Environmentally Extended Input-output Research Articles

Evaluation of Process- and Input–Output-based Life Cycle Inventory Data with Regard to Truncation and Aggregation Issues

Life cycle assessments (LCA) and environmentally extended input-output (EEIO) analyses both strive to account for direct and indirect environmental impacts of goods and services. Different methods have been developed to hybridize these two techniques and minimize the impact of their respective shortcomings on final assessments. These weaknesses, however, have not been extensively studied in a quantitative manner, especially not for complete LCA and EEIO databases. To this end, we jointly analyzed process-based and input-output-based data sets. We first evaluated their complementarity. Though the LCA data was more detailed overall, some sectors of the economy were more precisely represented in the EEIO database. We then contrasted the representation of the different economic sectors in the LCA database with the economic, environmental, and structural importance of these sectors. The weakness of the correlation results led us to conclude that process-inventory efforts have not been systematically directed at the most important sectors of the economy. The LCA data was also used to evaluate the sensitivity of EEIO data to aggregation uncertainty. This sensitivity proved highly inhomogeneous. We conclude the presence of important research inefficiencies stemming from the lack of hybrid perspective in the compilation of LCA and EEIO data.

EE-IO modeling of the environmental impacts of Finnish imports using different data sources

The environmental impacts of Finnish imports were modeled using alternative emission datasets. The first dataset was based on domestic technology assumptions from the Finnish environmentally extended input–output (EE-IO) model. In the second dataset, emissions of the largest volumes of imported goods were substituted for EIOLCA (USA) data and in the third option for data from Ecoinvent and the Danish LCA Food Database. Comparative results show that the environmental impacts of imports based on domestic emission intensities are mostly lower than the alternative approaches. Considering the high level of Finnish environmental protection we concluded that the impacts of imports are underestimated using domestic emission intensities. Additionally, we concluded that hybrid IO modeling will increase the accuracy of IO modeling by using process-based data for the most relevant material flows until a multi-regional IO model for Finland has been developed.

An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions and material flows caused by the Finnish economy using the ENVIMAT model

An environmentally extended input–output (EE-IO) analysis – environmental impacts of material flows caused by the Finnish economy – was carried out in order to improve data on production and consumption in Finland. The study resulted in the ENVIMAT model, which can be used to analyze the relationship between material flows, environmental impacts and the economy. The model is based on monetary and physical input–output tables and an environmental life-cycle impact assessment. This article summarizes the main methodological aspects and findings regarding the material flows and climate impacts caused by the Finnish economy in 2002 and 2005. The Finnish model has relatively detailed input data with 150 industries and 918 products and the data on imports was assessed according to a mixed approach with the help of life-cycle inventory data. The results of the model showed that the Finnish economy uses imported material resources as much as domestic resources. Life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused by imports were equivalent to 70–80% of domestic emissions. The GHG emissions embodied in imports (emissions abroad) and exports (emissions within Finland) were of the same magnitude. The analysis showed that the service sector accounted for 44% of GHG emissions caused by the domestic final use of products. Analysis of the results also showed that the indicator of total material requirement (TMR) should not be used for environmental impact comparisons of products and services. In the future, the aim is to use the ENVIMAT model for assessing temporal changes in the economy; for monitoring sustainable development; for planning climate change mitigation; and for identifying important factors in the economy and assessing their impacts.

A SYMMETRIC INPUT–OUTPUT TABLE FOR EU27: LATEST PROGRESS

The European Commission is currently establishing an Environmentally Extended Input–Output (EE-IO) Database for the EU27 developed by the Joint Research Centre at the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS). This project attempts to generate an analytical dataset comprising all EU countries and yearly time series for the period 1995–2005. Since, for the time being, IO and environmental accounts data are only available with significant gaps part of the dataset will require estimates based on best available proxy data and reasonable assumptions. This paper is focused on the IO database shaped around Eurostat supply and use tables and symmetric IO tables consistent with the NACE classification. The paper describes the procedure by which the latest preliminary results have been obtained for an aggregate EU27 symmetric input–output table for the year 2000.

Towards a global multi-regional environmentally extended input–output database

This paper presents the strategy for a large EU-funded Integrated Project: EXIOPOL (“A New Environmental Accounting Framework Using Externality Data and Input–Output Tools for Policy Analysis”), with special attention for its part in environmentally extended (EE) input–output (IO) analysis. The project has three principal objectives: (a) to synthesize and further develop estimates of the external costs of key environmental impacts for Europe; (b) to develop an EE IO framework for the EU-27 in a global context, including as many of these estimates as possible, to allow for the estimation of environmental impacts (expressed as LCA themes, material requirement indicators, ecological footprints or external costs) of the activities of different economic sectors, final consumption activities and resource consumption; (c) to apply the results of the work to external costs and EE I–O for illustrative policy questions.

Environmental Impacts of Products:Policy Relevant Information and Data Challenges

SummaryThe research and analysis presented in this special issue shows that the same limited number of consumption categories are consistently revealed to be responsible for the largest share of environmental impact: mobility (automobile and air transport), food (meat, poultry, fish, and dairy followed by plant‐based food), and residential energy use in the house (heating, cooling, electrical appliances, and lighting). It appears that differences in impact per euro between the product groupings are relatively limited, so it is essential to reduce the life‐cycle impacts of products as such, rather than to shift expenditures to less impact‐intensive product groupings. Furthermore, the effectiveness of expenditure on material products to improve quality of life leaves much room for improvement. Environmentally extended input‐output (EEIO) tables probably form, in this field, the most appropriate information support tool for priority setting, prospective assessment of options, scenario analysis, and monitoring. A clear benefit would result from integrating the input–output (IO) tables in the report to Eurostat of the 25 individual countries that make up the European Union (EU), with other officially available information on emissions and resources use, into a 60‐sector EEIO table for the EU. This, obviously, would be the first step toward more detailed tables. Three strategies are suggested to realize the additional, desirable detail of 150 sectors or more, each achievable at an increasing time horizon and with increasing effort: (1) developing further the current CEDA EU25 table; (2) building a truly European detailed input–output table accepting the restrictions of existing data gathering procedures; and (3) as (2), but developing new, dedicated data gathering and classification procedures. In all cases, a key issue is harmonizing classification systems for industry sectors, consumer expenditure categories, and product classifications (as in import/export statistics) in such a way that data sets may adequately be linked to input–output tables.

Environmental Impacts of Products: A Detailed Review of Studies

SummaryEnvironmental effects of economic activities are ultimately driven by consumption, via impacts of the production, use, and waste management phases of products and services ultimately consumed. Integrated product policy (IPP) addressing the life‐cycle impacts of products forms an innovative new generation of environmental policy. Yet this policy requires insight into the final consumption expenditures and related products that have the greatest life‐cycle environmental impacts. This review article brings together the conclusions of 11 studies that analyze the life‐cycle impacts of total societal consumption and the relative importance of different final consumption categories. This review addresses in general studies that were included in the project Environmental Impacts of Products (EIPRO) of the European Union (EU), which form the basis of this special issue. Unlike most studies done in the past 25 years on similar topics, the studies reviewed here covered a broad set of environmental impacts beyond just energy use or carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The studies differed greatly in basic approach (extrapolating LCA data to impacts of consumption categories versus approaches based on environmentally extended input‐output (EEIO) tables), geographical region, disaggregation of final demand, data inventory used, and method of impact assessment. Nevertheless, across all studies a limited number of priorities emerged. The three main priorities, housing, transport, and food, are responsible for 70% of the environmental impacts in most categories, although covering only 55% of the final expenditure in the 25 countries that currently make up the EU. At a more detailed level, priorities are car and most probably air travel within transport, meat and dairy within food, and building structures, heating, and (electrical) energy‐using products within housing. Expenditures on clothing, communication, health care, and education are considerably less important. Given the very different approaches followed in each of the sources reviewed, this result hence must be regarded as extremely robust. Recommendations are given to harmonize and improve the methodological approaches of such analyses, for instance, with regard to modeling of imports, inclusion of capital goods, and making an explicit distinction between household and government expenditure.