Circular life cycle sustainability assessment: An integrated framework

Journal of Industrial Ecology, vol. 28, pp. 41–58

Abstract

Abstract Robust monitoring and assessment methods are required to assess circular economy (CE) concepts in terms of their degree of circularity and their contribution to sustainability. This research aimed to develop an integrated framework for the CE context—considering both the technical circularity and the complexity of the three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and social). Two existing methods were identified as an appropriate foundation: CE indicators and life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), combining life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle costing (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (S‐LCA). The developed circular life cycle sustainability assessment (C‐LCSA) framework added circularity assessment (CA) as an additional dimension to LCSA (C‐LCSA = LCA + LCC + S‐LCA + CA). The abundance of CE indicators required a systematic selection process to identify the most appropriate indicators for the framework which was built on criteria levels, performance, loops, unit, dimension, and transversality. The material circularity indicator, product circularity indicator, and longevity indicator were identified as most suited for C‐LCSA. Being developed for a single life cycle, the traditional life cycle approaches needed refinements for application to CE concepts, derived from discussions and proposed adaptions presented in the academic literature. The cut‐off approach was identified as the most suitable end‐of‐life allocation method for C‐LCSA, being in line with the technical system boundaries. C‐LCSA can be used by LCA practitioners to identify trade‐offs between an improved circularity and resulting impacts on the environmental, economic, and social pillars to provide a basis for decision making in industrial ecology.

Authors 3

1. Anna Luthin corresponding Aachen Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University · The University of Melbourne

   Affiliation as printed

   Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning The University of Melbourne Parkville Australia

   Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering RWTH Aachen University Aachen Germany

   Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

   Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

2. Marzia Traverso Aachen Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering RWTH Aachen University Aachen Germany

   Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

3. Robert H. Crawford

   The University of Melbourne

   Affiliation as printed

   Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning The University of Melbourne Parkville Australia

   Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia