Life cycle assessment 281
14.4 Life cycle assessment as a mindset
There is a third dimension – in addition to results and method – connected
to the use of LCA in governance. This is the underlying mindset or worldview and how LCA depicts the function and connectedness of different
elements in the world.
14.4.1 Life cycle thinking and industrial ecology
Constructs like extended producer responsibility, circular economy and
product environmental footprint have all made their way into legislation and
the everyday reality of companies. They are constructs with large influence
from life cycle thinking which can be defined as “going beyond the traditional focus on production site and manufacturing processes to include
environmental, social and economic impacts of a product over its entire life
cycle” (UNEP- SETAC, 2018). Life cycle thinking is an umbrella concept
for various strategies rooted in the life cycle mindset. It contains both qualitative and quantitative approaches, such as life cycle assessment, life cycle
costing, social LCA or life cycle sustainability assessment but also integrated
analysis with combined tools (Petit- Boix et al., 2017), function- oriented
assessment paradigms or simple considerations of up- and downstream
impacts (Bidstrup, 2015). The first policy promoting the life cycle thinking
and Ecodesign arose from the waste management perspective and from the
recognised relevance of consumers’ awareness (Sala et al., 2016). Life cycle
thinking is visible in certain policy actions plans, as eco- labels and ecoinnovation strategies (Petit- Boix et al., 2017), and in the Communication on
Sustainable Consumption and Production, the Communication on Circular
Economy (Sala et al., 2016) and the EU waste hierarchy (Lazarevic, Buclet
& Brandt, 2012).
Life cycle thinking is connected to the scientific field of Industrial Ecology
which depicts the industrial system as “a certain kind of ecosystem” (Erkman,
1997) and tries to provide real solutions for sustainable development. It constitutes a broad framework intended to guide the industrial system in its transformation towards sustainability, shifting from linear industrial processes to
closed loop systems (Saavedra, Iritani, Pavan & Ometto, 2018), and strives for
an optimal circulation of materials and energy that limits damage in both
industrial and ecological systems (Cohen- Rosenthal, 2004). One of the key
concepts in Industrial Ecology is Industrial Metabolism. The term, partly borrowed from biology, focuses on the environmental impact of natural
resources’ use and how industrial systems can be organised to utilise all of
companies’ (energy and material) waste streams by mimicking nature (Saavedra et al., 2018).
Industrial ecology frameworks with LCA and ecological footprints are
common methods for designing transitions from unsustainable to sustainable
business models (Korhonen, 2003). Extended producers’ responsibility,
14.4 Life cycle assessment as a mindset
There is a third dimension – in addition to results and method – connected
to the use of LCA in governance. This is the underlying mindset or worldview and how LCA depicts the function and connectedness of different
elements in the world.
14.4.1 Life cycle thinking and industrial ecology
Constructs like extended producer responsibility, circular economy and
product environmental footprint have all made their way into legislation and
the everyday reality of companies. They are constructs with large influence
from life cycle thinking which can be defined as “going beyond the traditional focus on production site and manufacturing processes to include
environmental, social and economic impacts of a product over its entire life
cycle” (UNEP- SETAC, 2018). Life cycle thinking is an umbrella concept
for various strategies rooted in the life cycle mindset. It contains both qualitative and quantitative approaches, such as life cycle assessment, life cycle
costing, social LCA or life cycle sustainability assessment but also integrated
analysis with combined tools (Petit- Boix et al., 2017), function- oriented
assessment paradigms or simple considerations of up- and downstream
impacts (Bidstrup, 2015). The first policy promoting the life cycle thinking
and Ecodesign arose from the waste management perspective and from the
recognised relevance of consumers’ awareness (Sala et al., 2016). Life cycle
thinking is visible in certain policy actions plans, as eco- labels and ecoinnovation strategies (Petit- Boix et al., 2017), and in the Communication on
Sustainable Consumption and Production, the Communication on Circular
Economy (Sala et al., 2016) and the EU waste hierarchy (Lazarevic, Buclet
& Brandt, 2012).
Life cycle thinking is connected to the scientific field of Industrial Ecology
which depicts the industrial system as “a certain kind of ecosystem” (Erkman,
1997) and tries to provide real solutions for sustainable development. It constitutes a broad framework intended to guide the industrial system in its transformation towards sustainability, shifting from linear industrial processes to
closed loop systems (Saavedra, Iritani, Pavan & Ometto, 2018), and strives for
an optimal circulation of materials and energy that limits damage in both
industrial and ecological systems (Cohen- Rosenthal, 2004). One of the key
concepts in Industrial Ecology is Industrial Metabolism. The term, partly borrowed from biology, focuses on the environmental impact of natural
resources’ use and how industrial systems can be organised to utilise all of
companies’ (energy and material) waste streams by mimicking nature (Saavedra et al., 2018).
Industrial ecology frameworks with LCA and ecological footprints are
common methods for designing transitions from unsustainable to sustainable
business models (Korhonen, 2003). Extended producers’ responsibility,