IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v24y2020i3p485-499.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review of impact categories and environmental indicators for life cycle assessment of geotechnical systems

Author

Listed:
  • Alena J. Raymond
  • James R. Tipton
  • Alissa Kendall
  • Jason T. DeJong

Abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA) has only had limited application in the geotechnical engineering discipline, though it has been widely applied to civil engineering systems such as pavements and roadways. A review of previous geotechnical LCAs showed that most studies have tracked a small set of impact categories, such as energy and global warming potential. Accordingly, currently reported environmental indicators may not effectively or fully capture important environmental impacts and tradeoffs associated with geotechnical systems, including those associated with land and soil resources. This research reviewed previous studies, methods, and models for assessment of land use and soil‐related impacts to understand their applicability to geotechnical LCA. The results of this review show that critical gaps remain in current knowledge and practice. In particular, further development or refinement of environmental indicators, impact categories, and cause–effect pathways is needed as they pertain to geotechnical applications—specifically those related to soil quality, soil functions, and the ecosystem services soils provide. In addition, many existing methods emerge from research on land use and land use change related to other disciplines (e.g., agriculture). For applicability to geotechnical projects, the resolution of many of these methods and resulting indicators need to be downscaled from the landscape/macro scale to the project scale. In the near term, practitioners of geotechnical LCA should begin tracking changes to soil properties and report impacts to land and soil resources qualitatively.

Suggested Citation

  • Alena J. Raymond & James R. Tipton & Alissa Kendall & Jason T. DeJong, 2020. "Review of impact categories and environmental indicators for life cycle assessment of geotechnical systems," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(3), pages 485-499, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:24:y:2020:i:3:p:485-499
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12946
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12946?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & Fisher, Brendan & Mulder, Kenneth & Liu, Shuang & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 478-491, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elena Ojea & Paulo Nunes & Maria Loureiro, 2010. "Mapping Biodiversity Indicators and Assessing Biodiversity Values in Global Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 329-347, November.
    2. Malone, Thomas C. & DiGiacomo, Paul M. & Gonçalves, Emanuel & Knap, Anthony H. & Talaue-McManus, Liana & de Mora, Stephen, 2014. "A global ocean observing system framework for sustainable development," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 262-272.
    3. Ding, Helen & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D., 2014. "Modeling the links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing in the context of climate change: Results from an econometric analysis of the European forest ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-73.
    4. Paulo A.L.D. Nunes & Elena Ojea & Maria Loureiro, 2009. "Mapping of Forest Biodiversity Values: A Plural Perspective," Working Papers 2009.4, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Ramel, Cindy & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Fernandes, Rui & Vincent, Claire & Cardoso, Ana R. & Broennimann, Olivier & Pellissier, Loïc & Pradervand, Jean-Nicolas & Ursenbacher, Sylvain & Schmidt, Benedikt R, 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services within spatial biodiversity conservation prioritization in the Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    6. Houdet, Joël & Trommetter, Michel & Weber, Jacques, 2012. "Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-46.
    7. Kaur, Harpaljit & Habibullah, Muzafar & Nagaratnam, Shalini, 2019. "Impact of Natural Disasters on Biodiversity: Evidence Using Quantile Regression Approach," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 53(2), pages 67-81.
    8. Halkos, George E., 2011. "Nonparametric modelling of biodiversity: Determinants of threatened species," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 618-635, July.
    9. Chen, Haojie, 2020. "Complementing conventional environmental impact assessments of tourism with ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. Xiao Hu & Yujie He & Ze Kong & Jiang Zhang & Minshu Yuan & Le Yu & Changhui Peng & Qiuan Zhu, 2021. "Evaluation of Future Impacts of Climate Change, CO 2 , and Land Use Cover Change on Global Net Primary Productivity Using a Processed Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Zhongwei Guo & Lin Zhang & Yiming Li, 2010. "Increased Dependence of Humans on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-8, October.
    12. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    13. Enrique Acebo & José‐Ángel Miguel‐Dávila & Mariano Nieto, 2021. "External stakeholder engagement: Complementary and substitutive effects on firms' eco‐innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2671-2687, July.
    14. Divinsky, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2017. "Ecosystem service tradeoff between grazing intensity and other services - A case study in Karei-Deshe experimental cattle range in northern Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 16-27.
    15. Halkos, George, 2010. "Modelling biodiversity," MPRA Paper 39075, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Chunbo Chen & Chi Zhang, 2017. "Projecting the CO 2 and Climatic Change Effects on the Net Primary Productivity of the Urban Ecosystems in Phoenix, AZ in the 21st Century under Multiple RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) Sce," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    17. Thomas C. Malone & Paul M. DiGiacomo & Emanuel Gonçalves & Anthony H. Knap & Liana Talaue‐McManus & Stephen de Mora & Jose Muelbert, 2014. "Enhancing the Global Ocean Observing System to meet evidence based needs for the ecosystem‐based management of coastal ecosystem services," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(3), pages 168-181, August.
    18. Yang, Wu & Chang, Jie & Xu, Bin & Peng, Changhui & Ge, Ying, 2008. "Ecosystem service value assessment for constructed wetlands: A case study in Hangzhou, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 116-125, December.
    19. Canelas, Joana Viana & Pereira, Henrique Miguel, 2022. "Impacts of land-use intensity on ecosystems stability," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 472(C).
    20. Xinmin Zhang & Ronald C Estoque & Hualin Xie & Yuji Murayama & Manjula Ranagalage, 2019. "Bibliometric analysis of highly cited articles on ecosystem services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:24:y:2020:i:3:p:485-499. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.