LCA impact assessment categories

A technical framework is presented to evaluate the strengths and the limitations of LCA impact assessment categories to yield accurate, useful results. The framework integrates the inherent characteristics of life-cycle inventory (LCI) data sets, characteristics of individual impact categories, how impact categories are defined, and the models used to characterize different categories. The sources for uncertainty in impact assessment are derived from the basic LCI procedures and the complexity of environmental processes and mechanisms. The noteworthy LCI procedures are: (1) the collection and aggregation of data across a comprehensive product system, (2) co-product and recycling allocation for releases and resources, and (3) the conversion of these data by functional unit calculations. These operations largely remove spatial and temporal considerations, resulting in analytical and interpretive limitations that vary in magnitude for different impact assessment categories. The framework shows two groups of categories where LCA results may be insufficient for making comparisons: (1) categories that involve local and/or transient processes and (2) categories that involve non-mass loading, biological parameters, such as biodiversity, habitat alteration, and toxicity. The framework also shows that how impact categories are defined complicates their use. Some categories are based on objective stressor-effect networks using known environmental mechanisms. In contrast, other categories are defined using various levels of subjective judgment to address either highly complex or unknown mechanisms. Finally, the framework shows that differences in the quality and detail of information provided by various models used during characterization also influence the accuracy and usefulness of the results. In summary, the framework indicates that (1) the various uncertainties in each individual category have a a number of different technical origins and that (2) the degree of uncertainty varies significantly between categories. As a result, interpretation and valuation cannot presume an equivalency of processes or merit behind numerical values for different categories. The framework can be used to initially identify and track these uncertainties to improve LCA impact assessment interpretation and application.     

Social impact assessment in LCA using the Preston pathway

Purpose

The purpose of the social Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method is to predict the social impacts on people caused by the changes in the functioning of one product chain throughout its life cycle. Changes in health status are very important experiences for people. The aim of this paper is to build a pathway between changes in economic activity generated by the functioning of a product chain and the changes in health status of the population in the country where the economic activity takes place.

Methods

Empirical and historical factors suggest that increased economic activity through growth in income leads to improvements in the health of a country’s population. This empirical relationship is well known in economics as the Preston curve. Using this relationship, we design a pathway for social LCA impact assessment. This pathway may be used to explain or predict the potential impact caused by the modification of one product sector upon the health of a population. The Preston relationship usually is calculated for a cross section of countries. We assess whether the Preston relationship is valid when a single country is considered alone. Drawing from scientific literature regarding development, we define the context where the use of the Preston relationship is justified. We describe the general design of the Preston pathway, using a recalculated (panel based) relationship, and specify the conditions for its use. We apply it to the case of company B, a banana industry in Cameroon, for the period between 2010 and 2030.

Results

We highlight that the panel calculation of the Preston relationship remains significant when a country is considered alone. We suggest that the following conditions are required for the pathway to be used: (1) the activity is set within countries where the GDP per capita in purchasing power parity is less than $10,000 at the start of the period, (2) the assessed activity accounts for a significant part of the annual GDP and/or demonstrates obvious signs that it represents a huge stake in the country’s economy, (3) the duration of the assessed activity is regular and long enough, and (4) the added value created by the activity is shared within the country. We found that the future activity of company B would improve the potential LEX of the entire population of Cameroon by 5 days over 20 years, based on 200,000 t of bananas exported annually (in comparison with no activity).

Conclusions

When the four conditions for use are met, and provided results are interpreted by comparing them with other situations or countries, the recalculated panel-based relationship may be used to explain or predict a change in potential life expectancy generated by a change in economic activity. The Preston pathway may be useful for impact assessment in social LCA. The assessment is valid only when used for a comparative analysis and must be done within a multi-criteria framework. Complementary pathways therefore need to be designed. We suggest that the conditions for use and other research issues be discussed and fine-tuned further. Moreover, we welcome comments and criticisms.     

A decision-analytic framework for impact assessment part I: LCA and decision analysis

Life-cycle assessments (LCAs) are conducted to satisfy the aspiration of decision makers to consider the environment in their decision making. This paper reviews decision analysis and discusses how it can be used to structure the assessment and to integrate characterization and valuation. The decision analytic concepts of objectives (goals) and attributes (indicators of the degree to which an objective is achieved) are used to describe steps of the assessment of the entire impact chain. Decision analysis distinguishes among different types of objectives and attributes; it describes how these relate to each other. Impact indicators such as the Human Toxicity Potential are constructed attributes. A means-ends objectives network can show how the different constructed attributes relate to the objective of protecting the environment. As LCA takes disparate environmental impacts into account, it needs to assess their relative importance. Trade-off methods in decision analysis are grouped into utility theory and multicriteria decision aids; they have different advantages and disadvantages, but are all more sophisticated than simple weighting. The performance of the different trade-off methods has not yet been tested in an LCA context. In the second part of the paper, we present criteria for the development of characterization methods.     

Uncertainty in LCA case study due to allocation approaches and life cycle impact assessment methods

Purpose

Uncertainty is present in many forms in life cycle assessment (LCA). However, little attention has been paid to analyze the variability that methodological choices have on LCA outcomes. To address this variability, common practice is to conduct a sensitivity analysis, which is sometimes treated only at a qualitative level. Hence, the purpose of this paper was to evaluate the uncertainty and the sensitivity in the LCA of swine production due to two methodological choices: the allocation approach and the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) method.

Methods

We used a comparative case study of swine production to address uncertainty due to methodological choices. First, scenario variation through a sensitivity analysis of the approaches used to address the multi-functionality problem was conducted for the main processes of the system product, followed by an impact assessment using five LCIA methods at the midpoint level. The results from the sensitivity analysis were used to generate 10,000 independent simulations using the Monte Carlo method and then compared using comparison indicators in histogram graphics.

Results and discussion

Regardless of the differences between the absolute values of the LCA obtained due to the allocation approach and LCIA methods used, the overall ranking of scenarios did not change. The use of the substitution method to address the multi-functional processes in swine production showed the highest values for almost all of the impact categories, except for freshwater ecotoxicity; therefore, this method introduced the greater variations into our analysis. Regarding the variation of the LCIA method, for acidification, eutrophication, and freshwater ecotoxicity, the results were very sensitive. The uncertainty analysis with the Monte Carlo simulations showed a wide range of results and an almost equal probability of all the scenarios be the preferable option to decrease the impacts on acidification, eutrophication, and freshwater ecotoxicity. Considering the aggregate result variation across allocation approaches and LCIA methods, the uncertainty is too high to identify a statistically significant alternative.

Conclusions

The uncertainty analysis showed that performing only a sensitivity analysis could mislead the decision-maker with respect to LCA results; our analysis with the Monte Carlo simulation indicates no significant difference between the alternatives compared. Although the uncertainty in the LCA outcomes could not be decreased due to the wide range of possible results, to some extent, the uncertainty analysis can lead to a less uncertain decision-making by demonstrating the uncertainties between the compared alternatives.

     

The Glasgow consensus on the delineation between pesticide emission inventory and impact assessment for LCA

Purpose

Pesticides are applied to agricultural fields to optimise crop yield and their global use is substantial. Their consideration in life cycle assessment (LCA) is affected by important inconsistencies between the emission inventory and impact assessment phases of LCA. A clear definition of the delineation between the product system model (life cycle inventory—LCI, technosphere) and the natural environment (life cycle impact assessment—LCIA, ecosphere) is missing and could be established via consensus building.

Methods

A workshop held in 2013 in Glasgow, UK, had the goal of establishing consensus and creating clear guidelines in the following topics: (1) boundary between emission inventory and impact characterisation model, (2) spatial dimensions and the time periods assumed for the application of substances to open agricultural fields or in greenhouses and (3) emissions to the natural environment and their potential impacts. More than 30 specialists in agrifood LCI, LCIA, risk assessment and ecotoxicology, representing industry, government and academia from 15 countries and four continents, met to discuss and reach consensus. The resulting guidelines target LCA practitioners, data (base) and characterisation method developers, and decision makers.

Results and discussion

The focus was on defining a clear interface between LCI and LCIA, capable of supporting any goal and scope requirements while avoiding double counting or exclusion of important emission flows/impacts. Consensus was reached accordingly on distinct sets of recommendations for LCI and LCIA, respectively, recommending, for example, that buffer zones should be considered as part of the crop production system and the change in yield be considered. While the spatial dimensions of the field were not fixed, the temporal boundary between dynamic LCI fate modelling and steady-state LCIA fate modelling needs to be defined.

