scholarly journals Argumentation Corrected Context Weighting-Life Cycle Assessment: A Practical Method of Including Stakeholder Perspectives in Multi-Criteria Decision Support for LCA

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 2170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Sohn ◽  
Pierre Bisquert ◽  
Patrice Buche ◽  
Abdelraouf Hecham ◽  
Pradip P. Kalbar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Participatory Design ◽  
Weighting Scheme ◽  
Stakeholder Group ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Stakeholder Perspectives ◽  
Equal Weighting ◽  
Lca Results

Despite advances in the data, models, and methods underpinning environmental life cycle assessment (LCA), it remains challenging for practitioners to effectively communicate and interpret results. These shortcomings can bias decisions and hinder public acceptance for planning supported by LCA. This paper introduces a method for interpreting LCA results, the Argumentation Corrected Context Weighting-LCA (ArgCW-LCA), to overcome these barriers. ArgCW-LCA incorporates stakeholder preferences, corrects unjustified disagreements, and allows for the inclusion of non-environmental impacts (e.g., economic, social, etc.) using a novel weighting scheme and the application of multi-criteria decision analysis to provide transparent and context-relevant decision support. We illustrate the utility of the method through two case studies: a hypothetical decision regarding energy production and a real-world decision regarding polyphenol extraction technologies. In each case, we surveyed a relevant stakeholder group on their environmental views and fed their responses into the model to provide decision support that is relevant to their perspective. We found marked differences between results using ArgCW-LCA and results from a conventional analysis using an equal-weighting scheme, as well as differentiation between stakeholder preference groups, indicating the importance of applying the perspective of the particular stakeholder group. For instance, there was a rank reversal of alternatives when comparing between an equal weighting approach for all environmental and economic dimensions and ArgCW-LCA. ArgCW-LCA provides opportunity for both public and private sector incorporation of LCA, such as in developing enlightened stakeholder value measures. This is achieved through enabling the LCA practition to provide public and private actors’ interpreted LCA results in a manner that incorporates educated stakeholder perspectives. Furthermore, the method encourages stakeholder multiplicity through participatory design and policymaking that can enhance public backing of actions that can make society more sustainable.

scholarly journals Life cycle assessment as decision-support in choice of road corridor: case study and stakeholder perspectives

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Carolina Liljenström ◽  
Sofiia Miliutenko ◽  
Reyn O’Born ◽  
Helge Brattebø ◽  
Harpa Birgisdóttir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Stakeholder Perspectives

scholarly journals The evolution of life cycle assessment in European policies over three decades

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Serenella Sala ◽  
Andrea Martino Amadei ◽  
Antoine Beylot ◽  
Fulvio Ardente
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
General Concept ◽  
Life Cycle Thinking ◽  
Environmental Footprint ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Purpose Life cycle thinking (LCT) and life cycle assessment (LCA) are increasingly considered pivotal concept and method for supporting sustainable transitions. LCA plays a relevant role in decision support, for the ambition of a holistic coverage of environmental dimensions and for the identification of hotspots, possible trade-offs, and burden shifting among life cycle stages or impact categories. These features are also relevant when the decision support is needed in policy domain. With a focus on EU policies, the present study explores the evolution and implementation of life cycle concepts and approaches over three decades. Methods Adopting an historical perspective, a review of current European Union (EU) legal acts and communications explicitly mentioning LCT, LCA, life cycle costing (LCC), and environmental footprint (the European Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint PEF/OEF) is performed, considering the timeframe from 1990 to 2020. The documents are categorised by year and according to their types (e.g. regulations, directives, communications) and based on the covered sectors (e.g. waste, energy, buildings). Documents for which life cycle concepts and approaches had a crucial role are identified, and a shortlist of these legal acts and communications is derived. Results and discussion Over the years, LCT and life cycle approaches have been increasingly mentioned in policy. From the Ecolabel Regulation of 1992, to the Green Deal in 2019, life cycle considerations are of particular interest in the EU. The present work analysed a total of 159 policies and 167 communications. While in some sectors (e.g. products, vehicles, and waste) life cycle concepts and approaches have been adopted with higher levels of prescriptiveness, implementation in other sectors (e.g. food and agriculture) is only at a preliminary stage. Moreover, life cycle (especially LCT) is frequently addressed and cited only as a general concept and in a rather generic manner. Additionally, more stringent and rigorous methods (LCA, PEF/OEF) are commonly cited only in view of future policy developments, even if a more mature interest in lifecycle is evident in recent policies. Conclusion The EU has been a frontrunner in the implementation of LCT/LCA in policies. However, despite a growing trend in this implementation, the development of new stringent and mandatory requirements related to life cycle is still relatively limited. In fact, there are still issues to be solved in the interface between science and policy making (such as verification and market surveillance) to ensure a wider implementation of LCT and LCA.

