Are life cycle assessments a threat to sound public policy making?

Abstract

This paper deals with the question of whether Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs), with their focus on objective and quantitative results, are the best way to support public policy processes. The public policy making process is characterized as a continuous discoursive struggle. Criteria are defined to distinguish between good and bad public policy discourses to judge the effects of LCA on the public policy process. Many policy scientists argue that methodologies that emphasize quantification and the use of formal methods are not beneficial for sound public policy making. An empirical report of the role LCAs played in public policy making processes on PVC and chlorine in the Netherlands is made to evaluate the contribution of LCAs to public policy making processes and to identify the main limitations of the current LCA methodologies and practices. It appears that political actors tend to use LCAs in a polarizing way. LCAs are easily misused due to their apparent objectivity, and the quantitative and black box nature of their results. LCAs contain an implicit, normative frame that does not match the environmentalists’ perception on the kind of evidence needed on toxic effects of organochlorines, which reduced the open nature of the Dutch PVC debate. It is recommended to develop a methodology for product evaluation that approaches the issue in a more open and emergent way to prevent “premature closure” of the analysis. It is expected that a focus on the development of balanced, rich arguments on facts and values in the study process will be more fruitful than the calculation of integral, quantitative indicators.