IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v17y2013i5p777-788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing the Practice of Life Cycle Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Christi L. Saunders
  • Amy E. Landis
  • Laurel P. Mecca
  • Alex K. Jones
  • Laura A. Schaefer
  • Melissa M. Bilec

Abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a quantitative tool used to evaluate the environmental impacts of products or processes. With respect to buildings, LCA can be used to evaluate the environmental impacts of an entire building's life cycle. Currently LCA in the building area is used in a limited capacity, primarily to select building products. In order to determine the causality for the lack of whole‐building LCAs, focus groups with members of the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) communities were held. This article investigates the current level of knowledge of LCA in the AEC community and then discusses the benefits and barriers to the practice of LCA. In summary, the goal of the research was to identify why LCA is not used to its fullest potential in a whole‐building LCA. In an open forum and moderated setting, focus group participants were asked individually to self‐identify their experience with LCA, a brief education session on LCA was held, and then benefits and barriers to LCA were discussed. The focus group sessions were transcribed and systematically coded by social researchers in order to analyze the results. Hybrid flow and radar charts were developed. From the focus group results, the most important benefit to LCA was “provides information about environmental impacts.” The results did not identify a prominent barrier; however, building‐related metrics were ascertained to be one of the more crucial barriers. The benefits and barriers classified by this analysis will be utilized to develop a subsequent online survey to further understand the LCA and AEC community.

Suggested Citation

  • Christi L. Saunders & Amy E. Landis & Laurel P. Mecca & Alex K. Jones & Laura A. Schaefer & Melissa M. Bilec, 2013. "Analyzing the Practice of Life Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(5), pages 777-788, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:17:y:2013:i:5:p:777-788
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12028
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.12028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kai Kanafani & Regitze Kjær Zimmermann & Freja Nygaard Rasmussen & Harpa Birgisdóttir, 2021. "Learnings from Developing a Context-Specific LCA Tool for Buildings—The Case of LCAbyg 4," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Helena Nydahl & Staffan Andersson & Anders P. Åstrand & Thomas Olofsson, 2019. "Environmental Performance Measures to Assess Building Refurbishment from a Life Cycle Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Ming Hu, 2019. "Cost-Effective Options for the Renovation of an Existing Education Building toward the Nearly Net-Zero Energy Goal—Life-Cycle Cost Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Petrovic, Bojana & Myhren, Jonn Are & Zhang, Xingxing & Wallhagen, Marita & Eriksson, Ola, 2019. "Life cycle assessment of a wooden single-family house in Sweden," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Regitze Kjær Zimmermann & Simone Bruhn & Harpa Birgisdóttir, 2021. "BIM-Based Life Cycle Assessment of Buildings—An Investigation of Industry Practice and Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, May.
    6. Dolf, Matt & Teehan, Paul, 2015. "Reducing the carbon footprint of spectator and team travel at the University of British Columbia's varsity sports events," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 244-255.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:17:y:2013:i:5:p:777-788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.