Ecological scarcity 2013—new features and its application in industry and administration—54th LCA forum, Ittigen/Berne, Switzerland, December 5, 2013

  • Rolf FrischknechtEmail author
  • Sybille Büsser Knöpfel


The 54th LCA forum was held on December 5, 2013 to launch the fourth generation ecological scarcity method, applied to Switzerland. This conference report presents the highlights of the LCA forum. The ecological scarcity method belongs to the family of distance-to-target methods and is based on politically and legally defined environmental goals. The application of the method in industry and politics as well as its benefits, the main elements of the method and new elements such as the assessment of abiotic resources, global land use, noise and nuclear waste are presented. The losses (and not the extraction) of abiotic resources are characterised with the abiotic depletion potential. Land use impacts on flora and fauna biodiversity are quantified per land use type and for 14 different biomes. Transport noise is assessed based on the number of highly annoyed persons. Finally, nuclear waste is characterised using the radio toxicity index, a parameter commonly used in the nuclear industry. In three policy-making areas, LCA in general and the ecological scarcity method in particular are being applied: waste policy, biofuels tax exemption and Green Economy. Practical applications in administration and industry show that the eco-factors are considered useful in decision making because they cover a broad range of environmental impacts aggregated to a single score. The results of first applications and comparisons showed that the switch from third to fourth generation eco-factors hardly affects the results and conclusions although there are some significant changes in the eco-factor of individual pollutants. It was concluded that the fourth generation is a moderate evolution from the third generation published in 2008. It is considered crucial to allow for single-score methods as they allow to assess environmental impacts comprehensively and to identify environmental hot spots. The method presented thus is suited for a “true and fair” reporting on environmental information.


Life Cycle Assessment Nuclear Waste Fourth Generation Characterisation Factor Water Footprint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahbe S (2013) A basic principle for environmental assessments—“separation of powers” to avoid arbitrariness, Presentation at 54th Swiss Discussion forum in Ittigen/Berne Switzerland. Syrcon, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahbe S, Braunschweig A, Müller-Wenk R (1990) Methodik für Ökobilanzen auf der Basis ökologischer Optimierung. 133. Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), BernGoogle Scholar
  3. BAFU (2013) Aktionsplan grüne Wirtschaft—Faktenblatt 8. März 2013. Bundesamt für Umwelt, Bern, Schweiz, retrieved from:,
  4. de Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T (2012) Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(6):1216–1230. doi: 10.1007/s11367-012-0412-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Frischknecht R, Büsser Knöpfel S (2013) Swiss eco-factors 2013 according to the ecological scarcity method. Methodological fundamentals and their application in Switzerland. Environmental studies no. 1330. Federal Office for the Environment, BernGoogle Scholar
  6. Guinée JB (final editor), Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn H, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ, Lindeijer E, Roorda AAH, Weidema BP (2001) Life cycle assessment; An operational guide to the ISO standards; Part 3: Scientific Background. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (VROM) and Centre of Environmental Science (CML), Den Haag and Leiden, The Netherlands, retrieved from:
  7. Kounina A, Margni M, Bayart J-B, Boulay A-M, Berger M, Bulle C, Frischknecht R, Koehler A, Milà i Canals L, Motoshita M, Núñez M, Peters G, Pfister S, Ridoutt B, van Zelm R, Verones F, Humbert S (2013) Review of methods addressing freshwater use in life cycle inventory and impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):707–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. MinöStV (2014) Mineralölsteuerverordnung (MinöStV) vom 20. November 1996 (Stand am 1. Januar 2014). In: Schweizerische Bundesrat, Switzerland, retrieved from:
  9. Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, Underwood EC, D’Amico JA, Itoua I, Strand H, Morrison JC, Loucks CJ, Allnutt TF, Ricketts TH, Kura Y, Lamoreux JF, Wettengel WW, Hedao P, Kassem KR (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. Bioscience 51:933–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pfister S, Koehler A, Hellweg S (2009) Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater consumption in LCA. Environ Sci Technol, 43(11):4098–4104, retrieved from:
  11. USGS (2011) Mineral Commodity Summaries 2011. U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, Reston, Virginia, United States of America, retrieved from:

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Treeze Ltd.UsterSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations