Raw material criticality assessment as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment: Examining methods for product‐level supply risk assessment

Summary The diversity of raw materials used in modern products, compounded by the risk of supply disruptions—due to uneven geological distribution of resources, along with socioeconomic factors like production concentration and political (in)stability of raw material producing countries—has drawn at...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of industrial ecology Vol. 23; no. 5; pp. 1226 - 1236
Main Authors: Cimprich, Alexander, Bach, Vanessa, Helbig, Christoph, Thorenz, Andrea, Schrijvers, Dieuwertje, Sonnemann, Guido, Young, Steven B., Sonderegger, Thomas, Berger, Markus
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: New Haven Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.10.2019
Subjects:
Alternative fuel vehicles
Case studies
critical raw materials
Electric vehicles
English for special purposes
Evaluation
Geological distribution
Geopolitics
industrial ecology
Life cycle analysis
Life cycle assessment
life cycle sustainability assessment
Life cycles
raw material criticality assessment
Raw materials
Recycling
Regional development
Research methodology
Resource efficiency
Risk assessment
Risk factors
Scarcity
Social factors
Socioeconomic data
Socioeconomic factors
Socioeconomics
State-of-the-art reviews
supply risk
Test procedures
ISSN:1088-1980, 1530-9290
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Summary The diversity of raw materials used in modern products, compounded by the risk of supply disruptions—due to uneven geological distribution of resources, along with socioeconomic factors like production concentration and political (in)stability of raw material producing countries—has drawn attention to the subject of raw material “criticality.” In this article, we review the state of the art regarding the integration of criticality assessment, herein termed “product‐level supply risk assessment,” as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment. We describe and compare three methods explicitly developed for this purpose—Geopolitical Supply Risk (GeoPolRisk), Economic Scarcity Potential (ESP), and the Integrated Method to Assess Resource Efficiency (ESSENZ)—based on a set of criteria including considerations of data sources, uncertainties, and other contentious methodological aspects. We test the methods on a case study of a European‐manufactured electric vehicle, and conclude with guidance for appropriate application and interpretation, along with opportunities for further methodological development. Although the GeoPolRisk, ESP, and ESSENZ methods have several limitations, they can be useful for preliminary assessments of the potential impacts of raw material supply risks on a product system (i.e., “outside‐in” impacts) alongside the impacts of a product system on the environment (i.e., “inside‐out” impacts). Care is needed to not overlook critical raw materials used in small amounts but nonetheless important to product functionality. Further methodological development could address regional and firm‐level supply risks, multiple supply‐chain stages, and material recycling, while improving coverage of supply risk characterization factors.
Bibliography:Funding information
This work was supported by the Life Cycle Initiative hosted by UN Environment, Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicators and Methods.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1088-1980
1530-9290
DOI:10.1111/jiec.12865