnehammar, A.: Stepwise environmental product declarations: ten SME case studies. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1872–1886 (2008). doi:10.1016/j. jclepro.2008.01.001 Author Biographies Mikołaj Owsianiak involved in development and application of life cycle impact assessment methods in sustainability assessment of technologies. Has worked on issues associated with: soils (remediation), metals (toxic impact assessment), biodiesel (fate in the environment), and carbonaceous materials (biochar and hydrochar)


Has worked on issues associated with: soils (remediation), metals (toxic impact assessment), biodiesel (fate in the environment), and carbonaceous materials (biochar and hydrochar). Anders Bjørn part of the LCA community since the early 2010s. Main focus is interpretations of sustainability and integration of sustainability targets in LCA to enable absolute sustainability assessments. Alexis Laurent working with LCA since 2010 with a strong LCIA focus, particularly on normalisation aspects. Main LCA interests include development of LCIA methods, LCA applications and footprinting of large-scale systems for policy-making (e.g. nations, sectors), and LCA applied to various technology domains, including energy systems. Christine Molin active in the field of LCA since 1992. Special interest in the development and dissemination of LCA and in the use of LCA in small and medium sized enterprises. Morten W. Ryberg environmental engineer working with LCA since 2013


Special interest in the development and dissemination of LCA and in the use of LCA in small and medium sized enterprises. Morten W. Ryberg environmental engineer working with LCA since 2013. Primary focus on advancing absolute sustainability assessments by integrating and implementing environmental sustainability references in LCA. Other works include environmental assessment of coal cleaning technologies and of new carbonaceous materials. LCA Applications


Chapter 5 LCA and Sustainability Andreas Moltesen and Anders Bjørn Abstract LCA is often presented as a sustainability assessment tool. This chapter analyses the relationship between LCA and sustainability. This is done by first outlining the history of the sustainability concept, which gained momentum with the Brundtland Commission’s report ‘Our Common Future report’ in 1987, and presenting the most common interpretations of the concept, which generally comprise four dimensions: (1) measures of welfare, (2) inter-generational equity, (3) intra-generational equity and (4) interspecies equity. The relevance of environmental protection for dimensions 2 and 4 is then demonstrated, and the strategy of LCA to achieving environmental protection, namely to guide the reduction of environmental impacts per delivery of a function, is explained. The attempt to broaden the scope of LCA, beyond environmental protection, by so-called life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is outlined


The attempt to broaden the scope of LCA, beyond environmental protection, by so-called life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is outlined. Finally, the limitations of LCA in guiding a sustainable development are discussed. Learning Objectives After studying this chapter the reader should be able to: • Explain the most common interpretations of the definition of sustainable development from Our Common Future. • Account for the relevance of environmental protection to sustainability. • Describe the type of sustainability strategy that LCA may support and discuss its limitations. A. Moltesen (&)  A. Bjørn Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: andreasmoltesen@gmail.com A. Bjørn CIRAIG, Polytechnique Montréal, 3333 Chemin Queen-Mary, Montreal, QC, Canada © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al


Bjørn CIRAIG, Polytechnique Montréal, 3333 Chemin Queen-Mary, Montreal, QC, Canada © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_5


5.1 In 1987, the United Nations’ World Commission on Environment and Development published its report Our Common Future, which is sometimes referred to as the Brundtland Report after its chairperson, Gro Harlem Brundtland (WCED 1987). The report was a response; on the one hand to the growing disparity between North and South and on the other hand to the increased awareness that many of the natural systems on which we depend were under increasing stress. Development of the South was seen as urgently needed, but the development had to be achieved in an environmentally sound way which would allow for a continued thriving of the world’s population—also in the future. The development in other words had to be sustainable


The development in other words had to be sustainable. While the term “sustainable development” was already introduced in 1980 by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the publication of Our Common Future created a widespread awareness of sustainable development and provided its most well-known definition: “... development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. By coupling the concern for the present and future generations, the concept of sustainable development, as defined in Our Common Future, provided a framework for thinking these two increasingly pressing global challenges together in one immensely influential term. The ability of present and future generations to meet their needs depends strongly on the life support functions of the earth and inherent in the definition of sustainable development is thus a concern for the health of the environment


The development of LCA can in many regards be seen as stemming from the same concern for environmental protection (see Chap. 3). A natural question may therefore be; How does LCA and sustainable development relate, and to what extent can LCA be used as a methodology for informing decisions towards sustainability? To answer these questions we will start by giving an overview of how sustainable development is understood in literature, followed by an analysis of the possibilities and limitations for LCA to support it. 5.2 What Is Sustainability? Since the publication of Our Common Future, many different definitions of “sustainable development” or the related term “sustainability” have been presented. In this chapter we will use these two terms interchangeably, but it should be mentioned that in literature, these concepts can be used with different connotations


In this chapter we will use these two terms interchangeably, but it should be mentioned that in literature, these concepts can be used with different connotations. It is, for example, sometimes asserted that sustainable development is primarily about development (sometimes seen as synonymous with economic growth), whereas sustainability gives priority to the environment. Others have argued that the difference is rather that sustainable development should be seen as the process or journey to achieving sustainability. A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


Proposals for definitions of sustainable development have been booming after the publication of Our Common Future, and have added several nuances and potential modifications to this definition. For example, some have argued against the one-sided focus on human needs. In the definition of sustainable development given above, there is little room for considering other living species than humans, unless these species directly serve as means to meet these human needs. In line with this, it has been argued that the definition is too narrow, and that other living species should be considered as well. Others have debated the word “need”, and suggested several others and in many regards related words such as “wellbeing”, “utility”, “welfare” and “aspiration”


Others have debated the word “need”, and suggested several others and in many regards related words such as “wellbeing”, “utility”, “welfare” and “aspiration”. Finally, it should be mentioned that the researchers, especially within the economic discipline, have omitted the focus on the needs of the present and claimed that sustainability is simply about ensuring that the total utility or welfare of a society can be maintained over an infinite time horizon (Pezzey 1992). Despite these variations, there is a large degree of common ground in definitions of sustainability. Sustainability can be seen as comprising by the following four dimensions, with varying emphasis: 1. The first dimension relates to measures of welfare that is to be achieved in the population comprised by the definition (see Dimensions 2–4). This measure of welfare comprises several different concepts, such as “need”, “utility”, “happiness” and “aspiration”. Several others can be found in literature. 2


This measure of welfare comprises several different concepts, such as “need”, “utility”, “happiness” and “aspiration”. Several others can be found in literature. 2. The second dimension relates to the concern for inter-generational equity, i.e. a concern for the equity in the welfare (as defined by the first dimension) between this and future generations. In most cases, these future generations comprise anyone born in the future, i.e. from tomorrow till infinite time has passed. This concern, together with some version of the first dimension, is found in all definitions of sustainability. 3. The third dimension relates to intra-generational equity. Within this dimension, we consider the extent to which the measures of welfare are equally distributed within a generation both on a macro-scale (i.e. among developed and developing nations) and on a micro-scale (i.e. the equality within a given nation, region or local community)


among developed and developing nations) and on a micro-scale (i.e. the equality within a given nation, region or local community). As noted above, there is a large difference in the definitions with regards to whether this dimension is considered at all. 4. The fourth and final dimension relates to interspecies equity, relating to whether it is only the welfare (however defined) of humans which is a goal, or whether also the thriving of other living organisms (independent of their potential to contribute to human welfare) is considered. It should be noted that most definitions (including the original definition given in Our Common Future) are anthropocentric (i.e. human centred) and therefore do not include this dimension. LCA and Sustainability


5.3 Sustainability and the Environmental Concern Except from the fourth dimension of sustainability, which is typically not considered, there is no explicit consideration of environmental conservation in most definitions of sustainability. It may therefore seem odd that environmental protection is often seen as being more or less synonymous with sustainability. The reason should primarily be found in the concern for inter-generational equity. The rationale behind protecting the environment from a concern for inter-generational equity is that the natural resources and the services that nature provides are seen as the foundation for society. Without a functioning environment we will not be able to cultivate crops, secure clean air, be protected from ultraviolet radiation from the sun, etc. The idea is thus that protecting the environment is necessary to give future generations the same possibilities for achieving the levels of welfare that current generations are experiencing


The idea is thus that protecting the environment is necessary to give future generations the same possibilities for achieving the levels of welfare that current generations are experiencing. Thus, besides the concern for intra-generational equity, which is not ensured simply by protecting the environment, but which calls for initiatives related to combating poverty, sustainability includes a concern for environmental protection. The extent to which the environment should be protected as a condition for the inter-generational equity dimension of sustainability is, however, not clear-cut. Clearly, human needs cannot be met if humans cannot breathe due to air pollution or lack of oxygen. But the more detailed dependency of human needs on specific functions or qualities of the environment is disputed


But the more detailed dependency of human needs on specific functions or qualities of the environment is disputed. For example, will the potential for meeting human needs be violated if the panda bear becomes extinct? And to what extent can technology replace the services and functions provided by ecosystems? While keeping this discussion in mind, researchers have attempted to quantify carrying capacities of ecosystemsthat must not be exceeded to maintain functions and other ecosystem aspects of interest. For example, the carrying capacities of different terrestrial ecosystems in Europeand elsewhere towards deposition of acidifying compounds (sometimes termed critical loads) have been calculated (Hettelingh et al. 2007). At the global scale planetary boundaries have been proposed and tentatively quantified


