Cited by 50Environmental Impact and SustainabilitySustainability and Ecological Systems AnalysisEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments

Temporal discounting in life cycle assessment: a critical review and theoretical framework

Yuan, Chris, Wang, Endong, Zhai, Qiang, Yang, Fan·2015·Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eiar.2015.01.001

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yuan, C., Wang, E., Zhai, Q., & Yang, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
  • University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (US)
Corresponding author
Yuan, Chris
Venue
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
51
Pages
23-31
ISSN
0195-9255 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093314584
Cited by
50
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Environmental Impact Assessment Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Sustainability and Ecological Systems Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
Keywords
delay discounting, temporal homogeneity, life cycle inventory data, environmental impact assessment

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