Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An input–output based framework to evaluate human labour in life cycle assessment

  • INPUT-OUTPUT AND HYBRID LCA
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In LCA, the intrinsic dependence of productions to human labour (HL) activities is usually neglected, without providing any clear arguments. HL is not considered to be related to and affected by, changes to the functional unit, although this is evidently not the case. This research aims at investigating the relationship between HL and LCA and at developing an operational framework to assess the life cycle environmental impact of HL in LCA.

Materials and methods

System boundaries and functional unit (euro/working-hour) of HL were defined. Statistical datasets of household expenditures (HEs) allowed differentiating among human consumption behaviours and the definition of three HL types, based on different work skills: HL-1 (qualified worker), HL-2 (technician), and HL-3 (manual worker). The HEs framework of Luxembourg was used because of data availability and was then extended to other EU-27 countries. A comparative LCIA of the HLs types was carried out using an environmentally extended input–output model (EU-27). Afterwards, ten agri-food and industrial LCAs case studies were modified for hybrid LCAs, adding HL input to LCIs and using the ReCiPe midpoint method for LCIA.

Results and discussion

The LCIA comparison of HLs shows that HL-1 generates environmental impacts that are always greater than HL-2 and HL-3, e.g. 1 h of HL-1, which involves workers with the highest consumption of goods and services, does generate 0.52 kg CO2-eq, whereas HL-2 and HL-3 generate 0.46 and 0.41 kg CO2-eq, respectively. The impact of average HL is higher in EU countries with the highest HEs budgets, e.g. the average HL impact in Luxembourg is 28% to 79% higher than the corresponding HL impact in other EU-27 countries. Within the case studies, the HL significantly contributes to the total impact for several categories (e.g. fossil and ozone depletion up to 16% and 20%, respectively). Despite these important results, some limitations due to data and models used are investigated to suggest further methodological improvements.

Conclusions

The integration of HL inputs to product LCIs can improve accuracy of the entire life cycle analysis, since no product would exist without direct and/or indirect HL. This leads considering humans at the same level of technological/economic activities that cause environmental damage, with humans being perceived as leading actors and explicitly responsible for the impacts. What remains an open question is how to account for non-physical information, such as knowledge/education/culture, which distinguish humans from machinery and are essential items for our future sustainable 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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abel T (2010) Human transformities in a global hierarchy: emergy and scale in the production of people and culture. Ecol Model 221(17):2112–2117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender MH (2003) Energy budget of an energy-integrated organic farm. In: Proceedings of organic agriculture research symposium 2003, ASA-CSSA-SSSA Annual Meetings, Denver, Colorado, USA

  • Brandt-Williams S (2002) Handbook of emergy evaluation—folio#4—Emergy of Florida Agriculture. Centre for Environmental Policy, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. http://www.emergysystems.org/downloads/Folios/Folio_4.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Brown MT, Herendeen RA (1996) Embodied energy analysis and emergy analysis: a comparative view. Ecol Econ 19(3):219–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DE (1998) Emergy analysis of human carrying capacity and regional sustainability: an example using the State of Maine. Environ Monit Assess 51(1–2):31–569

