The Application of Life-Cycle Assessment Within a Public Policy Framework – Theory and Reality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Application of Life-Cycle Assessment within a Public Policy Framework – Theory and Reality by Christina Seidel A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Alberta © Christina Seidel, 2016 Abstract Public policy plays a major role in defining societal programs and frameworks, including issues related to environmental protection. Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) offers a tool to provide comprehensive environmental impact information that can be applied within the public policy development process. However, direct application of LCA results within the public policy arena has been limited, as a result of process and technical barriers. Despite the potential challenges and barriers, LCA could theoretically improve the decision-making process, and ultimately lead to better environmental outcomes. To facilitate this process, this thesis develops and presents recommendations to encourage consistent approaches to incorporating LCA into public policy decision making, in order improve the informed consideration of environmental factors within public policy development. In developing this thesis, information from existing literature provided a background of the use of LCA in public policy development and research into associated barriers. Literature was supplemented through interviews with subject matter experts, as well as practical LCA application through involvement with case studies with public policy elements. The current ISO LCA standards were also reviewed through a lens of public policy application. Research results were summarily integrated to develop a proposed framework for incorporating an improved LCA methodology into public policy development. Research showed that barriers that limit the application of LCA within the public policy development process range from lack of technical knowledge and LCA understanding on the part of policy makers, to a lack of trust in LCA process and results. Many of the ii identified barriers suggest that the failure of LCAs to contribute positively to public policy development is due to the process within which the LCA is being incorporated, rather than technical problems in the LCA itself. This led to the conclusion that a more open and inclusive process, with a focus on communication and understanding, may provide a better alternate framework for the development of public policy. This approach suggests that effectively incorporating LCA within the overall public policy decision-making process requires a more normative multi-disciplinary approach that includes a range of stakeholders and public policy decision-makers in a collaborative process at all stages of the assessment. Involving decision-makers and a full range of stakeholders actively, wholly and genuinely throughout a transparent and robust LCA process would serve to build an effective public policy development framework that would facilitate increased integration of LCA. A set of recommendations for implementing this type of process represents a significant contribution of this thesis. Additional recommendations suggest expanding the ISO LCA standards to embrace subjective and process elements, making them more robust, and encouraging the use of LCA in applications such as public policy. An overall conclusion is that one of the most important aspects of incorporating LCA into public policy decisions is to encourage life-cycle thinking among policy makers. Considering the life-cycle implications will result in more informed and thoughtful decisions, even when a full LCA is not undertaken. iii Preface This thesis is an original work by Christina Seidel. Portions of this thesis have been compiled and are pending publication as a paper titled The Application of Life Cycle Assessment to Public Policy Development in the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. iv Acknowledgements I owe a great deal to my long-suffering supervisors, Dr. Michael Lipsett, and Dr. David Checkel. They have seen me through this process despite delays and setbacks, always encouraging me to soldier on. It is entirely due to their perseverance and inspiration that this thesis has materialized. I would also like to acknowledge the many outside experts who contributed their knowledge and insight, adding much to the depth of research and conclusions. In particular, the individuals at CalRecycle, who led me through the California Used Oil LCA process were always very supportive and helpful in building my understanding of that monumental undertaking. The staff and Board members of the Alberta Recycling Management Authority also deserve a special thank you for allowing me to use their Scrap Tire LCA as a guinea pig for this thesis. Following that process through in its entirety provided much of the hands- on research for this project. v Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................... ii Preface........................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... v List of Tables ................................................................................................................. viii List of Figures................................................................................................................ viii Glossary ......................................................................................................................... ix 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 2 Methodology .............................................................................................................. 4 3 Public Policy Development Process .......................................................................... 8 4 The Basics of Life-Cycle Assessment ...................................................................... 14 4.1 Goal and Scope Definition .............................................................................. 15 4.2 Inventory Analysis ........................................................................................... 18 4.3 Impact Assessment ........................................................................................ 22 4.4 Interpretation .................................................................................................. 26 5 Application of LCA to Public Policy Development .................................................... 27 6 Barriers to Applying LCA within the Public Policy Development Process ................. 32 7 Addressing Barriers to Incorporation of LCA in Public Policy Development ............. 40 8 A Public Policy Development Process Framework that Embraces LCA ................... 44 9 A Broader Process – Life Cycle Thinking ................................................................. 66 10 Case Study Review ................................................................................................. 68 10.1 Alberta Scrap Tire Recycling Example ............................................................ 69 10.1.1 Process Results .................................................................................. 74 10.2 CalRecycle Used Oil LCA Project Example .................................................... 85 10.3 Key Case Study Lessons ................................................................................ 90 10.4 Case Studies Link to Proposed Public Policy Development Framework.......... 91 11 ISO Standards – Applications and Implications to Public Policy: A Critical Review .. 94 11.1 Rational Approach .......................................................................................... 95 11.2 Qualitative Elements ....................................................................................... 96 11.3 Life Cycle Interpretation .................................................................................. 98 vi 11.4 Reporting ........................................................................................................ 99 11.4.1 Critical Review .................................................................................. 100 11.4.2 Conclusions....................................................................................... 101 12 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................................... 102 References .................................................................................................................. 107 Appendix A: Key Informant Interview Guiding Questions ............................................. 114 Appendix B: Key Informant Contacts ........................................................................... 116 Appendix C: Interview Key Messages ......................................................................... 117 Appendix D: Alberta Scrap Tire LCA Model Results .................................................... 119 vii List of Tables Table 1: Alberta Tire Recycling LCA Option Rankings ................................................... 25 Table 2: RACI Matrix for LCA Process .......................................................................... 46 Table 3 Terminology Changes for Clarity and Simplicity ...............................................