Skip to main content
Log in

Life cycle inventory dataset review criteria—a new proposal

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

Abstract

Purpose

A review of LCA process datasets is an important element of quality assurance for databases and for other systems to provide LCA datasets. Somewhat surprisingly, a broadly accepted and applicable set of criteria for a review of LCA process datasets was lacking so far. Different LCA databases and frameworks are proposing and using different criteria for reviewing datasets. To close this gap, a set of criteria for reviewing LCA dataset has been developed within the Life Cycle Initiative.

Methods

Previous contributions to LCA dataset review have been analysed for a start, from ISO and various LCA databases. To avoid somewhat arbitrary review criteria, four basic rules are proposed which are to be fulfilled by any dataset. Further, concepts for assessing representativeness and relevance are introduced into the criteria set from established practices in statistics and materiality. To better structure the criteria and to ease their application, they are grouped into clusters. A first version of the developed review criteria was presented in two workshops with database providers and users on different levels of experience, and draft versions of the criteria were shared within the initiative. The current version of the criteria reflects feedback received from various stakeholders and has been applied and tested in a review for newly developed datasets in Brazil, Malaysia and Thailand.

Results and discussion

Overall, 14 criteria are proposed, which are organised in clusters. The clusters are goal, model, value, relevance and procedure. For several criteria, a more science-based definition and evaluation is proposed in comparison to ‘traditional’ LCA. While most of the criteria depend on the goal and scope of dataset development, a core set of criteria are seen as essential and independent from specific LCA modelling. For all the criteria, value scales are developed, typically using an ordinal scale, following the pedigree approach.

Conclusions

Review criteria for LCI datasets are now defined based on a stringent approach. They aim to be globally acceptable, considering also database interoperability and database management aspects, as well as feedback received from various stakeholders, and thus close an important gap in LCA dataset quality assurance. The criteria take many elements of already existing criteria but are the first to fully reflect the implications of the ISO data quality definition, and add new concepts for representativeness and relevance with the idea to better reflect scientific practice outside of the LCA domain. A first application in a review showed to be feasible, with a level of effort similar to applying other review criteria. Aspects not addressed yet are the review procedure and the mutual recognition of dataset reviews, and their application for a very high number of datasets.

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

Access this article

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

Notes

  1. https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/

  2. Definition of the goal and scope is the first step in developing a unit process dataset. It basically describes what kind of process the dataset intends to represent. Developers are required to define the goal and scope in a similar way as LCI and LCA studies do, to guide the steps needed to develop the dataset and to provide corresponding information for users when they choose datasets for their own LCI or LCA studies.’ (UNEP/SETAC 2011, p. 54)

  3. Data quality goals specify in general terms the desirable characteristics of the data needed for the study.’ (Weidema and Wesnæs 1996, p. 168)

  4. Up to the point of a trivial case study which consists of one single, aggregated dataset.

  5. http://greendelta.github.io/olca-schema/, and especially http://greendelta.github.io/olca-schema/html/ProductSystem.html

  6. https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/LCDN/developerILCDDataFormat.xhtml: ‘A new SDK zip will be released when the Extended ILCD (eILCD) format will be released’, accessed June 11, 2019. An implementation is publicly accessible here: https://github.com/GreenDelta/olca-modules/blob/master/doc/eilcd.md

  7. ‘In science and human affairs alike we lack the resources to study more than a fragment of the phenomena that might advance our knowledge’ (Cochran 1977, p. 1)

  8. Who continue: ‘When the determination of the [items] included in a sample involves personal judgement, one cannot have an objective measure of the reliability of the sample results, because the various [items] may have differing and unknown chances of being drawn.’ (Hansen et al. 1953, vol. I p 9)

  9. See e.g. Huijbregts (1998): Variability expresses inherent variations in the real world, e.g. temperature change from day to night; uncertainty and thus imprecision covers all other reasons of why values are not reproducible.

