Benefits and challenges of streamlined life-cycle assessment for SMEs – findings from case studies on climate change impacts

References

• Akola E, Havupalo N 2013. Restructuring in SMEs: Finland. European foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. [accessed 2019 Feb 5]. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ef_files/pubdocs/2012/476/en/4/EF12476EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Antikainen R, Seppälä J (Eds.). 2012. Elinkaarimenetelmät yrityksen päätöksenteon tukena. FINCLA-hankkeen loppuraportti (The Forum of Life Cycle Methods for Supporting the Decision Making of Companies (FINCLA). The Finnish Environment 10/2012.
   Google Scholar
• Arena M, Azzone G, Conte A. 2013. A streamlined LCA framework to support early decision making in vehicle development. J Clean Prod. 41:105–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arzoumanidis I, Salomone R, Petti L, Mondello G, Raggi A. 2017. Is there a simplified LCA tool suitable for the agri-food industry? An assessment of selected tools. J Clean Prod. 149:406–425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boles S 2018. What are the differences between Scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions? [accessed 2019 Apr 23]. https://www.bpaww.com/bpaww/#?targeturl=/bpaww/Content/MainContent/Products/icompli_Sustainability.htm&target=2&languageid=1&homepage=/BPAWW/Content/MainContent/Home/index.html&footerpage=/BPAWW/content/maincontent/footer/english.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Curran MA. 2000. Life cycle assessment: an international experience. Environ Prog. 19:65–71.
   Google Scholar
• Curran MA, Young S. 1996. Report from the EPA conference on streamlining LCA. Int J LCA. 1:57–60.
   Google Scholar
• Danilecki K, Mrozik M, Smurawski P. 2017. Changes in the environmental profile of a popular passenger car over the last 30 years – results of a simplified LCA study. J Clean Prod. 141:208–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Beaufort-Langeveld A, van Den Berg N, Christiansen K, Haydock R, Ten Houten M, Kotaji S, Oerlemans E, Schmidt WP, Weidenhaupt A, White R. 1997. Simplifying LCA: just a cut? Final report of the SETAC Europe screening and streamlining working group. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): SETAC.
   Google Scholar
• Downie J, Stubbs W. 2013. Evaluation of Australian companies’ scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions assessments. J Clean Prod. 56:156–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018a. The development of the PEF and OEF methods. [accessed 2019 Apr 30]. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/dev_methods.htm.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018b. The environmental footprint pilots. [accessed 2019 Apr 30]. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/ef_pilots.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S, Koehler A, Pennington D, Suh S. 2009. Recent developments in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manage. 91:1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frischknecht R. 2006. Notions on the design and use of an ideal regional or global LCA database. Int J LCA. 11:40–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frischknecht R, Rebitzer G. 2005. The ecoinvent database system: a comprehensive web-based LCA database. J Clean Prod. 13:1337–1343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goglio P, Smith WN, Grant BB, Desjardins RL, Gao X, Hanis K, Tenuta M, Campbell CA, McConkey BG, Nemecek T, et al. 2018. A comparison of methods to quantify greenhouse gas emissions of cropping systems in LCA. J Clean Prod. 172:4010–4017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graedel TE. 1998. Streamlined life-cycle assessment. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• GreenDelta 2019. Product environmental footprints (PEFs) in openLCA. [accessed 2019 Apr 30]. http://www.openlca.org/product-environmental-footprints-pefs-in-openlca/.
   Google Scholar
• The Greenhouse Gas Protocol. 2015. A corporate accounting and reporting standard. Revised ed. [accessed 2018 Mar 1]. http://www.ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard.
   Google Scholar
• Hauschild MZ, Jeswiet J, Alting L. 2004. Design for the environment – do we get the focus right. Ann CIRP. 53:1–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinonen J, Säynäjoki A, Junnonen JM, Pöyry A, Junnila S. 2016. Pre-use phase LCA of a multi-story residential building: can greenhouse gas emissions be used as a more general environmental performance indicator? Build Environ. 95:116–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillary H. 2004. Environmental management systems and the smaller enterprise. J Clean Prod. 12:561–569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochschorner E, Finnveden G. 2003. Evaluation of two simplified life cycle assessment methods. Int J LCA. 8:119–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huesemann MH. 2004. The failure of eco-efficiency to quarantee sustainability: future challenges for industrial ecology. Environ Prog. 23:264–270.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt RG, Boguski TK, Weitz K, Sharma A. 1998. Case studies examining LCA streamlining techniques. Int J LCA. 3:36–42.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. 2006. ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Principles and framework.
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2011. Summary for policymakers. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Seyboth K, Matschoss P, Kadner S, Zwickel T, Eickemeier P, Hansen G, Schlömer S, et al., editors. IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; p. 84.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson MP, Schaltegger S. 2016. Two decades of sustainability management tools for SMEs: how far have we come? JSBM. 54:481–505.
   Google Scholar
• Judl J, Mattila T, Manninen K, Antikainen R 2015. Life cycle assessment and ecodesign in a day. Lessons learned from a series of LCA clinics for start-ups and small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Finnish Environment Institute 18/2015.
   Google Scholar
• Levers C, Butsic V, Verburg PH, Müller D, Kuemmerle T. 2016. Drivers of changes in agricultural intensity in Europe. Land Use Policy. 58:380–393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levers C, Verkerk PJ, Müller D, Verburg PH, Butsic V, Leitão PJ, Lindner M, Kuemmerle T. 2014. Drivers of forest harvesting intensity patterns in Europe. Forest Ecol Manage. 315:160–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattila T, Leskinen P, Soimakallio S, Sironen S. 2012. Uncertainty in environmentally conscious decision making: beer or wine? Int J Life Cycle Assess. 17:696–705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAloone TC, Bey N. 2011. Environmental improvement through product development—a guide. 1st ed. Copenhagen: Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Motiva O 2010. Polttoaineiden lämpöarvot, hyötysuhteet ja hiilidioksidin ominaispäästökertoimet sekä energian hinnat (in Finnish). [accessed 2018 Jan 8]. http://www.motiva.fi/files/3193/Polttoaineiden_lampoarvot_hyotysuhteet_ja_hiilidioksidin_ominaispaastokertoimet_seka_energianhinnat_19042010.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Motiva O 2018. Private sector. [accessed 2019 Mar 25]. https://www.motiva.fi/en/private_sector.
   Google Scholar
• Myllyviita T, Antikainen R, Leskinen P. 2017. Sustainability assessment tools - their comprehensiveness and utilisation in company-level sustainability assessments in Finland. Int J Sust Dev World. 24:236–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myllyviita T, Hujala T, Kangas A, Eyvindson K, Sironen S, Leskinen P, Kurttila M. 2014. Mixing methods – assessment of potential benefits for natural resources planning. Scand J Forest Res. 29(sup1):20–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nygren J, Antikainen R. 2010. Use of life cycle assessment (LCA) in global companies. Finnish Environment Institute 16/2010. Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Olmez GM, Dilek FB, Karanfil T, Yetis U. 2016. The environmental impacts of iron and steel industry: a life cycle assessment study. J Clean Prod. 130:195–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ossés de Eicker M, Hischier R, Kulay LA, Lehmann M, Zah R, Hurni H. 2010. The applicability of non-local LCI data for LCA. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 30:192–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paramonova S, Thollander P. 2016. Energy-efficiency networks for SMEs: learning from the Swedish experience. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 65:295–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payen S, Basset-Mens C, Perret S. 2015. LCA of local and imported tomato: an energy and water trade-off. J Clean Prod. 87:139–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeredoom EC, Kleijn R, Lemkowitz S, Lundie S. 1998. Influence of inventory data sets on life-cycle assessment results: a case study on PVC. J Ind Ecol. 2:109–147.
   Google Scholar
• Rebitzer G, Ekvall T, Frischknecht R, Hunkeler D, Norris G, Rydberg T, Schmidt W-P, Suh H, Weidema BP, Pennington DW. 2004. Life cycle assessment. Part I: framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Env Int. 30:701–720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revell A, Stokes D, Chen H. 2010. Small businesses and the environment: turning over a new leaf? Bus Strat Env. 19:273–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics Finland, 2017. Fuel classification 2017. [accessed 2018 Jan 8]. http://tilastokeskus.fi/tup/khkinv/khkaasut_polttoaineluokitus.html.
   Google Scholar
• Subramanian V, Golden JS. 2016. Patching life cycle inventory (LCI) data gaps through expert elicitation: case study of laundry detergents. J Clean Prod. 115:354–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takano A, Winter S, Hughes M, Linkosalmi L. 2014. Comparison of life cycle assessment databases: A case study on building assessment. Build Environ. 79:20–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Testa F, Battaglia M, Bianchi L. 2012. The diffusion of CSR initiatives among SMES in industrial clusters: some findings from Italian experiences. Int J Technol Manag. 58:152–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Testa T, Nucci B, Iraldo F, Appolloni A, Daddi T. 2017. Removing obstacles to the implementation of LCA among SMEs: A collective strategy for exploiting recycled wool. J Clean Prod. 156:923–931.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triguero A, Moreno L, Davia MA. 2014. The influence of energy prices on adoption of clean technologies and recycling: evidence from European SMEs. Ener Econ. 46:246–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd., 2017. LIPASTO - calculation system for traffic exhaust emissions and energy use in Finland. [accessed 2017 Dec 12]. http://lipasto.vtt.fi/en/index.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Winter S, Emara Y, Ciroth A, Su C, Srocka M. 2015. OpenLCA 1.4 comprehensive user manual software Version: 1.4.1, Manual Version: 1.2. Berlin: GreenDelta GmbH.
   Google Scholar
• World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. United nations general assembly document A/42/427. In: our common future. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yellishetty M, Mudd GM, Ranjith PG, Tharumarajah A. 2011. Environmental life-cycle comparisons of steel production and recycling: sustainability issues, problems and prospects. Environ Sci Pol. 14:650–663.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar