A transdisciplinary review of the role of economics in life cycle sustainability assessment

被引:17
|
作者
Hall, Murray R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Geog Planning & Environm Management, Liveable Sustainable & Resilient Cities Program, CSIRO, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia
来源
关键词
Capability approach; Consequentialism; Ecological economics; Economics; Environmental life cycle costing; Ethics; Fairness; Life cycle assessment; Life cycle sustainability assessment; Planetary boundaries; Rawlsian social contract; Sustainability; Utilitarianism; Value; COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS; ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; UNRESOLVED PROBLEMS; LCA; VALUATION; KNOWLEDGE; VALUES; EXTERNALITIES; CAPABILITIES;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-015-0970-z
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This paper reviews the use of economic values in life cycle assessment (LCA) and the justification for environmental life cycle costing (ELCC) as the 'economic pillar' of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). A transdisciplinary review of economic values in LCA was undertaken and structured with a series of research questions. The review considered the philosophy of science and focussed on the concept of value as a point of synthesis among the disciplines of LCA, economics and ethics. An example from the ELCC Code of Practice was reviewed to highlight the challenges and alternative approaches explored. 'Value choices' and the role of decision makers have been a long-standing and largely unresolved discussion in LCA. Over the past two decades, LCA has been dominated by a utilitarian concept of ethics and valuation based on willingness to pay. This has a number of limitations which are further exacerbated in ELCC and its accounting definition of cost. ELCC struggles to address social costs, and the focus on the decision maker may define values that are not compatible with sustainability. John Rawls' 'justice as fairness' and Amartya Sen's capability approach were considered to reappraise the use of UN Conventions considered in early LCA literature on values. It was argued that there is an ethical basis to prioritise minimum standards in LCSA to address primary social goods as well as uncertainty in evaluations. This paper questioned the reliance of LCA on utilitarianism and valuation using willingness to pay and, in particular, the claim of ELCC as the economic pillar of LCSA. Concepts of fairness and capability may overcome some of these limitations and provide a basis for integration of social, economic and environmental pillars of sustainability. Although the ethical justification of prescriptive values may only reach agreement on minimum conditions for social and economic cooperation, it was argued that this may provide a reasonable starting point given the global sustainability challenges over the coming decades. A two-stage approach for the implementation of economic values in LCSA was suggested for further debate and discussion.
引用
收藏
页码:1625 / 1639
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A transdisciplinary review of the role of economics in life cycle sustainability assessment
    Murray R. Hall
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2015, 20 : 1625 - 1639
  • [2] Life cycle sustainability assessment
    Zamagni, Alessandra
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2012, 17 (04): : 373 - 376
  • [3] Life cycle sustainability assessment
    Alessandra Zamagni
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2012, 17 : 373 - 376
  • [4] THE ROLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL LIFE CYCLE COSTING IN SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE TECHNOLOGIES
    Janik, Agnieszka
    [J]. ECOLOGY, ECONOMICS, EDUCATION AND LEGISLATION CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, SGEM 2016, VOL III, 2016, : 677 - 684
  • [5] Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in Building Energy Retrofitting; A Review
    Toosi, Hashem Amini
    Lavagna, Monica
    Leonforte, Fabrizio
    Del Pero, Claudio
    Aste, Niccolo
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2020, 60
  • [6] Life Cycle Assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability
    Curran, Mary Ann
    [J]. CURRENT OPINION IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, 2013, 2 (03) : 273 - 277
  • [7] Bridging barriers in sustainability research: ? review from sustainability science to life cycle sustainability assessment
    Troullaki, Katerina
    Rozakis, Stelios
    Kostakis, Vasilis
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2021, 184
  • [8] The Mathematics of life cycle sustainability assessment
    Sadhukhan, Jhuma
    Sen, Sohum
    Gadkari, Siddharth
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 309
  • [9] Life cycle sustainability assessment of fuels
    Zhou, Zupeng
    Jiang, Hua
    Qin, Liancheng
    [J]. FUEL, 2007, 86 (1-2) : 256 - 263
  • [10] Industry, life cycle assessment and sustainability
    Selmes, D
    Boron, S
    Murray, K
    [J]. 1997 JUBILEE RESEARCH EVENT, VOLS 1 AND 2, 1997, : 153 - 156