Workshop 9 | A new methodology being no more contemporary? – How to interpret and weight the outcomes of LCSA

Workshop Organizer

[youzer_author_box user_id=”6064″ layout=’yzb-author-v5′ networks_type=”colorful” networks_format=”flat”]

Workshop Info

Workshop Title:

Time: 3:15 – 4:15pm

Workshop Abstract

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is a relatively new method, combining all 3 sustainability pillars (LCA, LCC and S-LCA). The hypothetically resulting advantage of LCSA is transparency, by allowing to identify trade-offs between society, environment and economy. However, a wide range of shortcomings exist, as the three pillars are not equally matured. Looking at the results of decision makers from diverse sectors evaluating the importance of each pillar, a vast variety without clear clustering is found. This “innovation” nowadays shows no standard interpretation- and comparison methodology. Different initiatives and approaches how to weight, compare and interpret LCSA results have been suggested, but none with resounding success.

This session provides an opportunity to learn from each other’s experiences and views in the field of LCSA-interpretation. Within this working space the main questions will be: If and when the three dimensions (LCA, LCC and S-LCA) are equally represented and If the equality of the three dimensions is contemporary. The desired result of this discussion could be an innovative and promising idea of how to interpret/weight the LCSA outcomes – and in the longer term design this initial idea accessible for a broad usage (decision makers in different sectors and LCSA experts/researchers).

Draft Agenda:

• Introduction in LCSA interpretation
• Group discussion (guidance by following questions):
  • Is equal weighting/interpretation of the three pillars contemporary?
  • Is a unified weighting/interpretation of the three pillars feasible for the whole world and different sectors?
  • Optional: Going a step backwards: How to interpret pillars if the indicators are not consistent? What about the used mid- and endpoints?
  • Optional: Going a step backwards: Are the currently defined and used endpoints contemporary or should we get inspired by SDGs or the Net Impact of Human Well-Being (Schaubroeck & Rugani, 2017)?
• Summary and Conclusion