Life cycle assessment as a decision tool in local waste management? A french case study
It is now a bit more than a decade that LCA is being used as a decision making tool in waste management, in France and other European countries. Among the different tools available for environmental assessment, LCA is expected to fit particularly well the demand for global and exhaustive environmental evaluation of waste management scenarios. While specialised waste LCA tools already exist on the market, the adequate adaptation of the methodology to this particular field is still under discussion.
Further Authors:
K. Schlierf - ENGEES, France
R. Barbier - ENGEES, France
C. Beurois -Médiation & Environnement, France
One open question is here how to achieve a “good” integration of LCA results into the decision making process between multi-criteria analysis and simplification. Objectives: This communication addresses the integration of LCA results into decision making in waste management. It gives evidence of a case study where non-aggregated LCA results were fed into decision making, in an early stage planning process with stakeholder implication. The case has been selected as a particular rich opportunity for studying the question whether and how LCA may be a help in decision making in local waste management. Following the LCA from the very motivation of use to the final decision, we analyse how the multi-criteria character of LCA and its results is fit into the process. Methods: Our research results have been obtained through a case study, selected from a previous inventory of applications of LCA and similar tools in French waste management. The study is based on a total of ten interviews with the different stakeholders involved, as well as in-depth analysis of documentation on the decision making process and of the LCA. Interpretation of the results was carried out through interdisciplinary dialogue between researchers in LCA methodology and social scientists. Results and discussion: The integration of LCA into the decision making process happened in different spheres (a sphere of external expertise, an internal decision sphere, a restricted stakeholder sphere and a wider one). LCA has been recognized by all actors as an appropriate tool thanks to its normalized nature. Accordingly, during and shortly after the period of external expertise, LCA results were discussed side by side with other (technical and economic) elements of multi-criteria analysis. The appropriation and comprehension of the non-aggregated LCA results were rather high, also within the stakeholder sphere. Supporting preconditions showed here to be the academic and professional background of the actors and the still reduced size of the stakeholder group. However, rather general LCA results due to early use in the planning phase mostly showed that all scenarios had their advantages and inconveniences. So, while LCA contributed in the eyes of decision makers to a solid decision, this very decision had in fact to be based on other criteria. Moreover, results appeared to concerned stakeholders quite trivial, in contrast to more tangible evidence on existing sites obtained through bio-monitoring and alike. A turning point in the acceptance of LCA was the moment of transformation of the results of external expertise to a synthetic document, integrating all criteria finally to be taken into account in the decision. This document was supposed to represent a consensus within the restricted stakeholder sphere, and was employed as a means for translating the process to the wider public sphere. Yet, the integration of certain criteria judged by stakeholders as “political” ones reduced the credibility and thus interest of the entire exercise for these stakeholders. They abandoned the scene of multi-criteria assessment, the political process was displaced to another scene. So, multi-criteria LCA seemed to offer a basis for discussion on environmental aspects of the scenarios, at least during some time. However, its influence on the final decision was rather a non-influence, showing that the decision had to be taken on other criteria. In fact, the normalized nature of LCA, considered by the actors a strength in a politically charged decision, showed to be at the same time a means for the decision maker for making the decision non-contestable at least in environmental terms.
| Copyright: | © European Compost Network ECN e.V. | |
| Quelle: | Orbit 2012 (Juni 2012) | |
| Seiten: | 6 | |
| Preis inkl. MwSt.: | € 6,00 | |
| Autor: | Dr Jacques Mery  Dr. Lynda Aissani | |
| Artikel weiterleiten | In den Warenkorb legen
| Artikel kommentieren |
Diese Fachartikel könnten Sie auch interessieren:
Muss die Abfallhierarchie entsorgt werden?
© Lehrstuhl für Abfallverwertungstechnik und Abfallwirtschaft der Montanuniversität Leoben (11/2014)
Mit der Richtlinie 98/2008/EG wurde in Europe eine Prioritätenfolge, die so genannte Abfallhierarchie, für Maßnahmen in Bereich der Abfallwirtschaft festgelegt. Diese fünfstufige Reihung bietet auf den ersten Blick eine einfache und rasche Entscheidungshilfe, welche Behandlungsarten für Abfälle zu bevorzugen bzw. zu vermeiden sind. In der Praxis zeigt sich jedoch, dass die in der Abfallhierarchie bevorzugen Optionen, Vermeidung und Wiederverwendung, zu wenig zur Anwendung kommen und die Abfallmenge weiterhin ansteigt.
Abfallwirtschaft 2030 – vier Szenarien und ihre Nutzung
© Lehrstuhl für Abfallverwertungstechnik und Abfallwirtschaft der Montanuniversität Leoben (11/2012)
Nachhaltiges Wirtschaften bedarf langfristiger Strategien. Auch die Entwicklung der Abfallwirtschaft ist von vielfältigen Trends bestimmt: Wachsender Ressourcenverbrauch, Klimawandel oder die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in Schwellenländern sind nur einige davon. Wie sich diese Trends in ihrer Gesamtheit in Zukunft entwickeln könnten, ist wesentlich für die langfristige Ausrichtung der Abfallwirtschaftspolitik, aber auch für eine strategische Planung in der von Abfallfragen betroffenen Wirtschaft. Strategischen Entscheidungen liegen aber häufig persönliche Präferenzen und ein verengter Blick auf Tagesthemen zugrunde. Eine gute Basis für eine langfristige Planung kann daher nur durch systematisches und methodisch fundiertes Vorgehen geschaffen werden.
Optimisation of the aerobic maturation process of the MSW digestate on Montpellier ametyst plant
© European Compost Network ECN e.V. (6/2012)
Due to an increasing environmental pressure affecting regulation of waste treatment in developed countries, new solutions of collection, specific treatment and recycling of organic waste appear in many countries in order to lower the quantities of organic waste that directly sent towards land filling or incineration. The growing scarcity and increasing price of fossil energy leads towards the more and more systematic integration of an anaerobic digestion stage in the biological treatment of bio waste or mixed waste.
Further Authors:
O. Garone - Suez Environnement, CIRSEE, France
A. Sommain - Ametyst, SITA Méditerranée, France
Municipal Solid Waste Management in Turkey: Status, Challenges and Future Strategies
© Wasteconsult International (5/2015)
As in many developing countries, municipal solid waste (MSW) is one of the major environmental problems in Turkey. Problems associated with MSW are difficult to address, but efforts towards more efficient and environmentally acceptable waste disposal continue in Turkey. Although strict regulations on the management of solid waste are in place, undesirable disposal methods such as open dumping still have been widely applied in Turkey.
Notwendige Treiber für Ressourceneffizienz in der Abfallwirtschaft
© Lehrstuhl für Abfallverwertungstechnik und Abfallwirtschaft der Montanuniversität Leoben (11/2014)
Abfall wird vielfach als Ressource am falschen Ort bezeichnet. Die österreichische Abfallwirtschaft ist weltweit ein Vorreiter bei der Nutzung dieser Ressource. Das bestehende System (rechtlich, wirtschaftlich, technisch) bietet dabei sowohl positive als auch negative Anreize diese Ressourcen optimal zu verwenden. In dieser Arbeit wird das bestehende System der EU und Österreichs in Hinblick auf Anreize zur Steigerung der Ressourceneffizienz (Kostenwahrheit, steuerliche Aspekte, Eigentumsverhältnisse, Recyclingquoten, Ziele etc.) analysiert. Im Anschluss daran werden die notwendigen Treiber für Ressourceneffizienz definiert. Zum Abschluss werden Vorschläge und mögliche Maßnahmen für eine Messung im Rahmen eines Ressourceneffizienzindikators und zur Verbesserung der österreichischen Ressourceneffizienz präsentiert.
