TY - JOUR
T1 - Similarities, differences and synergisms between HERA and LCA - An analysis at three levels
AU - De Haes, Helias A Udo
AU - Sleeswijk, Anneke Wegener
AU - Heijungs, Reinout
PY - 2006/7/1
Y1 - 2006/7/1
N2 - Linkages between Human and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be analyzed at three levels: the basic equations to describe environmental behavior and dose-response relationships of chemicals; the overall model structure of these tools; and the applications of the tools. At level 1 few differences exist: both tools use essentially the same fate and effect models, including their coefficients and data. At level 2 distinctive differences emerge: regional or life-cycle perspective, emission pulses or fluxes, scope of chemicals and types of impacts, use of characterization factors, spatial and temporal detail, aggregation of effects, and the functional unit as basis of the assessment. Although the two tools typically differ in all these aspects, only the functional unit issue renders the tools fundamentally different, expressing itself also in some main characteristics of the modeling structure. This impedes full integration, which is underpinned in mathematical terms. At level 3 the aims of the tools are complementary: quantified risk estimates of chemicals for HERA versus quantified product assessment for LCA. Here, beneficial synergism is possible between the two tools, as illustrated by some cases. These also illustrate that where full integration is suggested, in practice this is not achieved, thus in fact supporting the conclusions.
AB - Linkages between Human and Environmental Risk Assessment (HERA) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be analyzed at three levels: the basic equations to describe environmental behavior and dose-response relationships of chemicals; the overall model structure of these tools; and the applications of the tools. At level 1 few differences exist: both tools use essentially the same fate and effect models, including their coefficients and data. At level 2 distinctive differences emerge: regional or life-cycle perspective, emission pulses or fluxes, scope of chemicals and types of impacts, use of characterization factors, spatial and temporal detail, aggregation of effects, and the functional unit as basis of the assessment. Although the two tools typically differ in all these aspects, only the functional unit issue renders the tools fundamentally different, expressing itself also in some main characteristics of the modeling structure. This impedes full integration, which is underpinned in mathematical terms. At level 3 the aims of the tools are complementary: quantified risk estimates of chemicals for HERA versus quantified product assessment for LCA. Here, beneficial synergism is possible between the two tools, as illustrated by some cases. These also illustrate that where full integration is suggested, in practice this is not achieved, thus in fact supporting the conclusions.
KW - Combined approach
KW - Functional unit
KW - HERA
KW - LCA
KW - Toolbox
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748488651&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748488651&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10807030600561659
DO - 10.1080/10807030600561659
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:33748488651
SN - 1080-7039
VL - 12
SP - 431
EP - 449
JO - Human and Ecological Risk Assessment
JF - Human and Ecological Risk Assessment
IS - 3
ER -