2007). At the global scale planetary boundaries have been proposed and tentatively quantified. Planetary boundaries can be interpreted as carrying capacities for the entire Earth System towards various anthropogenic pressures, such as greenhouse gases and interference with nutrient cycles. If exceeded there is a substantial risk that the Earth System will change from its well-known and relatively stable state that has characterized the Holocene geological epoch in the past 12,000 years to an unknown state (Rockström 2009; Steffen et al. 2015a). According to estimates, this exceedance has already happened for four of the nine proposed planetary boundaries, as shown in Fig. 5.1. As this chapter is about the role of LCA in the environmental protection needed to achieve sustainability we will only address the part of the sustainability definition pertaining to the environment


As this chapter is about the role of LCA in the environmental protection needed to achieve sustainability we will only address the part of the sustainability definition pertaining to the environment. Chapter 16 addresses the development of what has been termed Social LCA, addressing the social dimension of sustainability. A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


Fig. 5.1 Planetary boundaries. a Illustrates the concept of thresholds and boundaries in relation to an ecosystem’s response to increasing human pressure. b Shows the proposed nine boundaries (two of them subdivided for specific pressures) and that mankind has currently exceeded four of them, two beyond the zone of uncertainty (Steffen et al. 2015a). Reprinted with permission from AAAS LCA and Sustainability


5.4 Sustainability and LCA If sustainability entails that the environment has to be conserved, the question is How can we conserve the environment? What are the overall drivers that lead to environmental deterioration? These questions were first addressed in Holdren and Ehrlich (1974), whose work in a modified form lead to the formulation of the so-called IPAT equation, or I 1⁄4 PAT ð5:1Þ where (I) is the environmental impact, (P) is the population, (A) is the per capita affluence and (T) is the technology factor. The formula expresses that the overall impact on the environment is controlled by the number of people on the planet, their affluence, expressed in material affluence per person, and technology’s environmental intensity, expressed in environmental impact per material affluence


Figure 5.2 shows the global development in population and various indicators of affluence, such as GDP, transportation and paper production, along with indicators of environmental pressures and impacts from 1750 to 2010. Figure 5.2a shows that while the world population has almost tripled from 1950 to 2010, all the indicators of affluence have increased at higher rates, meaning that the per capita affluence (“A” in the IPAT equation) has increased in the period (note that this increase has been unequal—income differences between and within countries have increased in the period). Figure 5.2b shows that the combined effect of an increasing population and increasing per capita affluence (“P” and “A” in the IPAT equation) has led to increases in environmental pressure and impacts (“I” in the IPAT equation)


This means that technological improvements in environmental impact per material affluence (“T” in the IPAT equation) have been insufficient for maintaining environmental pressures and impacts at a status quo, let alone for decreasing them. With the historical development in mind, the IPAT equation shows us that we, in theory, have three overall knots and handles to manipulate to ensure that loads on the environment do not exceed carrying capacities. Two of these three parameters, the number of people and their affluence, have been difficult to handle. In relation to the number of people, this can either be regulated by increasing mortality or reducing fertility, and in most parts of the world issues like these are not on the political agenda. In some parts of the world, for example in the EU, Russia and Japan, it is even seen as a political aim to increase fertility. However, despite this, projections show that the world population may stabilize around 10 billion in 2050


However, despite this, projections show that the world population may stabilize around 10 billion in 2050. With regards to the affluence, we have already established above that to increase the intra-generational equity, there is a need for increasing the affluence of the ones mostly in need. Reducing the overall affluence while increasing the affluence of the poorest inevitably calls for a decrease in the affluence of the richest part of the world population which is a difficult program for a political party striving for (re-)election A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


in a liberal democracy as found in most affluent societies today. The “A” in the IPAT equation above is therefore expected to increase over time. What is left is the development of technology, which can allow us to regulate the environmental impact per consumed unit (the ‘T’ factor in the IPAT equation). To increase the output or functionality while keeping a constant environmental impact corresponds to increasing what is often termed eco-efficiency. According to the World Business Council of Sustainable Development “eco-efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality of life while progressively reducing environmental impacts of goods and resource intensity throughout the entire life cycle to a level at least in line with the Earth’s estimated carrying capacity” (WBCSD 2000)


By increasing the eco-efficiency of existing products and technologies, the idea is thus that we will be able to consume the same, or more, while at the same time lowering the overall Fig. 5.2 Global development in a selection of a socio-economic indicators and b pressures and impacts on the environment from 1750 to 2010 (Steffen et al. 2015b). Reprinted by Permission of SAGE Publications, Ltd. LCA and Sustainability


environmental burden of this consumption to a level that does not exceed carrying capacities. As outlined in the chapters above, and as will be further detailed in the remaining parts of this book, LCA shows how a specific functionality can be achieved in the most environmentally friendly way among a predefined list of alternatives, or in which parts of the life cycle it is particularly important to improve a product to reduce its environmental impacts, in other words, increase its eco-efficiency. LCA can therefore be seen as a methodology that can guide decisions towards improving one of the three dimensions in the IPAT equation, namely the technology (“T”) dimension. Fig. 5.2 (continued) A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


