Quantification and valuation of ecosystem services in life cycle assessment: Application of the cascade framework to rice farming systems.

The integration of ecosystem service (ES) assessment with life cycle assessment (LCA) is important for developing decision support tools for environmental sustainability. A prequel study has proposed a 4-step methodology that integrates the ES cascade framework within the cause-effect chain of life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) to characterize the physical and monetary impacts on ES provisioning due to human interventions. We here follow the suggested steps in the abovementioned study, to demonstrate the first application of the integrated ES-LCIA methodology and the added value for LCA studies, using a case study of rice farming in the United States, China, and India. Four ES are considered, namely carbon sequestration, water provisioning, air quality regulation, and water quality regulation. The analysis found a net negative impact for rice farming systems in all three rice producing countries, meaning the detrimental impacts of rice farming on ES being greater than the induced benefits on ES. Compared to the price of rice sold in the market, the negative impacts represent around 2%, 6%, and 4% of the cost of 1 kg of rice from China, India, and the United States, respectively. From this case study, research gaps were identified in order to develop a fully operationalized ES-LCIA integration. With such a framework and guidance in place, practitioners can more comprehensively assess the impacts of life cycle activities on relevant ES provisioning, in both physical and monetary terms. This may in turn affect stakeholders' availability to receive such benefits from ecosystems in the long run.

Methodological review and detailed guidance for the life cycle interpretation phase.

Life cycle interpretation is the fourth and last phase of life cycle assessment (LCA). Being a "pivot" phase linking all other phases and the conclusions and recommendations from an LCA study, it represents a challenging task for practitioners, who miss harmonized guidelines that are sufficiently complete, detailed, and practical to conduct its different steps effectively. Here, we aim to bridge this gap. We review available literature describing the life cycle interpretation phase, including standards, LCA books, technical reports, and relevant scientific literature. On this basis, we evaluate and clarify the definition and purposes of the interpretation phase and propose an array of methods supporting its conduct in LCA practice. The five steps of interpretation defined in ISO 14040-44 are proposed to be reorganized around a framework that offers a more pragmatic approach to interpretation. It orders the steps as follows: (i) completeness check, (ii) consistency check, (iii) sensitivity check, (iv) identification of significant issues, and (v) conclusions, limitations, and recommendations. We provide toolboxes, consisting of methods and procedures supporting the analyses, computations, points to evaluate or check, and reflective processes for each of these steps. All methods are succinctly discussed with relevant referencing for further details of their applications. This proposed framework, substantiated with the large variety of methods, is envisioned to help LCA practitioners increase the relevance of their interpretation and the soundness of their conclusions and recommendations. It is a first step toward a more comprehensive and harmonized LCA practice to improve the reliability and credibility of LCA studies.

Overview and recommendations for regionalized life cycle impact assessment.

PURPOSE: Regionalized life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) has rapidly developed in the past decade, though its widespread application, robustness, and validity still faces multiple challenges. Under the umbrella of UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, a dedicated cross-cutting working group on regionalized LCIA aims to provides an overview of the status of regionalization in LCIA methods. We give guidance and recommendations to harmonize and support regionalization in LCIA for developers of LCIA methods, LCI databases, and LCA software. METHOD: A survey of current practice among regionalized LCIA method developers was conducted. The survey included questions on chosen method spatial resolution and scale, the spatial resolution of input parameters, choice of native spatial resolution and limitations, operationalization and alignment with life cycle inventory data, methods for spatial aggregation, the assessment of uncertainty from input parameters and model structure, and variability due to spatial aggregation. Recommendations are formulated based on the survey results and extensive discussion by the authors. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Survey results indicate that majority of regionalized LCIA models have global coverage. Native spatial resolutions are generally chosen based on the availability of global input data. Annual modelled or measured elementary flow quantities are mostly used for aggregating characterization factors (CFs) to larger spatial scales, although some use proxies, such as population counts. Aggregated CFs are mostly available at the country level. Although uncertainty due to input parameter, model structure, and spatial aggregation are available for some LCIA methods, they are rarely implemented for LCA studies. So far, there is no agreement if a finer native spatial resolution is the best way to reduce overall uncertainty. When spatially differentiated models CFs are not easily available, archetype models are sometimes developed. CONCLUSIONS: Regionalized LCIA methods should be provided as a transparent and consistent set of data and metadata using standardized data formats. Regionalized CFs should include both uncertainty and variability. In addition to the native-scale CFs, aggregated CFs should always be provided, and should be calculated as the weighted averages of constituent CFs using annual flow quantities as weights whenever available. This paper is an important step forward for increasing transparency, consistency and robustness in the development and application of regionalized LCIA methods.

Ecosystem quality in LCIA: status quo, harmonization, and suggestions for the way forward.

