Abstract
In a recent letter to the editor, Jørgensen et al. questioned that life cycle costing (LCC) is relevant in life cycle-based sustainability assessment (LCSA). They hold the opinion that environmental and social aspects are sufficient. We argue that sustainability has three dimensions: environment, economy, and social aspects in accordance with the well-accepted “three pillar interpretation” of sustainability, although this is not verbally stated in the Brundtland report (WCED 1987). An analysis of the historical development of the term “sustainability” shows that the economic and social component have been present from the beginning and conclude that LCSA of product systems can be approximated by LCSA = (environmental) LCA + (environmental) LCC + S-LCA where S-LCA stands for social LCA. The “environmental” LCC is fully compatible with life cycle assessment (LCA), the internationally standardized (ISO 14040 + 14044) method for environmental product assessment. For LCC, a SETAC “Code of Practice” is now available and guidelines for S-LCA have been published by UNEP/SETAC. First examples for the use of these guidelines have been published. An important practical argument for using LCC from the customers’ point of view is that environmentally preferable products often have higher purchasing costs, whereas the LCC may be much lower (examples: energy saving light bulbs, low energy houses, and cars). Also, since LCC allows an assessment for different actor perspectives, the producers may try to keep the total costs from their perspective below those of a conventional product: otherwise, it will not succeed at the market, unless highly subsidized. Those are practical aspects whichfinally decide about success or failure of “sustainable” products. Whether or not an analysis using all three aspects is necessary will depend on the exact question. However, if real money flows are important in sustainability analysis of product systems, inclusion of LCC is advisable.
References
Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010a) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):156–163
Benoît C, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Franze J, Traverso M, Vickery-Niederman G (2010) Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA, presentation, life cycle assessment conference Portland X, 2–4 November 2010
Carlowitz HC von (1713) Sylvicultura oeconomica. Anweisung zur wilden Baum-Zucht. Johann Friedrich Braun, Leipzig; Reprint: Veröffentlichungen der Bibliothek “Georgius Agricola” der TU Bergakademie Freiberg Nr. 135. ISBN 3-86012-115-4. Freiberg 2000
Ciroth A, Franze J (2010) Social LCA of an ecolabeled notebook, presentation, informal EU meeting on sustainable consumption and production and integrated product policy Brussels, 6–7 October 2010
Franze J, Ciroth A (2009) Social life cycle assessment of roses—a comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands, presentation, life cycle assessment conference Boston IX, 29 September–2 October 2009
Grober U (2010) Die Entdeckung der Nachhaltigkeit. Kulturgeschichte eines Begriffs. ISBN 978-3-88897-648-3. Verlag Antje Kunstmann, München
Hunkeler D, Lichtenvort K, Rebitzer G (eds) (2008) Environmental life cycle costing. SETAC, ISBN 978-1-4200-5470-5. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
Hunkeler D, Swarr T, Klöpffer W, Pesonen H-L, Ciroth A, Brent A, Pagan B (eds) (2011) Environmental life-cycle costing: a SETAC code of practice. SETAC Press, Pensacola
Jørgensen A, Hermann IT, Mortensen JB (2010) Is LCC relevant in a sustainability assessment? Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(6):531–532
Klöpffer W (2003) Life-cycle based methods for sustainable product development. Int J LCA 8(3):157–159
Klöpffer W (2006) The role of SETAC in the development of LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(Special Issue 1):116–122
Klöpffer W (2008) Life-cycle based sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):89–94
Klöpffer W, Renner I (2008) Life-cycle based sustainability assessment of products. In: Schaltegger S, Bennett M, Burritt RL, Jasch C (eds) Environmental management accounting for cleaner production. ISBN 978-1-4020-8912-1. Springer, Dordrecht
Projektgruppe ökologische Wirtschaft (1987) Produktlinienanalyse: Bedürfnisse, Produkte und ihre Folgen. ISBN 3-923243-27-8. Kölner Volksblattverlag, Köln
Remmen A, Jensen AA, Frydendal J (2007) The triple bottom line – the business case of sustainability. In: life cycle management. A business guide to sustainability. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. ISBN 978-92-807-2772-2, pp 10–11
UNEP/SETAC (2009) Benoît C, Mazijn B (eds) Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. Paris. 104 pp. Downloaded from http://lcinitiative.unep.fr
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Zamagni A, Buttol P, Buonamici R, Masoni P, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Heijungs R, van der Voet E, Ekvall T, Rydberg T (2009) Co-ordination Action for innovation in Life-Cycle Analysis for Sustainability (CALCAS). D20 Blue paper on life cycle sustainability analysis. Revision 1 after the open consultation. August 2009
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Klöpffer, W., Ciroth, A. Is LCC relevant in a sustainability assessment?. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16, 99–101 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0249-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0249-y