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciotola RJ, Lansing S, Martin JF (2011) Emergy analysis of biogas production and electricity generation from small-scale agricultural digesters. Ecol Eng 37(11):1681–1691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claro RM, Levy RB, Bandoni DH, Mondini L (2010) Per capita versus adult-equivalent estimates of calorie availability in household budget surveys. Cad Saude Publica 26(11):2188–2195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford RH (2008) Validation of a hybrid life-cycle inventory analysis method. J Environ Manage 88(3):496–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da Costa R, de Laiglesia JR, Martínez E, Melguizo A (2011) The economy of the possible pensions and informality in Latin America. Working Paper No. 295, OECD Development Centre, Paris, France. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/22/46937116.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA part 1: development of indicators for labour rights. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(3):247–259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman A, Jackson T (2009) The carbon footprint of UK households 1990–2004: a socio-economically disaggregated, quasi-multiregional input–output model. Ecol Econ 68(7):2066–2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman P, Sinclair P, Jackson T (2008) A geographically and socio-economically disaggregated local household consumption model for the UK. J Clean Prod 16(7):870–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecoinvent (2010) Ecoinvent database v2.2. Swiss Centre for Life-Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland. http://www.ecoinvent.org/database/. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Eurostat (2008a). European price statistics—an overview. Eurostat statistical books, European Commission, Luxembourg. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-70-07-038/EN/KS-70-07-038-EN.PDF. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Eurostat (2008b) NACE Rev.2—Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community. Methologies and Working papers, Eurostat-European Commission, Luxembourg. http://circa.europa.eu/irc/dsis/nacecpacon/info/data/en/NACE%20Rev%202%20structure%20+%20explanatory%20notes%20-%20EN.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Eurostat (2011) Mean consumption expenditure by detailed COICOP level (in PPS), year 2005. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Eurostat-OECD (2006) Methodological manual on purchasing power parities. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/10/37984252.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • EXIOPOL (2011) A new environmental accounting framework using externality data and input–output tools for policy analysis. http://www.feem-project.net/exiopol/index.php. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Fluck RC (1981) Net energy sequestered in agricultural labor. T Am Soc Agr Eng 24(6):1449–1455

    Google Scholar 

  • Fluck RC (1992) Energy of human labor. In: Fluck RC (ed) Energy in Farm production, vol. 6. of energy in world agriculture. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 31–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Giampietro M (1997) Socioeconomic pressure, demographic pressure, environmental loading and technological changes in agriculture. Agr Ecosys Environ 65(3):201–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giampietro M, Pimentel D (1990) Assessment of the energetics of human labour. Agr Ecosys Environ 32(3–4):257–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giampietro M, Mayumi K, Munda G (2006) Integrated assessment and energy analysis: quality assurance in multi-criteria analysis of sustainability. Energy 31(1):59–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, de Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008. A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition, report I: characterisation. The Hague: Ministry of VROM, The Netherlands

  • Guzmán GI, Alonso AM (2008) A comparison of energy use in conventional and organic olive oil production in Spain. Agr Syst 98(3):167–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberl H (2001a) The energetic metabolism of societies—part I: accounting concepts. J Ind Ecol 5(1):11–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberl H (2001b) The energetic metabolism of societies—part II: empirical examples. J Ind Ecol 5(2):71–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberl H, Weisz H, Amann C, Bondeau A, Eisenmenger N, Erb K-H, Fischer-Kowalski M, Fridolin Krausmann F (2006) The energetic metabolism of the European Union and the United States decadal energy input time-series with an emphasis on biomass. J Ind Ecol 10(4):151–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hau JL, Bakshi BR (2004) Promise and problems of emergy analysis. Ecol Model 178(1–2):215–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Suh S (2006) Reformulation of matrix-based LCI: from product balance to process balance. J Cleaner Prod 14(1):47–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertwich EG (2005) Life cycle approaches to sustainable consumption: a critical review. Environ Sci Technol 39(13):4673–4684

