Authors

Abstract

PurposeImproving the circularity of resources is important to the sustainability of consumer goods. Current research has indicated that circularity practices and circular economy (CE) methods do not always reduce environmental impacts. The aim of this research is to investigate the adoption of the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology to improve the environmental impacts of circularity practices. MethodsAs part of the Society for Environmental Toxicology And Chemistry (SETAC) forum, an interest group (IG) on Circularity and LCA was formed in partnership with the American Center for Life Cycle Assessment (ACLCA) to tackle methodological and technical issues related to circularity in LCA. The IGs research approach is summarized in four key steps: defining goals and objectives, literature review and gap analysis, ideation, and experimentation. The twelve active persons within this IG meet monthly and have been divided into four sub-working groups (sub-WGs) so that complementary tasks can be completed concurrently in an effective manner. Each sub-WG meets monthly and reports back to the main group for collaboration and brainstorming to meet the research objectives.Results and discussion First, the sub-WG #1, focusing on the pool of circularity and LCA-based indicators, analyzed the complementarity between two of the most used circularity indicators and LCA. Second, the sub-WG #2, working on the evaluation of CE loops performance through LCA, built a mind map of pain points that reflect the challenges that the LCA practitioners face when combining LCA with CE approaches. Third, the sub-WG #3, dealing with the trade-offs between circularity and sustainability, highlighted key alignments and/or conflicts between circularity and sustainability performance depending on the scope, product, industry, or system of analysis. Fourth, the sub-WG #4, focusing on business and industrial cases, plans to leverage the knowledge base developed within this IG to develop use cases documenting the benefits and challenges associated with CE-related loops modeling in LCA.ConclusionsThe first findings of this SETAC/ACLCA IG provide a state-of-the-art overview of the synergists of LCA methodology and the CE measurement frameworks reported in the literature. To move forward and capitalize on the first findings, one valuable point will be to discuss and provide concrete solutions to the pain points that emerged when considering circularity in LCA. Eventually, the knowledge base and resources created within this IG ultimately aim to support the proper application of LCA for practitioners in CE contexts, and could provide relevant inputs for the ISO Technical Committee ISO/TC 323 working on the upcoming standard for the measurement of CE performance.