monetisation the impacts are implicitly monetised by the difference of the internal
costs of corresponding alternatives (i.e. a decision between alternative technologies
or policies). Or in other words, if impacts are not monetised the external costs are
taken into account as if they were zero.
On the other hand, monetisation offers an additional indicator but must not be
the only basis for decision-making. At member state level, environmental agencies
are involved, such as the German Federal Environmental Agency (UBA): [3] or the
French ministry of environment (MEEM) who held a specific workshop on monetisation of goods and environmental services through life cycle assessment in
2017.
Currently two ISO documents (ISO 14007 and ISO 14008) are under construction in order to provide guidance and allow a wider use of monetisation.
Mr. Preiss points out some limits regarding the comparability of results of
various studies. Studies are different regarding their comprehensiveness. There is a
lack of transparency if the underlying assumptions and models are not displayed.
And generally, there is the lack of a widespread state of the art approach.
Mr. Chanoine (Deloitte) proposed a practical guidance issued from a study
carried out with the industrial consortium SCORELCA in 2012 [4] and followed by
a second study also driven by SCORELCA in 2016 of which the results are not
published yet. It is based on operational recommendations on how to use monetary
valuation to monetize LCA results. The proposal is an iterative approach with a go/
no go process in two steps. First, a set of questions allows to determine the
necessity to carry out monetisation, and how it should be done. Then nine information sheets provide explicit implementation guidance.
As a first conclusion, monetary valuation in LCA should be used when identified
as necessary, depending on the objectives of the study. It has been presented as an
approach to solve trade-offs. As a counterpart monetisation remains an approach
potentially complex to implement due to the set of parameters to be considered in
correlation to set monetary values, moreover considering the potential subjectivity
of those parameters. Also, it remains especially complex when it is required to
develop specific monetarisation factors, which may request time, funding, some
specific competences investments and political decisions.
3 Feedback from the Industry on the Application
of Monetisation
This section provides feedback from three chemical companies.
Mr. Sonnen (Ecomatters), in collaboration with AkzoNobel, provided insights
on how a company can monitor its global activity (downstream, upstream and
themselves) on economic [5], environmental costs [6, 7] and social capitals [5]. It
allows the company to identify business risks, opportunities, stimulate innovation
Discussion Panel—Assessment of Externalities …
393
costs of corresponding alternatives (i.e. a decision between alternative technologies
or policies). Or in other words, if impacts are not monetised the external costs are
taken into account as if they were zero.
On the other hand, monetisation offers an additional indicator but must not be
the only basis for decision-making. At member state level, environmental agencies
are involved, such as the German Federal Environmental Agency (UBA): [3] or the
French ministry of environment (MEEM) who held a specific workshop on monetisation of goods and environmental services through life cycle assessment in
2017.
Currently two ISO documents (ISO 14007 and ISO 14008) are under construction in order to provide guidance and allow a wider use of monetisation.
Mr. Preiss points out some limits regarding the comparability of results of
various studies. Studies are different regarding their comprehensiveness. There is a
lack of transparency if the underlying assumptions and models are not displayed.
And generally, there is the lack of a widespread state of the art approach.
Mr. Chanoine (Deloitte) proposed a practical guidance issued from a study
carried out with the industrial consortium SCORELCA in 2012 [4] and followed by
a second study also driven by SCORELCA in 2016 of which the results are not
published yet. It is based on operational recommendations on how to use monetary
valuation to monetize LCA results. The proposal is an iterative approach with a go/
no go process in two steps. First, a set of questions allows to determine the
necessity to carry out monetisation, and how it should be done. Then nine information sheets provide explicit implementation guidance.
As a first conclusion, monetary valuation in LCA should be used when identified
as necessary, depending on the objectives of the study. It has been presented as an
approach to solve trade-offs. As a counterpart monetisation remains an approach
potentially complex to implement due to the set of parameters to be considered in
correlation to set monetary values, moreover considering the potential subjectivity
of those parameters. Also, it remains especially complex when it is required to
develop specific monetarisation factors, which may request time, funding, some
specific competences investments and political decisions.
3 Feedback from the Industry on the Application
of Monetisation
This section provides feedback from three chemical companies.
Mr. Sonnen (Ecomatters), in collaboration with AkzoNobel, provided insights
on how a company can monitor its global activity (downstream, upstream and
themselves) on economic [5], environmental costs [6, 7] and social capitals [5]. It
allows the company to identify business risks, opportunities, stimulate innovation
Discussion Panel—Assessment of Externalities …
393