Assessing the Ability of the Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program to Reliably Determine the Environmental Performance of Products

Bach, Vanessa; Minkov, Nikolay; Finkbeiner, Matthias

doi:10.3390/su10051562

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the advantages provided by the two frameworks, the suitability of using both is identified. This is contrasted by various authors such as Bach [91] and Niero and Hauschild [92], who, on conducting an analysis on the products developed through C2C, conclude that LCA and C2C can and should be used as complementary tools. Scheepens [93] also confirms the suitability of LCA research for the CE, especially when evaluating circular systems.…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 84%

Standardization Framework for Sustainability from Circular Economy 4.0

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The circular economy (CE) is widely known as a way to implement and achieve sustainability, mainly due to its contribution towards the separation of biological and technical nutrients under cyclic industrial metabolism. The incorporation of the principles of the CE in the links of the value chain of the various sectors of the economy strives to ensure circularity, safety, and efficiency. The framework proposed is aligned with the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development regarding the orientation towards the mitigation and regeneration of the metabolic rift by considering a double perspective. Firstly, it strives to conceptualize the CE as a paradigm of sustainability. Its principles are established, and its techniques and tools are organized into two frameworks oriented towards causes (cradle to cradle) and effects (life cycle assessment), and these are structured under the three pillars of sustainability, for their projection within the proposed framework. Secondly, a framework is established to facilitate the implementation of the CE with the use of standards, which constitute the requirements, tools, and indicators to control each life cycle phase, and of key enabling technologies (KETs) that add circular value 4.0 to the socio-ecological transition.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 84%

Standardization Framework for Sustainability from Circular Economy 4.0

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Niero, Olsen and Laurent (2018) pointed out that, so far, the implementations of CTC have mainly focused on shifting from a waste paradigm to a resource one, leaving the complementary aspects of the wider vision beyond the scope of implementation. Bach, Minkov and Finkbeiner (2018) found that good environmental performance of CTC certified products is not assured due to the limited assessment scope, which does not take into account all product life-cycle phases and disregards some environmental impacts. Others have also argued that CTC design might shift the focus of design decisions from the entire life cycle of the product to the minimisation or eliminatation of toxic materials; therefore, it might result in the impacts of energy consumption being overlooked (Bakker et al, 2010;Llorach-Massana, Farreny, & Oliver-Solà, 2015;Niero et al, 2018).…”

Section: Compliance Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design for Sustainability

Ceschin¹,

Gaziulusoy²

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Negotiating the Environment: Civil Society, Globalisation and the UN Lauren E. Eastwood Carbon Inequality vi vi i Contents List of illustrations ix List of boxes xi Acknowledgements xii List of abbreviations xiii 10 Systemic design 113 viii Contents vi i i 11 Design for sustainability transitions 12 Reflections on the past, present and future of design for sustainability Index i x Illustrations 2.1 Berol Karisma coloured pencils 2.2 Tetra Pak street furniture 2.3 The FRIA refrigerator designed by Ursula Tischner 2.4 The Sayl office chair with its suspension back 3.1 The Do Scratch lamp: example of personalisation 3.2 The Do Scratch lamp: brand new and examples of personalisation 3.3 The Stain teacup before use 3.4 The Stain teacup after a number of uses 3.5 Save/ Space/ Vase: the process to make vases unique 3.6 A set of different Save/ Space/ Vase vases 4.1 The comprehensive action determination model (CADM) 4.2 The Power-Aware Cord 4.3 A screenshot from the SuperAmma animated film 4.4 The decision support framework for promoting sustainable behaviour, combining a set of existing DfSB approaches 5.1 Nike Considered boots 6.1 The Shinkansen bullet train, Japan 6.2 The Supertree Grove, Singapore 6.3 Diagram showing Supertrees' design and operation 7.1 The Riversimple car 7.2 The Philips Pay-per-lux lighting solution 8.1 The SafariSeat all-terrain wheelchair 8.2 The SafariSeat all-terrain wheelchair: one of the codesign sessions held to test and improve the product 8.3 The Sun Shines for All solar energy package 8.4 The Mitti Cool refrigerator xi Boxes 2.1 Green design examples 2.2 Ecodesign examples 2.3 Ecodesign principles, strategies and guidelines 3.1 EDD examples 4.1 DfSB examples 4.2 DfSB methods and tools 5.1 CTC design examples 5.2 CTC design tools and methods 6.1 BM design examples 6.2 BM design methods and tools 7.1 PSS design for sustainability examples 7.2 PSS design for sustainability methods and tools 8.1 DfBoP examples 8.2 DfBoP methods and tools 9.1 DfSI examples 9.2 DfSI tools and methods 10.1 SD examples 10.2 SD methods and tools 11.1 The MLP of system innovations 11.2 DfST examples 11.3 DfST methods and tools xi i Acknowledgements

show abstract

“…Mayyas et al (2017) showed that in the United States lightweight ICE vehicles performed better over life cycle in terms of GWP than BEV. Therefore, life cycle based product sustainability assessment is needed to ensure that the overall sustainable solution is found (Lehmann et al, , 2017Minkov et al, 2018;Bach et al, 2018).…”

Section: Sustainability In the Automotive Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing a product sustainability budget at an automotive company—one option to increase the use of LCSA results in decision-making processes

Tarne

Lehmann

Kantner³

et al. 2018

Int J Life Cycle Assess

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The assessment and improvement of sustainability impacts of products is integral to achieve sustainable development. A way to assess the impact of a product over its entire life cycle on all three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy and society) is Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). LCSA suggests to carry out three complementary assessments: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). While LCA is widely applied across various industries, the use of LCSA at industrial companies is still scarce. This is, inter alia, due to the challenges in data acquisition in S-LCA and missing support in decision making based on LCSA results as well as their implementation in the decision processes at companies. This thesis aims at remediating these shortcomings to achieve its overarching goal: Increasing the applicability of LCSA to identify and implement product sustainability improvement potential. For this, three research objectives were defined to address the main impediments. First, an approach to select social indicators and to focus primary data collection in S-LCA. Second, a method to interpret LCSA results for decision makers. Third, a mechanism to integrate LCSA based results into product-related decision making at an automotive company. Methods:To put the LCSA framework into practice at an automotive company, it was applied to the component level of a vehicle to assess the impact of every component over its life cycle. In the proposed framework, criticality scores for every LCSA dimension were defined. They were calculated based on the relative performance of a component in the respective LCSA dimension (LCA, LCC and S-LCA) to the rest of the components of the assessed vehicle. This conceptual approach formed the bearing for the integration of the individual research objectives. The three research objectives were addressed in individual publications. The results of these separate papers were combined to increase the applicability of the conceptual approach of the LCSA framework. Multi-Regional Input-Output (MRIO) databases were assessed regarding their possible use to address the first research objective.The findings were applied to enable an assessment of the S-LCA dimension in the LCSA framework.A study on the weighting of sustainability dimensions by decision makers in an automotive company was carried out to tackle the second research objective. The results were used to determine an overall LCSA impact result for every component of a vehicle. To address the third research objective, the customer added value of product sustainability features was investigated. The results were used to create a mechanism that enabled the integration of the assessment results of the LCSA framework alongside other indicators in product-related decision processes at an automotive company. Results:Supply chain analysis based on MRIO analysis did not offer substantial support for focusing primary data collection in S-LCA. Therefore, a material-based appr...

show abstract

Assessing the Ability of the Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program to Reliably Determine the Environmental Performance of Products

Cited by 21 publications

References 69 publications

Standardization Framework for Sustainability from Circular Economy 4.0

Standardization Framework for Sustainability from Circular Economy 4.0

Design for Sustainability

Introducing a product sustainability budget at an automotive company—one option to increase the use of LCSA results in decision-making processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About