The DOI matches its Crossref record.
IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology
Open accessAbstract
The new IMPACT 2002+ life cycle impact assessment methodology proposes a feasible implementation of a combined midpoint/damage approach, linking all types of life cycle inventory results (elementary flows and other interventions) via 14 midpoint categories to four damage categories. For IMPACT 2002+, new concepts and methods have been developed, especially for the comparative assessment of human toxicity and ecotoxicity. Human Damage Factors are calculated for carcinogens and non-carcinogens, employing intake fractions, best estimates of dose-response slope factors, as well as severities. The transfer of contaminants into the human food is no more based on consumption surveys, but accounts for agricultural and livestock production levels. Indoor and outdoor air emissions can be compared and the intermittent character of rainfall is considered. Both human toxicity and ecotoxicity effect factors are based on mean responses rather than on conservative assumptions. Other midpoint categories are adapted from existing characterizing methods (Eco-indicator 99 and CML 2002). All midpoint scores are expressed in units of a reference substance and related to the four damage categories human health, ecosystem quality, climate change, and resources. Normalization can be performed either at midpoint or at damage level. The IMPACT 2002+ method presently provides characterization factors for almost 1500 different LCI-results, which can be downloaded at http://www.epfl.ch/impact
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Recent developments in life cycle assessment
Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D., & Suh, S. (2009) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.018 · Cited by 3,444
Environmental impacts of the U.S. health care system and effects on public health
Eckelman, M. J., & Sherman, J. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157014 · Cited by 1,017
TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0
Bare, J. (2011) · Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy · doi:10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9 · Cited by 988
Corona, B., Shen, L., Reike, D., Rosales Carreón, J., & Worrell, E. (2019) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104498 · Cited by 987
The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review
Peters, J. F., Baumann, M., Zimmermann, B., Braun, J., & Weil, M. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.039 · Cited by 856
Metadata
- Authors
- Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., & Rosenbaum, R.
- Venue
- The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 6
- ISSN
- 0948-3349 (ISSN-L)
- 1614-7502
- OpenAlex
- W2001890098
- Cited by
- 1,968
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02978505
- The paper
- Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., & Rosenbaum, R. (2003). IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02978505
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.