Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods

Igor Linkov, Benjamin D. Trump, Ben A. Wender, Thomas Seager, Alan J. Kennedy, Jeffrey M. Keisler

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two analytic perspectives on environmental assessment dominate environmental policy and decision-making: Risk analysis (RA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). RA focuses on management of a toxicological hazard in a specific exposure scenario, while LCA seeks a holistic estimation of impacts of thousands of substances across multiple media, including non-toxicological and non-chemically deleterious effects. While recommendations to integrate the two approaches have remained a consistent feature of environmental scholarship for at least 15 years, the current perception is that progress is slow largely because of practical obstacles, such as a lack of data, rather than insurmountable theoretical difficulties. Nonetheless, the emergence of nanotechnology presents a serious challenge to both perspectives. Because the pace of nanomaterial innovation far outstrips acquisition of environmentally relevant data, it is now clear that a further integration of RA and LCA based on dataset completion will remain futile. In fact, the two approaches are suited for different purposes and answer different questions. A more pragmatic approach to providing better guidance to decision-makers is to apply the two methods in parallel, integrating only after obtaining separate results.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)740-743
Number of pages4
JournalNature Nanotechnology
Volume12
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Risk analysis
Life cycle
cycles
Nanotechnology
Nanostructured materials
Hazards
decision making
nanotechnology
Innovation
Decision making
recommendations
hazards
acquisition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Bioengineering
  • Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Materials Science(all)
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Cite this

Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., Wender, B. A., Seager, T., Kennedy, A. J., & Keisler, J. M. (2017). Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods. Nature Nanotechnology, 12(8), 740-743. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2017.152

Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods. / Linkov, Igor; Trump, Benjamin D.; Wender, Ben A.; Seager, Thomas; Kennedy, Alan J.; Keisler, Jeffrey M.

In: Nature Nanotechnology, Vol. 12, No. 8, 01.08.2017, p. 740-743.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Linkov, I, Trump, BD, Wender, BA, Seager, T, Kennedy, AJ & Keisler, JM 2017, 'Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods', Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 740-743. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2017.152
Linkov, Igor ; Trump, Benjamin D. ; Wender, Ben A. ; Seager, Thomas ; Kennedy, Alan J. ; Keisler, Jeffrey M. / Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods. In: Nature Nanotechnology. 2017 ; Vol. 12, No. 8. pp. 740-743.
@article{cfe07da81f7a48ee88bf19f0062263ae,
title = "Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods",
abstract = "Two analytic perspectives on environmental assessment dominate environmental policy and decision-making: Risk analysis (RA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). RA focuses on management of a toxicological hazard in a specific exposure scenario, while LCA seeks a holistic estimation of impacts of thousands of substances across multiple media, including non-toxicological and non-chemically deleterious effects. While recommendations to integrate the two approaches have remained a consistent feature of environmental scholarship for at least 15 years, the current perception is that progress is slow largely because of practical obstacles, such as a lack of data, rather than insurmountable theoretical difficulties. Nonetheless, the emergence of nanotechnology presents a serious challenge to both perspectives. Because the pace of nanomaterial innovation far outstrips acquisition of environmentally relevant data, it is now clear that a further integration of RA and LCA based on dataset completion will remain futile. In fact, the two approaches are suited for different purposes and answer different questions. A more pragmatic approach to providing better guidance to decision-makers is to apply the two methods in parallel, integrating only after obtaining separate results.",
author = "Igor Linkov and Trump, {Benjamin D.} and Wender, {Ben A.} and Thomas Seager and Kennedy, {Alan J.} and Keisler, {Jeffrey M.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1038/nnano.2017.152",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "740--743",
journal = "Nature Nanotechnology",
issn = "1748-3387",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods

AU - Linkov, Igor

AU - Trump, Benjamin D.

AU - Wender, Ben A.

AU - Seager, Thomas

AU - Kennedy, Alan J.

AU - Keisler, Jeffrey M.

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Two analytic perspectives on environmental assessment dominate environmental policy and decision-making: Risk analysis (RA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). RA focuses on management of a toxicological hazard in a specific exposure scenario, while LCA seeks a holistic estimation of impacts of thousands of substances across multiple media, including non-toxicological and non-chemically deleterious effects. While recommendations to integrate the two approaches have remained a consistent feature of environmental scholarship for at least 15 years, the current perception is that progress is slow largely because of practical obstacles, such as a lack of data, rather than insurmountable theoretical difficulties. Nonetheless, the emergence of nanotechnology presents a serious challenge to both perspectives. Because the pace of nanomaterial innovation far outstrips acquisition of environmentally relevant data, it is now clear that a further integration of RA and LCA based on dataset completion will remain futile. In fact, the two approaches are suited for different purposes and answer different questions. A more pragmatic approach to providing better guidance to decision-makers is to apply the two methods in parallel, integrating only after obtaining separate results.

AB - Two analytic perspectives on environmental assessment dominate environmental policy and decision-making: Risk analysis (RA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). RA focuses on management of a toxicological hazard in a specific exposure scenario, while LCA seeks a holistic estimation of impacts of thousands of substances across multiple media, including non-toxicological and non-chemically deleterious effects. While recommendations to integrate the two approaches have remained a consistent feature of environmental scholarship for at least 15 years, the current perception is that progress is slow largely because of practical obstacles, such as a lack of data, rather than insurmountable theoretical difficulties. Nonetheless, the emergence of nanotechnology presents a serious challenge to both perspectives. Because the pace of nanomaterial innovation far outstrips acquisition of environmentally relevant data, it is now clear that a further integration of RA and LCA based on dataset completion will remain futile. In fact, the two approaches are suited for different purposes and answer different questions. A more pragmatic approach to providing better guidance to decision-makers is to apply the two methods in parallel, integrating only after obtaining separate results.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026851903&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026851903&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/nnano.2017.152

DO - 10.1038/nnano.2017.152

M3 - Review article

VL - 12

SP - 740

EP - 743

JO - Nature Nanotechnology

JF - Nature Nanotechnology

SN - 1748-3387

IS - 8

ER -