330
T. Riedelsheimer et al.
21.1 Introduction
The sustainability impact of products depends on the social, economic, and environmental implications caused throughout the lifecycle. Life Cycle Sustainability
Assessment (LCSA) is used to monitor and understand the trade-offs between the
three sustainability dimensions, providing customers, regulating institutions and
decision makers with information on the sustainability performance of products.
The results of the LCSA support legislators as well as decision makers during
the product’s life to optimize the sustainability of products or systems. Decision
support systems use the LCSA results as an input and help, e.g. product designers,
to make more informed and sustainable decisions. Nevertheless, this process does
oftentimes not exhibit a continuous data flow and is very time consuming for users.
This paper aims at exploring the potential of new technological innovations for
an enhanced LCSA of capital goods and durable consumer goods as well as related
services. A taxonomy is developed based on a literature review to classify existing
and future technologies, which aim at enhancing the LCSA.
21.2 Challenges of LCSA
On the way to a more efficient, dynamic and automated LCSA and sustainable
decision-making, various challenges need to be addressed.
LCSA is the combination of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Social Lifecycle
Assessment (S-LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and consequently covers the
three pillars of sustainability: society, economy and environment (Kloepffer 2008).
The term LC(S)A is used within this paper to refer to the LCSA as well as its elements
or only one element of the three (LCA, S-LCA or LCC). The LCSA mainly evolved
from the classical LCA, the only standardized method. The LCSA process is structured into four phases: the goal and scope definition, the lifecycle inventory analysis
(LCI), the impact assessment and the interpretation (DIN EN ISO 2006). Subsequently, the main challenges, which could be identified in literature, are presented for
each phase in Table 21.1. These challenges are mainly identified based on (Kloepffer
2008; Guinée 2011; Finkbeiner et al. 2010; Neugebauer 2016). A consistent approach
across all three pillars and the definition of system borders through all product lifecycle phases are crucial for the goal and scope definition. During the LCI and data
collection phase, the most significant challenges are related to the availability of data
and measurability of social parameters. The lack of consistent methods and the large
range of indicators hinder the analysis and impact assessment. The key challenges
for the interpretation and communication of the results is their complexity and the
interdependency of design decisions and sustainability impact.
General challenges occur from the missing methodological consensus and standardization of the S-LCA framework as well as from the oversimplification of the
LCC method with its limitation to economic costs and the negligence of broader
T. Riedelsheimer et al.
21.1 Introduction
The sustainability impact of products depends on the social, economic, and environmental implications caused throughout the lifecycle. Life Cycle Sustainability
Assessment (LCSA) is used to monitor and understand the trade-offs between the
three sustainability dimensions, providing customers, regulating institutions and
decision makers with information on the sustainability performance of products.
The results of the LCSA support legislators as well as decision makers during
the product’s life to optimize the sustainability of products or systems. Decision
support systems use the LCSA results as an input and help, e.g. product designers,
to make more informed and sustainable decisions. Nevertheless, this process does
oftentimes not exhibit a continuous data flow and is very time consuming for users.
This paper aims at exploring the potential of new technological innovations for
an enhanced LCSA of capital goods and durable consumer goods as well as related
services. A taxonomy is developed based on a literature review to classify existing
and future technologies, which aim at enhancing the LCSA.
21.2 Challenges of LCSA
On the way to a more efficient, dynamic and automated LCSA and sustainable
decision-making, various challenges need to be addressed.
LCSA is the combination of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Social Lifecycle
Assessment (S-LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and consequently covers the
three pillars of sustainability: society, economy and environment (Kloepffer 2008).
The term LC(S)A is used within this paper to refer to the LCSA as well as its elements
or only one element of the three (LCA, S-LCA or LCC). The LCSA mainly evolved
from the classical LCA, the only standardized method. The LCSA process is structured into four phases: the goal and scope definition, the lifecycle inventory analysis
(LCI), the impact assessment and the interpretation (DIN EN ISO 2006). Subsequently, the main challenges, which could be identified in literature, are presented for
each phase in Table 21.1. These challenges are mainly identified based on (Kloepffer
2008; Guinée 2011; Finkbeiner et al. 2010; Neugebauer 2016). A consistent approach
across all three pillars and the definition of system borders through all product lifecycle phases are crucial for the goal and scope definition. During the LCI and data
collection phase, the most significant challenges are related to the availability of data
and measurability of social parameters. The lack of consistent methods and the large
range of indicators hinder the analysis and impact assessment. The key challenges
for the interpretation and communication of the results is their complexity and the
interdependency of design decisions and sustainability impact.
General challenges occur from the missing methodological consensus and standardization of the S-LCA framework as well as from the oversimplification of the
LCC method with its limitation to economic costs and the negligence of broader