Transcript SETAC Glasgow Global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators Flagship project of the 3rd phase of the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Olivier Jolliet, Rolf Frischknecht.

SETAC
Glasgow
2013
Global guidance on
environmental life cycle
impact assessment indicators
Flagship project of the 3rd phase of
the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative
Olivier Jolliet, Rolf Frischknecht
Tentative list of selected impact categories
and their relationship/relevance to endpoints
(high***,intermediate**,lower* relevance. In red:endpoints to be represented in priority)
Biodiversity
Resources /
ecosystem
services
*
Priority Impact category
1
Global warming
***
***
1
Respiratory inorganics
(incl. PM indoors)
***
*
*
***
***
Water use (Starting with
midpoint proxy)
***
***
***
Human toxicity
(incl. indoor)
**
1
1
2
2
2
Land use (Focus on land
occupation impacts on
biodiversity)
Acidification,
eutrophication and
ecotoxicity
Energy resources
**
starting with
terrestrial acid. and
freshwater eutr.
*
**
crosscutting
Integration, normalization & weighting
Human
health
Feedback from stakeholder
workshop in Indonesia, June 2013
• Organised by Shabbir Gheewala, and held at the LCA AgriFood Asia
Conference, in Bogor, Indonesia, June 24-26, 2013
• Main feedback:
− Priority setting is considered appropriate by a majority of respondents
− a few suggest to prioritise differently
e.g., respiratory inorganics priority 2, energy resources and eutrophication
priority 1,
− food security and scarcity considered additional safeguard subject
− safeguard subjects “biodiversity” and “resources/ecosystem services” is
questioned, rather use “ecosystem health” and “resources” and classify
“biodiversity” and “ecosystem services” under “ecosystem health”
− other impact categories suggested: “ozone depletion”, “invasive species”,
“groundwater contamination by hazardous substances”
− questions related to overall outcome of this flagship
e.g. a globally accepted LCIA method?
− consider regional impacts and involve regional researchers
Feedback from stakeholder
workshop in Indonesia, June 2013
Tentative conclusions
• keep list of impact categories and priority setting
• discussion needed about overall framework of safeguard subjects
• be more clear about deliverable/outcome of this flagship project
• increase regional diversity of researchers/experts