Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to treat uncertainties in life cycle assessment studies?

  • UNCERTAINTIES IN LCA
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The use of life cycle assessment (LCA) as a decision support tool can be hampered by the numerous uncertainties embedded in the calculation. The treatment of uncertainty is necessary to increase the reliability and credibility of LCA results. The objective is to provide an overview of the methods to identify, characterize, propagate (uncertainty analysis), understand the effects (sensitivity analysis), and communicate uncertainty in order to propose recommendations to a broad public of LCA practitioners.

Methods

This work was carried out via a literature review and an analysis of LCA tool functionalities. In order to facilitate the identification of uncertainty, its location within an LCA model was distinguished between quantity (any numerical data), model structure (relationships structure), and context (criteria chosen within the goal and scope of the study). The methods for uncertainty characterization, uncertainty analysis, and sensitivity analysis were classified according to the information provided, their implementation in LCA software, the time and effort required to apply them, and their reliability and validity. This review led to the definition of recommendations on three levels: basic (low efforts with LCA software), intermediate (significant efforts with LCA software), and advanced (significant efforts with non-LCA software).

Results and discussion

For the basic recommendations, minimum and maximum values (quantity uncertainty) and alternative scenarios (model structure/context uncertainty) are defined for critical elements in order to estimate the range of results. Result sensitivity is analyzed via one-at-a-time variations (with realistic ranges of quantities) and scenario analyses. Uncertainty should be discussed at least qualitatively in a dedicated paragraph. For the intermediate level, the characterization can be refined with probability distributions and an expert review for scenario definition. Uncertainty analysis can then be performed with the Monte Carlo method for the different scenarios. Quantitative information should appear in inventory tables and result figures. Finally, advanced practitioners can screen uncertainty sources more exhaustively, include correlations, estimate model error with validation data, and perform Latin hypercube sampling and global sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

Through this pedagogic review of the methods and practical recommendations, the authors aim to increase the knowledge of LCA practitioners related to uncertainty and facilitate the application of treatment techniques. To continue in this direction, further research questions should be investigated (e.g., on the implementation of fuzzy logic and model uncertainty characterization) and the developers of databases, LCIA methods, and software tools should invest efforts in better implementing and treating uncertainty in LCA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ardente F, Beccali M, Cellura M (2004) F.A.L.C.A.D.E.: a fuzzy software for the energy and environmental balances of products. Ecol Model 176:359–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baudrit C, Guyonnet D, Dubois D (2005) Post-processing the hybrid method for addressing uncertainty in risk assessments. Environ Eng 131:1750–1754

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benetto E, Dujet C, Rousseaux P (2008) Integrating fuzzy multicriteria analysis and uncertainty evaluation in life cycle assessment. Environ Model Softw 23:1461–1467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisinella V, Conradsen K, Christensen TH, Astrup TF (2016) A global approach for sparse representation of uncertainty in life cycle assessments of waste management systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:378–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojaca CR, Schrevens E (2010) Parameter uncertainty in LCA: stochastic sampling under correlation. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:238–246

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Muller S, Weidema B, Lesage P (2015) Empirically based uncertainty factors for the pedigree matrix in ecoinvent. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(9):1338–1348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clavreul J, Guyonnet D, Tonini D, Christensen TH (2013) Stochastic and epistemic uncertainty propagation. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1393–1403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruze N, Goel PK, Bakshi BR (2013) On the “rigorous proof of fuzzy error propagation with matrix-based LCI”. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:516–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cucurachi S, Heijungs R (2014) Characterisation factors for life cycle impact assessment of sound emissions. Sci Total Environ 468:280–291

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Koning A, Schowanek D, Dewaele J, Weisbrod A, Guinée J (2010) Uncertainties in a carbon footprint model for detergents; quantifying the confidence in a comparative result. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:79–89

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2010) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook—general guide for life cycle assessment—detailed guidance. Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability. First edition March 2010. EUR 24708 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

  • European Commission (2011) 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. Joint Research Centre—Institute for Environment and Sustainability. First edition November 2011. EUR 24571 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

  • Frey HC, Li S (2002) Methods and example for development of a probabilistic per-capita emission factor for VOC emissions from consumer/commercial product use. In Proceedings of the 95th Annual Conference & Exhibition of Air & Waste Management, Baltimore, MD, June 2002; Paper 42162

  • Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus HJ, Doka G, Heck T, Hellweg S, Hischier R, Nemecek T, Rebitzger G, Spielmann M, Wernet G (2007) Overview and methodology. Ecoinvent report no. 1. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf 

  • Gavankar S, Anderson S, Keller AA (2014) Critical components of uncertainty communication in life cycle assessments of emerging technologies–nanotechnology as a case study. J Ind Ecol 19(3):468–479

