IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v222y2025ics1364032125005970.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

More rationality and inclusivity are imperative in reference transition scenarios based on IAMs and shared socioeconomic pathways - recommendations for prospective LCA

Author

Listed:
  • de Bortoli, Anne
  • Chanel, Alexis
  • Chabas, Camille
  • Greffe, Titouan
  • Louineau, Estelle

Abstract

Prospective life cycle assessment (pLCA) is a key tool for evaluating future environmental impacts and supporting environmental policies. Recent pLCA methods integrate technological projections from transition scenarios modeled with integrated assessment models (IAMs), leveraging the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) and representative concentration pathways developed within the framework of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC). However, this computational framework is influenced by subjective modeling choices within IAMs and SSPs, which can affect the robustness and relevance of future technological scenarios thus pLCA results. This article starts by highlighting these subjective choices through the lens of Science and Technology Studies, to then provide recommendations to enhance pLCA practices within this computational framework, especially through the selection of more (a) rational and (b) inclusive technological scenarios. The first step toward better practices is recognizing the inherited choices and limitations of borrowed models. Our recommendations then address the selection of future technological scenarios for pLCA: these scenarios could (a.1) account for the whole variability of mainstream transition scenarios from the latest IPCC report and its effect on pLCA results, (a.2) include only screened IPCC mainstream IAM scenarios based on proposed reality check criteria, (b.1) integrate scenarios rooted in alternative economic schools of thought, such as post-Keynesian economics or ecological macroeconomics, explore scenarios based on alternative (b.2) indicators prioritizing strong sustainability, justice, and well-being, and (b.3) societal narratives such as economic downscaling avenues and degrowth. Finally, we emphasize the need to incorporate ethical considerations into modeling, offering recommendations to (b.4) prioritize more equitable scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • de Bortoli, Anne & Chanel, Alexis & Chabas, Camille & Greffe, Titouan & Louineau, Estelle, 2025. "More rationality and inclusivity are imperative in reference transition scenarios based on IAMs and shared socioeconomic pathways - recommendations for prospective LCA," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:222:y:2025:i:c:s1364032125005970
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2025.115924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125005970
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115924?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:rensus:v:222:y:2025:i:c:s1364032125005970. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.