Skip Navigation Links
Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management
Dmitry Kovalevsky (editor), Jiazhong Zhang(editor)
Dmitry Kovalevsky (editor)

Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS), Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon, Fischertwiete 1, 20095 Hamburg, Germany

Fax: +49 (0) 40 226338163 Email: dmitry.v.kovalevsky@gmail.com

Jiazhong Zhang (editor)

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710049, China

Fax: +86 29 82668723 Email: jzzhang@mail.xjtu.edu.cn


Organizational Life Cycle Assessment: A Systematic Review of Experiences, Applications and Lessons Learned

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management 9(3) (2021) 189--203 | DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2021.09.001

Jose Hugo L. Junior$^{1,2,}$ , Cassiano M. Piekarski$^{1}$, Ma}cio G Santos$^{2}$, Antonio C. Francisco$^{1}$

$^{1 }$ Sustainable Production Systems Laboratory (LESP), Universidade Tecnologica Federal do Parana (UTFPR), Ponta Grossa -- Parana, Brazil

$^{2 }$ Departament of Management, Federal Institute -- Parana (IFPR), Pitanga - Parana, Brazil

Download Full Text PDF

 

Abstract

The main objective of this paper was to analyze the Organizational Life Cycle Assessment (O-LCA) method, discussing its applicability based on papers that presented case studies or discussed the concept. Scientific productions from researchers and organizations were used to discuss advances in the O-LCA scientific approach. The systematic literature review method was performed, using the STARR-LCA (Zumsteg et al, 2012) and PRISMA (Moher et al, 2009) models, in 14 scientific papers indexed in two scientific databases, Scopus and Web of Science, from 2012 to 2020. It was given priority to the case studies that applied the OEF or UNEP / SETAC guides, but some authors approach other methods and practices as well, and some followed the steps of the OEF guidelines, ISO 14072 and O-LCA before the establishment of the methodologies themselves. As the O-LCA method is still recent, there are several understandings about its development. The data from this analysis helps organizations and researchers in understanding the divergences and issues that still need discussion to broaden the methodologies and emphasize their roles in the context of Life Cycle Assessment.

