IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v15y2011i5p707-725.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Approaches for Addressing Life Cycle Assessment Data Gaps for Bio‐based Products

Author

Listed:
  • Llorenç Milà i Canals
  • Adisa Azapagic
  • Gabor Doka
  • Donna Jefferies
  • Henry King
  • Christopher Mutel
  • Thomas Nemecek
  • Anne Roches
  • Sarah Sim
  • Heinz Stichnothe
  • Greg Thoma
  • Adrian Williams

Abstract

There is an increasing need for life cycle data for bio‐based products, which becomes particularly evident with the recent drive for greenhouse gas reporting and carbon footprinting studies. Meeting this need is challenging given that many bio‐products have not yet been studied by life cycle assessment (LCA), and those that have are specific and limited to certain geographic regions. In an attempt to bridge data gaps for bio‐based products, LCA practitioners can use either proxy data sets (e.g., use existing environmental data for apples to represent pears) or extrapolated data (e.g., derive new data for pears by modifying data for apples considering pear‐specific production characteristics). This article explores the challenges and consequences of using these two approaches. Several case studies are used to illustrate the trade‐offs between uncertainty and the ease of application, with carbon footprinting as an example. As shown, the use of proxy data sets is the quickest and easiest solution for bridging data gaps but also has the highest uncertainty. In contrast, data extrapolation methods may require extensive expert knowledge and are thus harder to use but give more robust results in bridging data gaps. They can also provide a sound basis for understanding variability in bio‐based product data. If resources (time, budget, and expertise) are limited, the use of averaged proxy data may be an acceptable compromise for initial or screening assessments. Overall, the article highlights the need for further research on the development and validation of different approaches to bridging data gaps for bio‐based products.

Suggested Citation

  • Llorenç Milà i Canals & Adisa Azapagic & Gabor Doka & Donna Jefferies & Henry King & Christopher Mutel & Thomas Nemecek & Anne Roches & Sarah Sim & Heinz Stichnothe & Greg Thoma & Adrian Williams, 2011. "Approaches for Addressing Life Cycle Assessment Data Gaps for Bio‐based Products," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 15(5), pages 707-725, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:15:y:2011:i:5:p:707-725
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00369.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00369.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00369.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena Huber & Vanessa Bach & Peter Holzapfel & Daria Blizniukova & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2022. "An Approach to Determine Missing Life Cycle Inventory Data for Chemicals (RREM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Ricardo Luís Carvalho & Pooja Yadav & Natxo García-López & Robert Lindgren & Gert Nyberg & Rocio Diaz-Chavez & Venkata Krishna Kumar Upadhyayula & Christoffer Boman & Dimitris Athanassiadis, 2020. "Environmental Sustainability of Bioenergy Strategies in Western Kenya to Address Household Air Pollution," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Sara González García & Enrica Imbert & Lucía Lijó & María Teresa Moreira & Almona Tani & Valentina Elena Tartiu & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2019. "Transitioning towards the bio‐economy: Assessing the social dimension through a stakeholder lens," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1135-1153, September.

    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:15:y:2011:i:5:p:707-725. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.