IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i14p5587-d383197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Archetypes of Goal and Scope Definitions for Consistent Allocation in LCA

Author

Listed:
  • Dieuwertje Schrijvers

    (Institute of Molecular Sciences (ISM), University of Bordeaux, CNRS, Bordeaux INP, UMR 5255, F-33400 Talence, France)

  • Philippe Loubet

    (Institute of Molecular Sciences (ISM), University of Bordeaux, CNRS, Bordeaux INP, UMR 5255, F-33400 Talence, France)

  • Guido Sonnemann

    (Institute of Molecular Sciences (ISM), University of Bordeaux, CNRS, Bordeaux INP, UMR 5255, F-33400 Talence, France)

Abstract

The selection of an appropriate allocation procedure for co-production and recycling in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) depends on the goal and scope of the analysis. However, it is not always clear when partitioning or system expansion can be applied, or when to conduct an attributional or a consequential LCA, both for LCA practitioners and users of LCA results. In this paper, the influence of the goal and scope on the selected modeling approaches is clarified. The distinction between process-oriented and product-oriented LCAs, between system expansion and substitution, and between the cut-off approach and other allocation procedures are highlighted. Archetypes of goal and scope definitions are developed. These archetypes reflect the minimum amount of information required to select an allocation procedure. It is demonstrated via an illustrative example that the question “what is the environmental impact of a product” can result in at least 15 different research questions requiring at least five different modeling methods. Finally, perspectives are provided on the use of attributional and consequential approaches to evaluate the environmental, social, and economic sustainability of products and processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Dieuwertje Schrijvers & Philippe Loubet & Guido Sonnemann, 2020. "Archetypes of Goal and Scope Definitions for Consistent Allocation in LCA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5587-:d:383197
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5587/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5587/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Evan Andrews & Pascal Lesage & Catherine Benoît & Julie Parent & Gregory Norris & Jean‐Pierre Revéret, 2009. "Life Cycle Attribute Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 13(4), pages 565-578, August.
    2. Vanessa Bach & Markus Berger & Natalia Finogenova & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2017. "Assessing the Availability of Terrestrial Biotic Materials in Product Systems (BIRD)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-35, January.
    3. Eskinder D. Gemechu & Christoph Helbig & Guido Sonnemann & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2016. "Import-based Indicator for the Geopolitical Supply Risk of Raw Materials in Life Cycle Sustainability Assessments," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(1), pages 154-165, February.
    4. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    5. Sabrina Neugebauer & Silvia Forin & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2016. "From Life Cycle Costing to Economic Life Cycle Assessment—Introducing an Economic Impact Pathway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-23, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Willem Haanstra & Willem-Jan Rensink & Alberto Martinetti & Jan Braaksma & Leo van Dongen, 2020. "Design for Sustainable Public Transportation: LCA-Based Tooling for Guiding Early Design Priorities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Xavier Tanguay & Gatien Geraud Essoua Essoua & Ben Amor, 2021. "Attributional and consequential life cycle assessments in a circular economy with integration of a quality indicator: A case study of cascading wood products," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(6), pages 1462-1473, December.
    4. Eric Johnson & Carl Vadenbo, 2020. "Modelling Variation in Petroleum Products’ Refining Footprints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-15, November.
    5. Julia Wenger & Stefan Pichler & Annukka Näyhä & Tobias Stern, 2022. "Practitioners’ Perceptions of Co-Product Allocation Methods in Biorefinery Development—A Case Study of the Austrian Pulp and Paper Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    6. Braud, L. & McDonnell, K. & Murphy, F., 2023. "Environmental life cycle assessment of algae systems: Critical review of modelling approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    7. Mario Rafael Giraldi-Díaz & Eduardo Castillo-González & Lorena De Medina-Salas & Raúl Velásquez-De la Cruz & Héctor Daniel Huerta-Silva, 2021. "Environmental Impacts Associated with Intensive Production in Pig Farms in Mexico through Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Thomas Schaubroeck & Simon Schaubroeck & Reinout Heijungs & Alessandra Zamagni & Miguel Brandão & Enrico Benetto, 2021. "Attributional & Consequential Life Cycle Assessment: Definitions, Conceptual Characteristics and Modelling Restrictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-47, July.

    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. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    2. Lina Baranauskaitė & Daiva Jurevičienė, 2021. "Import Risks of Agricultural Products in Foreign Trade," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Kim Maya Yavor & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2021. "Adapting the ESSENZ Method to Assess Company-Specific Criticality Aspects," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Christoph Helbig & Martin Bruckler & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2021. "An Overview of Indicator Choice and Normalization in Raw Material Supply Risk Assessments," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-26, August.
    5. Simone Blanc & Stefano Massaglia & Filippo Brun & Cristiana Peano & Angela Mosso & Nicole Roberta Giuggioli, 2019. "Use of Bio-Based Plastics in the Fruit Supply Chain: An Integrated Approach to Assess Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Hache, Emmanuel & Seck, Gondia Sokhna & Simoen, Marine & Bonnet, Clément & Carcanague, Samuel, 2019. "Critical raw materials and transportation sector electrification: A detailed bottom-up analysis in world transport," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 6-25.
    7. Zbigniew Leszczyński & Tomasz Jasiński, 2020. "Comparison of Product Life Cycle Cost Estimating Models Based on Neural Networks and Parametric Techniques—A Case Study for Induction Motors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Witold Chmielarz & Marek Zborowski, 2022. "On the Assessment of e-Banking Websites Supporting Sustainable Development Goals," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski & Michał Krzyżaniak, 2021. "Economic Evaluation of the Production of Perennial Crops for Energy Purposes—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Giacomo Falcone & Anna Irene De Luca & Teodora Stillitano & Alfio Strano & Giuseppa Romeo & Giovanni Gulisano, 2016. "Assessment of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Vine-Growing Combining Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Costing and Multicriterial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-34, August.
    11. Georges Atallah & Faris Tarlochan, 2021. "Comparison between Variable and Constant Refrigerant Flow Air Conditioning Systems in Arid Climate: Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Energy Savings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-13, September.
    12. Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Jakub Jan Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski, 2023. "External Environmental Costs of Solid Biomass Production against the Legal and Political Background in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-27, May.
    13. Lapko, Yulia & Trucco, Paolo, 2018. "Influence of power regimes on identification and mitigation of material criticality: The case of platinum group metals in the automotive sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 360-370.
    14. Shule Li & Jingjing Yan & Qiuming Pei & Jinghua Sha & Siyu Mou & Yong Xiao, 2019. "Risk Identification and Evaluation of the Long-term Supply of Manganese Mines in China Based on the VW-BGR Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, May.
    15. Sunghoon Kim & Adam Beier & H. Brett Schreyer & Bhavik R. Bakshi, 2022. "Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of a Novel Cultivated Meat Burger Patty in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Teodora Stillitano & Emanuele Spada & Nathalie Iofrida & Giacomo Falcone & Anna Irene De Luca, 2021. "Sustainable Agri-Food Processes and Circular Economy Pathways in a Life Cycle Perspective: State of the Art of Applicative Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-28, February.
    17. Mitja Mori & Rok Stropnik & Mihael Sekavčnik & Andrej Lotrič, 2021. "Criticality and Life-Cycle Assessment of Materials Used in Fuel-Cell and Hydrogen Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-29, March.
    18. Arendt, Rosalie & Muhl, Marco & Bach, Vanessa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2020. "Criticality assessment of abiotic resource use for Europe– application of the SCARCE method," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    19. Simon Glöser-Chahoud & Luis Tercero Espinoza & Rainer Walz & Martin Faulstich, 2016. "Taking the Step towards a More Dynamic View on Raw Material Criticality: An Indicator Based Analysis for Germany and Japan," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Pırıl Tekin & Rızvan Erol, 2017. "A New Dynamic Pricing Model for the Effective Sustainability of Perishable Product Life Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-22, July.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5587-:d:383197. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.