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hertwich EG (2011) The life cycle environmental impacts of consumption. Econ Sys Res 23(1):27–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen WW (2010) Uncertainty characterization for emergy values. Ecol Model 221(3):445–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Lai LCH, Hauschild MZ (2010) Assessing the validity of impact pathways for child labour and well-being in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(1):5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondo Y, Nakamura S (2004) Evaluating alternative life-cycle strategies for electrical appliances by the waste input–output model. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9(4):236–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krausmann F (2004) Milk, manure, and muscle power. Livestock and the transformation of preindustrial agriculture in Central Europe. Hum Ecol 32(6):735–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krausmann F, Haberl H (2002) The process of industrialization from the perspective of energetic metabolism—socioeconomic energy flows in Austria 1830–1995. Ecol Econ 41(2):177–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen M, Peters G (2010) How city dwellers affect their resource hinterland—a spatial impact study of Australian households. J Ind Ecol 14(1):73–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen M, Schaeffer R (2004) Environmental and social accounting for Brazil. Environ Res Econ 27(2):201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen M, Treloar G (2003) Differential convergence of life-cycle inventories toward upstream production layers implications for life-cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 6(3–4):137–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin C (2009) Hybrid input–output analysis of wastewater treatment and environmental impacts: a case study for the Tokyo Metropolis. Ecol Econ 68(7):2096–2105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loake C (2001) Energy accounting and well-being—examining UK organic and conventional farming systems through a human energy perspective. Agr Syst 70(1):275–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milà L, Domènech X, Rieradevall J, Fullana P, Puig R (1998) Application of life cycle assessment to footwear. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(4):203–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller RE (1980) The relationship between type I and type II income multipliers in an input–output model: a comment. Int Regional Sci Rev 5(2):185–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moll HC, Noorman KJ, Kok R, Engström R, Throne-Holst H, Clark C (2005) Pursuing more sustainable consumption by analyzing household metabolism in European countries and cities. J Ind Ecol 9(1):259–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongelli I, Suh S, Huppes G (2005) A structure comparison of two approaches to LCA inventory data, based on the MIET and ETH databases. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(5):317–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munksgaard J, Wier M, Lenzen M, Dey C (2005) Using input–output analysis to measure the environmental pressure of consumption at different spatial levels. J Ind Ecol 9(1–2):169–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz I, Milà i Canals L, Clift R (2008) Consider a spherical man—a simple model to include human excretion in life cycle assessment of food products. J Ind Ecol 12(4):521–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz I, Milà i Canals L, Fernández-Alba AR (2010) Life cycle assessment of the average Spanish diet including human excretion. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(8):794–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura S, Kondo Y (2002) Input–output analysis of waste management. J Ind Ecol 6(1):39–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nebel B, Zimmer B, Wegener G (2006) Life cycle assessment of wood floor coverings—a representative study for the German flooring industry. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(3):172–182

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen TLT, Gheewala SH (2008a) Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from cane molasses in Thailand. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(4):301–311

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen TLT, Gheewala SH (2008b) Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from cassava in Thailand. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):147–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen TLT, Gheewala SH, Garivait S (2007) Full chain energy analysis of fuel ethanol from cassava in Thailand. Environ Sci Technol 41(11):4135–4142

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nijdam DS, Wilting HC, Goedkoop MJ, Madsen J (2005) Environmental load from Dutch private consumption. J Ind Ecol 9(1–2):147–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Odum HT (1988) Self-organization, transformity, and information. Science 242(4882):1132–1139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Odum HT (1996) Environmental accounting: emergy and environmental decision making. Wiley, New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortega E (1997) Handbook of emergy calculation. http://www.unicamp.br/fea/ortega/curso/handbook.htm. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Paoli C, Vassallo P, Fabiano M (2008) Solar power: an approach to transformity evaluation. Ecol Eng 34(3):191–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel D (1993) Economics and energetics of organic and conventional farming. J Agric Environ Ethics 6(1):53–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulselli RM (2010) Integrating emergy evaluation and geographic information systems for monitoring resource use in the Abruzzo region (Italy). J Environ Manage 91(11):2349–2357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulselli RM, Simoncini E, Ridolfi R, Bastianoni S (2008) Specific emergy of cement and concrete: an energy-based appraisal of building materials and their transport. Ecol Indic 8(5):647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulselli FM, Patrizi N, Focardi S (2011) Calculation of the unit emergy value of water in an Italian watershed. Ecol Model 222(16):2929–2938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley HV, Lundie S, Peters GM (2009) A hybrid life cycle assessment model for comparison with conventional methodologies in Australia. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(6):508–516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rugani B, Huijbregts MAJ, Mutel C, Bastianoni S, Hellweg S (2011) Solar energy demand (SED) of commodity life cycles. Environ Sci Technol 45(12):5426–5433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sciubba E, Ulgiati S (2005) Emergy and exergy analyses: complementary methods or irreducible ideological options? Energy 30(10):1953–1988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sciubba E, Bastianoni S, Tiezzi E (2008) Exergy and extended exergy accounting of very large complex systems with an application to the province of Siena, Italy. J Environ Manage 86(2):372–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silalertruksa T, Gheewala SH (2009) Environmental sustainability assessment of bio-ethanol production in Thailand. Energy 34(11):1933–1946

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sorrells NR, Pimentel D (1981) Food, energy, and the environment: alternatives for creating new lifestyles. Am Biol Teach 43(4):190–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Spirinckx C, Ceuterick D (1996) Biodiesel and fossil diesel fuel: comparative life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 1(3):127–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STATEC (2008) Dépenses annuelles moyennes par ménage selon la catégorie socio-professionnelle de la personne de reference. http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableViewHTML.aspx?ReportId=517&IF_Language=fra&MainTheme=3&FldrName=1&RFPath=28. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • UN Statistics Division (2011) COICOP—classification of individual consumption according to purpose. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl = 5. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Suh S (2003) MIET 3.0 User Guide—an inventory estimation tool for missing flows using input–output techniques. SimaPro Database Manual, PRé Consultants, The Netherlands. http://www.pre.nl/download/manuals/DatabaseManualUSAIODatabase98.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Suh S, Huppes G (2002) Missing inventory estimation tool using extended input–output analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(3):134–140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suh S, Huppes G (2005) Methods for life cycle inventory of a product. J Clean Prod 13(7):687–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suh S, Nakamura S (2007) Five years in the area of input–output and hybrid LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(6):351–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Tedford JR, Capps OJ, Havlicek JJ (1986) Adult equivalent scales once more: a developmental approach. Am J Agr Econ 68(2):322–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tukker A et al (2006) Environmental Impact of Products (EIPRO)—analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the final consumption of the EU-25. In: Eder P, Delgado L (eds) Main Report, European Commission, DG Joint Research Centre (JRC). ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/eur22284en.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Ulgiati S, Raugei M, Bargigli S (2006) Overcoming the inadequacy of single criterion approaches to life cycle assessment. Ecol Model 190(3–4):432–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vassallo P, Paoli C, Fabiano M (2009) Emergy required for the complete treatment of municipal wastewater. Ecol Eng 35(5):687–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science 277(5325):494–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP (2006) The integration of economic and social aspects in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(1):89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Christiansen K, Nielsen AM, Norris GA, Notten P, Suh S, Madsen J (2005) Prioritisation within the integrated product policy. Environmental project no. 980. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen. http://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2005/87-7614-517-4/pdf/87-7614-518-2.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011

  • Wier M, Lenzen M, Munksgaard J, Smed S (2001) Environmental effects of household consumption pattern and lifestyle. Econ Sys Res 13(3):259–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang TW, Dornfeld DA (2007) Energy use per worker-hour: a method of evaluating the contribution of labour to manufacturing energy use. In: Shozo T, Yasushi U (eds) Proceedings of the 14th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering 2007, advances in life cycle engineering for sustainable manufacturing businesses. Waseda University, Tokyo, pp 189–194

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Research Fund of Luxembourg and cofounded under the Marie Curie Actions of the European Commission (FP7-COFUND). These are gratefully acknowledged. We thank Dr. Alex Cornelissen for the English proof-reading and Colin Jury for his helpful comments on the preliminary idea behind this paper. We would like also to thank three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which notably contributed to improve the quality of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Public Research Centre Henri Tudor (CRPHT)/Resource Centre for Environmental Technologies (CRTE), 66, rue de Luxembourg, P.B. 144, 4002, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

    Benedetto Rugani, Daryna Panasiuk & Enrico Benetto

Authors
  1. Benedetto Rugani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daryna Panasiuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Enrico Benetto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benedetto Rugani.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Shinichiro Nakamura

Electronic Supplementary Materials

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 1681 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rugani, B., Panasiuk, D. & Benetto, E. An input–output based framework to evaluate human labour in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17, 795–812 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0403-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0403-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation