The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of Process- and Input–Output-based Life Cycle Inventory Data with Regard to Truncation and Aggregation Issues
Abstract
Life cycle assessments (LCA) and environmentally extended input-output (EEIO) analyses both strive to account for direct and indirect environmental impacts of goods and services. Different methods have been developed to hybridize these two techniques and minimize the impact of their respective shortcomings on final assessments. These weaknesses, however, have not been extensively studied in a quantitative manner, especially not for complete LCA and EEIO databases. To this end, we jointly analyzed process-based and input-output-based data sets. We first evaluated their complementarity. Though the LCA data was more detailed overall, some sectors of the economy were more precisely represented in the EEIO database. We then contrasted the representation of the different economic sectors in the LCA database with the economic, environmental, and structural importance of these sectors. The weakness of the correlation results led us to conclude that process-inventory efforts have not been systematically directed at the most important sectors of the economy. The LCA data was also used to evaluate the sensitivity of EEIO data to aggregation uncertainty. This sensitivity proved highly inhomogeneous. We conclude the presence of important research inefficiencies stemming from the lack of hybrid perspective in the compilation of LCA and EEIO data.
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
Cites
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
System Boundary Selection in Life-Cycle Inventories Using Hybrid Approaches
Suh, S., Lenzen, M., Treloar, G. J., Hondo, H., Horvath, A., Huppes, G., Jolliet, O., Klann, U., Krewitt, W., Moriguchi, Y., et al. (2004) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0263745 · Cited by 1,025
Cited by
Genovese, A., Acquaye, A. A., Figueroa, A., & Koh, S. C. L. (2017) · Omega · doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015 · Cited by 1,502
Hertwich, E. G., Gibon, T., Bouman, E. A., Arvesen, A., Suh, S., Heath, G. A., Bergesen, J. D., Ramirez, A., Vega, M. I., & Shi, L. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1312753111 · Cited by 759
Self-citationPlevin, R. J., Delucchi, M. A., & Creutzig, F. (2014) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12074 · Cited by 425
Chastas, P., Theodosiou, T., & Bikas, D. (2016) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.05.040 · Cited by 400
Environmental impacts of food waste: Learnings and challenges from a case study on UK
Tonini, D., Albizzati, P. F., & Astrup, T. F. (2018) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.03.032 · Cited by 348
Achkari, O., & El Fadar, A. (2020) · Applied Thermal Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114806 · Cited by 341
Evaluating the environmental impacts of dietary recommendations
Behrens, P., Kiefte-de Jong, J. C., Bosker, T., Rodrigues, J. F. D., de Koning, A., & Tukker, A. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1711889114 · Cited by 283
Toward a Resource‐Efficient Built Environment: A Literature Review and Conceptual Model
Ness, D. A., & Xing, K. (2017) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12586 · Cited by 268
The greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation options for materials used in UK construction
Giesekam, J., Barrett, J., Taylor, P., & Owen, A. (2014) · Energy and Buildings · doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.04.035 · Cited by 202
Thomassen, G., Van Dael, M., Van Passel, S., & You, F. (2019) · Green Chemistry · doi:10.1039/c9gc02223f · Cited by 197
The ecoinvent database version 3 (part II): analyzing LCA results and comparison to version 2
Steubing, B., Wernet, G., Reinhard, J., Bauer, C., & Moreno-Ruiz, E. (2016) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1109-6 · Cited by 181
Stephan, A., & Crawford, R. H. (2016) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.038 · Cited by 102
Wolfram, P., & Wiedmann, T. (2017) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.219 · Cited by 99
Arvesen, A., Bright, R. M., & Hertwich, E. G. (2011) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.013 · Cited by 67
Self-citationBetter than bottled water?—Energy and climate change impacts of on-the-go drinking water stations
Makov, T., Meylan, G., Powell, J. T., & Shepon, A. (2019) · Resources Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.11.010 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Majeau-Bettez, G., Strømman, A. H., & Hertwich, E. G.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2011-11-07
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 10170-10177
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2052909841
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
