Page 447 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

430 Part 3 : Scientific background

Together, (1) support for a (2) substantially robust result after (3) a fair process may be sufficient to
ensure that there is consensus among the stakeholders. In many cases, though, the interests of the
stakeholders may differ so widely that consensus cannot reasonably be expected. A process may then
well result in commitment to a particular product. Parties expressing commitment declare that they:
commit themselves to the product of a process;
perhaps distance themselves from certain elements of that product;
are prepared to vouch for the product.

1.3.2 Decision-making based on a process approach
The philosophy behind the process approach is that the outcome of a LCA will be authoritative only if the
principal parties are duly involved in this analysis. This involvement should be structured in an orderly
fashion and a process design is consequently essential. This design should indicate:
which parties (singular or plural) are to be involved in the analysis;
at which points in the decision-making process these parties may exert their influence;
how to proceed at such points in the process.

Advantages
In brief, the principal arguments in favour of a process approach are as follows:
I. Support
Successful execution of an LCA requires the support of the stakeholders, and if they are to stand
behind the outcome of the analysis they must be duly involved in the analysis process.
II. Quality of data and other information
The stakeholders can also make an important contribution to the quality of the information used to
perform the LCA, for they dispose over factual data and other information (based on such data), in
the form of data and know-how on recent and expected innovations, for example.
III. Quality of the analysis
Critical interrogation by stakeholders vis-à-vis the study and its outcome will bring into clear view
the underlying values, the choices (regarding data and assumptions) made, and which results are
robust and authoritative and which do not satisfy these criteria.
IV. Validation of stakeholder views and assumptions
Conversely, in their meetings with researchers the stakeholders will have to expound on their own
views and assumptions, some of which may not stand up to the scrutiny of scientific criticism.
V. ‘Enrichment’
The stakeholders involved in the analysis will often be representing different interests.
Confrontations between these interests may lead to enrichment: a mutual learning process.

Basic preconditions
If a process approach is to have any chance of success, three basic preconditions must be satisfied:
Condition 1: There must be a sense of urgency.
A process design demands a sense of urgency. The stakeholders must, in
other words, be convinced that:
1
there is a problematic situation that must be resolved as a matter of
priority;
an LCA can help resolve this problematic situation;
the stakeholders must somehow collaborate on designing the LCA.
If these three conditions are not fulfilled, the process will have little chance of
succeeding, for nobody will be prepared to commit themselves to a decision-
making process. Phenomena like the ‘participation paradox’ as well as limited
participation at the outset of the process (see Section 1.3.4) are especially likely
if there is little sense of urgency. There is then a high major risk of the process
breaking down.

Condition 2: Stakeholders must be willing to commit themselves to a process design.
It is important that the basic process agreements between parties are explicitly
recorded in a process design, making clear which organisations may participate

1
The stakeholders may well, at the outset, have different perceptions of the problem. What matters, though, is that
all parties see the need to arrive at a collective approach and decision.