What are the main environmental impacts and products contributing to the biodiversity footprint of EU consumption? A comparison of life cycle impact assessment methods and models

Abstract

PurposeRecent developments in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) target at better addressing biodiversity impacts, including the extended modeling of drivers of biodiversity loss. This led to the development of multiple LCIA methods addressing the area of protection of ecosystem quality (i.e, biodiversity loss) over time. This paper aims at systematically comparing available operational LCIA methods and models for assessing the main drivers of biodiversity impacts of EU consumption and unveiling similarities and differences among current methods.MethodsThis paper compares the biodiversity impacts of EU consumption by implementing eight LCIA methods and models: five full LCIA methods (namely, LC-IMPACT, Impact World + , Ecological Scarcity 2013, ReCiPe 2016, and Stepwise), a land-use intensity-specific LCIA model, and two approaches based on the GLOBIO model. The EU Consumption Footprint model is adopted as case study. The comparative analysis between the assessed methods aimed at identifying convergent and divergent results regarding the drivers of biodiversity impacts of EU consumption. The analysis focused on four different levels: impact category, representative product (modeled consumed products), inventory process, and elementary flow. The agreement among the methods in defining an element as relevant was evaluated. Finally, gaps among methods were assessed in terms of coverage of impact categories and elementary flows.Results and discussionThe analysis unveiled that there is a certain level of agreement among available LCIA methods and models regarding the most contributing impact categories and products to the overall biodiversity footprint due to EU consumption. Land use, climate change, and ecotoxicity had a major contribution to overall impacts, thereby highlighting their role as drivers of biodiversity loss. Biodiversity impacts were due to a limited number of consumed products, where food (meat), mobility, and household goods were identified as top contributors. Most contributing inventory processes and elementary flows were associated to most contributing representative products (e.g, animal feed). The relevance and presence of elementary flows in LCIA methods and models were heterogeneous for most of the impact categories.ConclusionsThe results of this study highlight the importance of impact category coverage in the assessment of biodiversity impacts. Limited coverage of impact categories (e.g, methods limited to assess land use) might underestimate the impacts of other drivers of biodiversity loss, especially climate change and ecotoxicity. Further efforts are required to assess the effects of spatial regionalization and the inclusion of missing drivers, recently developed in LCIA.