Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Combined material flow analysis and life cycle assessment as a support tool for solid waste management decision making

Open access
Turner, David A., Williams, Ian D., Kemp, Simon·2016·Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract

Material flow analysis (MFA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) have both widely been applied to support solid waste management (SWM) decision making. However, they are often applied independently rather than conjointly. This paper presents an approach that combines the MFA and LCA methodologies to evaluate large and complex SWM systems from an environmental perspective. The approach was applied to evaluate the environmental performance, focusing on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, of a local authority SWM system and to compare it with alternative systems to assess the potential effectiveness of different waste policy measures. The MFA results suggest that national recycling targets are unlikely to be met even if the assessed policies are implemented optimally. It is likely that for the targets to be met, investigated policies would need to be combined with additional policies that target reductions in waste arisings. The LCA results found landfilling of residual waste to be the dominant source of GHG burdens for the existing system, whilst material reprocessing was found to result in GHG benefits. Overall, each of the alternative systems investigated were found to result in lower GHG impacts compared to the existing system, with the diversion of food waste from the residual waste stream found to be potentially the most effective strategy to reduce GHG emissions. The results of this study demonstrate that the complementary methodologies of MFA and LCA can be used in combination to provide policy and decision makers with valuable information about the environmental performance of SWM systems. • A combined MFA–LCA approach was applied to evaluate a large and complex SWM system. • The potential effectiveness of waste policies were assessed with scenario modelling. • The purpose was to provide information on SWM system performance to decision makers. • The MFA revealed that recycling targets will be missed even with enacted policies. • The LCA revealed food waste diversion from landfill to be the optimum strategy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.077

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S.
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
129
Pages
234-248
ISSN
0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2394298188
Cited by
183
References
3
FWCI
20.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Combined material flow analysis and life cycle assessment as a support tool for solid waste management decision making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.077
The paper
Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2016). Combined material flow analysis and life cycle assessment as a support tool for solid waste management decision making. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.077

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.