Conclusions and recommendations

For pesticide application, the inventory should report pesticide identification, crop, mass applied per active ingredient, application method or formulation type, presence of buffer zones, location/country, application time before harvest and crop growth stage during application, adherence with Good Agricultural Practice, and whether the field is considered part of the technosphere or the ecosphere. Additionally, emission fractions to environmental media on-field and off-field should be reported. For LCIA, the directly concerned impact categories and a list of relevant fate and exposure processes were identified. Next steps were identified: (1) establishing default emission fractions to environmental media for integration into LCI databases and (2) interaction among impact model developers to extend current methods with new elements/processes mentioned in the recommendations.

     

Evaluating options in LCA: The emergence of conflicting paradigms for impact assessment and evaluation

LCA aims to help direct decisions in an environmentally sustainable direction. It indicates the environmental effects of choices and evaluates these against this background. Approaches to evaluation in LCA differ substantially, related to the way of modelling environmental effects and to the way these effects are combined into an overall judgement on alternative options. Several approaches are now operational, which are linked to different paradigms in decision making. It is shown that the choice of paradigm is quite decisive on the outcome of the analysis. Also within similar paradigms, different methods now operational may lead to different outcomes. These latter differences may be alleviated more easily than those related to paradigmatic choices, as they are partly a matter of refinement, and they partly result from legitimate differences in subjective priorities. The more basic paradigmatic differences can hardly be bridged. The practical relevancy of the subject is proven by applying different operational methods to one case, showing widely differing outcomes. The paradigm behind evaluating environmental effects is either values based, directly or through policy decisions, or economics based, as individual preferences measured in the monetary terms of willingness-to-pay. Accordingly, the different methods are “policy-oriented” or “monetary”. It may be doubted if the differences between these can be overcome in standardisation.     

UNEP-SETAC guideline on global land use impact assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services in LCA

Purpose

As a consequence of the multi-functionality of land, the impact assessment of land use in Life Cycle Impact Assessment requires the modelling of several impact pathways covering biodiversity and ecosystem services. To provide consistency amongst these separate impact pathways, general principles for their modelling are provided in this paper. These are refinements to the principles that have already been proposed in publications by the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. In particular, this paper addresses the calculation of land use interventions and land use impacts, the issue of impact reversibility, the spatial and temporal distribution of such impacts and the assessment of absolute or relative ecosystem quality changes. Based on this, we propose a guideline to build methods for land use impact assessment in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA).

Results

Recommendations are given for the development of new characterization models and for which a series of key elements should explicitly be stated, such as the modelled land use impact pathways, the land use/cover typology covered, the level of biogeographical differentiation used for the characterization factors, the reference land use situation used and if relative or absolute quality changes are used to calculate land use impacts. Moreover, for an application of the characterisation factors (CFs) in an LCA study, data collection should be transparent with respect to the data input required from the land use inventory and the regeneration times. Indications on how generic CFs can be used for the background system as well as how spatial-based CFs can be calculated for the foreground system in a specific LCA study and how land use change is to be allocated should be detailed. Finally, it becomes necessary to justify the modelling period for which land use impacts of land transformation and occupation are calculated and how uncertainty is accounted for.

Discussion

The presented guideline is based on a number of assumptions: Discrete land use types are sufficient for an assessment of land use impacts; ecosystem quality remains constant over time of occupation; time and area of occupation are substitutable; transformation time is negligible; regeneration is linear and independent from land use history and landscape configuration; biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services are independent; the ecological impact is linearly increasing with the intervention; and there is no interaction between land use and other drivers such as climate change. These assumptions might influence the results of land use Life Cycle Impact Assessment and need to be critically reflected.

Conclusions and recommendations

In this and the other papers of the special issue, we presented the principles and recommendations for the calculation of land use impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services on a global scale. In the framework of LCA, they are mainly used for the assessment of land use impacts in the background system. The main areas for further development are the link to regional ecological models running in the foreground system, relative weighting of the ecosystem services midpoints and indirect land use.     

A method for human health impact assessment in social LCA: lessons from three case studies

Purpose

Improving human health is a long-lasting endeavour of mankind. In the field of social life cycle assessment (SLCA), the importance of human health is often highlighted, and further development of impact assessment methods has been recommended. The purpose of this article is to present a method for assessing human health impacts within SLCA.

Methods

By using a systematic combining approach, knowledge and experience about assessing human health impacts were obtained from three previously conducted case studies. The first case study was about an airbag system, the second about a catalytic converter and the third about gold jewellery. The disability-adjusted life years (DALY) indicator was used for impact assessment in all three case studies.

