Comparative analysis of methods for integrating various environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment

Changyoon Ji, Taehoon Hong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous studies have proposed several methods for integrating characterized environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment. Each of them, however, may lead to different results. This study presents internal and external normalization methods, weighting factors proposed by panel methods, and a monetary valuation based on an endpoint life cycle impact assessment method as the integration methods. Furthermore, this study investigates the differences among the integration methods and identifies the causes of the differences through a case study in which five elementary school buildings were used. As a result, when using internal normalization with weighting factors, the weighting factors had a significant influence on the total environmental impacts whereas the normalization had little influence on the total environmental impacts. When using external normalization with weighting factors, the normalization had more significant influence on the total environmental impacts than weighing factors. Due to such differences, the ranking of the five buildings varied depending on the integration methods. The ranking calculated by the monetary valuation method was significantly different from that calculated by the normalization and weighting process. The results aid decision makers in understanding the differences among these integration methods, and, finally, help them select the method most appropriate for the goal at hand.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)123-133
Number of pages11
JournalEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review
Volume57
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 Feb 1

Fingerprint

life cycle assessment
environmental impact
life cycle
normalization
weighting
valuation
ranking
building
analysis
index
method
assessment method
normalisation
aid
elementary school
decision maker

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Ecology
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

@article{92790647820d47128983e8f16ff20ec4,
title = "Comparative analysis of methods for integrating various environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment",
abstract = "Previous studies have proposed several methods for integrating characterized environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment. Each of them, however, may lead to different results. This study presents internal and external normalization methods, weighting factors proposed by panel methods, and a monetary valuation based on an endpoint life cycle impact assessment method as the integration methods. Furthermore, this study investigates the differences among the integration methods and identifies the causes of the differences through a case study in which five elementary school buildings were used. As a result, when using internal normalization with weighting factors, the weighting factors had a significant influence on the total environmental impacts whereas the normalization had little influence on the total environmental impacts. When using external normalization with weighting factors, the normalization had more significant influence on the total environmental impacts than weighing factors. Due to such differences, the ranking of the five buildings varied depending on the integration methods. The ranking calculated by the monetary valuation method was significantly different from that calculated by the normalization and weighting process. The results aid decision makers in understanding the differences among these integration methods, and, finally, help them select the method most appropriate for the goal at hand.",
author = "Changyoon Ji and Taehoon Hong",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.013",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "123--133",
journal = "Environmental Impact Assessment Review",
issn = "0195-9255",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative analysis of methods for integrating various environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment

AU - Ji, Changyoon

AU - Hong, Taehoon

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - Previous studies have proposed several methods for integrating characterized environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment. Each of them, however, may lead to different results. This study presents internal and external normalization methods, weighting factors proposed by panel methods, and a monetary valuation based on an endpoint life cycle impact assessment method as the integration methods. Furthermore, this study investigates the differences among the integration methods and identifies the causes of the differences through a case study in which five elementary school buildings were used. As a result, when using internal normalization with weighting factors, the weighting factors had a significant influence on the total environmental impacts whereas the normalization had little influence on the total environmental impacts. When using external normalization with weighting factors, the normalization had more significant influence on the total environmental impacts than weighing factors. Due to such differences, the ranking of the five buildings varied depending on the integration methods. The ranking calculated by the monetary valuation method was significantly different from that calculated by the normalization and weighting process. The results aid decision makers in understanding the differences among these integration methods, and, finally, help them select the method most appropriate for the goal at hand.

AB - Previous studies have proposed several methods for integrating characterized environmental impacts as a single index in life cycle assessment. Each of them, however, may lead to different results. This study presents internal and external normalization methods, weighting factors proposed by panel methods, and a monetary valuation based on an endpoint life cycle impact assessment method as the integration methods. Furthermore, this study investigates the differences among the integration methods and identifies the causes of the differences through a case study in which five elementary school buildings were used. As a result, when using internal normalization with weighting factors, the weighting factors had a significant influence on the total environmental impacts whereas the normalization had little influence on the total environmental impacts. When using external normalization with weighting factors, the normalization had more significant influence on the total environmental impacts than weighing factors. Due to such differences, the ranking of the five buildings varied depending on the integration methods. The ranking calculated by the monetary valuation method was significantly different from that calculated by the normalization and weighting process. The results aid decision makers in understanding the differences among these integration methods, and, finally, help them select the method most appropriate for the goal at hand.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84949204506&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84949204506&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.013

DO - 10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.013

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 123

EP - 133

JO - Environmental Impact Assessment Review

JF - Environmental Impact Assessment Review

SN - 0195-9255

ER -