Abstract
Purpose
To contribute to the upcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in 2012 by introducing a life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) and showing how it can play a crucial role in moving towards sustainable consumption and production. The publication, titled Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment, and published by the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative aims to show how three life cycle techniques—(environmental) LCA, S-LCA and LCC—can be combined as part of an over-arching LCSA.
Methods
The method was demonstrated by evaluating the characteristics of each phase for each life cycle technique. In defining the goal and scope of an LCSA, for example, different aspects should be taken into account to establish the aim of the study as well as the functional unit, system boundaries, impact category and allocation. Then, the data to be collected for the life cycle sustainability inventory can be either in a unit process or on an organisational level. They can also be quantitative or qualitative. Life cycle sustainability impact assessment should consider the relevance of the impacts as well as the perspective of stakeholders. The interpretation should not add up the results, but rather evaluate them jointly. In order to clarify the approach, a case study is presented to evaluate three types of marble according to the proposed method.
Results and discussion
The authors have identified that while LCSA is feasible, following areas need more development: data production and acquisition, methodological development, discussion about LCSA criteria (e.g. cutoff rules), definitions and formats of communication and dissemination of LCSA results and the expansion of research and applications combining (environmental) LCA, LCC and S-LCA. The authors also indicate that it is necessary to develop more examples and cases to improve user capacity to analyse the larger picture and therefore address the three dimensions or pillars of sustainability in a systematic way. Software and database providers are called for in order to facilitate user-friendly and accessible tools to promote LCSAs.
Conclusions
The application demonstrated that, although methodological improvements are still needed, important steps towards an overarching sustainability assessment have been accomplished. LCSA is possible and should be pursued; however, more efforts should be made to improve the technique and facilitate the studies in order to contribute to a greener economy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
After applying cutoff criteria, system boundaries might differ from one technique to the other. For example, when looking at the life cycle of coffee (Mazijn et al. 2004), the shipping from Latin America to Europe does not have environmental relevance; however, from the S-LCA perspective, bad working conditions might be a factor.
References
Capitano C, Traverso M, Rizzo G, Finkbeiner M (2011) Life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to marble products. In: Proceedings of the LCM 2011 Conference. Berlin, 29–31 August 2011. www.lcm2011.org
Cavanagh J, Frame B, Lennox J (2006) The sustainability assessment model (SAM): measuring sustainable development performance. Aust J Environ Manage 13:142–145
Ciroth A, Franze J (2011) LCA of an Ecolabeled Notebook—consideration of social and environmental impacts along the entire life cycle, GreenDeltaTC, sustainable development. Berlin
Consoli F, Allen D, Boustead I, Fava J, Franklin W, Jensen AA, de Oude N, Parrish R, Perriman R, Postlethwaite D, Quay B, Seguin J, Vigon B (1993) Guidelines for life-cycle assessment: a ‘code of practice.’ SETAC, Brussels and Pensacola
EFORWOOD (2010) ToSIA: a tool for sustainable impact assessment of the forest-wood chain. Final report, HYPERLINK. http://87.192.2.62/Eforwood/Portals/0/. http://87.192.2.62/Eforwood/Portals/0/documents/Final_print%20_version_23205_Eforwood.pdf. Retrieved 17 July 2011
Finkbeiner M, Schau E, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustain 2(10):3309–3322. doi:10.3390/ su2103309
Franze J, Ciroth A (2011) A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(4):366–379
Grießhammer R, Buchert M, Gensch C-O, Hochfeld C, Manhart A, Reisch L, Rüdenauer I (2007) PROSA—product sustainability assessment—guideline. Öko-Institut, Freiburg
Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, de Haes HA U, de Bruijn H, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment. Operational guide to the ISO standards. I: LCA in perspective. IIa: Guide. IIb: Operational annex. III: Scientific background. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht
Halog A, Manik J (2011) Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustain 3(2):469–499
ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Organization of Standardization, Geneva
ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Organization of Standardization, Geneva
Itsubo N, Inaba I (2003) A new LCIA method. Lime has been completed. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(5):305
Klöpffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):89–95
Jesinghaus J (2000) On the art of aggregating apples & oranges. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan
Mazijn B, Doom R, Peeters H, Spillemaeckers S, Vanhoutte G, Taverniers L, Lavrysen L, Van Braeckel D, Duque Rivera J (2004) Ecological, social and economical aspects of integrated product policy—integrated product assessment and the development of the label ‘sustainable development’. Final report, UGhent-CDO/Ethibel, Belgian Science Policy, Project CP/20, 124pp, plus annexes
Poulsen P, Jensen A (eds) (2004) Working environment in life cycle assessment. SETAC, Pensacola
Saling P, Kicherer A, Dittrich-Krämer B, Wittlinger R, Zombik W, Schmidt I, Schrott W, Schmidt S (2002) Eco-efficiency analysis by BASF: the method. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(4):203–218
Spoerri A, Bening C, Scholz RW (2011) The sustainability of sugar supply chains—Swiss beet sugar compared to Brazilian cane sugar. In: Proceedings of the LCM 2011 conference, Berlin, 29–31 August 2011
Swarr T, Hunkeler D, Klöpffer W, Pesonen H-L, Ciroth A, Brent AC, Pagan R (2011) Environmental life cycle costing: a code of practice. SETAC, Pensacola
Traverso M, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen A, Schneider L (2012) Life cycle sustainability dashboard. J Ind Ecol 16(5):680–688
UNEP/SETAC (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. UNEP/SETAC, Paris, 103 p
UNEP/SETAC (2011a) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment. UNEP/SETAC, Paris, 65 p
UNEP/SETAC (2011a) Global guidance principles for LCA databases. UNEP/SETAC, Paris, 157 p
UNEP/SETAC (2010) Methodological sheets of sub-categories for a social LCA. Report available at HYPERLINK. http://www.estis.net/sites/lcinit/default.asp?site=lcinit&page_id=EDA1E98F-412F-4F51-B407-3A7E006E1B83
UN (1972) Conference on the human development, Stockholm, 1972. Report available at HYPERLINK. http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=97
UNFPA (2011) State of the world population 2011. 124 p. Available at HYPERLINK. http://foweb.unfpa.org/SWP2011/reports/EN-SWOP2011-FINAL.pdf
Vinyes E, Gasol C M, Oliver-Solà J, Ugaya C, Rieradevall J (2011) Application of LCSA in used cooking oil (UCO) waste management. In: Proceedings of the LCM 2011 Conference, Berlin, 29–31 August 2011
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987) Our common future, Brundtland report. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Weidema B (2006) The integration of economic and social aspects in life cycle impact assessment. IInt J Life Cycle Assess 11(1):89–96
Zamagni A, Buttol P, Buonamici R, Masoni P, Guinée JB, Huppes G, van Heijungs R, der Voet E, Ekvall T, Rydberg T (2009) Blue paper on life cycle sustainability analysis. Deliverable 20 of Work Package 7 of the CALCAS project. ENEA, Italy
Acknowledgments
The authors of this article would like to thank the other co-authors of Towards a Life Cycle Assessment of Products: Walter Klöpffer, Matthias Finkbeiner, Andreas Ciroth, Siddhart Prakash and Gina Vickery-Niederman, as well as the members of the International Life Cycle Board of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative for their support.
Disclaimer
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the UNEP/ SETAC Life Cycle Initiative concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of UNEP or SETAC, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Hanna-Leena Pesonen
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valdivia, S., Ugaya, C.M.L., Hildenbrand, J. et al. A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment—our contribution to Rio+20. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18, 1673–1685 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0529-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0529-1