% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Wulf:865441,
author = {Wulf, Christina and Werker, Jasmin and Ball, Christopher
and Zapp, Petra and Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm},
title = {{R}eview of sustainability assessment approaches based on
life cycles},
journal = {Sustainability},
volume = {11},
number = {20},
issn = {2071-1050},
address = {Basel},
publisher = {MDPI},
reportid = {FZJ-2019-04892},
pages = {5717},
year = {2019},
abstract = {Many different approaches have been developed to quantify
and evaluate sustainability. Here a review is performed on
sustainability assessment based on Life Cycle Thinking,
which mostly means Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment
(LCSA). Until the end of 2018, 258 publications can be
found, from which 146 include a case study. The highest
number of publications appeared between 2016 and 2018 and,
compared to the years before 2016, the number of authors has
increased. However, in recent years the focus has been more
on case studies than on methodological aspects of LCSA. The
presented holistic approaches for LCSA are either too broad
or too narrow for scientific guidance. Therefore, many
questions concerning LCSA are still open, e.g., regarding
definition of sustainability dimensions and the desire or
need for multi-criteria decision-analysis. An underlying
problem is the lack of discussion about sustainability
concepts. The momentum in the community to perform case
studies for LCSA should be used to also develop more guiding
principles.},
cin = {IEK-STE},
ddc = {690},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
pnm = {153 - Assessment of Energy Systems – Addressing Issues of
Energy Efficiency and Energy Security (POF3-153)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-153},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000498398900174},
doi = {10.3390/su11205717},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/865441},
}