A distance-to-target weighting method for Europe 2020

PurposeDistance-to-target (DTT) methods are weighting methods aimed at assessing the distance of an existing situation from a desired state (the target). Weighting factors in DTT methods could be based on calculation which is performed on normalization factors (NFs) developed for life cycle assessment (LCA). At present, some DTT weighting sets have been developed. However, there is no DTT weighting set assessing the distance of EU domestic impacts from the desired state set by EU binding or non-binding policy targets (e.g., those related to the “Climate and Energy Package” and the “Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe”).MethodsIn the present work, a methodology to derive target references from policy-based targets in 2020 (TRs2020), both binding (A) and non-binding (B), is presented. Resulting target factors and DTT weighting factors are then compared to the current normalisation factors (based on 2010 normalization references). The resulting weighting factor (WF) sets are presented and discussed in light of their use for decision support in policy and business contexts. We applied the WF sets to characterization results to an example (the EU energy mix process) aiming at illustrating key differences and effects on the results.Results and discussionThe three reference sets (NRs2010, TRs2020A, and TRs2020B) show, in some impact categories, a relatively small difference. WFs referred to set A and set B result to be quite similar, with the only exception of water depletion impact category, for which a very relevant change is foreseen when considering the effect of the non-binding target of limiting the abstraction of water resource to 20 % of the available renewable water resources. This is mainly due to the higher difficulty in deriving quantitative targets from non-binding strategies and policies rather than from binding ones.ConclusionsThe resulting weighting sets present strengths and limitations. The translation of policy targets into quantitative modifications to the baseline inventories appeared to be not a straightforward task, due to several reasons discussed in the paper (e.g., not all the policy targets are expressed in quantitative terms or can be translated into quantitative reductions and modifications of the elementary flows in the existing baseline inventories). Aiming at improving the effectiveness in supporting policies, further development of the methodology may be the integration with other DTT approaches such those based on carrying capacity, developed to integrate Earth’s carrying capacity concept and planetary boundaries.

[1]  Eric Johnson Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment Operational Guide to the ISO Standards , 2003 .

[2]  Pekka Leskinen,et al.  Impact of normalisation, elicitation technique and background information on panel weighting results in life cycle assessment , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[3]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Bias in normalization: Causes, consequences, detection and remedies , 2007 .

[4]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Integrating Human Indoor Air Pollutant Exposure within Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[5]  Huppes Gjalt,et al.  Background review of existing weighting approaches in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) , 2011 .

[6]  Anders Bjørn,et al.  Introducing carrying capacity-based normalisation in LCA: framework and development of references at midpoint level , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[7]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Normalisation in product life cycle assessment: an LCA of the global and European economic systems in the year 2000. , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[8]  Shushen Zhang,et al.  Distance-to-Target Weighting in Life Cycle Impact Assessment Based on Chinese Environmental Policy for the Period 1995-2005 (6 pp) , 2005 .

[9]  Hanna Pihkola,et al.  Comparison of different normalised LCIA results and their feasibility in communication , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[10]  M. Huijbregts,et al.  Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards , 2002 .

[11]  S. Humbert Geographically Differentiated Life-cycle Impact Assessment of Human Health , 2009 .

[12]  B. Weidema,et al.  Monetary valuation in Life Cycle Assessment: a review , 2015 .

[13]  Jyri Seppälä,et al.  On the meaning of the distance-to-target weighting method and normalisation in Life Cycle Impact assessment , 2001 .

[14]  F. Chapin,et al.  Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity , 2009 .

[15]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment - the EDIP-2003 methodology. Guidelines from the Danish EPA , 2004 .

[16]  Jane C. Powell,et al.  Approaches to valuation in LCA impact assessment , 1997 .

[17]  David W. Macdonald,et al.  Exploring a safe operating approach to weighting in life cycle impact assessment – a case study of organic, conventional and integrated farming systems , 2012 .

[18]  Magnus Bengtsson,et al.  Weighting in LCA – approaches and applications , 2000 .

[19]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Weighting environmental effects: Analytic survey with operational evaluation methods and a meta-method , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[20]  Ralph Newman,et al.  Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution , 2014 .

[21]  David Pennington,et al.  Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[22]  Hans Bruyninckx,et al.  Upscaling transition governance. An exploratory analysis of the Roadmap to a Resource‐Efficient Europe , 2012 .

[23]  Alan C. Brent,et al.  Characterisation and Normalisation Factors for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Mined Abiotic Resources Categories in South Africa: The manufacturing of catalytic converter exhaust systems as a case study (10 pp) , 2006 .

[24]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Environmental assessment of products , 1997 .

[25]  Per Ola Wiberg Assessment of resource efficiency indicators and targets Final report – Executive summary , 2012 .

[26]  L. Mancini,et al.  Resource footprint of Europe: Complementarity of material flow analysis and life cycle assessment for policy support , 2015 .

[27]  Carlo Lavalle,et al.  Mapping current and future European public water withdrawals and consumption , 2013 .

[28]  G. Finnveden,et al.  Valuation methods within LCA - Where are the values? , 1997 .

[29]  Rana Pant,et al.  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) , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[30]  Rolf Frischknecht,et al.  Human health damages due to ionising radiation in life cycle impact assessment , 2000 .

[31]  Thomas Gloria,et al.  Development of the method and U.S. normalization database for Life Cycle Impact Assessment and sustainability metrics. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[32]  Hans-Jürgen Dr. Klüppel,et al.  The Revision of ISO Standards 14040-3 - ISO 14040: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework - ISO 14044: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines , 2005 .

[33]  A. Holma,et al.  Assessing environmental impacts of biomass production chains - application of life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). , 2012 .

[34]  Rana Pant,et al.  Integrated assessment of environmental impact of Europe in 2010: data sources and extrapolation strategies for calculating normalisation factors , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[35]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Environmental Assessment of Products: Volume 2: Scientific Background , 1997 .

[36]  G Finnveden,et al.  Life cycle assessment part 2: current impact assessment practice. , 2004, Environment international.

[37]  Hao Zhang,et al.  A Novel Weighting Method in LCIA and its Application in Chinese Policy Context , 2011 .

[38]  Schau Erwin,et al.  Normalisation method and data for Environmental Footprints , 2014 .

[39]  Louise Deschênes,et al.  Development of weighting factors in the context of LCIA , 2006 .

[40]  F. Amery,et al.  Agricultural phosphorus legislation in Europe , 2014 .