Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?

Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Pelletier, Nathan [verfasserIn] Bamber, Nicole Brandão, Miguel

Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2019

Schlagwörter:	Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting

Anmerkung:	© The Author(s) 2019

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: The international journal of life cycle assessment - Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996, 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:24 ; year:2019 ; number:9 ; day:26 ; month:03 ; pages:1580-1586

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y

Katalog-ID:	OLC2051209529

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	OLC2051209529
003	DE-627
005	20230504090603.0
007	tu
008	200820s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)OLC2051209529
035			\|a (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 650 \|a 330 \|a 333.7 \|q VZ
082	0	4	\|a 690 \|q VZ
100	1		\|a Pelletier, Nathan \|e verfasserin \|0 (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
264		1	\|c 2019
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen \|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Band \|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © The Author(s) 2019
520			\|a Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework.
650		4	\|a Distributive justice
650		4	\|a Efficiency
650		4	\|a Interpretation
650		4	\|a Life cycle assessment
650		4	\|a Planetary boundaries
650		4	\|a Sustainability
650		4	\|a Weighting
700	1		\|a Bamber, Nicole \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Brandão, Miguel \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t The international journal of life cycle assessment \|d Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 \|g 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 \|w (DE-627)211584533 \|w (DE-600)1319419-7 \|w (DE-576)059728728 \|x 0948-3349 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:24 \|g year:2019 \|g number:9 \|g day:26 \|g month:03 \|g pages:1580-1586
856	4	1	\|u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_OLC
912			\|a SSG-OLC-UMW
912			\|a SSG-OLC-ARC
912			\|a SSG-OLC-TEC
912			\|a SSG-OPC-FOR
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_267
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2016
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2018
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4277
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 24 \|j 2019 \|e 9 \|b 26 \|c 03 \|h 1580-1586

Indexfelder

author_variant	n p np n b nb m b mb
matchkey_str	article:09483349:2019----::nepeigieylassmnrslsoitgaessanbltdcsospotaaeooiaeooi
hierarchy_sort_str	2019
publishDate	2019
allfields	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y doi (DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Pelletier, Nathan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 aut Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting Bamber, Nicole aut Brandão, Miguel aut Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 (DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728 0948-3349 nnns volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277 AR 24 2019 9 26 03 1580-1586
spelling	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y doi (DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Pelletier, Nathan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 aut Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting Bamber, Nicole aut Brandão, Miguel aut Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 (DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728 0948-3349 nnns volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277 AR 24 2019 9 26 03 1580-1586
allfields_unstemmed	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y doi (DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Pelletier, Nathan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 aut Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting Bamber, Nicole aut Brandão, Miguel aut Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 (DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728 0948-3349 nnns volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277 AR 24 2019 9 26 03 1580-1586
allfieldsGer	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y doi (DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Pelletier, Nathan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 aut Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting Bamber, Nicole aut Brandão, Miguel aut Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 (DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728 0948-3349 nnns volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277 AR 24 2019 9 26 03 1580-1586
allfieldsSound	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y doi (DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Pelletier, Nathan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008 aut Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? 2019 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting Bamber, Nicole aut Brandão, Miguel aut Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 (DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728 0948-3349 nnns volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277 AR 24 2019 9 26 03 1580-1586
language	English
source	Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586
sourceStr	Enthalten in The international journal of life cycle assessment 24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586 volume:24 year:2019 number:9 day:26 month:03 pages:1580-1586
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting
dewey-raw	650
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	The international journal of life cycle assessment
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Pelletier, Nathan @@aut@@ Bamber, Nicole @@aut@@ Brandão, Miguel @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2019-03-26T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	211584533
dewey-sort	3650
id	OLC2051209529
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2051209529</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504090603.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2051209529</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pelletier, Nathan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Distributive justice</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Efficiency</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Interpretation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Life cycle assessment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Planetary boundaries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sustainability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Weighting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bamber, Nicole</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Brandão, Miguel</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The international journal of life cycle assessment</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)211584533</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1319419-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)059728728</subfield><subfield code="x">0948-3349</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:26</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1580-1586</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-FOR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">26</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">1580-1586</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Pelletier, Nathan
spellingShingle	Pelletier, Nathan ddc 650 ddc 690 misc Distributive justice misc Efficiency misc Interpretation misc Life cycle assessment misc Planetary boundaries misc Sustainability misc Weighting Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
authorStr	Pelletier, Nathan
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)211584533
format	Article
dewey-ones	650 - Management & auxiliary services 330 - Economics 333 - Economics of land & energy 690 - Buildings
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	OLC
remote_str	false
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	0948-3349
topic_title	650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots? Distributive justice Efficiency Interpretation Life cycle assessment Planetary boundaries Sustainability Weighting
topic	ddc 650 ddc 690 misc Distributive justice misc Efficiency misc Interpretation misc Life cycle assessment misc Planetary boundaries misc Sustainability misc Weighting
topic_unstemmed	ddc 650 ddc 690 misc Distributive justice misc Efficiency misc Interpretation misc Life cycle assessment misc Planetary boundaries misc Sustainability misc Weighting
topic_browse	ddc 650 ddc 690 misc Distributive justice misc Efficiency misc Interpretation misc Life cycle assessment misc Planetary boundaries misc Sustainability misc Weighting
format_facet	Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	nc
hierarchy_parent_title	The international journal of life cycle assessment
hierarchy_parent_id	211584533
dewey-tens	650 - Management & public relations 330 - Economics 690 - Building & construction
hierarchy_top_title	The international journal of life cycle assessment
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)211584533 (DE-600)1319419-7 (DE-576)059728728
title	Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
ctrlnum	(DE-627)OLC2051209529 (DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p
title_full	Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
author_sort	Pelletier, Nathan
journal	The international journal of life cycle assessment
journalStr	The international journal of life cycle assessment
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	600 - Technology 300 - Social sciences
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2019
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	1580
author_browse	Pelletier, Nathan Bamber, Nicole Brandão, Miguel
container_volume	24
class	650 330 333.7 VZ 690 VZ
format_se	Aufsätze
author-letter	Pelletier, Nathan
doi_str_mv	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y
normlink	(ORCID)0000-0003-1943-9008
normlink_prefix_str_mv	(orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008
dewey-full	650 330 333.7 690
title_sort	interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
title_auth	Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
abstract	Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. © The Author(s) 2019
abstractGer	Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. © The Author(s) 2019
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework. © The Author(s) 2019
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-UMW SSG-OLC-ARC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OPC-FOR GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2016 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_4277
container_issue	9
title_short	Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?
url	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y
remote_bool	false
author2	Bamber, Nicole Brandão, Miguel
author2Str	Bamber, Nicole Brandão, Miguel
ppnlink	211584533
mediatype_str_mv	n
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y
up_date	2024-07-04T03:50:30.924Z
_version_	1803618909876649984
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2051209529</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504090603.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2051209529</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11367-019-01612-y-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">650</subfield><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">690</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pelletier, Nathan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0003-1943-9008</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) is often described as a sustainability decision support tool. In practice, however, the interpretation and application of most LCA studies are restricted to eco-efficiency considerations, which provide an important but incomplete basis for sustainability decision-making. Recent methodological advances in the field enable assessing LCA results against sustainability boundaries or thresholds at planetary or more finely resolved scales. Weighting, although controversial, facilitates consistent, stakeholder-appropriate decision-making that reflects prioritization among multiple and potentially competing sustainability outcomes. Here, we discuss how the three minimum necessary criteria for sustainability (i.e., sustainable scale relative to biocapacity, distributive justice, and efficient allocation), as proposed by ecological economist Herman Daly, may provide an internally consistent basis for integrating these methodological developments, and for subsequently better positioning LCA as a sustainability decision support framework.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Distributive justice</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Efficiency</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Interpretation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Life cycle assessment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Planetary boundaries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sustainability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Weighting</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bamber, Nicole</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Brandão, Miguel</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The international journal of life cycle assessment</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2019), 9 vom: 26. März, Seite 1580-1586</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)211584533</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1319419-7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)059728728</subfield><subfield code="x">0948-3349</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:26</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1580-1586</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01612-y</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-UMW</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-ARC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OPC-FOR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">26</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">1580-1586</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.399455

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Interpreting life cycle assessment results for integrated sustainability decision support: can an ecological economic perspective help us to connect the dots?

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?