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of viticultural technical management routes (TMRs): comparison between an organic and an integrated management route

OENO One ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Rouault ◽  
Sandra Beauchet ◽  
Christel Renaud-Gentie ◽  
Frédérique Jourjon
Keyword(s):  
Heavy Metal ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Impact Categories ◽  
Nitrogen Emissions ◽  
Technical Management ◽  
Lca Results

<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Aims</strong>: Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), this study aims to compare the environmental impacts of two different viticultural technical management routes (TMRs); integrated and organic) and to identify the operations that contribute the most to the impacts.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Methods and results</strong>: LCA impact scores were expressed in two functional units: 1 ha of cultivated area and 1 kg of collected grape. We studied all operations from field preparation before planting to the end-of-life of the vine. Inputs and outputs were transformed into potential environmental impacts thanks to SALCA™ (V1.02) and USETox™ (V1.03) methods. Plant protection treatments were a major cause of impact for both TMRs for fuel-related impact categories. For both TMRs, the main contributors to natural resource depletion and freshwater ecotoxicity were trellis system installation and background heavy metal emissions, respectively.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Conclusion</strong>: This study shows that the studied organic TMR has higher impact scores than the integrated TMR for all the chosen impact categories except eutrophication. However, the chosen TMRs are only typical of integrated and organic viticulture in Loire Valley and some emission models (heavy metal, fuel-related emissions, and nitrogen emissions) have to be improved in order to better assess the environmental impacts of viticulture. Soil quality should also be integrated to LCA results in viticulture because this lack may be a disadvantage for organic viticulture.</p><strong>Significance and impact of study</strong>: This study is among the first to compare LCA results of an integrated and an organic TMR.

scholarly journals Life cycle assessment as development and decision support tool for wastewater resource recovery technology

2016 ◽  
Vol 88 ◽  
pp. 538-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda L. Fang ◽  
Borja Valverde-Pérez ◽  
Anders Damgaard ◽  
Benedek Gy. Plósz ◽  
Martin Rygaard
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Resource Recovery ◽  
Support Tool

scholarly journals Mitigation Life Cycle Assessment: Best Practices from LCA of Energy and Water Infrastructure That Incurs Impacts to Mitigate Harm

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Grubert ◽  
Jennifer Stokes-Draut
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Functional Unit ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Environmental Costs ◽  
Lca Results

Climate change will require societal-scale infrastructural changes. Balancing priorities for water, energy, and climate will demand that approaches to water and energy management deviate from historical practice. Infrastructure designed to mitigate environmental harm, particularly related to climate change, is likely to become increasingly prevalent. Understanding the implications of such infrastructure for environmental quality is thus of interest. Environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) is a common sustainability assessment tool that aims to quantify the total, multicriteria environmental impact caused by a functional unit. Notably, however, LCA quantifies impacts in the form of environmental “costs” of delivering the functional unit. In the case of mitigation infrastructures, LCA results can be confusing because they are generally reported as the harmful impacts of performing mitigation rather than as net impacts that incorporate benefits of successful mitigation. This paper argues for defining mitigation LCA as a subtype of LCA to facilitate better understanding of results and consistency across studies. Our recommendations are informed by existing LCA literature on mitigation infrastructure, focused particularly on stormwater and carbon management. We specifically recommend that analysts: (1) use a performance-based functional unit; (2) be attentive to burden shifting; and (3) assess and define uncertainty, especially related to mitigation performance.

scholarly journals Optimal Planning of Sustainable Buildings: Integration of Life Cycle Assessment and Optimization in a Decision Support System (DSS)

Energies ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Magrassi ◽  
Adriana Del Borghi ◽  
Michela Gallo ◽  
Carlo Strazza ◽  
Michela Robba
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Support System ◽  
Optimal Planning ◽  
Sustainable Buildings
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document