5.5 A Note on Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment It has been proposed to expand LCA into life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) to also encompass socialand economic aspects, in addition to environmental aspects of sustainability when analysing product life cycles (Kloepffer 2008; Zamagni 2012). The idea of LCSA builds on the so-called “three pillars” (or three dimensions) interpretation of sustainability, according to which sustainability is composed of an environmental, social and economic pillar. This interpretation gained momentum with the concept of the “Triple bottom line” by Elkington (1997), who proposed that businesses should manage environmental, social and economic aspects of sustainability in the same quantitative way that financial aspects are typically managed inaccounting


Accordingly, Kloepffer (2008) proposed the following scheme for LCSA: LCSA 1⁄4 LCA þ LCC þ SLCA ð5:2Þ LCC is an abbreviation for life cycle costingwhich aims to quantify all costs associated with the life cycle of a product that is directly covered by one or more of the actors in that life cycle. S-LCA is an abbreviation for social life cycle assessment, which has the goal of assessing the social impacts of a product over its life cycle. LCC and S-LCA are detailed in Chaps. 15 and 16 of this book. An important requirement of LCSA is that the three pillars of sustainability must be assessed using the same system boundaries, i.e. that the same elements of a product life cycle are considered in all three assessments (Kloepffer 2008) (see Chap. 8, for an elaboration on system boundaries). While LCSA is much less mature than LCA and there is a little agreement of how to actually perform it, two fundamental aspects of LCSA deserve highlighting in this chapter: 1


While LCSA is much less mature than LCA and there is a little agreement of how to actually perform it, two fundamental aspects of LCSA deserve highlighting in this chapter: 1. LCSA seems to be based on the assumption that sustainability is something that can be balanced between an environmental, social and economic dimension. This is hinted by the scheme proposed by Kloepffer (2008), according to which a decrease in one sustainability dimension (e.g. environmental) can be compensated by an increase in another dimension (e.g. social). This conflicts with the concept of carrying capacity, according to which the meeting of human needs depends on a minimum level of environmental protection, as mentioned in Sect. 5.2


social). This conflicts with the concept of carrying capacity, according to which the meeting of human needs depends on a minimum level of environmental protection, as mentioned in Sect. 5.2. In our view it would therefore be misleading to assess a product that has a relatively good performance in an LCC and an S-LCA, but a relatively poor performance in an LCA, to be overall sustainable, because the bad performance in an LCA may be contributing to the exceedances of carrying capacities, which in the long term threatens the meeting of human needs and thus social (and economic) sustainability. This perspective is reflected by a popular quote, attributed to Dr. Guy McPherson: “If you really think that the environment is less important than the economy, try holding your breath while you count your money” (McPherson 2009). LCA and Sustainability


2. LCSA includes an economic dimension of sustainability. This is consistent with the common “three pillar” interpretation of sustainability, but it can be questioned how relevant LCC is for sustainability assessments. This is because the costsquantified by LCC are only relevant to sustainability if these costs apply to the poor, which are of concern to the intra-generational equity dimension of sustainability (Jørgensen et al. 2013). Yet, quantifying the monetary gains or losses for the poor is already an aspect commonly included in S-LCA (see Chap. 16). 5.6 Limitations to the Strategy for Achieving Sustainability Through LCA Even though LCA gives us the very valuable possibility of choosing the most eco-efficient way of achieving a specific functionality or service, this approach has some important limitations in regards to ensuring (environmental) sustainability


Following the IPAT equation, and knowing the projections for the population growth and the goals for the increase inaverage affluence, it has been estimated that a factor 4, or higher, increase in the eco-efficiency of technologies or products is needed just to ensure a status quo with regards to our impacts on the environment (Reijnders 1998). But as shown in Fig. 5.1, status quo, with regards to some environmental impacts, is not good enough if we are to guarantee a sustainable development, because a number of planetary boundaries have already been exceeded. For some technologies and products an increase in “T” closer to a factor 10 may therefore be required. It is evident that a factor of 10 increase in the eco-efficiency of technologies or products in many cases will be difficult to achieve


It is evident that a factor of 10 increase in the eco-efficiency of technologies or products in many cases will be difficult to achieve. For example, even the most eco-efficient cars are far from a factor 10 more efficient than the average car, both regarding energy consumption during use and material consumption during production (Girod et al. 2014). In other cases, however, a factor 10 increase in the eco-efficiency of products has been achieved in isolated areas. Freon and other ozone depleting gases used in for example refrigerators have more or less been phased out as a result of the Montreal Protocol, leading to an eco-efficiency increase on this isolated area, far better than a factor of 10 (WMO 2014). However, one thing is to increase the eco-efficiency of the product, another is how we administer the gains achieved through the increased efficiency. History has demonstrated that the level of services that we want from products and technologies is not static


