Page 29 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition

Life Cycle Assessment: Principles, Practice and Prospects
16
2.3 Regional and international initiatives

2.3.1 Development of LCA through the Society of Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry and the International Organization for Standardization standards
It is impossible to discuss the evolution of LCA without considering the work of the Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). The involvement of SETAC has had such
an enduring effect on the pathways and scope of LCA that environmental toxicology has
occupied a significant proportion of scientific efforts in LCA. Development of toxicological
models and extensive databases on chemical impacts has culminated in the Omnitox project
(Molander et al. 2004). SETAC’s contribution to forming LCA method began with SETAC
guidelines to LCA in 1992 (Fava et al. 1991; Fava et al. 1992). The disadvantage of SETAC’s
work is a bias towards European and North American development (particularly the former).
SETAC in the Asia Pacific region has never had a strong LCA focus, so the SETAC develop-
ments have focused on issues more relevant to the highly populated areas of Europe, mostly
relating to increases in concentrations of pollutants. Elsewhere in the world, and particularly
in Australia, the issues of land use and water resources are critical and have generally been paid
less attention in the LCA debate.
The development of documents and working groups in SETAC have shaped much of the
LCA content in the international standards process undertaken by ISO, which began just as
LCA was being formalised by SETAC. The ISO process took what SETAC had initially devel-
oped, and over four years developed an international consensus that became the ISO Stand-
ards on LCA (ISO 14040 series). For better or worse, the standards had to be broad enough to
incorporate the diversity of LCA users and the lack of consensus on specific methodological
issues in LCA. The issue of impact assessment was one of the most difficult standards to
complete, with discursive debate on the use of indicators and weighting.
As the long-awaited LCA standards were nearing completion, a synthesis project was
proposed to bring the stages of LCA into two overarching standards: the framework and
requirements for LCA: ISO 14040:2006 (ISO 2006a), Environmental management – Life cycle
assessment – Principles and framework; and ISO 14044:2006 (ISO 2006b), Environmental man-
agement – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines (Finkbeiner et al. 2006). Signifi-
cant developments in LCA that are not in the standards include how to undertake weighting in
LCA (which is not condoned for public comparative studies), and a recognition of the distinc-
tion between consequential and attributional approaches.

2.3.2 Developments through the United Nations Environment Programme/
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Life Cycle Initiative
With the completion of the ISO standards, it was clear that standards on their own would not
promote the use and development of LCA and that the breadth of the standards still allowed
significant diversity in LCA practice, making it difficult for newcomers to navigate appropriate
methods. SETAC approached the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to work
together on building international consensus on LCA use and development. UNEP were most
interested in how emerging economies might be included in the LCA debate and development.
From these two differing interests, the United Nations Environment Programme/Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP/SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative (LCI) was
born (UNEP and SETAC n.d.a). Stage one developed extensive working groups in three broad
areas (Udo de Haes et al. 2002):
s application of and education on LCA and life cycle thinking
s development and enhancement of sound LCI data and methods
s development and enhancement of sound life cycle impact assessment data and methods.

100804•Life Cycle Assessment 5pp.indd 16 17/02/09 12:46:15 PM