Results and discussion

Both positive and negative human health impacts associated with the products were identified and assessed in the three case studies. For the airbag system, avoided health impacts in the use phase outweighed health impacts during production. For the catalytic converter, whether health impacts avoided exceeded health impacts caused or not depended on which time perspective regarding impacts was employed. Gold jewellery does not help avoiding any health impacts but caused considerable health impacts when produced at a certain location. Based on experience from these case studies, a generic human health impact assessment method was developed, and a life cycle human health typology for products was developed based on the method. The method provides a basis for analysis and interpretation of health impacts along product life cycles, and it is therefore important to report both positive and negative health impacts separately for different actors.

Conclusions

The developed human health impact assessment method involves the assessment and comparison of both positive and negative human health impacts along product life cycles. In addition to the products assessed in the three case studies, we suggest additional products that could be particularly interesting to assess with the developed method, including medicines, seat belts, other conflict minerals, alcoholic beverages and products with a high chemical impact.

     

LCA of the timber sector in Ghana: preliminary life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

Purpose  

Most life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) approaches in life cycle assessment (LCA) are developed for western countries. Their LCIA approaches and characterization methodologies for different impact categories may not be necessarily relevant to African environmental conditions and particularly not for the timber sector in Ghana. This study reviews the relevance of existing impact categories and LCIA approaches, and uses the most relevant for the timber sector of Ghana.     

The assessment of positive impacts in LCA of products

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - The objective of this paper is to open a discussion on the implications and challenges of including positive impacts in LCAs of products and to...     

Environmental assessment of sardine (Sardina pilchardus) purse seine fishery in Portugal with LCA methodology including biological impact categories

Purpose

The purse seine fishery for sardine is the most important fishery in Portugal. The aim of the present study is to assess the environmental impacts of sardine fished by the Portuguese fleet and to analyse a number of variables such as vessel size and time scale. An additional goal was to incorporate fishery-specific impact categories in the case study.

Methods

Life Cycle Assessment methodology was applied, and data were collected from nine vessels, which represented around 10 % of the landings. Vessels were divided into two length categories, above and below 12 m, and data were obtained for the years 2005 to 2010. The study was limited to the fishing phase only. The standard impact categories included were energy use, global warming potential, eutrophication potential, acidification potential and ozone depletion potential. The fishery-specific impact categories were overfishing, overfishedness, lost potential yield, mean trophic level and the primary production required, and were quantified as much as possible.

Results and discussion

The landings from the data set were constituted mainly by sardine (91 %), and the remainders were other small pelagic species (e.g. horse mackerel). The most important input was the fuel, and both vessel categories had the same fuel consumption per catch 0.11 l/kg. Average greenhouse gas emissions (carbon footprint) were 0.36 kg CO₂ eq. per kilo sardine landed. The fuel use varied between years, and variability between months can be even higher. Fishing mortality has increased, and the spawning stock biomass has decreased resulting in consequential overfishing for 2010. A correlation between fuel use and stock biomass was not found, and the stock condition does not seem to directly influence the global warming potential in this fishery. Discards were primarily non-target small pelagic species, and there was also mortality of target species resulting from slipping. The seafloor impact was considered to be insignificant due to the fishing method.

Conclusions

The assessment of the Portuguese purse seine fishery resulted in no difference regarding fuel use between large and small vessels, but differences were found between years. The stock has declined, and it has produced below maximum sustainable yield. By-catch and discard data were missing but may be substantial. Even being difficult to quantify, fishery impact categories complement the environmental results with biological information and precaution is need in relation to the stock management. The sardine carbon footprint from Portuguese purse seine was lower than that of other commercial species reported in.     

Adapting the LCA framework to environmental assessment in land planning

Purpose

Since the implementation of the European directive (EC/2001/42) on strategic environmental assessment, an ex ante evaluation has become mandatory for plans and programs. This requirement could have significant consequences for the environment. Local authorities, who are in charge of land planning issues, must therefore conduct such assessments. However, they are faced with lack of uniform methodology. The aim of this paper is thus to propose a methodological framework for the required environmental assessment stages in land planning.

