Konrad Saur

A comprehensive approach towards product and organisation related environmental management tools

The international standardisation of Environmental Management (EM) is documented by the ISO 14000 series. Within this series a number of Environmental Management tools are treated. Therefore, it can be seen as a “toolbox” which offers several options for sound Environmental Management practices in organisations. However, a number of questions remain because they are not treated by the standards themselves. Some examples are which of the tools should be applied to what kind of Environmental Management problem or what are the synergisms and antagonisms between these tools. To illustrate the importance of a comprehensive choice and a compatible approach towards EM-tools, Life Cycle Assessment (ISO 14040 series) is discussed in the context of Environmental Management Systems (ISO 14001). The focus of ISO 14001 are organisations, while LCA deals with products or processes. In principle, they are not compatible, since the life-cycle approach analyses one production chain from “cradle to grave” or even back to the cradle, while a management system according to ISO 14001 analyses organisations, i.e. a number of product chains, from “gate to gate”. LCAs, however, could be compiled by aggregating several “gate to gate” energy and material balances of companies. LCA can assist in prioritising and achieving the objectives of an EM-System. LCA can also help to understand the environmental impact of organisations and what share of their overall environmental burden is produced “inside the gates” or “outside the gates”, respectively.

UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative: background, aims and scope

The conclusions about the development of the content of the LC Initiative are the following:A specific niche for the Life Cycle Initiative has developed, compared with the role of SETAC, the International Society of Industrial Ecology (ISIE) and ISO.The aims of the initiative have step by step been extended, by bringing the initiative at a world level, by including both LCI and LCIA, and by including a program on Life Cycle Management (LCM).In the LCM program due attention is to be given to other tools and approaches than quantitative LCA which are relevant for life-cycle thinking in general, and also to the other two dimensions of sustainability, i.e. the social and economic dimensions.A number of important questions regarding the scope of the initiative and the methodological set-up have been in-depth discussed, thus resulting in a clear basis for the technical content of work to come.Three definition studies will now be implemented which will define the work program for the three programs of the initiative; these studies will be finalised by the end of 2002.

Life cycle management: UNEP-workshop

On August 30, 2001, the first in a series of planned global workshops on Life Cycle Management was organized in Copenhagen by UNEP in cooperation with dk-TEKNIK. The workshop provided an international forum to share experiences on LCM. The specific purpose of the workshop was to define the focus of a possible UNEP programme on Life Cycle Management under the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. Life Cycle Management has been defined by the SETAC Europe Working Group on LCM as an integrated framework of concepts, techniques and procedures to address environmental, economic, technological and social aspects of products and organizations to achieve continuous environmental improvement from a life cycle perspective. Life Cycle Management has been requested as an additional component for the Life Cycle Initiative by business organizations as well as governments in order to provide practical approaches for management systems in this area. The breakout groups of the workshop focussed on the role of integrating environmental management practices, concepts and tools in a life cycle perspective, on the integration of socio-economic aspects of sustainability in life cycle approaches, including the definition of adequate indicators for these aspects, on the communication strategies to promote life cycle thinking, and on the demand side of LCA. The workshop closed with a consensus that the UNEP/ SETAC Life Cycle Initiative should really include a programme on Life Cycle Management with the proposed areas of work. UNEP in cooperation with SETAC should function as a global catalyser of knowledge transfer and cooperation on life cycle approaches. The key issue behind all activities would be the promotion of Life Cycle Thinking since all break-out groups mentioned the importance of well-prepared communication strategies. Another interesting outcome of the workshop is the clear interest of different stakeholders in the consideration of social and institutional effects of products, in addition to environmental and economic impacts, i.e. a sustainable development perspective.

In reply to hertwich & pease, Int. J. LCA 3 (4) 180 — 181, “ISO 14042 restricts use and development of impact assessment”

Life Cycle Impact Assessment describes indicators and does not predict actual impacts. The value of an LCA is its comprehensive review of all stages of a product’s life cycle and its synoptic view of all relevant environmental issues. The current version of the 14042 draft describes the uniqueness of Life Cycle Impact Assessment approach which is distinct from other assessment techniques. The wording was designed to help users of the standard understand how and why LCIA is distinct from other assessment methods.In closing, we would like to highlight our opinion that the present document on the level of a DIS is sound, stable and practical within the ISO 14040 series of standards. We do not agree withHertwich & Pease that the present document prevents the use of LCIA. It makes a choice regarding the exclusion of weighting across categories in order to prevent misuse in deriving inappropriate claims. And for characterisation it has achieved a well founded synthesis. In addition, we strongly believe that this standard will stimulate the international scientific discussion of LCA and will substantially contribute to enhanced and more valuable applications of LCA in the future.

Analysis of the potential for a comprehensive approach towards LCA and EMS in Japan

Sustainable development can only be achieved if industry adoptsboth product related and organisation related environmental management tools, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Environmental Management Systems (EMS). In Japan, EMS (ISO 14001) is more widely applied than LCA (ISO 14040). Therefore,one means by which Japanese industries could be motivated to adopt and use LCA is to relate LCA-activities to the policies and instruments of ISO 14001. The potential of such a comprehensive approach was analysed by a survey of 270 Japanese enterprises (response rate 45%). The results indicate that 19% of the responding representatives had responsibilities for both LCA and EMS, while the remaining only work in one of both fields. A statement in the company’s/ plant’s Environmental Policy of ISO 14001, stating that LCA is to be used as part of the EMS, was found in 42% of all companies. A surprising number (39%) either already use, or plan to use, LCA and EMS as combinated/integrated tools. A strong argument for the establishment of a comprehensive approach can be seen in the perception of the usefulness of LCA, which was rated significantly higher in companies that acknowledged the complementary potential of LCA and EMS.