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geisler G, Hellweg S, Hungerbühler K (2005) Uncertainty analysis in life cycle assessment (LCA): case study on plant-protection products and implications for decision making. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(3):184–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geldermann J, Spengler T, Rentz O (2000) Fuzzy outranking for environmental assessment—case study: iron and steel making industry. Fuzzy Sets Syst 115:45–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groen EA, Heijungs R (2016) Ignoring correlation in uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment: what is the risk? Environ Impact Assess Rev 62:98–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groen EA, Heijungs R, Bokkers EAM, de Boer IJM (2014) Methods for uncertainty propagation in life cycle assessment. Environ Model Softw 62:316–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groen EA, Bokkers EAM, Heijungs R, de Boer IJM (2016) Methods for global sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(7):1125–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güereca LP, Agel N, Baldasano JM (2007) Fuzzy approach to life cycle impact assessment—an application for biowaste management systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(7):486–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo M, Murphy RJ (2012) LCA data quality: sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. Sci Total Environ 435-436:230–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Guyonnet D, Bourgine B, Dubois D, Fargier H, Côme B, Chilès JP (2003) Hybrid approach for addressing uncertainty in risk assessments. Environ Eng 129:68–78

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R (1994) A generic method for the identification of options for cleaner products. Ecol Econ 10:69–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R (2010) Sensitivity coefficients for matrix-based LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:511–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Frischknecht R (2005) Representing statistical distributions for uncertain parameters in LCA—relationships between mathematical forms, their representation in EcoSpold, and their representation in CMLCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(4):248–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ (2004) A review of approaches to treat uncertainty in LCA. In complexity and integrated resources management. In: Pahl-Wostl C, Schmidt S, Rizzoli AE, Jakeman AJ (eds) Complexity and integrated resources management, University of Osnabrück, Germany, 14–17 June 2004. International Environmental Modelling and Software Society, Manno, pp 332–339

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Kleijn R (2001) Numerical approaches towards life cycle interpretation—five examples. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(3):141–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Lenzen M (2014) Error propagation methods for LCA—a comparison. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1445–1461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Tan RR (2010) Rigorous proof of fuzzy error propagation with matrix-based LCI. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:1014–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksson PJG, Guinée JB, Heijungs R, de Koning A, Green DM (2014) A protocol for horizontal averaging of unit process data—including estimates for uncertainty. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:429–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong J, Shaked S, Rosenbaum RK, Jolliet O (2010) Analytical uncertainty propagation in life cycle inventory and impact assessment: application to an automobile front panel. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:499–510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huijbregts MAJ, Gilijamse W, Ragas ADMJ, Reijnders L (2003) Evaluating uncertainty in environmental life-cycle assessment. A case study comparing two insulation options for a Dutch one-family dwelling. Environ Sci Technol 37:2600–2608

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hung ML, Ma HW (2009) Quantifying system uncertainty of life cycle assessment based on Monte Carlo simulation. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:19–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igos E, Benetto E (2015) Uncertainty sources in LCA, calculation methods and impacts on interpretation. Study no. 2014-03, SCORELCA association, available at https://www.scorelca.org/en/studies-lca.php Accessed 29 August 2017

  • Imbeault-Tétrault H, Jolliet O, Deschênes L, Rosenbaum RK (2013) Analytical propagation of uncertainty in life cycle assessment using matrix formulation. J Ind Ecol 17(4):485–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO (International Organization for Standardization) (2006a) Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework. ISO 14040:2006; Second Edition 2006-06. ISO, Geneva

  • ISO (International Organization for Standardization) (2006b) Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines. ISO 14044:2006; First edition 2006-07-01. ISO, Geneva

  • Jung J, von der Assen N, Bardow A (2014) Sensitivity coefficient-based uncertainty analysis for multi-functionality in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:661–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kätelhön A, Bardow A, Suh S (2016) Stochastic technology choice model for consequential life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 50:12575–12583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lacirignola M, Blanc P, Girard R, Pérez-López P, Blanc I (2017) LCA of emerging technologies: addressing high uncertainty on inputs' variability when performing global sensitivity analysis. Sci Total Environ 578:268–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd SM, Ries R (2007) Characterizing, propagating, and analyzing uncertainty in life-cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 11(1):161–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo SC, Ma H, Lo SL (2005) Quantifying and reducing uncertainty in life cycle assessment using the Bayesian Monte Carlo method. Sci Total Environ 340:23–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Malça J, Freire F (2012) Addressing land use change and uncertainty in the life-cycle assessment of wheat-based bioethanol. Energy 45:519–527

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maurice B, Frischknecht R, Coelho-Schwirtz V, Hungerbühler K (2000) Uncertainty analysis in life cycle inventory. Application to the production of electricity with French coal power plants. J Clean Prod 8:95–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza Beltran A, Heijungs R, Guinée J, Tukker A (2016) A pseudo-statistical approach to treat choice uncertainty: the example of partitioning allocation methods. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:252–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mery Y, Tiruta-Barna L, Baudin I, Benetto E, Igos E (2014) Formalization of a technical procedure for process ecodesign dedicated to drinking water treatment plants. J Clean Prod 68:16–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MG, Henrion M, Small M (1990) Uncertainty: a guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muller S, Lesage P, Ciroth A, Mutel C, Weidema BP, Samson R (2016a) The application of the pedigree approach to the distributions foreseen in ecoinvent v3. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(9):11327–11337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller S, Lesage P, Samson R (2016b) Giving a scientific basis for uncertainty factors used in global life cycle inventory databases: an algorithm to update factors using new information. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1185–1196

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mutel CL, de Baan L, Hellweg S (2013) Two-step sensitivity testing of parametrized and regionalized life cycle assessments: methodology and case study. Environ Sci Technol 47:5660–5667

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Noori M, Tatari O, Nam B, Golestani B, Greene J (2014) A stochastic optimization approach for the selection of reflective cracking mitigation techniques. Transp Res 69:367–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes N, Shrader-Frechette K, Belitz K (1994) Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science 263(5147):641–646

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Padey P, Beloin-Saint-Pierre D, Girard R, Le-Boulch D, Blanc I (2012) Understanding LCA results variability: developing global sensitivity analysis with Sobol indices. Int Symp Life Cycle Assess Constr Civ Eng Build, July 2012. RILEM Publications, Nantes, p 19–27

  • Refsgaard JC, van der Sluijs JP, Brown J, van der Keur (2006) A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error. Adv Water Resour 29:1586–1597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röder M, Whittaker C, Thornley P (2015) How certain are greenhouse gas reductions from bioenergy? Life cycle assessment and uncertainty analysis of wood pellet-to-electricity supply chains from forest residues. Biomass Bioenergy 79:50–63

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sakai S, Yokoyama K (2002) Formulation of sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment using a perturbation method. Clean Tech Environ 4:72–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltelli A, Annoni P (2010) How to avoid a perfunctory sensitivity analysis. Environ Model Softw 25:1508–1517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnemann GW, Schuhmacher M, Castells F (2003) Uncertainty assessment by a Monte Carlo simulation in a life cycle inventory of electricity produced by a waste incinerator. J Clean Prod 11:279–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugiyama H, Fukushima Y, Hirao M, Hellweg S, Hungerbühler K (2005) Using standard statistics to consider uncertainty in industry-based life cycle inventory databases. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(6):399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan RR (2008) Using fuzzy numbers to propagate uncertainty in matrix-based LCI. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(7):585–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thabrew L, Lloyd S, Cypcar C, Hamilton JD, Ries R (2008) Life cycle assessment of water-based acrylic floor finish maintenance programs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(1):65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Asselt MBA, Rotmans J (2001) Uncertainty in integrated assessment modelling–from positivism to pluralism. Clim Chang 54:75–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zelm R, Huijbregts MAJ (2013) Quantifying the trade-off between parameter and model structure uncertainty in life cycle impact assessment. Environ Sci Technol 47:9274–9280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker WE, Harremoës P, Rotmans J, van der Sluijs JP, van Asselt MBA, Janssen P, Krayer von Krauss MP (2003) Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr Assess 4(1):5–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang E, Shen Z (2013) A hybrid data quality Indicator and statistical method for improving uncertainty analysis in LCA of complex system - application to the whole-building embodied energy analysis. J Clean Prod 43:166–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weckenmann A, Schwan A (2001) Environmental life cycle assessment with support of fuzzy-sets. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(1):13–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wei W, Larrey-Lassalle P, Faure T, Dumoulin N, Roux P, Mathias JD (2015) How to conduct a proper sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment: taking into account correlations within LCI data and interactions within the LCA calculation model. Environ Sci Technol 49:377–385

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Wesnaes MS (1996) Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators. J Clean Prod 4(3–4):167–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C et al (2013) Overview and methodology. Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3. The ecoinvent Centre, St. Gallen

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni A, Buttol P, Porta PL, Buonamici R et al (2008) Critical review of the current research needs and limitations related to ISO-LCA practice - Deliverable D7 of work package 5 of the CALCAS project. http://www.estis.net/builder/includes/page.asp?site=calcas&page_id=8215FF89-5114-4748-BE6C-1F0F1E69DAF5. Accessed 29 August 2017

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the members of the SCORELCA association for their feedback on the review of and recommendations for uncertainty treatment methods.

Funding

This work was funded by the SCORELCA association (study 2014-03).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Research and Innovation (ERIN), Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LIST), 41, rue du Brill, 4362, Belvaux, Luxembourg

    Elorri Igos, Enrico Benetto, Rodolphe Meyer, Paul Baustert & Benoit Othoniel

Authors
  1. Elorri Igos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Enrico Benetto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rodolphe Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Baustert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benoit Othoniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elorri Igos.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Adisa Azapagic

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 30 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Igos, E., Benetto, E., Meyer, R. et al. How to treat uncertainties in life cycle assessment studies?. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24, 794–807 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1477-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1477-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation