Commentary on issues in data quality analysis in life cycle assessment




For compliance with the ISO standard 14044, comparative life cycle assessments are required to address data quality for time-related coverage, geographic coverage, technology coverage, precision, completeness, representativeness, consistency, reproducibility, sources of the data and uncertainty of the information. As the community of practitioners and data developers grows, the purpose of this commentary is to initiate discussion of current issues and opportunities for improvement in data quality analysis.


Commonly applied data quality analysis methods are described as ranging from the collection of only qualitative information to the assignment of numeric scores. Common interpretations of data quality information are described as ranging from comparison in raw form to contribution and sensitivity analysis results, combination into an aggregate/multiaspect score, or use to infer data uncertainty. Method strengths and issues are described.


The strengths of current data quality analysis methods lie in the consideration of the data quality aspects specified by the ISO standards and in the differentiation of low and high data quality. Weaknesses, however, lie in unrepeatable scoring criteria, aggregation of data quality information in a way that is difficult to interpret or misinterpreted and the use of data quality information in the estimation of uncertainty with no basis for accuracy.


It is found that among commonly applied methods there exists a need for improved repeatability and interpretability. When combined with emerging efforts to provide reliable uncertainty data to support the use of data quality information with contribution and sensitivity analysis results and efforts that have improved consideration of completeness, the future of data quality analysis promises substantial contribution to the field.


Data quality Data quality analysis Life cycle assessment Uncertainty 


  1. Athena™ Sustainable Materials Institute (2004) US LCI Database Project Development Guidelines. US Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Retrieved from
  2. European Commission–Joint Research Centre–Institute for Environment and Sustainability (2010) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) handbook—general guide for life cycle assessment—detailed guidance. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  3. Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus H-J, Doka G, Heck T, Hellweg S, Hischier R et al (2007) Overview and methodology. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  4. International Standards Organization (ISO) (2006) Life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelinesGoogle Scholar
  5. United Nations Environment Programme (2011) Global guidance principles for life cycle assessment databases. A basis for greener processes and products, available at
  6. Lloyd SM, Ries R (2007) Characterizing, propagating, and analyzing uncertainty in life-cycle assessment: a survey of quantitative approaches. J Indust Ecol 11(1):161–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Weidema BP (1998) Multi-user test of the data quality matrix for product life cycle inventory data. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(5):259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Weidema BP, Wesnæs MS (1996) Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators. J Clean Prod 4(3–4):167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Weidema BP, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Vadenbo CO, Wernet G (2011) Overview and methodology: data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3 (final draft_revision 1) ecoinvent report No. 1(v3),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Design for Environment LaboratoryUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations