Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Review and downscaling of life cycle decision support tools for the procurement of low-value products

  • LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In this article, we analyze how environmental aspects can be derived from life cycle management instruments for procurement decisions of low-value products. For our analysis, we chose the case of operating room textiles. The review includes the life cycle management instruments: life cycle assessment, environmental labels, and management systems applied within the textile industry. We do so in order to identify the most important environmental decision criteria based on which the procurer of low-value products can decide for the most environmentally friendly option.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search in the relevant literature databases. We critically evaluate the identified life cycle assessment studies for sound methodology, verifiability, completeness, and actuality. Based on this review, we analyze and compare the results of the three most comprehensive studies in more detail and derive the most important environmental aspects of operating room textiles. In a second step, we extend the operational perspective via the strategic perspective, namely environmental management systems and further existing life cycle instruments such as eco-labels. We then synthesize the gathered information into a decision vector. Finally, we discuss how the gathered data can be further exploited and give suggestions for a more sophisticated assessment.

Results and discussion

The review of the existing life cycle assessments on operating room textiles showed that procurers should not base their decisions exclusively on existing life cycle assessments. In addition to problems such as methodological weakness, incompleteness, outdated data, and poor verifiability, the information provided is far too complex to prepare procurement decisions regarding low-value products. Furthermore, the results for the textiles assessed in the existing life cycle assessments are not necessarily transferrable to the textiles considered by the procurer because of restrictive assumptions. Therefore, it is necessary to downscale the available information and synthesize it in an applicable decision support tool. Our decision vector consists of the key environmental aspects water, CO2, energy, and waste and is completed by environmental management systems, eco-labels, and the countries of origin that matters for environmental and social aspects as well.

Conclusions

The decision vector supports procurers when considering environmental aspects in procurement decisions and provides a mechanism for balancing the information between overcomplexity and oversimplification. Therefore, it should be the basis for future development of an eco-label for operating room textiles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This number varies in the LCA studies from 30 to 100 use cycles. Experienced textile researches assume that 75 use cycles are a realistic number.

  2. Pulp can be produced by the chemicothermomechanical pulping method. The wood is firstly softened by the use of chemicals and further decomposed with thermomechanical energy.

  3. Werner and Richter (2007) used similar criteria.

  4. http://www.carbonfootprintofnations.com/content/calculator_of_carbon_footprint_for_nations/

  5. http://www.iea.org/stats/index.asp

  6. http://www.waterfootprint.org

  7. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/data/wastemanagement/waste_treatment

  8. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main/index.stm

Abbreviations

bc:

Best case

CEN:

European Committee for Standardization

CTMP:

Chemithermomechanical pulping

CO:

Cotton

CO2 :

Carbon dioxide

COD:

Chemical oxygen demand

DESTATIS:

Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt (German Federal Statistical Office)

e:

Equivalent

EC:

European Commission

EEL:

European Eco-label

EMAS:

Eco-management and audit scheme

EMS:

Environmental management system

FC:

Fluorocarbon

g:

Gram

HDT:

Hasse Diagram Technique

IEA:

International Energy Agency

IFEU:

Institute for Energy and Environmental Research

ISO:

International Organization for Standardization

kg:

Kilogram

l:

Liter

LCA:

Life cycle assessment

LCI:

Life cycle inventory

LCIA:

Life cycle inventory assessment

LCM:

Life cycle management

MJ:

Megajoule

NMVOC:

Non-methane volatile organic compounds

NOX :

Nitrogen oxide

O.R. textiles:

Operating room textiles

PE:

Polyethylene

PES:

Polyester

PP:

Polypropylene

PROMETHEE:

Preference ranking organisation method for enrichment evaluations

SMS:

Spunbond–meltblown–spunbond

SOX :

Sulfur oxide

uc:

Use cycle

VI:

Viscose

VOC:

Volatile organic compounds

wc:

Worst case

References

  • Albrecht W, Fuchs H, Kittelmann W (2002) Nonwoven fabrics: raw materials, manufacture, applications, characteristics, testing processes. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baldo GL, Marino M, Montani M, Ryding S (2009) The carbon footprint measurement toolkit for the EU Ecolabel. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:591–596

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman H, Tillman AM (2004) The hitch hiker's guide to LCA. Studentlitteratur AB, Lund

    Google Scholar 

  • Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publications, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Brune D, Krauch H (1988) Ökobilanz von Operations- und Klinikmaterialien aus beschichtetem Zellstoff, aus ausgerüstetem Baumwollpolyestergewebe und Textillaminaten. Kassel, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen C (2005) Incorporating green purchasing into the frame of ISO 14000. J Clean Prod 13:927–933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dettenkofer M, Grießhammer R, Scherrer M, Daschner F (1999) Einweg- versus Mehrweg-Patientenabdeckung im Operationssaal Ökobilanz: Vergleich von Zellstoff-Polyethylen- und Baumwoll-Mischabdeckung. Der Chirurg 70:485–491

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt (DESTATIS) (2011) Wirtschaft und statistik. Statistisches Bundesamt, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson E, Berg H (2003) Livscykelanalys av aoprationsrockar. Göteborg

  • European Commission (EC) (2004) Buying green! A handbook on environmental public procurement. At: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/buying_green_handbook_en.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • European Commission (EC) (2006) First meeting of the working group textiles products third revision, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/ecolabelled_products/categories/pdf/background_27_03_06.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • European Commission (EC) (2008) European Commission Green Public Procurement (GPP) training toolkit–module 3: purchasing recommendations. At: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/toolkit/textiles_GPP_background_report.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • European Commission (EC) (2009) Commission decision of 9 July 2009 establishing the ecological criteria for the award of the community ecolabel for textile products (2009/567/EC). Off J Eur Union 197:70–86

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (EC) (2011a) Marketing-guide for EU ecolabel companies—how to make the EU flower visible in your marketing. At: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/ecolabelled_products/pdf/marketingguide_11i_en.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • European Commission (EC) (2011b) Eco-label catalogue: the green store. At: http://www.eco-label.com. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • Feifel S et al (2010) LCA, how are you doing today? A snapshot from the 5th German LCA workshop. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:139–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M (2009) Carbon footprinting-opportunities and threats. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:91–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankl P, Rubik F (2000) Life cycle assessment in industry and business: adoption patterns, applications and implications. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Guenther E, Greschner Farkavcová V (2010) Decision making for transportation systems as a support for sustainable stewardship: freight transport process evaluation using the ETIENNE-Tool. Manage Res Rev 33(4):317–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guninée JB (2002) Handbook on life cyle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertwic EC, Peters GP (2009) Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environ Sci Technol 43:6414–6420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hochschorner E, Finnveden G (2003) Evaluation of two simplified life cycle assessment methods. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:119–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hochschorner E, Finnveden G (2006) Life cycle approach in the procurement process: the case of defence materiel. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:200–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra AY, Mekonnen MM (2011) Global water scarcity: monthly blue water footprint compared to blue water availability for the world's major river basins. Value of water. Research Report Series. No. 53, UNESCO-IHE, Delft. At: http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Report53-GlobalBlueWaterScarcity.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2012

  • Hur T, Lee J, Ryu J, Kwon E (2005) Simplified LCA and matrix methods in identifying the environmental aspects of a product system. J Environ Manage 75:229–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institut für Energie und Umweltforschung (IFEU) (1996) Ökobilanz für OP-Abdecksysteme und OP-Kittel. Heidelberg

  • International Energy Agency (IEA) (2011) Key world energy statistics. Paris 2011. At: http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2011/key_world_energy_stats.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2012

  • Jäger WR (1996) Ökobilanz Rentex-OP-Set und Einweg-OP-Set. Düsseldorf

  • Klöpffer W, Heinrich AB (2009) Our plans and expectations for the 14th volume 2009 of Int J Life Cycle Assess. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llach J, Bikfalvi A, Marques P (2009) What are the success factors for Spanish textile firms? An exploratory multiple-case study. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 17:7–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews D, Axelrod S (2004) Whole life considerations in IT procurement. Int J Life Cycle Assess 9:344–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy BJ, Burdett BC (2008) Eco-labelling and textile eco-labelling. Rev Prog Coloration 28:61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mielecke T (2006) Erstellung einer Sachbilanz-Studie und Modellierung des Lebensweges von Operationstextilien. Dresdner Beiträge zur Lehre der Betrieblichen Umweltökonomie http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/1/1243331792926-5688.pdf. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • Nash J, Ehrenfeld J (1997) Codes of environmental management practice: assessing their potential as a tool for change. Annu Rev Energy Environ 22:487–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen E, Linke M, Tobler M, Vander Beke B (2007) EU COST Action 628: life cycle assessment (LCA) of textile products, eco-efficiency and definition of best available technology (BAT) of textile processing. J Clean Prod 15:1259–1270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieminen-Kalliala E (2003) Environmental indicators of textile products for ISO (type III) environmental product decleration. AUTEX Research Journal 4:206–218, http://www.autexrj.com/cms/zalaczone_pliki/8-03-4.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Oeko-Tex (2011) Oeko-Tex 100: Sources of supply. At: http://www.oeko-tex.com. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • Perry P, Towers N (2009) Determining the antecedents for a strategy of corporate social responsibility by small- and medium-sized enterprises in the UK fashion apparel. J Retailing Consum Serv 16:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponder CS (2009) Life cycle inventory analysis of medical textiles and their role in prevention of nosocomial infections. Dissertation, North Carolina State University. At: http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/handle/1840.16/4715. Accessed 11 April 2011

  • Ren X (2000) Development of environmental performance indicators for textile process and product. J Clean Prod 8:473–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger S, Burrit R, Petersen H (2003) An introduction to corporate environmental management—striving for sustainability. Greenleaf, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt D (2000) Simplified life cycle assessment of surgical gowns—second draft

  • Schmidt H (2009) Carbon footprinting, labelling and life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:6–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schorb A (1990) Ökobilanz von Hygieneprodukten für den Krankenhausbereich. 2. Aufl. Heidelberg

  • Slater K (2003) Environmental impact of textiles: production, processes and protection. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Søndergård B, Hansen OE, Holm J (2004) Ecological modernisation and institutional transformations in the Danish textile industry. J Clean Prod 12:337–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Targosz-Wrona E (2009) Ecolabelling as a confirmation of the application of sustainable materials in textiles. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 75:21–25, http://www.fibtex.lodz.pl/file-Fibtex_(uesz7osoyl2888s5).pdf-FTEE_75_21.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber Marin A, Tobler M (2003) The purpose of LCA in environmental labels and concepts of products—conference report on the 18th discussion forum on LCA. Int J LCA 2:115–116. doi:10.1007/BF02978441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner F, Richter K (2007) Wooden building products in comparative LCA. A literature review. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:470–479

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business and Economics, Chair of Environmental Management and Accounting, Technische Universität Dresden, Münchner Platz 1/3, 01062, Dresden, Germany

    Martin Nowack & Edeltraud Guenther

  2. Schott Solar AG, Carl-Zeiss-Str. 4, 63755, Alzenau, Germany

    Holger Hoppe

Authors
  1. Martin Nowack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Holger Hoppe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edeltraud Guenther
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Nowack.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Gerald Rebitzer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nowack, M., Hoppe, H. & Guenther, E. Review and downscaling of life cycle decision support tools for the procurement of low-value products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17, 655–665 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0401-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0401-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation