More rationality and inclusivity are imperative in reference transition scenarios based on IAMs and shared socioeconomic pathways - recommendations for prospective LCA

Anne De Bortoli, Alexis Chanel, Camille Chabas, Titouan Greffe, Estelle Louineau

Article de revue (2025)

Accéder à ce document
Disponible
Libre accès au texte intégral dans PolyPublie et chez l'éditeur officiel
Version officielle de l'éditeur
Texte Texte • 1MB •
Matériel supplémentaire
Feuille de calcul Feuille de calcul • 23kB •
Matériel supplémentaire
Feuille de calcul Feuille de calcul • 179kB •

Résumé

Prospective life cycle assessment (pLCA) is a key tool for evaluating future environmental impacts and supporting environmental policies. Recent pLCA methods integrate technological projections from transition scenarios modeled with integrated assessment models (IAMs), leveraging the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) and representative concentration pathways developed within the framework of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC). However, this computational framework is influenced by subjective modeling choices within IAMs and SSPs, which can affect the robustness and relevance of future technological scenarios thus pLCA results. This article starts by highlighting these subjective choices through the lens of Science and Technology Studies, to then provide recommendations to enhance pLCA practices within this computational framework, especially through the selection of more (a) rational and (b) inclusive technological scenarios. The first step toward better practices is recognizing the inherited choices and limitations of borrowed models. Our recommendations then address the selection of future technological scenarios for pLCA: these scenarios could (a.1) account for the whole variability of mainstream transition scenarios from the latest IPCC report and its effect on pLCA results, (a.2) include only screened IPCC mainstream IAM scenarios based on proposed reality check criteria, (b.1) integrate scenarios rooted in alternative economic schools of thought, such as post-Keynesian economics or ecological macroeconomics, explore scenarios based on alternative (b.2) indicators prioritizing strong sustainability, justice, and well-being, and (b.3) societal narratives such as economic downscaling avenues and degrowth. Finally, we emphasize the need to incorporate ethical considerations into modeling, offering recommendations to (b.4) prioritize more equitable scenarios.

Mots clés

Organismes subventionnaires:
Environment and Climate Change Canada
Numéro de subvention:
FDE-CA-2022g010
Adresse URL de PolyPublie:
Titre de la revue :
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews ( vol. 222 )
Maison d'édition:
Elsevier BV
OAI:
oai:publications.polymtl.ca:66396
ORCID
Date du dépôt:
02 juil. 2025 13:52
Dernière modification:
14 oct. 2026 14:27
Citer en APA 7:
De Bortoli, A., Chanel, A., Chabas, C., Greffe, T., & Louineau, E. (2025). More rationality and inclusivity are imperative in reference transition scenarios based on IAMs and shared socioeconomic pathways - recommendations for prospective LCA. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 222, 115924 (14 pages). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115924

Statistiques

Total des téléchargements à partir de PolyPublie

Téléchargements par année

Provenance des téléchargements

Dimensions

Actions réservées au personnel

Afficher document
Afficher document