Advanced search
1 file | 1.38 MB
Author
Organization
Abstract
Our whole society depends on the use of natural resources. Despite the fact that most natural resources are limited, they are not always used in a sustainable way. To monitor the transition towards a more resource efficient society, a wide variety of indicators has been developed over the years, both within a policy context and an industrial context. However, these indicators are not univocally defined, which generates confusion about the real meaning of resource efficiency. Indeed, the term resource efficiency is interpreted in different ways: from the simple accounting of resource extraction to environmental impact assessment related to resource availability and provision of resources ; from the micro-level of products and companies to the macro-level of regions and countries ; from a gate-to-gate perspective to a life cycle perspective or from a national perspective1 to a global perspective . Also the considered resource range (which natural resource types are taken into account) and the used quantification metric (monetary or physical) can vary from indicator to indicator. Another issue is the provenience of resources: in some studies is referred to natural resources, while in others waste is also considered to be a potential resource . This paper tries to bring order into these different visions by proposing a systematized framework for resource efficiency indicators based on LCA practices. The proposed framework is subdivided in multiple levels based on the interpretations summarized above. The use of the framework is illustrated by structuring several resource efficiency indicators in practice today, e.g. the GDP over DMC (Gross Domestic Product over Domestic Material Consumption), used within a policy context, or process-efficiency, used within an industrial context. Within this framework, resource efficiency indicators can be classified and critically evaluated, identifying possibilities for further development and improvement.

Downloads

  • PosterLCM.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.38 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Huysman, Sofie, Serenella Sala, Lucia Manicni, Fulvio Ardente, Fabrice Mathieux, Rodrigo Freitas de Alvarenga, Steven De Meester, and Jo Dewulf. 2015. “Classifying Resource Efficiency Indicators Based on LCA Practices.” In Life Cycle Management, 7th International Conference, Abstracts.
APA
Huysman, Sofie, Sala, S., Manicni, L., Ardente, F., Mathieux, F., Freitas de Alvarenga, R., De Meester, S., et al. (2015). Classifying resource efficiency indicators based on LCA practices. Life Cycle Management, 7th International conference, Abstracts. Presented at the 7th International conference on Life Cycle Management (LCM 2015).
Vancouver
1.
Huysman S, Sala S, Manicni L, Ardente F, Mathieux F, Freitas de Alvarenga R, et al. Classifying resource efficiency indicators based on LCA practices. Life Cycle Management, 7th International conference, Abstracts. 2015.
MLA
Huysman, Sofie, Serenella Sala, Lucia Manicni, et al. “Classifying Resource Efficiency Indicators Based on LCA Practices.” Life Cycle Management, 7th International Conference, Abstracts. 2015. Print.
@inproceedings{6930993,
  abstract     = {Our whole society depends on the use of natural resources. Despite the fact that most natural resources are limited, they are not always used in a sustainable way. To monitor the transition towards a more resource efficient society, a wide variety of indicators has been developed over the years, both within a policy context and an industrial context. However, these indicators are not univocally defined, which generates confusion about the real meaning of resource efficiency. 
Indeed, the term resource efficiency is interpreted in different ways: from the simple accounting of resource extraction  to environmental impact assessment related to resource availability and provision of resources ; from the micro-level of products and companies  to the macro-level of regions and countries ; from a gate-to-gate perspective to a life cycle perspective or from a national perspective1 to a global perspective . Also the considered resource range (which natural resource types are taken into account) and the used quantification metric (monetary or physical) can vary from indicator to indicator. Another issue is the provenience of resources: in some studies is referred to natural resources, while in others waste is also considered to be a potential resource . 
This paper tries to bring order into these different visions by proposing a systematized framework for resource efficiency indicators based on LCA practices. The proposed framework is subdivided in multiple levels based on the interpretations summarized above.
The use of the framework is illustrated by structuring several resource efficiency indicators in practice today, e.g. the GDP over DMC (Gross Domestic Product over Domestic Material Consumption), used within a policy context, or process-efficiency, used within an industrial context. Within this framework, resource efficiency indicators can be classified and critically evaluated, identifying possibilities for further development and improvement.},
  author       = {Huysman, Sofie and Sala, Serenella and Manicni, Lucia and Ardente, Fulvio and Mathieux, Fabrice and Freitas de Alvarenga, Rodrigo and De Meester, Steven and Dewulf, Jo},
  booktitle    = {Life Cycle Management, 7th International conference, Abstracts},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Bordeaux, France},
  title        = {Classifying resource efficiency indicators based on LCA practices},
  year         = {2015},
}