History has demonstrated that the level of services that we want from products and technologies is not static. As soon as new possibilities evolve we tend simply to expand our wants and expectations (which might not be the same as needs, depending on the interpretation of sustainability). Evidence suggests that increases in eco-efficiencies in some cases due to changes in wants and expectations lead to so-called “rebound effects”. An example of a rebound effect could be if an increase in eco-efficiencyof the car engine leads the producer to increase the power of the motor, add extra A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


comfort to the car, or if costumers travel longer distances due to an improved fuel economy, reducing or eliminating the effect of the increase in eco-efficiency. Another example is seen in the lighting technologies: Since the light bulb was invented there has been an enormous increase in the energy efficiency, which has equally lead to a dramatic decrease in the price of light. But as our appetite for more light seems insatiable this increase in eco-efficiency has been met by a corresponding increase in demand—with no signs of saturation. In fact, it has been found that the fraction of GDP spent on light has remained almost constant, close to 1% over the last three centuries in the UK and that this fraction is similar in other countries spanning diverse temporal, geographic, technological and economic circumstances (Tsao and Waide 2010)


In sum, this implies that while LCA may help identify the most eco-efficient solution among a range of alternatives, the actual eco-efficiency that we may achieve through redesign and technological inventions is in many cases insufficient. Furthermore, the increases that are gained in eco-efficiency on the product or technology level may be counterbalanced by increases in demand. Impacts on the environment quantified using LCA can be put into a sustainability perspective by relating them to environmental carrying capacities (Bjørn et al. 2015). This can facilitate an absolute evaluation of whether a studied product can be considered environmentally sustainable, and if not, how much further environmental impacts must be reduced for this to come true. Such an absolute perspective can complement the common relative perspective of LCA which is about identifying the product system that is better for the environment, but that might not be good enough from a sustainability perspective


Yet, even when an absolute perspective is taken LCA cannot, by itself, cover all relevant aspects of sustainability. Many sustainability researchers have argued that the narrow focus on eco-efficiency simply will not suffice. They propose that we have to look at the necessity of the services, and not only at providing the services in the most eco-efficient way. In other words, these researchers talk about the necessity to adjust the “A”, the affluence, in the IPAT equation. In this relation, the LCA falls short—it is a tool to find the most eco-efficient way to deliver this service among a list of predefined alternatives—not a tool for identifying the importance of various services. Increases in eco-efficiency are high on the agenda in many companies, not least because of the often accompanying cost reductions, and on this journey there is no doubt that the LCA will be an invaluable tool to show the way


However, at the same time, we have to be open to the possibility that we may need to discuss not only how different services should be provided, but also the more sensitive and political question—whether a service should be provided at all, if we are to ensure that the future generations are given the same possibilities for meeting their needs as we were given. LCA and Sustainability


Bjørn, A., Diamond, M., Owsianiak, M., et al.: Strengthening the link between life cycle assessment and indicators for absolute sustainability to support development within planetary boundaries. Environ Sci Technol 49, 6370–6371 (2015). doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b02106 Elkington, J.: Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Capstone Publ, Oxford (1997) Girod, B., van Vuuren, D.P., Hertwich, E.G.: Climate policy through changing consumption choices: Options and obstacles for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Glob. Environ. Chang. 25, 5–15 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.01.004 Hettelingh, J.-P., Posch, M., Slootweg, J., et al.: Critical loads and dynamic modelling to assess European areas at risk of acidification and eutrophication. Water Air Soil Pollut. Focus 7, 379–384 (2007). doi:10.1007/s11267-006-9099-1 Holdren, J.P., Ehrlich, P.R.: Human population and the global environment. Am. Sci


Water Air Soil Pollut. Focus 7, 379–384 (2007). doi:10.1007/s11267-006-9099-1 Holdren, J.P., Ehrlich, P.R.: Human population and the global environment. Am. Sci. 62, 282–292 (1974) Jørgensen, A., Herrmann, I.T., Bjørn, A.: Analysis of the link between a definition of sustainability and the life cycle methodologies. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 1440–1449 (2013). doi:10.1007/ s11367-013-0617-x Kloepffer, W.: Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 13, 89–95 (2008). doi:10.1065/lca2008.02.376 McPherson, G.: Time for a revolution. http://guymcpherson.com/2009/05/time-for-a-revolution/ (2009). Accessed 1 June 2016 Pezzey, J.: Sustainable Development Concepts—An Economic Analysis. World Bank Environment Paper No. 2. The World Bank, Washington DC (1992) Reijnders, L.: The factor X debate: setting targets for eco-efficiency. J. Ind. Ecol. 2, 13–22 (1998) Rockström, J.: Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity


J. Ind. Ecol. 2, 13–22 (1998) Rockström, J.: Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society. 14(2), art. 32 (2009) Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., et al.: Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science (2015a). doi:10.1126/science.1259855 Steffen, W., Broadgate, W., Deutsch, L., Gaffney, O., Ludwig, C.: The trajectory of the Anthropocene: the great Acceleration. Anthrop. Rev. 2(1), 81–98 (2015b) Tsao, J.Y., Waide, P.: The world’s appetite for light: empirical data and trends spanning three centuries and six continents. Leukos 6, 259–281 (2010) WBCSD: Eco-efficiency—Creating More Value With Less Impact. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Washington DC (2000) WCED: Report of the World Commission On Environment And Development: Our Common Future


World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Washington DC (2000) WCED: Report of the World Commission On Environment And Development: Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987) WMO: Scientific Assessment Of Ozone Depletion: World Meteorological Organization, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project, Geneva (2014) doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0389-8 Zamagni, A.: Life cycle sustainability assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 373–376 (2012). doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0389-8 Author Biographies Andreas Moltesen has been working with LCA since 2006 with a particular focus on social life cycle assessment. He has later worked on life cycle assessments of biofuels and is currently particularly involved with life cycle assessments of transport systems. A. Moltesen and A. Bjørn


Anders Bjørn part of the LCA community since the early 2010s. Main focus is interpretations of sustainability and integration of sustainability targets in LCA to enable absolute sustainability assessments. LCA and Sustainability


Part II


Chapter 6 Introduction to LCA Methodology Michael Z. Hauschild Abstract In order to offer the reader an overview of the LCA methodology in the preparation of the more detailed description of its different phases, a brief introduction is given to the methodological framework according to the ISO 14040 standard and the main elements of each of its phases. Emphasis is on the iterative nature of the LCA process with its many feedback loops between the different phases. It is explained how the integrated use of sensitivity analysis helps identify key assumptions and key data and thus ensure effectiveness by directing the focus of the LCA practitioner to those parts of the study where additional work contributes most to strengthen the results and conclusions of the study. Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, the reader should be able to • Draw and explain the methodological framework for LCA. • Present an overview of the phases of LCA, their purpose and main elements


• Present an overview of the phases of LCA, their purpose and main elements. • Explain the iterative nature of LCA and its rationale in terms of helping the LCA practitioner focus on what matters most for the results and conclusions of the study. 6.1 As described in Chap. 3, the need for agreement on common principles for how to perform an LCA was realised back in the 1980s. An international discussion of methodological issues took off around 1990 under the auspices of SETAC leading M.Z. Hauschild (&) Division for Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark e-mail: mzha@dtu.dk © Springer International Publishing AG 2018 M.Z. Hauschild et al. (eds.), Life Cycle Assessment, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_6


to publication of state-of-the-art reports and codes of conduct for different parts of the LCA methodology throughout the 1990s and feeding into the standardisation process that went on in parallel. Although many methodological aspects are still under discussion and development continues today, the fundamental structure has been stable since the appearance of the first ISO 14040 standard in 1997, and it is also applied in major LCA methodologies like the CML (Guinée 2002), EDIP97 (Wenzel et al. 1997), and by the ILCD guidelines from the EU Commission (EC-JRC 2010). The methodology chapters in Part II of this book give a detailed presentation of the LCA methodology structured according to the ISO framework and referring to the recommendations and requirements given by the ILCD guidelines. References are not given consistently to these sources throughout the chapters but unless otherwise mentioned, they are the basis of the presented methodology


References are not given consistently to these sources throughout the chapters but unless otherwise mentioned, they are the basis of the presented methodology. The European ILCD guidelines for LCA (EC-JRC 2010) are strongly founded in the framework and methodological requirements of the ISO LCA standards (ISO 2006a, b) but they go further and offer methodological guidance at a much more detailed level than the standards do. They are the outcome of a comprehensive consultation process involving hearings of experts and stakeholders, and on this basis, we have chosen them as a useful reference for discussing LCA methodology and specifying methodological choices. In Chap. 37 the most important methodological actions and requirements of the ILCD guideline are presented in the form of a cookbook or checklist that you can refer to as a reference methodology to follow, or to deviate from at specific and transparently documented points of the methodology


6.2 The Phases of LCA We begin in this introductory chapter with a brief description of the main methodological phases and the way in which their results are assessed and refined in a focused iterative process. This will give you an overview of the methodology before you dig into the details and peculiarities of its different phases and elements, and it will introduce you to the iterative approach, which is fundamental for performing a successful LCA. As illustrated in Fig. 6.1, the ISO standard distinguishes the methodological framework of LCA from its different applications, which are multiple such as product development, Ecolabelling, carbon footprint and other footprints (see Part III of the textbook for examples). Applications of LCA are treated in separate publications from the standard organisation. The LCA framework operates with four separate phases, Goal and scope definition, Inventory analysis, Impact assessment and Interpretation. M.Z. Hauschild


6.2.1 Goal and Scope Definition An LCA starts with a well-considered and deliberate definition of the goal of the study (see Chap. 7). Why is this study performed? Which question(s) is it intended to answer and for whom is it performed? The goal definition sets the context of the LCA study and is the basis of the scope definition (see Chap. 8) where the assessment is framed and outlined in accordance with the goal definition, primarily in terms of • Defining the functional unit: a quantitative description of the function or service for which the assessment is performed, and the basis of determining the reference flow of product that scales the data collection in the next LCA phase, the inventory analysis. • Scoping the product system, deciding which activities and processes belong to the life cycle of the product that is studied. • Selecting the assessment parameters, i.e. the impacts that shall be assessed in the study


• Selecting the assessment parameters, i.e. the impacts that shall be assessed in the study. • Selecting the geographical and temporal boundaries and settings of the study and the level of technology that is relevant for the processes in the product system. • Deciding the relevant perspective to apply in the study: should it be a consequential study assessing the impacts that can be expected as a consequence of choosing one alternative over another, or should it be an attributional study assessing the impacts that are associated with the studied activity? • Identifying the need to perform critical review, in particular if the study is a comparative assertion intended to be disclosed to the public. Direct applications: product development and improvement strategic planning public policy making marketing other Scope definition Inventory analysis Impact assessment Interpretation Goal definition Fig


6.1 Framework of LCA modified from the ISO 14040 standard Introduction to LCA Methodology


The goal definition and the ensuing scope definition are very important to consider when the results of the study are interpreted since these definitions involve choices that determine the collection of data and the way in which the system is modelled and assessed. They therefore have a strong influence on the validity of the conclusions and recommendations that are based on the results of the LCA. 6.2.2 Inventory Analysis Following the definition of goal and scope, the inventory analysis collects information about the physical flows in terms of input of resources, materials, semi-products and products and the output of emissions, waste and valuable products for the product system (see Chap. 9). The analysis studies all the processes that were identified as belonging to the product system, and the flows are scaled in accordance with the reference flow of product that is determined from the functional unit


Due to the comprehensiveness of most product systems, the inventory analysis often relies on generic data for many processes originating from databases with unit processes or cradle-to-gate data, presenting the in- and output flows for one unit process, e.g. for production of a material, generation of heat or electricity, transportation or waste management. Environmentally extended input–output analysis can be used to support and qualify the collection of inventory data as discussed in Chap. 14. The outcome of the inventory analysis is the life cycle inventory, a list of quantified physical elementary flows for the product system that is associated with the provision of the service or function described by the functional unit


6.2.3 Impact Assessment Taking the life cycle inventory as a starting point, the impact assessment translates the physical flows and interventions of the product system into impacts on the environment using knowledge and models from environmental science (see Chap. 10). The impact assessment consists of five elements of which the first three are mandatory according to the ISO 14040 standard: 1. Selection of impact categories representative of the assessment parameters that were chosen as part of the scope definition. For each impact category, a representative indicator is chosen together with an environmental model that can be used to quantify the impact of elementary flows on the indicator. 2. Classification of elementary flows from the inventory by assigning them to impact categories according to their ability to contribute by impacting the chosen indicator. M.Z. Hauschild


3. Characterisation using environmental models for the impact category to quantify the ability of each of the assigned elementary flows to impact the indicator of the category. The resulting characterised impact scores are expressed in a common metric for the impact category. This allows aggregation of all contributions into one score, representing the total impact that the product system has for that category. The collection of aggregated indicator scores for the different impact categories (each expressed in its own metric) constitutes the characterised impact profile of the product system. 4. Normalisation is used to inform about the relative magnitude of each of the characterised scores for the different impact categories by expressing them relative to a common set of reference impacts—one reference impact per impact category. Often the background impact from society is used as a reference


Often the background impact from society is used as a reference. The result of the normalisation is the normalised impact profile of the product system in which all category indicator scores are expressed in the same metric. 5. Grouping or weighting supports comparison across the impact categories by grouping and possibly ranking them according to their perceived severity, or by weighting them using weighting factors that for each impact category gives a quantitative expression of how severe it is relative to the other impact categories. Quantitative weighting allows aggregation of all the weighted impact scores into one overall environmental impact score for the product system, which may be useful when the results of the LCA are used in decision support together with other condensed information like the economic costs of the alternatives


The main focus of this book is the traditional environmental LCA focusing on the environmental impacts of the product system, but for sustainability assessment, also social and economic impacts need to be considered. For these other dimensions of sustainability, a life cycle perspective is as relevant as it is for the environmental dimension and in a life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA—See Chap. 5) they may be addressed through a social LCA (S-LCA) and a life cycle costing analysis (LCC). Both of these assessment techniques have their own distinct methodological foundation which shares the fundamental framework of environmental LCA but has many distinct elements in all phases of the methodology as introduced in Chaps. 15 (LCC) and 16 (S-LCA). Interpretation The results of the study are interpreted in order to answer the question(s) posed as part of the goal definition (see Chap. 12)


