A review and comparative assessment of existing approaches to calculate material footprints

Lutter, Stephan; Giljum, Stefan; Brückner, Martin

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.03.012

Cited by 70 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) approaches may be the optimal solution here, allowing an integration of sector‐ and product‐level LCA results to be integrated into a background GMRIO (Lutter et al. ). An alternative is to provide per‐element reliability estimates.…”

Section: Factors Affecting the Potential For Simplification Of Footprmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Robust, Authoritative Assessments of Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Current State and Recommendations

Tukker

Koning

Owen

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryGlobal multiregional input-output databases (GMRIOs) became the standard tool for tracking environmental impacts through global supply chains. To date, several GMRIOs are available, but the numerical results differ. This paper considers how GMRIOs can be made more robust and authoritative. We show that GMRIOs need detail in environmentally relevant sectors. On the basis of a review of earlier work, we conclude that the highest uncertainty in footprint analyses is caused by the environmental data used in a GMRIO, followed by the size of country measured in gross domestic product (GDP) as fraction of the global total, the structure of the national table, and only at the end the structure of trade. We suggest the following to enhance robustness of results. In the short term, we recommend using the Single country National Accounts Consistent footprint approach, that uses official data for extensions and the national table for the country in question, combined with embodiments in imports calculated using a GMRIO. In a time period of 2 to 3 years, we propose work on harmonized environmental data for water, carbon, materials, and land, and use the aggregated Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Inter-Country Input-Output GMRIO as default in combination with detailing procedures developed in, for example, the EXIOBASE and Eora projects. In the long term, solutions should be coordinated by the international organizations such as the United Nations (UN) Statistical Division, OECD, and Eurostat. This could ensure that when input-output tables and trade data of individual countries are combined, that the global totals are consistent and that bilateral trade asymmetries are resolved. Keywords:embodiments in trade footprints impact assessment industrial ecology input-output analysis (IOA) statistical offices Conflict of interest statement:The authors have no conflict to declare.

show abstract

Section: Factors Affecting the Potential For Simplification Of Footprmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Robust, Authoritative Assessments of Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Current State and Recommendations

Tukker

Koning

Owen

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several methods are available to calculate consumption-based MFA indicators, each having its advantages and drawbacks (Lutter et al 2016;Schoer et al 2013). Three methodological approaches have been developed and applied so far: coefficient-based approaches building on process analysis, environmental input-output analysis and hybrid approaches combining elements from both approaches.…”

Section: Methodological Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying priority areas for European resource policies: a MRIO-based material footprint assessment

Giljum

Wieland

Lutter

et al. 2016

Economic Structures

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of the transformation toward a "green economy, " issues related to natural resource use have rapidly increased in importance in European and international policy debates. The large number of studies applying economy-wide material flow analysis so far mostly produced aggregated national indicators, making the results difficult to connect to policies, which are often designed for single sectors or consumption areas. This paper provides a detailed assessment of the composition of EU's material footprint in its global context, aiming at identifying the main product groups contributing to overall material consumption and specifying the geographical sources for the raw materials required to satisfy EU's final demand. Based on multi-regional input-output (MRIO) modeling, we apply production layer decomposition to assess supply chains and their structural changes from 1995 to 2011. The global MRIO database used in this study is EXIOBASE 3, which disaggregates 200 products and 163 industries, of which 33 represent material extraction sectors. By that means, we increase the level of detail to a degree where policies can more easily connect to. We find that the generally growing material footprint of the EU was characterized by a dramatic shift regarding the origin of raw materials, with the share of materials extracted within the EU territory falling from 68 % in 1995 to 35 % in 2011. In 2011, raw materials extracted in China to produce exports to the EU already contributed an equal share to EU's material footprint as material extraction within the EU itself. Import dependency is most critical for the material group of metal ores, with only 13 % of all metals required as inputs to EU final demand stemming from within the EU. Regarding product composition, construction was confirmed as the most important sector contributing to the material footprint, followed by the group of manufacturing products based on biomass. Materials embodied in service sector activities together contributed a quarter to the total material footprint in 2011, making services an important, but currently disregarded area for European resource policies. We also find that supply chain structures became more complex over time, with a growing part located outside the EU territory.

show abstract

“…In this sense, the four resource‐based footprints constitute a valid tool to reflect the environmental pressures instigated from resource use. Moreover, environmental footprints are applicable at different scales, for instance, using life cycle tools to capture whole life cycles of products (Fang & Heijungs, ) or input–output analysis at a macroscale (Lutter, Giljum, & Bruckner, ), which is commonly on a “cradle‐to‐use” basis for the consumed products and also includes the resources required for domestic waste management and recycling. Whether the system of interest is a product system or service system, an infrastructure, or a whole economy, we suggest that resource‐based footprints are suitable to monitor CE environmental performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to monitor environmental pressures of a circular economy: An assessment of indicators

Helander

Petit‐Boix

Leipold

et al. 2019

J of Industrial Ecology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding how a circular economy (CE) can reduce environmental pressures from economic activities is crucial for policy and practice. Science provides a range of indicators to monitor and assess CE activities. However, common CE activities, such as recycling and eco‐design, are contested in terms of their contribution to environmental sustainability. This article assesses whether and to what extent current approaches to assess CE activities sufficiently capture environmental pressures to monitor progress toward environmental sustainability. Based on a material flow perspective, we show that most indicators do not capture environmental pressures related to the CE activities they address. Many focus on a single CE activity or process, which does not necessarily contribute to increased environmental sustainability overall. Based on these results, we suggest complementing CE management indicators with indicators capturing basic environmental pressures related to the respective CE activity. Given the conceptual linkage between CE activities, resource extraction, and waste flows, we suggest that a resource‐based footprint approach accounting for major environmental inputs and outputs is necessary—while not sufficient—to assess the environmental sustainability of CE activities. As footprint approaches can be used across scales, they could aid the challenging process of developing indicators for monitoring progress toward an environmentally sustainable CE at the European, national, and company levels.

show abstract

A review and comparative assessment of existing approaches to calculate material footprints

Cited by 70 publications

References 48 publications

Towards Robust, Authoritative Assessments of Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Current State and Recommendations

Towards Robust, Authoritative Assessments of Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Current State and Recommendations

Identifying priority areas for European resource policies: a MRIO-based material footprint assessment

How to monitor environmental pressures of a circular economy: An assessment of indicators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About