Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bare JC, Hofstetter P, Pennington D, Udo de Haes HA (2000): Life cycle impact assessment workshop summary, midpoints versus endpoints: the sacrifices and benefits. Int J LCA 5 (6): 319–326 (Report of the UNEP workshop in Brighton on midpoint and endpoint modelling, 25-26 May 2000)
Beaufort A de et al. (in press 2002): Report of the SETAC-Europe Working Group on Data Availability and Data Quality. SETAC, Pensacola, FL
European Environmental Agency (1998): Europe’s environment: The second assessment. EEA, Copenhagen, Denmark
Sonnemann GW, Solgaard A, Saur K, Udo de Haes HA, Christiansen K, Jensen AA (2001): Life Cycle Management: UNEP-Workshop. Sharing experiences on LCM. Int J LCA 6 (6) 325–333. (Report of the UNEP workshop in Copenhagen on life cycle management, August 30, 2001)
Udo de Haes HA, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Krewitt W, Müller-Wenk R (eds) (1999): Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. Part I. Int J LCA 4 (2) 66–74. Part II. Int J LCA 4 (3) 167-174. (Report of the 1 st SETAC-Europe working group on life cycle impact assessment)
Udo de Haes HA, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich E, Hofstetter R, Klöpffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Mueller-Wenk R, Olson S, Pennington D, Potting J, Steen B (eds) (in press). Life cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. Report of the 2nd SETAC-Europe working group on life cycle impact assessment. SETAC, Pensacola, FL
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Haes, H.A.U.d., Jolliet, O., Norris, G. et al. UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative: background, aims and scope. Int J LCA 7, 192–195 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978872
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978872