15 (LCC) and 16 (S-LCA). Interpretation The results of the study are interpreted in order to answer the question(s) posed as part of the goal definition (see Chap. 12). The interpretation considers both results of the inventory analysis and the impact assessment elements characterisation and, possibly, normalisation and weighting. The interpretation must be done with the goal and scope definition in mind and respect the restrictions that the scoping choices impose on a meaningful interpretation of the results, e.g. due to geographical, temporal or technological assumptions. Sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis are applied as part of the interpretation to guide the development of conclusions from the results, to appraise the robustness of the conclusions, and to identify the focus points for further work in order to further strengthen the conslusions. Introduction to LCA Methodology


6.3 The Iterative Nature of LCA In Fig. 6.1 a number of arrows indicate that rather than a linearly proceeding process, LCA involves many feedback loops between the different phases of the LCA. Insights from the impact assessment are used in refining the inventory analysis and insights from both of these phases may feed back to the scope definition, e.g. in the setting of the boundaries of the product system, what to include and what to exclude. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis are thus not just performed in the interpretation at the end but throughout the study as part of both inventory analysis and impact assessment in order to identify the key figures or key assumptions of the study and the data that are associated with the largest uncertainties (see Chap. 11). Each phase of the methodology provides feedback to the previous phases of the study and helps target the next iteration of the LCA


11). Each phase of the methodology provides feedback to the previous phases of the study and helps target the next iteration of the LCA. The best precision is obtained with minimum work effort if the focus is on improving the key figures wherever possible and needed, and on reducing the largest uncertainties. In practice, the first iteration will often be a screening that covers the full life cycle, but in terms of inventory data largely is based on easily accessible data from available databases. Following the impact assessment, the parts of the product system that contribute most strongly to the total results can be identified, and the chosen boundaries of the product system can be tested. As a consequence, the scoping may have to be refined


As a consequence, the scoping may have to be refined. The impact assessment results also allow identifying those inventory data or assumptions made in the inventory analysis that have the largest influence on the overall results or for which the uncertainties are so large that they potentially could be key figures. These data should be the target of the next iteration, where effort should be focused on testing and refining these assumptions or data and get more representative or recent data. Based on the revised inventory a new impact assessment is performed, and the sensitivity analysis is performed once more to see which are now the key figures and key assumptions. Large uncertainties may also accompany the factors applied in the characterisation of some of the inventory flows in the impact assessment, and if the sensitivity analysis indicates that such uncertainties may have a decisive influence on the results, these factors will also be the target of a consecutive iteration


Figure 6.2 illustrates the iterative approach to performing an LCA. As illustrated by the narrowing spiral in Fig. 6.2, the uncertainty of the LCA results is reduced through the repeated iterations, and these are carried on until the remaining uncertainty of the results is sufficiently small to meet the goal of the study. If the goal is to identify which among several alternatives has the lowest environmental impacts, the number of needed iterations may be low if the alternatives show large differences in their impacts, while a higher number of iterations will be needed if the alternatives are more similar. An LCA performed to support an environmental product declaration with a general requirement to the uncertainty of the impact scores can require a high number of iterations before all impact scores are determined within the stipulated level of uncertainty. M.Z. Hauschild


With this overview of the LCA framework, its interconnected phases and how iteration is used to ensure effectiveness when performing an LCA, you are now prepared for diving into the intricate details of the many elements of the LCA methodology. Enjoy! This chapter is to a large extent based on the ILCD handbook and the ISO standards 14040 and 14044. Due to the scope of this chapter, some details have been omitted, and some procedures have been rephrased to make the text more relevant to students. For more details, the reader may refer to these texts: EC-JRC (2010) European Commission—Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook—General guide for Life Cycle Assessment—Detailed guidance. First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union. ISO: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework (ISO 14040)


First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union. ISO: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework (ISO 14040). ISO, The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2006a) ISO: Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines (ISO 14044). ISO, The International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2006b) Additional References Quoted in the Text Guinée, J.B., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., van Oers, L., Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Suh, S., Udo de Haes, H.A., de Bruijn, H., van Duin, R., Huijbregts, M.A.J.: Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002). ISBN 1-4020-0228-9 Wenzel, H., Hauschild, M.Z., Alting, L.: Environmental Assessment of Products, vol. 1— Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, MA. USA (1997)


1— Methodology, Tools and Case Studies in Product Development, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham, MA. USA (1997). ISBN 0 412 80800 5 Fig. 6.2 Using sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis as integrated tools, the phases of the LCA methodology are repeated with focus on improving and strengthening the identified key figures and assumptions in consecutive iterations until the strength of the conclusions meets the requirements posed by the goal and scope definition Introduction to LCA Methodology