Life Cycle Assessment - Opportunities For Forest Products Sector
Life Cycle Assessment - Opportunities For Forest Products Sector
Life Cycle Assessment - Opportunities For Forest Products Sector
Abstract
The utilization of wood in long life products, such as construction materials in the built environment, is an
effective way to optimize the use of natural resources while also reducing negative environmental impacts.
However, the environmental benefits of timber, especially in the construction sector, are not always clearly
understood. As a renewable material, timber is available in perpetuity if it is obtained from sustainably managed
forests. Using timber in the built environment stores sequestered atmospheric carbon dioxide in long-life products
and timber can be incinerated at the end of its life (or its multiple lives) with energy recovery, thereby minimizing
demolition waste. The built environment effectively acts as an extension of the forest. The question is: how
should the environmental benefits of timber use be measured and presented? To answer that question, this
paper offers an overview of the life cycle assessment (LCA) methods the forest products sector could broadly
apply to evaluate and report the sustainability performance of wood. In addition to environmental LCA, the
paper also incorporates an overview of organizational LCA (O-LCA), and social LCA (S-LCA). Furthermore, this
paper discusses environmental product declarations (EPDs) and construction standards aiming to enable better
comparability of the environmental performance of products. This review paper concludes with a discussion of
where the opportunities for the forest products sector lie and the need for joint actions within the sector. The
importance of including the storage of sequestered atmospheric carbon dioxide into the standards assessing
the environmental impact is emphasized.
Keywords: environmental impact, environmental product declaration (EPD), forest products, life cycle
assessment (LCA), O-LCA, product category rules (PCR), S-LCA, wood
benefits need to be properly quantified. This requires of criticism (Ayres 1995, De Haes 1993, Ehrenfeld 1997,
using tools that can properly assess and compare sustain- Finnveden 2000, Krozer and Vis 1998). However, since the
ability benefits of different. Wood-based products, from beginning of the 21st century, considerable progress has
raw materials to intermediate and final products, need been made, including the development of international
to be subjected to detailed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), standards. There are also several international initiatives
considering use and disposal or re-use to fully evaluate taking place with the aim of building consensus and
their claimed benefits. This is necessary to provide solid developing robust methodologies. These include the
evidence for supporting policy decisions, such as policies Life Cycle Initiative of the United Nations Environment
to encourage building with wood, as well as to support Program (UNEP), the Society of Environmental Toxicology
claims of superior environmental credentials, particularly and Chemistry (SETAC), the European Platform for LCA of
when compared with non-renewable materials. Product the European Commission (EPLCA) and the International
quality standards, certification programs, environmental Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD). Life cycle assess-
labelling, industry-led schemes, and communication ment is not static and there are ongoing programs deal-
tools are important to encourage demand and provide ing with improving various aspects of this methodology
environmental information to consumers and other (Finnveden et al. 2009). It is important that the correct
stakeholders. Industries associated with non-renewable decisions are made regarding the choice of materials for
materials are putting considerable effort into conducting the built environment and LCA can be used as a means
LCAs and publishing environmental product declarations of informing those choices. However, it entails that LCA
(EPDs) of their products; it is important that the forest is properly used and that decision support tools allow for
products sector does not get left behind. LCA is a tool accurate comparability between products (Audenaert et
that has been developed to analyze and quantify the al. 2012, Ding 2008, Forsberg and Von Malmborg 2004).
environmental burdens associated with the production, The common LCA methodology is defined in ISO
use, and disposal of a product and is arguably the best 14040 (ISO 2006a) and ISO 14044 (ISO 2006b). Since the
way of quantifying this information (Hill 2011). For the 1980s, when LCA analysis was first developed, numerous
purposes of this review, the term product includes both methodologies to classify, characterize, and normalize
goods and services. environmental effects have been developed. The most
Due to consumer pressure and government legisla- common are focused on the following environmental
tion at national and regional levels, the environmental impact indicators: acidification, eutrophication, thin-
impacts of products are increasingly coming into focus. ning of the ozone layer, various types of ecotoxicity,
Many companies now make environmental claims about air contaminants, resource usage and green-house gas
their products to boost sales and it is desirable to back up emissions.
such claims with verifiable data which can be achieved by The LCA methodology was originally developed
conducting LCAs. This introduces a potential tension be- for products. Recently, however, its application at the
cause companies tend to keep details of manufacturing organizational level is becoming more and more rel-
secret, and LCA process requires transparency. Another evant, leading to the introduction of the so-called
use of conducting an LCA is to reduce the environmental Organizational LCA (O-LCA). This includes more than
footprint associated with the manufacturing of a prod- one product life cycle, as most organizations are engaged
uct. In this case, LCA can be used as an analytical tool to in many product life cycles to different degrees and a
identify where major environmental impacts arise and large part of organizations’ environmental impacts can
determine appropriate actions to reduce these impacts. reside outside the organization’s boundaries- upstream
A valuable outcome from an LCA study is the identifica- and downstream in the value chain. Guidance on O-LCA
tion of ‘hot-spots,’ which are parts of a process associated is included in the Technical Specification ISO/TS 14072
with the most significant environmental burdens, where (ISO 2014). ISO/TS 14072 extends the application of ISO
investment in process improvements will result in the 14040 and ISO 14044 to all activities of the organization.
greatest environmental benefits. O-LCA also follows the four-steps defined in ISO 14044.
Interest in LCA grew rapidly during the 1990’s and The main differences between LCA and O-LCA reside
generated high expectations, but also became the focus at the scope level and boundary definition (Martínez-
54 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
Blanco et al. 2015a,b). In O-LCA, the unit of analysis is environmental impacts associated with a product choice
the organization and its portfolio, which is unique for therefore requires the entire life cycle to be considered.
each organization. This invariably introduces a higher level of uncertainty
Recent methodological developments have aimed into the process because there may be aspects of the
at extending life cycle thinking to also evaluate social life cycle that are not well understood, thus requiring
issues, referred to as Social life cycle assessment (S-LCA), assumptions to be made. These assumptions may have
and economic issues, referred to as Life Cycle Costing a very significant impact upon an LCA and a bias may
(LCC), towards a complete and comprehensive Life Cycle be introduced if comparisons are being made between
Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). Similar to LCA, S-LCA different products.
integrates traditional life cycle assessment methodologi- Defining the goal and scope involves writing a series
cal steps while having social impacts as its focus (Sala et of statements at the beginning of the process to tell the
al. 2015). The basic phases of LCA defined by ISO 14044 reader why the LCA was performed, who is conducting
are also applied in S-LCA, including (i) scope and goal of the study, who the client is, and what is covered by
the assessment; (ii) inventory of impacts; (iii) impact as- the LCA. It is at this stage that the system boundary is
sessment with proper indicators (e.g., child labor, forced defined. For example, the purpose may be to conduct
labor, health and safety, etc.); and (iv) interpretation of an LCA of only the manufacturing process (i.e., cradle
the results. These methodologies differ from the mere to factory gate) or of the entire service life. Additional
reporting of data, such as emissions from a factory, in parts of the lifecycle, such as recycling and disposal, may
that they consider the consequences of these activities also be analyzed. The purpose of the LCA may simply be
on society. to report the environmental burdens associated with a
In this paper, LCA of products as well as organizations product or process, referred to as an attributional LCA,
are presented, aiming to deliver a comprehensive over- or to examine the consequences of changing various
view of environmental impact assessments to include parameters or adopting different scenarios, referred to
assessments of environmental impact, social impact, as a consequential LCA (Frischknecht and Stucki 2010,
and economic impact. The paper moves on to discuss Gala and Raugei 2015). It is also necessary to specify the
the importance of these assessments in the context of subject of the LCA. This is referred to as the declared
the forest/wood products sector. unit if cradle to factory gate is being analyzed, or the
functional unit if other parts of the lifecycle are also
2 LCA Methodology being studied. Another important consideration when
studying the environmental impacts associated with
To conduct an LCA, it is necessary to determine the a product or process is the timescale involved and it is
appropriate goal and scope (i.e. what is the purpose important that this is also defined at the preliminary
behind conducting a LCA and what is being included stage. It is also a requirement to specify which allocation
in the study). The scope must define the system bound- procedures will be used during the analysis.
aries in the study and declare the functional unit. For The life cycle inventory (LCI) phase of the analysis
many purposes, the system boundary can be defined requires a compilation of all information about the se-
as ‘cradle to gate,’ that is, from the manufacture of a lected process. To do this, an imaginary system boundary
specific product in a factory to the point at which it is drawn around the process and all the material and
leaves the facility (corresponding to modules A1-A3 energy inputs and outputs are quantified. This process
in the European Standard EN 15804 (CEN 2012)). This is usually divided into the different life cycle stages,
provides the most accurate LCA because this phase of a including manufacture, service life, end of life, and dis-
product life cycle involves the fewest assumptions and posal. Data gaps are identified once the LCI phase of
the data gathering process is relatively straightforward. the analysis is complete. In some cases, it is possible to
However, a low impact product, as determined through a collect the missing data; where doing so is not possible,
cradle to gate analysis, may require a lot of maintenance ‘reasonable’ assumptions must be made. During this
during the in-service phase of the life cycle, or there phase, mass balance calculations are also performed.
may be serious environmental impacts associated with This is a very useful tool for identifying data gaps and
disposal. A full appreciation and understanding of the is based on the principle that the mass of all matter go-
Kutnar and Hill — Life Cycle Assessment – Opportunities for Forest Products Sector 55
ing into the system under study should equal that of all ficult to interpret (Dong et al. 2014). Impact categories
the matter exiting the system. At some stage, the data are reported in terms of effect on human health (e.g.,
gathering process must be terminated and the point at disability adjusted life years (DALY)), or on ecosystems
which this occurs is determined by cut-off criteria. Data (e.g., species loss). Some systems have even gone so
falls into two principal categories: primary (foreground) far as to aggregate all impacts into one category (e.g.,
and secondary (background) data. Primary data is that ecopoints), but values reported using this approach
which has been gathered by the LCA practitioner and have such high uncertainties that they’re effectively
may include utility bills, delivery notes, and other infor- meaningless. Environmental impacts are calculated us-
mation that is directly linked to the process. Secondary ing a variety of models, currently more than 150, which
data is that which has not been directly obtained, but is attempt to determine the impacts of processes on the
more generic in nature; for example, if wooden pallets natural environment. Examples of such models include:
are used to ship the product, then it is highly unlikely
•• Midpoint: Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of
that a full inventory of the pallets would be made. This
Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI),
information may be sourced from a database, such as
University of Leiden Institute of Environmental
Ecoinvent. The collection and analysis of data invariably
Sciences method – Centrum Milieukund Leiden
leads to issues regarding commercial confidentiality,
(CML), Environmental Development of Industrial
which can cause problems, especially when the LCA must
Products (EDIP)
meet adequate levels of transparency to be credible.
Ultimately, what should result from such an analysis is a •• Endpoint: Eco-indicator, Life Cycle Assessment
table, referred to as an input-output table that represents Method based on Endpoint Modelling (LIME)
flows of materials and energy to and from the natural
•• Combined midpoint and endpoint: ReCiPe (the
environment (i.e., the ecosphere).
acronym represents the initials of the main developers
Once the LCI phase has been completed, it is neces- of the method), IMPACT 2002+
sary to quantify environmental burdens. This is called
the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) phase. During For example, applying IMPACT 2002+, the ‘value’ of
this phase, there are several additional complications an environmental impact is reported as an ecoindicator
that should be considered. The biggest problem involves and measured in environmental points. The accumu-
deciding how to report environmental impacts. There is lated ecoindicator is composed of damage categories
ongoing discussion regarding how to properly report (e.g., human health, ecosystem quality, climate change,
environmental burdens, but a consensus has been devel- resources) and impact categories (e.g., carcinogens, non-
oping over the past decade or so. The objective involves carcinogens, respiratory inorganics, respiratory organics,
aggregating environmental implications associated ionizing radiation, ozone layer depletion, aquatic ecotox-
with flows to and from the natural environment into a icity, terrestrial ecotoxicity, terrestrial acidification, land
small, but nonetheless meaningful, set of indicators. This occupation, aquatic acidification, aquatic eutrophication,
methodology has essentially broken down into two main global warming potential, non-renewable energy, min-
approaches, including midpoint and endpoint indicators eral extraction). This requires a weighting process to be
(Bare et al. 2000, Ortiz et al. 2009, Hauschild et al. 2013). applied, which is reliant on value judgement.
In the midpoint approach, environmental burdens are The impact categories selected should provide useful
grouped into similar environmental impact categories information about the product or process while taking
(e.g., global warming potential, ozone layer depletion, the goal and scope of the study into consideration. When
freshwater eutrophication, etc.). In comparison, the selecting the impact categories, it is also necessary to
endpoint approach seeks to model the chain of cause select characterization factors, which are the units used
and effect to the point of the evaluation of damage to report each environmental burden. To consider the
(e.g. incidence of skin cancer rather than ozone layer example of the climate change impact category, the
depletion is reported). This makes for simpler report- characterization factor for this category involves global
ing with fewer indicators, but involves a higher level of warming potential over a 100-year timeframe (GWP100)
uncertainty. The midpoint approach is preferred because measured in kilogram CO2 equivalents. The method
of the higher level of accuracy, but can be more dif- used to calculate impacts affect the results of the LCA
56 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
study, which should always be considered when making Jungmeier et al. (2002) identified ten different pro-
comparisons between products or materials in different cesses in the forestry value chain where allocation is-
studies (Monteiro and Freire 2012). sues can occur: forestry, sawmill, wood industry, pulp
Another important factor involves the correct al- and paper industry, particle board industry, recycling
location of environmental burdens on different co- of paper, recycling of wood-based boards, recycling of
products when the system under analysis produces waste wood, combined heat and power production, and
more than one product. Examples of this include the landfill processes. These can be divided into multi-output
allocations between cereal and straw, or meat and wool processes (e.g., sawmill) or multi-input processes (e.g.,
in agricultural production systems (Brankatschk and landfill or domestic waste incineration plant).
Finkbeiner 2014). Ideally, allocation should be avoided At the end of the LCA process, there are additional
when possible but, in many cases, this cannot be done analyses that can be performed; these include normaliza-
and a choice must be made regarding the allocation tion, grouping (aggregation), and weighting. These are
procedure used. Various approaches can be used for usually used to make environmental information more
allocating environmental burdens, including mass, comprehensible (Chau et al. 2015).
energy, or economic allocation. Guidance regarding
allocation is given in ISO 14040 and ISO 14044, both of 3 Life Cycle Assessment and
which recommend a hierarchy of choice for allocation Environmental Product Declarations
methods. In many cases, economic allocation is used,
which provides a more realistic allocation of burdens LCA is a useful tool when it is used correctly. However,
because economic concerns often justify processes used. problems can arise when LCA is used to make com-
Problems with this method include price fluctuations parative assertions between different products. There is
and unavailability of important economic information. considerable scope for variation in the way that LCA is
An advantage of mass allocation is that it does not vary, performed (e.g., choice of system boundary, functional
however, a disproportionate burden may be assigned unit, environmental impact categories and calculation
to a waste or co-product. One method of dealing with methods, assumptions about service life, maintenance,
allocation issues is to employ a system expansion so that etc.), which can make comparisons between products
all the different product streams are included within the problematic, if not impossible. A limitation of LCA in-
same system boundary. For comparison purposes, the volves the insufficient transparency of results, which
wood-based functional unit must be the same as the can hinder the utilization of existing studies as a source
non-wood-based functional unit. For example, if a timber of information and in making comparisons. To com-
frame building is manufactured using waste from the pare LCAs with confidence, the datasheet, assumptions,
process used to produce energy, then it is possible to sources of data, and calculations should be provided.
make the functional unit ‘the structural frame plus the Due to the use of commercial software, transparency is
production of x kWh of energy’. This could be compared often lacking. For the wood sector and other bio-based
with the same structural functional unit made from a products, it is particularly important to present system
non-renewable material plus x kWh of energy produced boundaries, functional units, and co-product allocation
from a fossil fuel. However, if the wood waste goes to transparently. It is important to include agricultural
the production of chipboard or paper, then the com- activities as well as any change in land use for agricul-
parison becomes more difficult. It is almost inevitable tural inputs. For example, old-growth forests represent
that some form of allocation will have to be employed. a significant carbon pool; disturbing such forests could
In many cases, an economic allocation may be the best lead to the release of substantial carbon. Furthermore,
way of allocating burdens but, again, prices may fluctu- a direct LCA comparison can only be done on the same
ate. Furthermore, forests can produce different product functional unit, which considers the actual function of the
streams at different times (e.g., first thinnings, second product. If a comparison is performed on a mass basis,
thinnings, third thinnings, harvest), which adds to the the comparison is meaningless when the alternative
problem of economic allocation over a time scale that product has a different lifetime or is used or disposed
can be as long as a century (Jungmeier et al. 2002). of in a different way.
Kutnar and Hill — Life Cycle Assessment – Opportunities for Forest Products Sector 57
Clearly, there is considerable potential for uncertain- Table 1. List of information modules within the product life cycle listed
in CEN standard EN 15804 (CEN 2012).
ties to influence LCA. Nevertheless, considerable progress
has been made in this arena in the past decade. One of the Module Life cycle stage Description
most significant developments has been the introduction
of EPDs. In order to develop a framework that allows for A1 Production Raw material supply
the comparability of environmental performance of dif- A2 Production Transport
ferent products, ISO 14025 (ISO 2006c) was introduced. A3 Production Manufacturing
ISO 14025 describes the procedures required to produce
Type III environmental declarations (or environmental A4 Construction Transport
product declarations). This framework is based on the A5 Construction Construction/installation
principle of developing product category rules (PCRs),
which specify how information from an LCA is to be used B1 Use Use
to produce an EPD. A PCR will, for example, specify what B2 Use Maintenance
the declared unit and/or functional unit is for the product. B3 Use Repair
Within the framework of ISO 14025, only the produc- B4 Use Replacement
tion phase (i.e., cradle to gate) of the lifecycle should be B5 Use Refurbishment
B6 Use Operational energy use
included in the EPD. It is also possible to include other
B7 Use Operational water use
lifecycle stages, such as the in-service stage and the
end of life stage, but these are not required. ISO 14025
C1 End of life De-construction/demolition
also gives guidance on the process of managing an EPD
C2 End of life Transport
program. This requires program operators to set up a
C3 End of life Waste processing
scheme for the publication of a PCR under the guidance
C4 End of life Disposal
of general program instructions. There has been a range
of EPD programs initiated since the publication of ISO
D Beyond building life cycle Reuse/recovery/recycling
14025 (Del Borghi 2013), resulting in a correspondingly
large number of published PCRs, which often do not
correspond with one another (Subramanian et al. 2012). The primary purpose of an EPD, according to ISO
There have been additional standards issued that 14025, is to improve business to business (b2b) com-
apply to the construction industry to promote greater munication, but an EPD may also be used for business
comparability of the environmental performance of to consumer (b2c) communication. In the latter case,
products. For example, ISO 21930 (ISO 2007) provided there are further requirements within the process, which
some guidance on both PCR and EPD development, but particularly apply to verification procedures. In any case,
this was recently replaced by EN 15804 (CEN 2012) in ISO 14025 encourages those involved in the production
Europe. EN 15804 is an integral PCR for building products of an EPD to take account of the level of awareness of
and is considerably more detailed and prescriptive than the target audience. Standards are increasingly removing
ISO 14025; ISO 21930 is currently being revised. Different the flexibility (and uncertainty) that was once associated
life cycle stages are divided into modules in EN 15804. with determining the environmental performance of
Modules A1-A3 cover the production stage, A4-A5 the products and services. This should make it much easier
construction process, B1-B7 the use stage, and C1-C4 to compare the environmental impacts of products
the end of life stage; beyond this is the ‘after-life’ stage within a product category in the future. Namely, EPD
(D). These are listed in Table 1 below. The publication of is presenting the life cycle of a product in a report, fo-
this standard ensures harmonization of core PCRs for cusing on the product’s environmental impacts, such
building products in Europe (a core PCR is the basic PCR as contributions to global warming, ozone depletion,
for a whole product group, upon which more specific water pollution, ozone creation, and greenhouse gas
PCRs are based). It is mandatory to report stages A1-A3, emissions. An EPD can include additional impacts that
whereas the other stages are included for any reporting are of interest to the discloser, such as human toxicity,
beyond cradle to factory gate. risk, and corporate social responsibility.
58 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
was equal to the annual inflow. This means that although Section 5.4.9 in the current version of the PEF
a substantial quantity of atmospheric carbon may be guidance document, Commission Recommendation
stored in the HWP pool, this amount is assumed to be 2013/179/EU (European Commission, 2013), available
stable over time, thus negating net benefits in terms of from the European Commission, deals with the issue of
mitigation potential. For the second commitment period temporary carbon storage, stating, “Credits associated
(2013-2020), carbon accounting included carbon stock with temporary (carbon) storage or delayed emissions
changes in the HWP pool. shall not be considered in the calculation of the default
Although the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate EF impact categories. However, these may be included
Change (IPCC) recognizes the importance of the built as ‘additional environmental information.’”
environment, its mitigation strategies included in the Conventional LCA methods do not assign any ben-
fourth and fifth assessment reports (IPCC 2007, 2014) efits to the temporary storage of atmospheric carbon
are almost exclusively concerned with energy consump- because the timing of emissions relative to removal is
tion. The use of wood as an example of a low embodied disregarded (Pinsonnault et al. 2014). Although there
energy material is mentioned, but consideration of the are benefits to be gained from using timber products
potential for timber and other plant derived products to in long life products as a store of atmospheric carbon,
act as carbon stores in the built environment is lacking. there is still no recognized way of accounting for this
Furthermore, the use of mitigation strategies associated (Brandão et al. 2013).
with forestry is only connected to bioenergy and do not
discuss the carbon storage potential of timber products. 5 Life Cycle Assessments of
However, in 2009, the 14th Conference of the Parties (COP Organizations
14) did recognize the importance of including timber
products as carbon sinks. Likewise, the 2011 Durban The O-LCA approach is a compilation and evaluation of
and 2012 Doha conferences stated that carbon stored the inputs, outputs, and potential environmental impacts
in wood products should be integrated into reporting of the activities associated with an organization. The
procedures. organization, which is the object studied in O-LCA, is
Nevertheless, the benefits of using wood products defined by ISO/TS 14072 (ISO 2014). It can be a person
as a store for atmospheric carbon dioxide are only re- or a group of people. O-LCA can be performed by an
alized if the products have a sufficiently long life. The organization of any size and sector.
question of the temporal nature of carbon emissions The organization’s portfolio usually includes more
into the atmosphere and considerations of the length than one product. When performing an O-LCA, all ac-
of time that atmospheric carbon is held in storage are tivities associated with the set of goods and services an
extremely important when biogenic carbon is considered organization provides are assessed at the same time.
(Cherubini et al. 2012). Unfortunately, there is no con- Therefore, an O-LCA can be incredibly complex. UNEP/
sensus regarding the methodology for measuring and SETAC (2015) published Guidance on Organizational Life
accounting for carbon in biogenic products. Although Cycle Assessment, which summarizes opportunities an
the ILCD methodology is still utilized, there have not been O-LCA could provide. An organization may be motivated
any useful developments in standardization. The 2008 to perform an O-LCA for analytical, managerial, or so-
version of PAS2050 (BSI 2008) initially included methods cietal reasons. Examples of analytical goals include: to
for calculating the temporal aspects of biogenic carbon understand internal operations, identify the operations
storage in annex C, but by the time the 2011 version with highest impacts on the environment, identify the
was published, the methods were no longer included. risks and define the activities to reduce the impacts, etc.
Similarly, the European Standard EN 16485 (CEN 2014) Managerial objectives may include: gain support for
that designated product category rules for round and strategic decisions, improve organizational procedures,
sawn timber featured a temporal calculation method for initiate environmental communication and reporting with
determining the storage of biogenic carbon in its draft stakeholders, reduce operational costs, and/or demon-
form, but not in the final publication. strate environmental awareness for marketing purposes.
60 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
These goals may encourage other organizations and consulting, and cosmetic and personal care, and four
foster sustainable development of society. However, regions, including South and North America, Europe,
the objectives and/or justification for LCA should be Asia, and Oceania, were represented in the case studies.
adapted to each organization. The ISO/TS 14072 (ISO BASF, a chemical company, was included as a pilot proj-
2014) does not allow the use of O-LCA for comparative ect. Their industrial complex is located in the Demarchi
purposes. Unlike a product LCA, an O-LCA is not capable neighborhood of São Bernardo do Campo, Brazil and
of providing comparative assertions to be disclosed to includes seven production plants, mainly dedicated to
the public. Most principles, requirements, and guidelines paint and varnish production. The goal of the study was
of a product LCA apply to an O-LCA. An O-LCA requires to evaluate the environmental impacts of production
the definition of two new elements, roughly equivalent systems over time to evaluate impact trends and to
to the functional unit and reference flow, the so-called identify relevant effects on impact distribution due to
reporting organization and reporting flow. changes in production units. Therefore, the cradle-to-
Martínez-Blanco et al. (2015a) compared the LCA of gate boundary approach was used. The reference unit
products and the O-LCA to identify the main differences was 1 tonne of finished product. Primary data, including
in the scope phase of LCA analysis. The authors found the organization’s annual production reports for 2010,
that the characterization of the organization must be 2011, and 2012, and secondary data, including techni-
evaluated carefully. The characterization of the so-called cal literature, research reports, and LCA databases, were
reporting organization should include three elements: used in the study. The impact assessment included raw
name and description of the organization under study materials and energy consumption across the following
(i.e., whole organization or part of it), definition of the impact categories:
consolidation method (i.e., which sites should be consid- •• depletion of natural resources,
ered), and the reference period to be considered in the
•• cumulative energy consumption,
O-LCA. Additionally, the system boundary of the study
should define which direct and indirect activities are to •• human toxicity potential,
be included. In the O-LCA, all relevant upstream activi- •• land use,
ties and downstream burdens should be incorporated.
Witczak et al. (2014) conducted evaluations of the •• emissions (e.g., gaseous emissions, global warming
implementation of LCA in small and medium-sized en- potential, photochemical ozone creation potential,
terprises (SMEs) by investigating 46 Polish companies. ozone depletion potential, and acidification potential),
The study concluded that SMEs should see the economic •• liquid emissions (volume of wastewater), and
benefits of proposed environmental improvements and,
•• solid emissions (the inventory flow waste generated)).
therefore, LCA should be performed simultaneously
with Life Cycle Costing (LCC). Furthermore, the analyses To the best of our knowledge, no O-LCA has yet been
led to the conclusion that incentives for SMEs to take performed for the forest products sector.
measures should come from outside the organization, Besides the O-LCA, the so-called social organizational
such as requirements for green public procurements, LCA (SO-LCA) has also been proposed (Martínez-Blanco
or as part of an assessment made by suppliers within et al. 2015b). The SO-LCA is presented as a method able
the supply chain. In the Guidance on Organizational Life to boost the social life cycle assessment (S-LCA), which
Cycle Assessment (UNEP/SETAC 2015), the first practical addresses social aspects from a life cycle perspective. An
experiences of approaches encompassing O-LCA are S-LCA is a method that can be used to assess the social
identified. Eleven case studies of the so-called “First and sociological aspects of products as well as their ac-
Movers” are included in the guidance document to il- tual and potential positive and negative impacts along
lustrate some methodological facets and benefits that the life cycle. This method looks at the extraction and
the methodology could bring to organizations. Most processing of raw materials, manufacturing, distribution,
of these organizations developed their own adapted use, reuse, maintenance, recycling, and final disposal.
methodology. Eight sectors, including hotel and cater- S-LCA makes use of generic and site-specific data, can
ing, food, chemical, car manufacturing, energy, retail, be quantitative, semi-quantitative or qualitative, and
Kutnar and Hill — Life Cycle Assessment – Opportunities for Forest Products Sector 61
complements the environmental LCA and LCC (UNEP/ Why isn’t the forest products sector implementing
SETAC 2009). The UNEP Guidelines for Social Life Cycle LCA to a greater extent? The timber sector is an unusual
Assessment of Products discusses the main difference industrial sector, as it is made up of a very large number
between the environmental LCA and social S-LCA as of relatively small enterprises. This is partly due to the
well as limitations of S-LCA, due to the complexity of the geographical distribution of forests and partly to the
social dimension. The S-LCA methodology proposes 189 often local nature of the supply chain. Forest product
indicators of impacts, among which only 8 refer to the companies do not see the need to invest in the expensive
product level, while 127 refer to the organizational level LCA, which can involve quite invasive questions about
and 69 refer to the country level. Identified challenges products and processes. This problem can, in part, be
of the S-LCA were addressed by Martínez-Blanco et al. addressed by the development of generic EPDs, which
(2015b). The difficult challenge of linking social indica- cover certain product types for an entire sector and can
tors to the product could be overcome in the SO-LCA be produced by member organizations. Nevertheless,
by linking social indicators to the reference unit of the larger companies within the sector do see the need
SO-LCA (e.g., the reporting organization), instead of for conducting LCAs, mostly due to competition for
the product(s). Problems surrounding data collection other materials, and a considerable number of EPDs
and missing data in the S-LCA, which is generally com- have been produced over the past five years (Hill and
prised only of generic sector or country data, could be Dibdiakova 2016).
resolved by the SO-LCA, as specific data is more likely Organizations in the forest products sector should
to be available on the organization than on the product use the O-LCA to reveal environmental hotspots where
level. Furthermore, the application and applied use of the organization should focus energies and intervention,
the S-LCA, which is not clearly defined and does not throughout the value chain and among all products and
adequately evaluate social performance on the prod- operations involved in the provision of the portfolio.
uct level, could be overcome by the SO-LCA, which Furthermore, by understanding risk and impact reduc-
refers to the assessment of organizational behavior and tion, opportunities could be a basis for strategic decisions
performance. at different levels. These decisions could be based on
technologies, investments, and new product lines. O-LCA
6 Discussion
may also serve as a framework for tracking environmental
The use of life cycle thinking and various LCA methodolo- performance over time and for informing corporate sus-
gies could bring direct and indirect benefits to enterprises tainability reporting. In many respects, the forest prod-
in the forest product sector. These approaches could be ucts sector is taking the lead in social and environmental
included in organizations’ decision-making processes to reporting with the long-established use of certification
create value. Typically, organizations focus on processes schemes. Many of these have been voluntary, but an
within their own organization, such as labor costs, manu- increasing emphasis has been placed on legislation. The
facturing, and logistics. Adding resource use assessments European Parliament introduced the Sixth Community
in their product life cycle across the entire value chain Action Programme in July 2002 to deal with the trade in
could reduce costs and provide additional benefits. illegally harvested wood. Subsequently, there was a re-
An assessment of the whole value chain is a data port produced by the European Commission entitled the
intensive process but delivers a product’s environmental ‘Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT):
impacts across the value chain, from product devel- Proposal for an EU Action Plan.’ The European Union
opment, sourcing, manufacturing, distribution, mar- then negotiated Voluntary Partnership Agreements
keting, use, and reuse or disposal. Energy, water, and (FLEGT VPAs) with timber producing countries in order
raw material use involve real costs that, with proper to introduce a licensing scheme to regulate trade. This
handling, can reduce environmental impacts across was only partially successful and consequently the EU
the value chain. Assessing the end-to-end product life Timber Regulation came into force in December 2010,
cycle opens the largest potential opportunities for ad- making it against the law to place illegally harvested
ditional value creation through cost reduction and/or timber and timber products on the EU market as of 3rd
improved reputation. March 2013. The trend is increasingly moving towards
62 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
the development of robust chains of custody throughout enterprises. By participating in research communities,
the entire value chain and the move from voluntary to such as COST Action FP1407, the entire sector can come
legislated certification schemes. The chain of custody together to participate in collecting and analyzing data
schemes that are required can be extended beyond the for the benefit of all.
sawmill gate and involve all stages of the life cycle, which
can also potentially allow for the tracking of sequestered 7 Conclusions
carbon, as well as environmental burdens. LCA is a useful tool for reporting on the environmen-
There has been an increasing number of timber EPDs tal burdens associated with a product or process and
appearing. In March 2011, the Construction Products is increasingly being used to back up environmental
Regulation (305/2011) was introduced, replacing the claims, especially with the use of Environmental Product
Construction Products Directive (89/106/EEC). The Declarations. The forest products sector must be pre-
Construction Products Regulation states that where a pared to meet the challenges of the future. The timber
European standard exists, it must take precedence. In sector has a good story to tell, but other sectors with
addition, it states, “for the assessment of the sustainable more resources at their disposal are not standing still. A
use of resources and of the impact of construction works very important benefit of using timber from sustainable
on environment Environmental Product Declarations sources in long life products is the storage of sequestered
should be used when available,” (EU Regulation 2011). atmospheric carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, at the time
An increasing emphasis will be placed on environmental of writing, the situation regarding the methodology
and social credentials by specifiers in the built environ- of measuring and accounting for carbon in biogenic
ment and it is important that the forest products sector products is lacking. With current global efforts regard-
has the required information. Architects are increasingly ing the mitigation and adaptation of greenhouse gas
using building information modelling (BIM) software, emissions, the importance of including the methods for
which will likely incorporate environmental and social determining the storage of biogenic carbon is becom-
impact information in the future, alongside the physical ing increasingly important. The forest products sector
material properties that are already embedded. should act globally and collectively pursue this.
The forest-based sector can make a significant contri-
bution towards the mitigation of climate change caused 8 References
by anthropogenic CO2 emissions, reduced energy con-
Audenaert, A., De Cleyn, S.H. & Buyle, M. 2012. LCA of low-energy
sumption, increased wood products recycling, and reuse. flats using the Eco-indicator 99 method: Impact of insulation
Apart from these environmental benefits, the use of materials. Energy and Buildings, 47, pp.68-73.
forest products in long life products in the built environ- Ayres, R.U. 1995. Life cycle analysis: A critique. Resources, Conserva-
tion and Recycling, 14(3), pp.199-223.
ment, allows for the prolonged storage of atmospheric Bare, J.C., Hofstetter, P., Pennington, D.W. & De Haes, H.A.U. 2000.
carbon dioxide. Wood modification (chemical, thermal, Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrifices and benefits. The
impregnation) is being increasingly used in the wood International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(6), pp.319-326.
Brandão, M., Levasseur, A., Kirschbaum, M.U., Weidema, B.P., Cowie,
products sector, but there is relatively little information
A.L., Jørgensen, S.V., Hauschild, M.Z., Pennington, D.W. &
on the environmental impacts of the processes. This is Chomkhamsri, K. 2013. Key issues and options in accounting
being addressed by COST Action FP1407 “Understanding for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle
assessment and carbon footprinting. The International Journal
wood modification through an integrated scientific and
of Life Cycle Assessment, pp.1-11.
environmental impact approach,” where researchers from Brankatschk, G. & Finkbeiner, M. 2014. Application of the Cereal
36 countries are collaborating on the development of Unit in a new allocation procedure for agricultural life cycle
technologies and analyzing their environmental impacts. assessments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, pp.72-79.
Brunet‐Navarro, P., Jochheim, H. & Muys, B. 2016. Modelling carbon
This requires analysis of the whole value chain, from for- stocks and fluxes in the wood product sector: A comparative
est through processing, installation, in-service, end of life, review. Global Change Biology, 22(7), pp.2555-2569.
second/third life (cascading), and ultimately incineration BSI. 2008. Specification for the assessment of the life cycle green-
house gas emissions of goods and services. BSI British Stan-
with energy recovery (Sathre and Gustavsson 2006). The
dards. ISBN, 978(0), pp.580.
creation of an LCA is a very complex process and is not CEN. 2012. EN 15804: Sustainability of construction works – Envi-
always something which is easily undertaken by small ronmental product declarations – Core rules for the product
Kutnar and Hill — Life Cycle Assessment – Opportunities for Forest Products Sector 63
category of construction products. Brussels: CEN. characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment.
CEN. 2014. EN 16485: Round and sawn timber – Environmental The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, pp.1-15.
Product Declarations – Product category rules for wood and Hill, C.A., 2011. An introduction to sustainable resource use.
wood-based products for use in construction. Brussels: CEN. Earthscan, Routledge.
Chau, C.K., Leung, T.M. & Ng, W.Y. 2015. A review on life cycle Hill, C.A.S. & Dibdiakova, J. 2016. The environmental impact of
assessment, life cycle energy assessment and life cycle car- wood compared to other building materials. International
bon emissions assessment on buildings. Applied Energy, 143, Wood Products Journal, 7(4), pp.215-219.
pp.395-413. IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribu-
Cherubini, F., Guest, G. & Strømman, A.H. 2012. Application of tion of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment
probability distributions to the modeling of biogenic CO2 Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
fluxes in life cycle assessment. Global Change Biology - Bio- [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)].
energy, 4(6), pp.784-798. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.
De Haes, H.A.U. 1993. Applications of life cycle assessment: ex- IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution
pectations, drawbacks and perspectives. Journal of Cleaner of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report
Production, 1(3-4), pp.131-137. of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writ-
Del Borghi, A. 2013. LCA and communication: Environmental ing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva,
product declaration. The International Journal of Life Cycle Switzerland, 151 pp.
Assessment, pp.1-3. ISO. 2006a. ISO 14040—Environmental management—Life cycle
Ding, G.K. 2008. Sustainable construction—The role of environ- assessment—Principles and framework. International Organ-
mental assessment tools. Journal of Environmental Manage- isation for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
ment, 86(3), pp.451-464. ISO. 2006b. ISO 14044—Environmental management—Manage-
Dong, Y.H. & Ng, S.T. 2014. Comparing the midpoint and end- ment—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines.
point approaches based on ReCiPe - A study of commercial International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva, Swit-
buildings in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Life Cycle zerland.
Assessment, 19(7), pp.1409. ISO. 2006c. ISO 14025—Environmental labels and declarations—
Ehrenfeld, J.R. 1997. The importance of LCAs—warts and all. Type III environmental declarations—Principles and proce-
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 1(2), pp.41-49. dures. International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva,
EU Regulation. 2011. No 305/2011 of the European Parliament Switzerland.
and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down harmonised ISO. 2007. ISO 21930— Sustainability in building construction— –
conditions for the marketing of construction products and Environmental declaration of building products. International
repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC. Organisation for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. ISO.
European Commission (EC). 2013. Product Environmental Footprint 2014.
Guide [PEF Guide] Annex II of Commission Recommendation ISO. 2014. ISO/TS 14072—Environmental management—Life
of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure cycle assessment. —Requirements and guidelines for orga-
and communicate the life cycle environmental performance nizational life cycle assessment. International Organisation
of products and organisations (2013/179/EU). Official Journal for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
of the European Union, L124(4.5.2013), pp. 6-210. Jasinevičius, G., Lindner, M., Pingoud, K. & Tykkylainen, M. 2015.
Finkbeiner, M. 2014. Product environmental footprint—break- Review of models for carbon accounting in harvested wood
through or breakdown for policy implementation of life cycle products. International Wood Products Journal, 6(4), pp.198-
assessment? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19, 212.
pp.266-271. Jungmeier, G., Werner, F., Jarnehammar, A., Hohenthal, C. & Richter,
Finnveden, G. 2000. On the limitations of life cycle assessment K. 2002. Allocation in LCA of wood-based products experi-
and environmental systems analysis tools in general. The ences of cost action E9. The International Journal of Life Cycle
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(4), pp.229-238. Assessment, 7(6), pp.369-375.
Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Krozer, J. & Vis, J.C. 1998. How to get LCA in the right direction?
Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D. & Suh, S. 2009. Recent Journal of Cleaner Production, 6(1), pp.53-61.
developments in life cycle assessment. Journal of Environmen- Martínez-Blanco, J., Lehmann, A., Chang, Y.J. & Finkbeiner, M.
tal Management, 91(1), pp.1-21. 2015a. Social organizational LCA (SOLCA) — a new approach
Forsberg, A. & Von Malmborg, F. 2004. Tools for environmental for implementing social LCA. The International Journal of Life
assessment of the built environment. Building and Environ- Cycle Assessment, 20(11), pp.1586.
ment, 39(2), pp.223-228. Martínez-Blanco, J., Inaba, A. & Finkbeiner, M. 2015b. Scoping or-
Frischknecht, R. & Stucki, M. 2010. Scope-dependent modelling of ganizational LCA— challenges and solutions. The International
electricity supply in life cycle assessments. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(6), pp.829.
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(8), pp.806-816. Monteiro, H. & Freire, F. 2012. Life-cycle assessment of a house
Gala, A.B. & Raugei, M. 2015. Introducing a new method for cal- with alternative exterior walls: comparison of three impact
culating the environmental credits of end-of-life material assessment methods. Energy and Buildings, 47, pp.572-583.
recovery in attributional LCA. The International Journal of Life Nepal, P., Skog, K.E., McKeever, D.B., Bergman, R.D., Abt, K.L. &
Cycle Assessment, 20(5), p.645. Abt, R.C. 2016. Carbon mitigation impacts of increased soft-
Hauschild, M.Z., Goedkoop, M., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Huijbregts, wood lumber and structural panel use for nonresidential
M., Jolliet, O., Margni, M., De Schryver, A., Humbert, S., Lau- construction in the United States. Forest Products Journal,
rent, A. & Sala, S. 2013. Identifying best existing practice for 66(1), pp.77-87.
64 BioProducts Business 2(6) 2017
Ortiz, O., Castells, F. & Sonnemann, G. 2009. Sustainability in the Energy, 86(2), pp.251-257.
construction industry: A review of recent developments based Subramanian, V., Ingwersen, W., Hensler, C. & Collie, H. 2012.
on LCA. Construction and Building Materials, 23(1), pp.28-39. Comparing product category rules from different programs:
Pilli, R., Fiorese, G. & Grassi, G. 2015. EU mitigation potential of Learned outcomes towards global alignment. The International
harvested wood products. Carbon Balance and Management, Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, pp.1-12.
10(1), pp.6. UNEP/SETAC. 2009. Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of
Pingoud, K. & Lehtilä, A. 2002. Fossil carbon emissions associated products. Life-Cycle Initiative, United Nations Environment
with carbon flows of wood products. Mitigation and Adapta- Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and
tion Strategies for Global Change, 7(1), pp.63-83. Chemistry., Paris, France. http://www.unep.fr/shared/pub-
Pinsonnault, A., Lesage, P., Levasseur, A. & Samson, R. 2014. Tem- lications/pdf/DTIx1164xPA-guidelines_sLCA.pdf (Accessed
poral differentiation of background systems in LCA: relevance April 15, 2016).
of adding temporal information in LCI databases. The Interna- UNEP/SETAC. 2015. Life Cycle Initiative–Guidance on organiza-
tional Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19(11), pp.1843-1853. tional life cycle assessment. United Nations Environment
Sala, S., Vasta, A., Mancini, L., Dewulf, J. & Rosenbaum, E. 2015. Programme. Paris, France. http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/
Social life cycle assessment: State of the art and challenges wp-content/uploads/2015/04/o-lca_24.4.15-web.pdf (Ac-
for supporting product policies. EUR 27624 EN. cessed April 15, 2016).
Sathre, R. & Gustavsson, L. 2006. Energy and carbon balances of Witczak, J., Kasprzak, J., Klos, Z., Kurczewski, P., Lewandowska, A.
wood cascade chains. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, & Lewicki, R. 2014. Life cycle thinking in small and medium
47(4), pp.332-355. enterprises: The results of research on the implementation of
Sathre, R. & Gustavsson, L. 2009. Using wood products to mitigate life cycle tools in Polish SMEs—Part 2: LCA related aspects. The
climate change: External costs and structural change. Applied International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19(4), pp.891.