IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v8y2017i1d10.1038_ncomms15065.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life cycle assessment needs predictive spatial modelling for biodiversity and ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Sarah Sim

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Perrine Hamel

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Benjamin Bryant

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Ryan Noe

    (Natural Capital Project, Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota)

  • Carina Mueller

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Giles Rigarlsford

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Michal Kulak

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Virginia Kowal

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Richard Sharp

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Julie Clavreul

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Edward Price

    (Unilever Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever R&D)

  • Stephen Polasky

    (Natural Capital Project, Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota
    University of Minnesota)

  • Mary Ruckelshaus

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University)

  • Gretchen Daily

    (Natural Capital Project, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University
    Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University)

Abstract

International corporations in an increasingly globalized economy exert a major influence on the planet’s land use and resources through their product design and material sourcing decisions. Many companies use life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate their sustainability, yet commonly-used LCA methodologies lack the spatial resolution and predictive ecological information to reveal key impacts on climate, water and biodiversity. We present advances for LCA that integrate spatially explicit modelling of land change and ecosystem services in a Land-Use Change Improved (LUCI)-LCA. Comparing increased demand for bioplastics derived from two alternative feedstock-location scenarios for maize and sugarcane, we find that the LUCI-LCA approach yields results opposite to those of standard LCA for greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption, and of different magnitudes for soil erosion and biodiversity. This approach highlights the importance of including information about where and how land-use change and related impacts will occur in supply chain and innovation decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer & Sarah Sim & Perrine Hamel & Benjamin Bryant & Ryan Noe & Carina Mueller & Giles Rigarlsford & Michal Kulak & Virginia Kowal & Richard Sharp & Julie Clavreul & Edward Price & S, 2017. "Life cycle assessment needs predictive spatial modelling for biodiversity and ecosystem services," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:8:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1038_ncomms15065
    DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15065
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/ncomms15065?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. Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Energy Crops in Regional Biogas Systems: An Integrative Spatial LCA to Assess the Influence of Crop Mix and Location on Cultivation GHG Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Roland Clift & Sarah Sim & Henry King & Jonathan L. Chenoweth & Ian Christie & Julie Clavreul & Carina Mueller & Leo Posthuma & Anne-Marie Boulay & Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer & Julia Chatterton & Fabrice , 2017. "The Challenges of Applying Planetary Boundaries as a Basis for Strategic Decision-Making in Companies with Global Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Aalto, Mika & KC, Raghu & Korpinen, Olli-Jussi & Karttunen, Kalle & Ranta, Tapio, 2019. "Modeling of biomass supply system by combining computational methods – A review article," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 243(C), pages 145-154.
    4. Babí Almenar, Javier & Petucco, Claudio & Sonnemann, Guido & Geneletti, Davide & Elliot, Thomas & Rugani, Benedetto, 2023. "Modelling the net environmental and economic impacts of urban nature-based solutions by combining ecosystem services, system dynamics and life cycle thinking: An application to urban forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Andreas Nicolaidis Lindqvist & Sarah Broberg & Linda Tufvesson & Sammar Khalil & Thomas Prade, 2019. "Bio-Based Production Systems: Why Environmental Assessment Needs to Include Supporting Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-26, August.
    6. Yi Yang & Beibei Liu & Peng Wang & Wei‐Qiang Chen & Timothy M. Smith, 2020. "Toward sustainable climate change adaptation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(2), pages 318-330, April.
    7. Yang, Yi, 2018. "Improving estimates of subnational commodity flows in LCA for policy support: A US case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 312-316.
    8. Claudia Parra Paitan & Peter H. Verburg, 2019. "Methods to Assess the Impacts and Indirect Land Use Change Caused by Telecoupled Agricultural Supply Chains: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, February.
    9. 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).

    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:nat:natcom:v:8:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1038_ncomms15065. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.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.