IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v26y2022i5p1600-1604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability assessment of product systems in dire straits due to ISO 14040–14044 standards: Five key issues and solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Schaubroeck

Abstract

Quintessential for a more sustainable society is adequate sustainability assessment to guide us. In the case of environmental impact assessment of product systems, life cycle assessment (LCA) is the main method, with associated variants covering other sustainability pillars. At the core of LCA practice are the standards set up by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), namely ISO 14040–14044. However, I point out five key issues with these standards: (1) the presence of inconsistencies on crucial matters as pointed out in the literature; (2) a lack in major update since two decades; (3) mismanagement of notified issues; (4) lacking representativeness; and (5) a low or unclear relevance. I provide solutions for these but overall plea for a societal intervention to put this method back on track.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Schaubroeck, 2022. "Sustainability assessment of product systems in dire straits due to ISO 14040–14044 standards: Five key issues and solutions," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(5), pages 1600-1604, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:26:y:2022:i:5:p:1600-1604
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13330
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13330?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. Bo Weidema, 2014. "Has ISO 14040/44 Failed Its Role as a Standard for Life Cycle Assessment?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 324-326, May.
    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. Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Paper 305677, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    2. Voicu-Teodor Muica & Alexandru Ozunu & Zoltàn Török, 2021. "Comparative Life Cycle Impact Assessment between the Productions of Zinc from Conventional Concentrates versus Waelz Oxides Obtained from Slags," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Papers 149, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    4. Chamkalani, A. & Zendehboudi, S. & Rezaei, N. & Hawboldt, K., 2020. "A critical review on life cycle analysis of algae biodiesel: current challenges and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Konstantinos G. Aravossis & Vasilis C. Kapsalis & Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos & Theofanis G. Xouleis, 2019. "Development of a Holistic Assessment Framework for Industrial Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-24, July.
    6. Christian Dierks & Tabea Hagedorn & Alessio Campitelli & Winfried Bulach & Vanessa Zeller, 2021. "Are LCA Studies on Bulk Mineral Waste Management Suitable for Decision Support? A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, April.

    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:26:y:2022:i:5:p:1600-1604. 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.