A framework for implementing holistic and integrated life cycle sustainability assessment of regional bioeconomy

Abstract Purpose Currently, social, environmental, and economic risks and chances of bioeconomy are becoming increasingly a subject of applied sustainability assessments. Based on life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) aims to combine or integrate social, environmental, and economic assessments. In order to contribute to the current early stage of LCSA development, this study seeks to identify a practical framework for integrated LCSA implementation. Methods We select possible indicators from existing suitable LCA and LCSA approaches as well as from the literature, and allocate them to a sustainability concept for holistic and integrated LCSA (HILCSA), based on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In order to conduct a practical implementation of HILCSA, we choose openLCA, because it offers the best current state and most future potential for application of LCSA. Therefore, not only the capabilities of the software and databases, but also the supported methods of life cycle impact assessments (LCIA) are evaluated regarding the requirements of the indicator set and goal and scope of future case studies. Results and discussion This study presents an overview of available indicators and LCIAs for bioeconomy sustainability assessments as well as their link to the SDGs. We provide a practical framework for HILCSA of regional bioeconomy, which includes an indicator set for regional (product and territorial) bioeconomy assessment, applicable with current software and databases, LCIA methods and methods of normalization, weighting, and aggregation. The implementation of HILCSA in openLCA allows an integrative LCSA by conducting all steps in a single framework with harmonized, aggregated, and coherent results. HILCSA is capable of a sustainability assessment in terms of planetary boundaries, provisioning system and societal needs, as well as communication of results to different stakeholders. Conclusions Our framework is capable of compensating some deficits of S-LCA, E-LCA, and economic assessments by integration, and shows main advantages compared to additive LCSA. HILCSA is capable of addressing 15 out of 17 SDGs. It addresses open questions and significant problems of LCSAs in terms of goal and scope, LCI, LCIA, and interpretation. Furthermore, HILCSA is the first of its kind actually applicable in an existing software environment. Regional bioeconomy sustainability assessment is bridging scales of global and regional effects and can inform stakeholders comprehensively on various impacts, hotspots, trade-offs, and synergies of regional bioeconomy. However, significant research needs in LCIAs, software, and indicator development remain.

Download Full-text

Collaborating constructively for sustainable biotechnology

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-019-54331-7 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Nicholas E. Matthews ◽

Carrie A. Cizauskas ◽

Donovan S. Layton ◽

Laurence Stamford ◽

Philip Shapira

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle ◽

Synthetic Biology ◽

Social Impact ◽

New Technologies ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Early Stage ◽

Impact Categories ◽

Recent Advances ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Analytical Approaches

AbstractTackling the pressing sustainability needs of society will require the development and application of new technologies. Biotechnology, emboldened by recent advances in synthetic biology, offers to generate sustainable biologically-based routes to chemicals and materials as alternatives to fossil-derived incumbents. Yet, the sustainability potential of biotechnology is not without trade-offs. Here, we probe this capacity for sustainability for the case of bio-based nylon using both deliberative and analytical approaches within a framework of Constructive Sustainability Assessment. We highlight the potential for life cycle CO2 and N2O savings with bio-based processes, but report mixed results in other environmental and social impact categories. Importantly, we demonstrate how this knowledge can be generated collaboratively and constructively within companies at an early stage to anticipate consequences and to inform the modification of designs and applications. Application of the approach demonstrated here provides an avenue for technological actors to better understand and become responsive to the sustainability implications of their products, systems and actions.

Download Full-text

Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11030636 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. 636 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Rizal Taufiq Fauzi ◽

Patrick Lavoie ◽

Luca Sorelli ◽

Mohammad Davoud Heidari ◽

Ben Amor

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Research Gaps ◽

Hotspot Analysis ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Challenges And Opportunities

Sustainability decision making is a complex task for policy makers, considering the possible unseen consequences it may entail. With a broader scope covering environmental, economic, and social aspects, Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is a promising holistic method to deal with that complexity. However, to date, this method is limited to the hotspot analysis of a product, service, or system, and hence only assesses direct impacts and overlooks the indirect ones (or consequences). This critical literature review aims to explore the challenges and the research gaps related to the integration of three methods in LCSA representing three pillars of sustainability: (Environmental) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC), and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). The challenges and the research gaps that appear when pairing two of these tools with each other are identified and discussed, i.e., the temporal issues, different perspectives, the indirect consequences, etc. Although this study does not aim to remove the shadows in LCSA methods, critical research gaps are identified in order to be addressed in future works. More case studies are also recommended for a deeper understanding of methodological trade-offs that might happen, especially when dealing with the consequential perspective.

