284
• Life cycle “practitioners” who apply the tools developed above in specialist consultancies, in industry (often in EHS, sustainability, R&D departments), or in
government (technical agencies like environmental agencies or policy makers)
• Life cycle advocates, who may not be able to undertake an LCA themselves, but
who understand their utilization and importance
• Students in a variety of disciplines learning about how to apply life cycle thinking
and approaches
Traditionally, global and local LCA networks have been dominated by academic
stakeholders, but data providers, practitioners and users of life cycle data and information in industry and businesses are crucial. They are the ones who use the tools
and methods to actually assess and interpret products’ sustainability performance
and thereby help establishing a scientifi cally more accurate decision-making basis
for companies. As shown in Box 20.2 , the LCM conference series is currently the
only prominent place where companies and businesses get to exchange on their
challenges and advancements. However, the LCM conference series is focused on
Europe alone and organized only every 2 years, thus not well suited to facilitate a
regular exchange. Other initiatives driving collaboration among the life cycle
Community include:
• International life cycle networks such as the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative
and the International Society for Industrial Ecology
• Local or regional life cycle networks for practitioners, such as ACLCA in the US,
ALCALA in Latin America, or ALCAS in Australia
• Life cycle conferences, such as the before-mentioned LCM, SETAC case study
symposium, Ecobalance, [avniR], LCA Food, PEF World Summit
• Online collaborative platforms such as the PRe LCA discussion list and various
LinkedIn groups (e.g. on GaBi)
• Specifi c workgroups targeting technical subareas of the discipline such as Social
LCA, Food LCA or Toxicity and Water issues
These many “circles of collaboration” tend to be extremely dynamic and
productive, and in most cases very complementary. Many work on similar issues in
different geographical spaces or with different types of stakeholders. They all have
their place and are an important part of nurturing this constantly evolving fi eld.
However, they do not represent the community as a coherent and clearly identifi able
stakeholder, but limited possibilities for exchange.
Consequently a global effort will be needed to bring these small groups together
and thereby not only facilitate knowledge sharing and the establishment of links, but
more importantly create a shared sense of belonging. In the end, a community only
functions if its members can identify themselves with it.
Uniting the community behind a commonly shared set of ideas, principles or
perspectives is thus a key step towards creating a community as such and thus lay
the ground for collaboration and co-creation.
P. Strothmann et al.
• Life cycle “practitioners” who apply the tools developed above in specialist consultancies, in industry (often in EHS, sustainability, R&D departments), or in
government (technical agencies like environmental agencies or policy makers)
• Life cycle advocates, who may not be able to undertake an LCA themselves, but
who understand their utilization and importance
• Students in a variety of disciplines learning about how to apply life cycle thinking
and approaches
Traditionally, global and local LCA networks have been dominated by academic
stakeholders, but data providers, practitioners and users of life cycle data and information in industry and businesses are crucial. They are the ones who use the tools
and methods to actually assess and interpret products’ sustainability performance
and thereby help establishing a scientifi cally more accurate decision-making basis
for companies. As shown in Box 20.2 , the LCM conference series is currently the
only prominent place where companies and businesses get to exchange on their
challenges and advancements. However, the LCM conference series is focused on
Europe alone and organized only every 2 years, thus not well suited to facilitate a
regular exchange. Other initiatives driving collaboration among the life cycle
Community include:
• International life cycle networks such as the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative
and the International Society for Industrial Ecology
• Local or regional life cycle networks for practitioners, such as ACLCA in the US,
ALCALA in Latin America, or ALCAS in Australia
• Life cycle conferences, such as the before-mentioned LCM, SETAC case study
symposium, Ecobalance, [avniR], LCA Food, PEF World Summit
• Online collaborative platforms such as the PRe LCA discussion list and various
LinkedIn groups (e.g. on GaBi)
• Specifi c workgroups targeting technical subareas of the discipline such as Social
LCA, Food LCA or Toxicity and Water issues
These many “circles of collaboration” tend to be extremely dynamic and
productive, and in most cases very complementary. Many work on similar issues in
different geographical spaces or with different types of stakeholders. They all have
their place and are an important part of nurturing this constantly evolving fi eld.
However, they do not represent the community as a coherent and clearly identifi able
stakeholder, but limited possibilities for exchange.
Consequently a global effort will be needed to bring these small groups together
and thereby not only facilitate knowledge sharing and the establishment of links, but
more importantly create a shared sense of belonging. In the end, a community only
functions if its members can identify themselves with it.
Uniting the community behind a commonly shared set of ideas, principles or
perspectives is thus a key step towards creating a community as such and thus lay
the ground for collaboration and co-creation.
P. Strothmann et al.