Land use and biodiversity indicators for life cycle impact assessment

Background  The primary purpose of environmental assessment is to protect biological systems. Data collected over the last several decades indicates that the greatest impacts on biological resources derive from physical changes in land use. However, to date there is no consensus on indicators of land use that could be applicable worldwide at all scales. This has hampered the assessment of land use in the context of LCA. Objectives  The Institute for Environmental Research and Education and its partner Defenders of Wildlife have begun an effort to develop the necessary consensus. Methods  In July 2000, they held a workshop attended by a diverse group of interested parties and experts to develop a preliminary list of life cycle indicators for land use impacts. Results  Their preliminary list of impact indicators includes: protection of priority habitats/species; soil characteristics: soil health; proximity to & protection of high priority vegetative communities; interface between water and terrestrial habitats/buffer zones; assimilative capacity of water and land; hydrological function; percent coverage of invasive species within protected areas; road density; percent native-dominated vegetation; restoration of native vegetation; adoption of Best Management Practices linked to biodiversity objectives; distribution (patchiness; evenness, etc.); and connectivity of native habitat. Conclusion  The list of indicators conforms well to other efforts in developing indicators. There appears to be convergence among experts in the field and in related fields on the appropriate things to measure. Future Prospects  These indicators are currently being tested in the United States. Further workshops and testing is planned towards developing internationally recognized indicators for land use.     

Land use indicators in life cycle assessment

Purpose  

Inclusion of land use-related environmental aspects into LCA methodology has been under active development in recent years. Although many indicators have been developed and proposed for different aspects of land use (climate change, biodiversity, resource depletion and soil quality), many of indicators have, as yet, not been tested and compared in LCA applications. The aim of this study is to test the different LCIA indicators in practice in a case study of beer production.     

The use of environmental assays for impact assessment

The assessment of impacts of chemically contaminated aquatic environments on animal systems has a number of shortcomings. These include problems with analyses for toxic chemicals and the relevance of bioassays for predicting risk to ecosystems. Research is urgently needed to find better ways to solve these problems, particularly with respect to chronic exposures.     

Land use impact assessment in the construction sector: an analysis of LCIA models and case study application

Purpose

Land use is a potentially important impact category in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of buildings. Three research questions are addressed in this paper: Is land use a decisive factor in the environmental impact of buildings?; Is it important to include the primary land use of buildings in the assessment?; and How does the environmental performance of solid structure and timber frame dwellings differ when assessed by distinct available models for quantifying land use impacts?

Methods

This paper compares several operational land use impact assessment models, which are subsequently implemented in an LCA case study comparing a building constructed using timber frame versus a solid structure. Different models were used for addressing the different research questions.

Results and discussion

The results reveal that contrasting decisions may be supported by LCA study results, depending on whether or not and how land use is included in the assessment. The analysis also highlights the need to include the building land footprint in the assessment and to better distinguish building locations in current land use impact assessment models.

Conclusions

Selecting land use assessment models that are most appropriate to the goals of the study is recommended as different models assess different environmental issues related to land use. In general, the combination of two land use assessment methods for buildings is recommended, i.e. soil organic matter (SOM) of Milà i Canals and Eco-indicator 99.     

Linking land use inventories to biodiversity impact assessment methods

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - There is generally a mismatch in the land use classification of life cycle inventory (LCI) databases and life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)...     

The use of meiofauna in marine pollution impact assessment*

The use of meiofaunal assemblages for the detection and quantification of perturbation of the marine environment by man is examined. The theoretical and practical advantages and drawbacks of meiofaunal monitoring are described and different methods of impact assessment described and evaluated. It is suggested that identification of meiofaunal material need not present a major obstacle to its use, as sensitive responses of meiofaunal assemblages to pollution can be recorded without the necessity for specific identifications. It is concluded that the great sensitivity to pollution of some meiofaunal groups (particularly copepods) offers the potential for better estimation of the real extent of pollution impact than is being achieved by sole reliance on examination of the macrofaunal assemblage. Meiofaunal monitoring should also be considered where there is difficulty in adequate sampling of the macrofauna, due to impoverishment or practical difficulties.     

Correlation analysis of life cycle impact assessment indicators measuring resource use

Introduction  

Even though the necessity of a sustainable use of natural resources is widely accepted, there is neither consensus on how “resource use” is clearly defined nor how it should be measured. Depending on the definition, it can comprise raw material consumption only or the consumption and pollution of natural resources. Consequently, lots of indicators can be applied, and the result of a life cycle assessment study aiming to quantify resource use seems to depend on the selection of impact categories. Therefore, this paper aims at analyzing life cycle impact assessment results obtained by means of several indicators to check if different indexes lead to similar results and if the number of indicators can be reduced.     

Sustainability impact assessment of increasing resource use intensity in forest bioenergy production chains

Changing forest management practices towards more intensive biomass utilization for energy purposes will affect the sustainability of resource management. The Tool for Sustainability Impact Assessment was applied to evaluate the environmental, social, and economic sustainability impacts of the stepwise increased extraction of forest biomass of three typical Scandinavian Scots pine bioenergy production chains (BPCs). The assessed sources of the woody biomass were pellets as a by‐product of the sawmilling industry, wood chips deriving from early whole‐tree harvesting, and residues from final cuttings. Three commercially practiced BPCs were compared. By the additional extraction of biomass for heat production, the employment increased by 0.6 person‐years 1000 m^?3 solid wood chips, while there was a decrease in the costs and greenhouse gases emitted per unit of heat consumed. Furthermore this practice did not only add positive socio‐economic but also positive environmental impacts on sustainability, particularly on the greenhouse gas balance and the energy efficiency ratio (input to output ratio along the BPC), which was determined to be 1–24. Potential drawbacks, on the other hand, include decreasing nutrient returns to the soil and the associated potential reduction in future stand productivity. Fertilization might be needed to maintain sustainable forest growth on poor sites.     

Inclusion of discard assessment indicators in fisheries life cycle assessment studies. Expanding the use of fishery-specific impact categories

Purpose

The main purpose of this article is to propose specific discard indexes for their development in fisheries life cycle assessment (LCA). The objective of these is to characterize and standardize discards in worldwide fisheries.

Methods

The global discard index (GDI) is intended to be an easily understood index whose use is extendible to any fishery in the world. It is presented as a dynamic index that aims to characterize and standardize discard rates between fisheries by direct comparison with the global discard rates reported periodically by FAO. Furthermore, a simplified approach excluding characterization is presented for scenarios in which the data quality linked to discards is poor. Two additional indicators, survival rate of discards and slipping, are proposed to improve the reporting and quantification of biomass waste by fishing vessels.

Results

GDI implementation, together with two other fishery-specific impact categories, showed remarkable differences in the environmental impacts of several fishing fleets when compared with the obtained results for conventional impact categories. Results for the conventional categories were strongly influenced by the energy use in the fishery, while results obtained for fishery-specific categories presented variable trends due to the dependence on a wider range of factors. GDI inclusion favored direct comparison with worldwide average discard rates on a time scale basis, from a wet weight or a net primary productivity perspective, depending on the selected approach.

Conclusions

Proposed indicators achieved the important objective of integrating discard data as a fishery-specific impact in fishery LCAs, increasing the benefits of implementing LCA in fisheries assessment. Specific advantages of these indicators include assessing changes in capture and landing composition, evaluating the selectivity of the fishing gears, and monitoring the behavior of fisheries in a normalized context respect to other fisheries. GDI was identified as an adequate methodological improvement for regular use in fisheries LCA. Future developments GDI include its harmonization for inclusion in damage assessment.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of margarine and butter consumed in the UK,Germany and France

Purpose  

The goal of the study was to compare the environmental impact of butter and margarine. Altogether, seven products were studied in three European markets: UK, Germany and France.     

Product social impact assessment

Purpose

Whereas the business evolution of environmental sustainability metrics has advanced significantly over the past decade, social sustainability at product level is still relatively immature. Research continues to support the front runners on organisational sustainability, while workable solutions at product level have not yet been addressed sufficiently. Triggered by this imbalance, a group of experts from large companies decided to join forces, initiating the Roundtable for Product Social Metrics.

Methods

Starting in early 2013, this group of companies aimed to (i) consolidate principles for product social sustainability assessment and harmonise approaches, (ii) align with other global initiatives and share with other companies and (iii) develop solutions for cross-cutting implementation issues. In order to be able to produce a comprehensive method for social impact assessment that provides enough flexibility for individual requirements, the Roundtable developed a method based on the approaches of the participant companies and external references such as the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines for Social Life-Cycle Assessment of Products and corporate level standards. Guiding principles were defined for the development of the method.

Results and discussion

The results of the first two phases of the Roundtable for Product Social Metrics are documented in a handbook, which proposes a practical method for organisations to assess the social impacts of a product or a service along its life cycle. The handbook outlines an aligned method for social impact assessment at a product level offering two approaches: quantitative and scale based. The method was developed to allow reasoned assessment of overall performance by including social topics and performance indicators that reflect positive and negative impacts of the product on three stakeholder groups: workers, consumers and local communities. Nineteen social topics are proposed, together with their individual performance indicators, including detailed definitions. Application examples and recommendations for the communication of results are also included in the handbook.

Conclusions

The method can be applied in numerous scenarios, from understanding improvement opportunities and steering product development in different stages, to providing support for decision making and external communications. However, the method still has further potential for improvement, inter alia that the proposed indicators are not fully applicable to small farmers, SMEs and the self-employed, as well as that the indicators are mainly at inventory level. Furthermore, the proposed method is strongly dependent on the availability of data.