References

  1. [1] Allacker, K., Mathieux, F., Pennington, D., and Pant, R. (2017), The search for an appropriate end-of-life formula for the purpose of the European Commission Environmental Footprint initiative, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22, 1441-1458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1244-0.
  2. [2] Camargo, A.M., Forin, S., Macedo, K., Finkbeiner, M., and Martinez-Blanco, J. (2019), The implementation of organizational LCA to internally manage the environmental impacts of a broad product portfolio: an example for a cosmetics, fragrances, and toiletry provider, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 24, 104-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1502-4.
  3. [3] Collaboration for Environmental Evidence, (2018), Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.0. https://goo.gl/Vv3Whj.
  4. [4] Deming, W.E. (1990), Quality: the management revolution. Hail: Rio de Janeiro.
  5. [5] European Anti-Poverty Network (2011), The Europe 2020 strategy. Brussels, Belgium.
  6. [6] European Comission - EC (2012), Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) Guide. Available on. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/footprint/OEF%20Guide{\_}final{\_}July%202012{\_}clean%20version.pdf.
  7. [7] Europe Union, (2013), Recommendation of the Commission of the European Union on the Use of Common Methods to Measure and Communicate the Life Cycle Environmental Performance of Products and Organizations. Official Journal of the European Union.
  8. [8] Fang, K., Heijungs, R., and De Snoo, G.R. (2015), Understanding the complementary linkages between environmental footprints and planetary boundaries in a footprint-boundary environmental sustainability assessment framework. Ecological Economics, 114. 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.04.008.
  9. [9] Finkbeiner, M., Inaba, A., Tan, R., Christiansen, K., and Kl\"{u}ppel, H.J. (2006), The new international standards for life cycle assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22(2), 80-85. http://dx.doi.org /10.1065/lca2006.02.002.
  10. [10] Finkbeiner, M., K\"{o}nig, P., and Liu, G. (2013), Carbon Footprint and Life Cycle Assessment of Organizations, Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management, 1, 55-63. https://doi.org /10.5890/JEAM.2013.01.005.
  11. [11] Forin, S., Martinez-Blanco, J., and Finkbeiner, M. (2019), Facts and figures from road testing the guidance on organizational life cycle assessment, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 24, 866-880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1533-x.
  12. [12] Galatola, M. and Pant, R. (2014), Reply to the editorial ``Product environmental footprint--breakthrough or breakdown for policy implementation of life cycle assessment? written by Prof. Finkbeiner (Int J. Life Cycle Assess., 19(2), 266-271). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0740-3.
  13. [13] Heijungs R, de Koning A, Guin\{e}e J B (2014). Maximizing affluence within the planetary boundaries. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19: 1331-1335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0729-y.
  14. [14] ISO (2014), ISO / TS 14072 environmental management - life cycle assessment - requirements and guidelines for organizational life cycle assessment. Geneva, Switzerland.
  15. [15] Jesson, J.K. and Lacey, F.M. (2006), How to do (or not to do) a critical literature review. Pharmacy Education, 6, 139-148.
  16. [16] Lo-Iacono-Ferreira, V.G., Torregrosa-Lopez, J.I., and Hood-Rizo, S.F. (2017), Organizational life cycle assessment: suitability for higher education institutions with environmental management systems, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22, 1928-1943. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1289-8.
  17. [17] Lo-Iacono-Ferreira, V.G., Torregrosa-Lopez, J.I., and Capuz-Rizo, S. (2016), Use of Life Cycle Assessment methodology in the analysis of Ecological Footprint Assessment results to evaluate the environmental performance of universities, Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 43-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.046.
  18. [18] Manzardo, A., Loss, A., Niero, M., Vianello, C., and Scipioni, A. (2018), Definition and application of activity portfolio and control / influence approaches in organizational life cycle assessment, Journal of Cleaner Production, 184, 264-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.262.
  19. [19] Mart\{\i}nez-Blanco, J., Inaba, A., and Finkbeiner, M. (2015), Scoping organizational LCA--challenges and solutions, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20, 829-841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0883-x.
  20. [20] Martinez-Blanco, J., Forin, S., and Finkbeiner, M. (2018), Launch of a new report: ``Road testing organizational life cycle assessment around the world: applications, experiences and lessons learned, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 23, 159-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1409-5.
  21. [21] Mart\{\i}nez-Blanco, J., Forin, S., and Finkbeiner, M. (2020), Challenges of organizational LCA: lessons learned from road testing the guidance on organizational life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 311-331. https://doi-org.Ez109.Periodicos.capes. gov.br/10.1007/s11367-019-01699-3.
  22. [22] Mart\{\i}nez-Blanco, J., Inaba, A., Quiros, A., Valdivia, S., Mil\`{a}-i-Canals, L., and Finkbeiner, M. (2015), Organizational LCA: the new member of the LCA family introducing the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative guidance document. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20, 1045-1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0912-9.
  23. [23] Martinez, S., Marchamalo, M., and Alvarez, S. (2017), Organization environmental footprint applying a multi-regional input-output analysis: A case study of a wood parquet company in Spain, Science of the Total Environment, 618, 7-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.306.
  24. [24] Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D.G. (2009), Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyzes: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med, 151, 264-270. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
  25. [25] Neppach, S., Nunes, K.R.A., and Schebek, L. (2017), Organizational Environmental Footprint in German construction companies, Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 78-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.065.
  26. [26] Pelletier, N., Allacker, K., Pant, R., and Manfredi, S. (2014), The European Commission Organisation Environmental Footprint method: comparison with other methods, and rationales for key requirements, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19, 387-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0609-x.
  27. [27] European Commission (EC), Joint Research Centre(JRC), Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES), 2012. Organization Environmental Footprint (OEF) Guide. Ispra, Italy. https://goo.gl/F5PbS6.
  28. [28] Resta, B., Gaiardelli, P., Pinto, R., and Dotti, S. (2016), Enhancing environmental management in the textile sector: an organizational-life cycle assessment approach, Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 620-632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.135.
  29. [29] UNEP (2017), Road testing organizational life cycle assessment around the world: Applications, experiences and lessons learned. United Nations Environment Program and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Paris, France, http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/o-lcaroad-testing-publication-launched/.
  30. [30] UNEP/SETAC (2015), Guidance on Organizational Life Cycle Assessment. Berlin. http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content /uploads/2015/04/o-lca{\_}24.4.15-web.pdf.
  31. [31] Zanghelini, G.M., Souza Junior, H.R.A., Kulay, L., Cherubini, E., Ribeiro, P.T., and Soares, S.R. (2016), The bibliometric overview of Brazilian LCA research, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21, 1759-1775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1132-7