Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Philosophy of science, policy sciences and the basis of decision support with LCA Based on the toxicity controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands

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

Abstract

Current LCA implicitly assumes that a single rational truth can be found. Mainstream policy sciences has taken a different starting point when analysing decision making in complex and controversial societal debates for already several decades. In such debates, in general, more than one reasonable conceptualisation or ‘framing’ of the problem is at stake which forms the core of the controversy. This paper analyses the Dutch chlorine debate and the Swedish PVC debate and shows that (three) frames also play a role in toxicity controversies: the risk assessment frame, the strict control frame, and the precautionary frame. The latter frame, adhered to by the environmentalists, seeks to judge substances mainly on their inherent safety. The cases show that this logic may be defended as at least being equally reasonable to the emission-effect calculations that form the core of Risk Assessment and Life-cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). As predicted by policy sciences, this finding implies that the political neutrality of tools like LCIA is questionable. In summary, the approaches and procedures developed for LCA have to be reconciled with key lessons from policy science and philosophy of science, i.e. considering the fact that multiple realities play a key role in many decision making processes. This paper suggests some alternative indicators for toxicity evaluations, and indicates the implications of LCA method development.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allenby, B. (1998): Context is everything. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 2, No.2

  • Beauchamp, T.L. (1987): Ethical theory and the problem of closure. In: Engelhardt Jr., T.H. and A.L. Caplan (eds., 1987): Scientific Controversies. Case studies in the resolution and closure of disputes in science and technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/London/New York/New Rochelle/Melbourne/

    Google Scholar 

  • Berbee, R.P.M. (1987): “Onverwachte aanwezigheid” van organische chlooren broomverbindingen in het afvalwater van 6 chemische bedrijven[“Unexpected presence” of organic chlorine compounds in the effluent from 6 chemical companies], RIZA, Lelystad, Holland, not public

  • Bowden, G. (1985): The social construction of validity in estimates of us crude oil reserves, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 15, 207–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEFIC (1995): Comments on the draft declaration of the 4th North Sea conference, 9 January 1995, CEFIC, Brussels, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Bras-Klapwijk, R.M. andB. Enserink (1997a): Participatie van belanghebbenden in milieugerichte produktvergelijkingen vergroot draagvlak[Participation of Stakeholders in Environmental Product Comparisons Enhances Acceptance]. Milieu 1997/5, p. 235, Boom, Meppel, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Bras-Klapwijk, R.M. (1999): Adjusting Life Cycle Assessment methodology for public policy discourse. Thesis, TU Delft, Delft, the Netherlands

  • Chemicals Policy Committee (CPC, 1997): En Hållbar Kemikaliepolitik. Riskpanorama för kemikalier. With a summary in English. SOU 1997:84, Fritzes, Offentliga Publilationer, Stockholm, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D. andC. Reeve (1986): Science speaks to power. The role of experts in policy making. Frances Pinter Publishers, London, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H.M. (1983): An empirical relativist programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge, in: Knorr-Cetina and Mulkay (1983)

  • ENDS (1997): Risk assessment under fire at chemicals strategy workshop, ENDS Report 274, November 1997

  • EU (1999): Industrial chemicals: Burden of the past, challenge for the future. A Stakeholder Workshop on the Development of a Future “Chemicals’ Strategy for the European Union — 24/25 February 1999. Compiled by WRc Medmenham, Marlow, Bucks, SL7 2HD, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P. (1988): Against method. Revised edition. Verso, London/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Finance (1986): Evaluatiemethoden, een introductie[Evaluation methods, an introduction]. Report of the department ‘Beleidsanalyse’ of the Ministry of Finance, Third revised edition, Sdu Publishers, the Hague, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, F. (1995): Evaluating public policy. Nelson-Hall Publishers, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop, M. (ed., 1999): Eco-indicator 99, a damage oriented LCA impact assessment method, Methodology report. Nr 1999/36A, Distribution code 21223/204, Ministry of Environment, the Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinée, J. (ed., 1999): Life Cycle Assessment in environmental policy. Dtaft update of the CML LCA methodology Guide & Backgrounds documents of 1992, Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden Universtity, the Netherlands, available at http://www.leidenuniv.nl/interfac/cml/lca2/index.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M.A. (1995): The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. andM. Kleiboer (1995): Policy controversies in the negotiatory state. Knowledge and Policy, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 5–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs, R. (1999): Does a participatory approach to Life Cycle Assessment solve its problems? SETAC-Europe News, Vol. 10, issue 5.

  • Hofstetter, P. (1998): Perspectives in Life Cycle Impact Assessment: A structured approach to combine models of the technosphere, ecosphere and valuesphere. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1993): Reconstructing scientific revolutions — Thomas S Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huijbrechts, M. (1998): Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Part I: A general framework for the analysis of uncertainty and variability in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. of LCA Vol. 3, No. 5

  • Interational Joint Commission (IJC, 1993): A strategy for virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances. Vol. 1 and 2, ISBN 1 -895085-65-7 and 66–9, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, August 1993

  • Keeney, R.L. andH. Raiffa (1993): Decisions with multiple objectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York/Oakleigh (first published in 1976 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijn, R., A. Tukker andE. van der Voet (1997): Chlorine in the Netherlands Part I: An overview. Journal of Industrial Ecology Vol. 1, No. 1 186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. andM. Mulkay (1983): Science observed, Sage Publications, London/Beverly Hills/New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1993): Strong constructivism — from a sociologists point of view: A personal addendum to Sismondo’s Paper, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 23, 555–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T.S. (1970a): The structure of scientific revolutions, Dutch translation of the 1970 ed. (including postscript): Boom, Meppel, Holland

  • Kuhn, T.S. (1970b): Reflection on my critics, in: Lakatos and Musgrave (1970)

  • Kuhn, T.S. (1991): The road since structure. In: Fine, A., M. Forbes and L. Wessels (eds.): Proceedings of the 1990 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I. andA. Musgrave (1970): Criticism and the growth of knowledge, Cambridge University Press, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R.D. andH. Raiffa (1957): Games and decisions. Introduction and critical survey. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, D. (1999): Letter to the editor, Int. J. of LCA, Vol. 4, No. 2

  • Pinch, T. (1981): The sun-set: The presentation of certainty in scientific life. Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11, 131–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz, J. (1993): The sin of science. Ignorance of ignorance, Knowledge, Vol. 15, No. 2, p. 157

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. and H.J.M. de Vries (eds.): Perspectives on global futures: The TARGETS approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

  • Shackley, S. andB. Wynne (1995): Mutual construction — Global climate change: the mutual construction of an emergent science-policy domain. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.218–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluijs, J. v.d. (1997): Anchoring amid uncertainty. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Stringer, R.L., P.A. Johnston, R. Clayton andR.J. Swindlehurs (1994): Back to the basics: The case for an intensification in the monitoring of point source discharges, Submitted by Greenpeace International to the 19th Meeting of the Joint Monitoring Group of the Oslo and Paris Commisions, Greenpeace Exeter Research Laboratory, Exeter, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M. (1984): Among the Energy Tribes: A cultural framework for the analysis and design for energy policy. Policy Sciences 17, pp. 321–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M., R. Ellis andA. Wildavsky (1990): Cultural theory, Westview press, Boulder, CO, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A.,R. Kleijn,E.v.d. Voet,M. Alkemade,J. Brouwer,H. de Groot,J. de Koning,T. Pulles,E. Smeets andJ.J.D. van der Steen (1995): A chlorine balance for the Netherlands, Report 95/40, TNO-STB and CML, Apeldoorn, Holland

  • Tukker, A.,R. Kleijn,L. van Oers andE. Smeets (1996): A PVC substance flow analysis for Sweden, TNO-STB and CML, report 96/48, Apeldoorn, Holland

  • Tukker, A.,R. Kleijn,E v.d. Voet andE. Smeets (1997): Chlorine in the Netherlands Part II: Risk management in uncertainty, Journal of Industrial Ecology Vo. 1, No. 2

  • Tukker, A.,R. Kleijn,L. van Oers andE. Smeets (1998a): Combining SFA and LCA: The Swedish PVC Analysis, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 1 No. 4

  • Tukker, A. (1998b): Uncertainty in Life Cycle Impact Assessment of toxic releases. Practical experiences — arguments for a reductionalistic approach? Int. J. of LCA, Vol. 3. No. 5

  • Tukker, A. (1999a): Frames in the toxicity controversy. Risk assessment and policy analysis related to the Dutch chlorine debate and the Swedish PVC debate. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A. (1999b): LCAs for Waste. Part II: Thermal treatment options for hazardous waste. Int. J. of LCA, Vol. 4, No. 6

  • Tukker, A. (2000): LCAs for Waste, Part III. The case of paint-packaging separation and general conclusions. Int. J. of LCA, Vol. 5, No 2

  • Udo de Haes, H.A.,O. Joluet,G. Finnveden,M. Hauschild,W.Krewitt, andR. Mueller-Wenk (1999): Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in Life Cycle Assessment. Int. J. of LCA, Vol. 4 No. 2 and No. 3

  • Weinberg, A.M. (1972): Science and trans-science, Minerva Vol. X Nr. 2, pp. 209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (ed.): (1987): Risk management and hazardous waste. Implementation and the Dialectics of Credibility. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TNO Institute of Strategy, Technology and Policy, P.O. Box 6030, 6300, JA Delft, Netherlands

    Arnold Tukker

Authors
  1. Arnold Tukker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnold Tukker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tukker, A. Philosophy of science, policy sciences and the basis of decision support with LCA Based on the toxicity controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands. Int. J. LCA 5, 177–186 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978621

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978621

Keywords

Search

Navigation