Download Full-text

A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment-Based Decision-Analysis Framework

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su10113863 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (11) ◽

pp. 3863 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Marwa Hannouf ◽

Getachew Assefa

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Decision Analysis ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Three Dimensions ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Analysis Framework ◽

Product Systems ◽

Trade Offs

One of the main challenges in using life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) is the difficulty of integrating the interrelationships between the three dimensions (environmental, economic and social dimensions) of LCSA results in decision-making toward proposing sustainability improvements for existing product systems. This paper is addressing this challenge by presenting an LCSA-based decision-analysis framework, which is a systematic and structured framework that appraises the pool of potential actions determined based on LCSA results and evaluates their trade-offs to propose potential sustainability solutions. The framework is composed of two parts: (a) LCSA application; (b) decision-analysis approach. The decision analysis part of the framework is built based on some features from previous decision-making approaches and considering the characteristics of LCSA results. The decision-analysis part of the framework, which is the main focus of this study, is divided into five phases to propose and select some recommendations to improve the sustainability performance of product systems. The framework developed is illustrated using results from a previous LCSA case study. The framework can handle the complexity in understanding the interrelationships between the three dimensions of LCSA results, through a structured way of dividing the process into manageable steps. Further work is still needed to apply this framework to a real case study.

Download Full-text

Principles for the application of life cycle sustainability assessment

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment ◽

10.1007/s11367-021-01958-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 26 (9) ◽

pp. 1900-1905 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sonia Valdivia ◽

Jana Gerta Backes ◽

Marzia Traverso ◽

Guido Sonnemann ◽

Stefano Cucurachi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle ◽

Social Life ◽

Sustainability Assessment ◽

Social Life Cycle Assessment ◽

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment ◽

Bottom Line ◽

Life Cycle Initiative ◽

Iso 14040 ◽

Trade Offs

Abstract Purpose and context This paper aims to establish principles for the increased application and use of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). Sustainable development (SD) encompassing resilient economies and social stability of the global system is growingly important for decision-makers from business and governments. The “17 SDGs” emerge as a high-level shared blueprint for peace, abundance, and prosperity for people and the planet, and “sustainability” for supporting improvements of products and organizations. A “sustainability” interpretation—successful in aligning stakeholders’ understanding—subdivides the impacts according to a triple bottom line or three pillars: economic, social, and environmental impacts. These context and urgent needs inspired the LCSA framework. This entails a sustainability assessment of products and organizations in accordance with the three pillars, while adopting a life cycle perspective. Methods The Life Cycle Initiative promotes since 2011 a pragmatic LCSA framework based on the three techniques: LCSA = environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) + life cycle costing (LCC) + social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). This is the focus of the paper, while acknowledging previous developments. Identified and reviewed literature shows challenges of addressing the three pillars in the LCSA framework implementation like considering only two pillars; not being fully aligned with ISO 14040; lacking interconnectedness among the three pillars; not having clear criteria for results’ weighting nor clear results’ interpretation; and not following cause-effect chains and mechanisms leading to an endpoint. Agreement building among LCSA experts and reviewing processes strengthened the consensus on this paper. Broad support and outreach are ensured by publishing this as position paper. Results For harmonizing practical LCSA applications, easing interpretation, and increasing usefulness, consensed ten LCSA principles (10P) are established: understanding the areas of protection, alignment with ISO 14040, completeness, stakeholders’ and product utility considerations, materiality of system boundaries, transparency, consistency, explicit trade-offs’ communication, and caution when compensating impacts. Examples were provided based on a fictional plastic water bottle Conclusions In spite of increasing needs for and interest in SD and sustainability supporting tools, LCSA is at an early application stage of application. The 10P aim to promote more and better LCSA applications by ensuring alignment with ISO 14040, completeness and clear interpretation of integrated results, among others. For consolidating its use, however, more consensus-building is needed (e.g., on value-laden ethical aspects of LCSA, interdependencies and interconnectedness among the three dimensions, and harmonization and integration of the three techniques) and technical and policy recommendations for application.

Download Full-text