Methods

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has been identified as a promising tool to perform environmental assessment at a meso-level (i.e., territories). Yet, the standardized LCA framework has never been used for assessing the environmental impacts of a territory as such, which can be explained by the complexity that its application would involve. Four major methodological bottlenecks have been identified in this paper, i.e., (1) functional unit definition, (2) boundary selection, (3) data collecting, and (4) the refinement of the life cycle impact assessment phase in order to provide useful indicators for land planning. For each of these challenges, recommendations have been made to adapt the analytical framework of LCA.

Results and discussion

A revised framework is proposed to perform LCA of a territory. One of the major adaptations needed concerns the goal and scope definition phase. Henceforth, the association of a territory and the studied land planning scenario, defined by its geographical boundaries and its interactions with other territories, will be designated as the reference flow in LCA. Consequently, two kinds of indicators will be determined using this approach, i.e., (1) a vector of environmental impacts generated (conventional LCA) and (2) a vector of land use functions provided by the territory for different stakeholders (e.g., provision of work, recreation, culture, etc.). This revised framework has been applied to a theoretical case study in order to highlight its utility in land planning.

Conclusions

This work is a first step in the adaptation of the LCA framework to environmental assessment in land planning. We believe that this revised framework has the potential to provide relevant information in decision-making processes. Nonetheless, further work is still needed to broaden and deepen this approach (i.e., normalization of impacts and functions, coupled application with GIS, uncertainties, etc.).     

Environmental assessment of the Peruvian industrial hake fishery with LCA

Purpose

The Peruvian hake (Merluccius gayi peruanus) stock has been in a delicate state in the last decades due to overexploitation combined with adverse climatic events. The stock is showing certain signs of recovery since 2012. This work analyses the environmental impacts of current fleet operations and its likely trend.

Methods

The fleet was divided into coherent segments, per holding capacity and engine power. The validity of both segmentations, as well as the presence of an effect of economies of scale driving fuel use intensity (FUI), was tested. Life cycle assessment was used to calculate environmental impacts, per individual sampled vessel and per segment, complemented with indicators of energy efficiency and biotic resource depletion.

Results and discussion

The fleet is highly fuel-efficient (120 kg fuel per tonne fish) when compared with other reported values, despite a large overcapacity that increases the impact of the construction and maintenance phases. Significant inter-annual FUI variations were observed (80.0 kg t^?1 in 2008 to 210.3 kg t^?1 in 2006), but no clear trend. Neither significant differences in FUI among fleet segments nor a clear effect of economies of scale were found (but FUI analysis was based on a small sample of 32 values for nine vessels, two of which had data for a single year). Only the largest vessels, featuring 242 m³ holding capacity and 850 hp engine power, were found to have lower FUI than any of the other vessels, but no statistical test could be applied to validate this difference. Differences in environmental impacts of individual vessels are mostly dominated by their relative FUI. Fuel use and, to a lower extent, maintenance are the main sources of environmental impacts. The most contributing impacts to ReCiPe single score are climate change, human toxicity and fossil depletion. The fishery’s impacts on the biotic natural resource were orders of magnitude higher than many other global hake stocks, due to overexploitation.

Conclusions

The environmental impacts of the national hake fleet are relatively low during the study period, despite an overcapacity of the fleet. With the perspective of expanding its operations and obtaining better yields on the eventuality that the stock fully recovers, these impacts should decrease. More research based on additional FUI data is necessary to effectively compare the performance of these vessels with larger ones (featuring >180 m³ and >500 hp, of which nine existed in 2016) before possibly recommending their preferential use.

     

Application of the impact pathway analysis in the context of LCA

Current LCA practice is mass oriented, i.e. is focused on the amount of chemicals released, disregarding place and time of release. Life cycle impact assessment aims at evaluating potential impacts, and a variety of weighting schemes is discussed to he used for ranking and aggregation of impacts. To establish a closer link between the quantity of a burden released and a decision making context, we propose to follow a detailed impact pathway analysis to estimate actual impacts for some priority impact categories, and use measured individuals’ preferences for impact valuation. Results from a case study illustrate the relevance of site specific impact assessment in the context of LCA.     

Environmental impact evaluation of co-products: decision-aid tool for allocation in LCA

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - As sustainability has become an important asset for production systems, it is important to conduct life cycle assessment (LCA) studies. When...     

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.

     

A crustal scarcity indicator for long-term global elemental resource assessment in LCA

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - How to assess impacts of mineral resources is much discussed in life cycle assessment (LCA). We see a need for, and a lack of, a mineral...