The life cycle assessment (LCA) process is a multi-step calculation that is challenging even for seasoned LCA professionals to recite with precision. Do not feel alone; it is a complex process. Let’s break it down into simpler bites by examining the components of the LCA calculations.

The LCA process follows four steps:
• Process inventory data collection
• Impact characterization
• Normalization
• Weighting

We consider each step, first individually; then combined, in a continuous calculation. Please keep in mind that each of these steps is included in every Okala Impact Factor. Designers and product teams need not take the time to understand them in depth. They are included here to show the rigor behind the single-score assessment process.

I thank you for asking an important, albeit complex question, so I’ll try to provide some context for my response. The financial crisis has triggered a global recession resulting in the contraction of large consumer economies like that of the US, as growing numbers of people experience job loss along with decreased asset values. These factors have combined to send consumer spending into a downward spiral in many parts of the world, derailing global economic growth plans.

Events are causing some economists to speculate on what a global economy will be like in a ‘post financial crisis’ world. The baseline question is this: will consumers change their spending, savings, and lifestyle habits in fundamental ways over the long term? During the 1930’s, consumption contracted, savings soared, and businesses tried to adjust to fewer discretionary dollars. Today, this model has significant implications for the design profession and for businesses pursuing sustainable design strategies as they try to ponder the future.

In the near-term we are seeing many consumers focusing on value. They are buying fewer ‘things’ beyond essentials, and non-essential purchases are meeting a more stringent evaluation of the value proposition. That’s good news for stores like Wal-Mart. This consumption model impacts medium- to higher-end goods most, resulting in fewer discretionary purchases. Many consumers are saying one of three things: “What I have is good enough; I can live without that; or, I really don’t need so much.”

Great question and the concept is directly linked to the foundation of Okala and ecodesign, as I’ll reference later. We define biomimicry in Module 12 of the Okala guide as “the study of the way that nature does things, so that we can adapt nature’s methods to modern production.” There is also a primer for design strategies described by biomimicry expert Janine Benyus:

These nature-based design tenets can be considered an outline for life cycle planning — the foundation of Okala. All artificially produced products or systems have a life cycle, but it’s only when you step back far enough to consider the total life cycle of a product and its environmental impacts that you begin to see how biomimicry can be applied to design problem solving. Yet we often fall short of achieving nature’s design elegance when we attempt to emulate it.

One of the most well-known examples of applying nature’s principles to human need is the development of Velcro®; derived from the cockle burr. However, when conceived, it’s doubtful that anyone on the development team considered the full life cycle of a product containing a Velcro® closure system. Made largely from non-renewable polymers that don’t bio-degrade, Velcro® closure components are often attached to products like leather sandals, making them difficult to replace or easily reclaim. This is an example of seeing the short-term benefit of a natural design principle without considering the long term environmental consequences.