PURPOSE: Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) results are used to assess potential environmental impacts of different products and services. As part of the UNEP-SETAC life cycle initiative flagship project that aims to harmonize indicators of potential environmental impacts, we provide a consensus viewpoint and recommendations for future developments in LCIA related to the ecosystem quality area of protection (AoP). Through our recommendations, we aim to encourage LCIA developments that improve the usefulness and global acceptability of LCIA results. METHODS: We analyze current ecosystem quality metrics and provide recommendations to the LCIA research community for achieving further developments towards comparable and more ecologically relevant metrics addressing ecosystem quality. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We recommend that LCIA development for ecosystem quality should tend towards species-richnessrelated metrics, with efforts made towards improved inclusion of ecosystem complexity. Impact indicators-which result from a range of modeling approaches that differ, for example, according to spatial and temporal scale, taxonomic coverage, and whether the indicator produces a relative or absolute measure of loss-should be framed to facilitate their final expression in a single, aggregated metric. This would also improve comparability with other LCIA damage-level indicators. Furthermore, to allow for a broader inclusion of ecosystem quality perspectives, the development of an additional indicator related to ecosystem function is recommended. Having two complementary metrics would give a broader coverage of ecosystem attributes while remaining simple enough to enable an intuitive interpretation of the results. CONCLUSIONS: We call for the LCIA research community to make progress towards enabling harmonization of damage-level indicators within the ecosystem quality AoP and, further, to improve the ecological relevance of impact indicators.

LCIA framework and cross-cutting issues guidance within the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative.

Increasing needs for decision support and advances in scientific knowledge within life cycle assessment (LCA) led to substantial efforts to provide global guidance on environmental life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators under the auspices of the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. As part of these efforts, a dedicated task force focused on addressing several LCIA cross-cutting issues as aspects spanning several impact categories, including spatiotemporal aspects, reference states, normalization and weighting, and uncertainty assessment. Here, findings of the cross-cutting issues task force are presented along with an update of the existing UNEP-SETAC LCIA emission-to-damage framework. Specific recommendations are provided with respect to metrics for human health (Disability Adjusted Life Years, DALY) and ecosystem quality (Potentially Disappeared Fraction of species, PDF). Additionally, we stress the importance of transparent reporting of characterization models, reference states, and assumptions, in order to facilitate cross-comparison between chosen methods and indicators. We recommend developing spatially regionalized characterization models, whenever the nature of impacts shows spatial variability and related spatial data are available. Standard formats should be used for reporting spatially differentiated models, and choices regarding spatiotemporal scales should be clearly communicated. For normalization, we recommend using external normalization references. Over the next two years, the task force will continue its effort with a focus on providing guidance for LCA practitioners on how to use the UNEP-SETAC LCIA framework as well as for method developers on how to consistently extend and further improve this framework.

How Well Does LCA Model Land Use Impacts on Biodiversity?--A Comparison with Approaches from Ecology and Conservation.

The modeling of land use impacts on biodiversity is considered a priority in life cycle assessment (LCA). Many diverging approaches have been proposed in an expanding literature on the topic. The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative is engaged in building consensus on a shared modeling framework to highlight best-practice and guide model application by practitioners. In this paper, we evaluated the performance of 31 models from both the LCA and the ecology/conservation literature (20 from LCA, 11 from non-LCA fields) according to a set of criteria reflecting (i) model completeness, (ii) biodiversity representation, (iii) impact pathway coverage, (iv) scientific quality, and (v) stakeholder acceptance. We show that LCA models tend to perform worse than those from ecology and conservation (although not significantly), implying room for improvement. We identify seven best-practice recommendations that can be implemented immediately to improve LCA models based on existing approaches in the literature. We further propose building a "consensus model" through weighted averaging of existing information, to complement future development. While our research focuses on conceptual model design, further quantitative comparison of promising models in shared case studies is an essential prerequisite for future informed model choice.

SoilTrEC: a global initiative on critical zone research and integration.

Soil is a complex natural resource that is considered non-renewable in policy frameworks, and it plays a key role in maintaining a variety of ecosystem services (ES) and life-sustaining material cycles within the Earth's Critical Zone (CZ). However, currently, the ability of soil to deliver these services is being drastically reduced in many locations, and global loss of soil ecosystem services is estimated to increase each year as a result of many different threats, such as erosion and soil carbon loss. The European Union Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection alerts policy makers of the need to protect soil and proposes measures to mitigate soil degradation. In this context, the European Commission-funded research project on Soil Transformations in European Catchments (SoilTrEC) aims to quantify the processes that deliver soil ecosystem services in the Earth's Critical Zone and to quantify the impacts of environmental change on key soil functions. This is achieved by integrating the research results into decision-support tools and applying methods of economic valuation to soil ecosystem services. In this paper, we provide an overview of the SoilTrEC project, its organization, partnerships and implementation.