  10. This definition combines ISO 14071 TS (ISO 2014) and concepts in accounting (e.g. Investopedia 2016), where also other affiliations apart from employment, e.g. shares held in a company, are considered.

References

  • Brown KF, Corbera E (2002) A multi-criteria assessment framework for carbon-mitigation projects : Putting

  • Ciroth A, Srocka M (2008) How to obtain a precise and representative estimate for parameters in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:265–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Hildenbrand J, Zamagni A, Foster C, Vigon B (2015a) Annex A: Review Criteria for LCI Datasets Annex A: life cycle inventory dataset review criteria Llorenc Mila i Canals Fayçal Boureima Annex A: Review Criteria for LCI Datasets 2 Content

  • Ciroth A, Vigon B, Sonnemann G (2015b) UNEP Shonan Guidance Principles put into practice [WWW Document]

  • Cochran, WG (1977) Sampling Techniques. 3rd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

  • Dodge Y (2008) The concise encyclopedia of statistics. Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin

  • Edelen A, Ingwersen W (2016) Guidance on Data Quality Assessment for Life Cycle Inventory Data, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-16/096, 2016

  • Elkasabi MA, Heeringa SG, Lepkowski JM (2015) Joint calibration estimator for dual frame surveys, Statistics in Transition. New Series. GUS

  • European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and, Sustainability (2012) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Data Network - Compliance rules and entry-level requirements. Version 1.1. https://doi.org/10.2788/80302

  • Hansen MH, Hurwitz WG, Madow WN (1953) Sample survey methods and theory. Vol. I-Methods and Applications; Vol. II-Theory. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.3800010416

  • Henn L (2015) A multi-dimensional financing appraisal framework for public infrastructure 272

  • Huijbregts MAJ (1998) Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Int. J Life Cycle Assess 3:273–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Accounting Standard Board (2010) Conceptual framework for financial reporting 2010. https://doi.org/ISBN: 978-1-907026-69-0 Copyright

  • Investopedia (2016) Independent Auditor [WWW Document]. URL https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/independentauditor.asp. Accessed 7.26.19

  • ISO (2002) ISO/TS 14048:2002 - Environmental management -- life cycle assessment -- data documentation format

  • ISO (2006a) ISO 14040: Life cycle assessment — principles and framework. Environ Manag 3:28. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006b) ISO 14044: Life Cycle Assessment — requirements and guidelines. Environ Manag 3:54

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2014) ISO/TS 14071:2014 - Environmental management -- life cycle assessment -- critical review processes and reviewer competencies: additional requirements and guidelines to ISO 14044:2006 11

  • Kuczenski B (2019) Disclosure of product system models in life cycle assessment: achieving transparency and privacy. J Ind Ecol 23:574–586

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Offensive gegen Schadstoffe [WWW Document] (2016) VDI Nachrichten. URL https://www.vdi-nachrichten.com/Technik-Wirtschaft/Offensive-Schadstoffe. Accessed 7.27.19

  • PE International (2018) GaBi database & modelling principles

  • UNEP/SETAC (2011) Global guidance principles for life cycle assessment databases - “Shonan Guidance Principles.” UNEP/SETAC

  • Waterworth AM, Benz J, Northwest P (2018) Criteria for Comparative Evaluations of Treaty 999

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Reinhard J, Vadenbo CO, Wernet G (2013) Data quality guideline for the ecoinvent database version 3. St. Gallen

  • Yodkhum S, Sampattagul S, Gheewala SH (2018) Energy and environmental impact analysis of rice cultivation and straw management in northern Thailand. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:17654–17664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhai J (2013) Calibration estimation via a smoothing newton method. WSEAS Trans Math 12:329–340

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Ciroth.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Yi Yang

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ciroth, A., Foster, C., Hildenbrand, J. et al. Life cycle inventory dataset review criteria—a new proposal. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 483–494 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01712-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01712-9

Keywords

Navigation