PESI-LCA in Building Manufacturing: A Triple-Bottom-Line Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in the Built Environment

Fredrik Lindblad; StallgårdSigrid; Ramona Axelstorm

doi:https://doi.org/10.37155/3060-8716-2-1-2

PESI-LCA in Building Manufacturing: A Triple-Bottom-Line Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in the Built Environment

Fredrik Lindblad （ Department of Management, School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University, Lückligsplats 1, 351 95 Växjö, Sweden ）

StallgårdSigrid （ Department of Management, School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University, Lückligsplats 1, 351 95 Växjö, Sweden ）

Ramona Axelstorm （ Department of Management, School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University, Lückligsplats 1, 351 95 Växjö, Sweden ）

https://doi.org/10.37155/3060-8716-2-1-2

Abstract

Traditional Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) emphasizes environmental impacts but often omits critical social and economic dimensions, limiting its capacity for holistic sustainability evaluation in the construction sector. This paper introduces the PESI-LCA framework (Product Environmental and Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment), which integrates environmental, social, and economic metrics into a structured, industry-ready method for comprehensive life cycle sustainability assessment. Drawing on 38 interviews across two European companies involved in building manufacturing, this study compares LCA adoption and outcomes. Company Y, applying PESI-LCA, reduced CO₂ emissions by ≈15%, improved energy efficiency by 10%, and achieved ≈8% cost savings through sustainable sourcing and process optimization. In contrast, Company X, lacking a structured LCA approach, failed to realize similar gains. The PESI-LCA framework extends LCA's utility in building manufacturing by identifying synergies across the triple bottom line and enabling alignment with emerging policy standards such as the EU Green Deal and CSRD. The findings also highlight the role of digital tools, such as AI-based tracking and supply chain analytics, as key enablers for broader PESI-LCA adoption within construction engineering contexts.

Keywords

Life Cycle Assessment; Construction Sustainability; Triple Bottom Line; Circular Economy; Building Manufacturing; PESI-LCA

Full Text

PDF

References

[1]United Nations. "Sustainable Development Goals." 2015. Available from: https://sdgs.un.org/goals [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[2]European Commission. European Green Deal." 2020. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[3]Araujo JBD, Frega J and Ugaya CML. From social impact subcategories to human health: an application of multivariate analysis on S-LCA. International Journal Life Cycle Assess, 2021; 26:1471–1493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01935-9
[4]Hackenhaar IC, Moraga G, Thomassen G, et al. A comprehensive framework covering Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment, resource circularity and criticality. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2024; 45, 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.01.018
[5]Guinée J. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: What Is It and What Are Its Challenges?. In: Clift, R., Druckman, A. (eds) Taking Stock of Industrial Ecology. Springer, Cham. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20571-7_3
[6]Schramm A, Richter F and Götze U. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment for manufacturing – analysis of existing approaches, Procedia Manufacturing, 2020; Volume 43: 712-719, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.02.115.
[7]Backes JG, Steinberg LS, Weniger A, et al. Visualization and Interpretation of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment—Existing Tools and Future Development. Sustainability, 2023; 15(13), 10658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310658
[8]Padilla-Rivera A, Hannouf M Assefa G. et al. Enhancing environmental, social, and governance, performance and reporting through integration of life cycle sustainability assessment framework. Sustainable Development, 2025; 33(2), 2975–2995. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3265
[9]Parvathy SU, Kolil VK, Raman R, et al. Integrating sustainable development goals into life cycle thinking: a multidimensional approach for advancing sustainability. Environment Development and Sustainability, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05810-z
[10]Busch T. Industrial ecology, climate adaptation, and financial risk. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2020; 24: 285–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12938
[11]Elkington J. Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Capstone, Oxford; 1997.
[12]Murray A, Skene K and Haynes K. ‘The circular economy: An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application’, Journal of Business Ethics, 2017; 140(3): 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2
[13]Ayres RU and Ayres LW. A handbook of industrial ecology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2002.
[14]ISO 14040:2006. Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[15]Bouillass G, Blanc I and Perez-Lopez P. Step-by-step social life cycle assessment framework: a participatory approach for the identification and prioritization of impact subcategories applied to mobility scenarios. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2021; 26, 2408–2435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01988-w
[16]ISO 14075:2024. Environmental management — Principles and framework for social life cycle assessment. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/61118.html [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[17]Elkington J. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environmental Quality Management, 1998; 8: 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106
[18]Amofa B, Adekunle O and Morrison Z. Mapping the trends of sustainable supply chain management research: a bibliometric analysis of peer-reviewed articles, Frontiers in Sustainability, 2023; Volume 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.1129046
[19]Toniolo S, Pierli G, Bravi L, et al. Digital technologies and circularity: Trade-offs in the development of life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-025-02436-9
[20]UNEP. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. Available from: https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/library/guidelines-for-social-life-cycle-assessment-of-products-and-organisations-2020/ [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[21]Global Reporting Initiative. Consolidated Set of GRI Standards. Available from: https://www.globalreporting.org/standards [Last accessed on 12 June 2025]
[22]Trollman H, Colwill J and Brejnholt A. Ecologically Embedded Design in Manufacturing: Legitimation within Circular Economy. Sustainability, 2020; 12(10), 4261. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104261
[23]Nica I, Chiriță N and Georgescu I. Triple Bottom Line in Sustainable Development: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability, 2025; 17(5), 1932. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17051932
[24]Alquraish A. Digital Transformation, Supply Chain Resilience, and Sustainability: A Comprehensive Review with Implications for Saudi Arabian Manufacturing. Sustainability, 2025; 17(10), 4495. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104495
[25]Popowicz M, Katzer NJ, Kettele M, et al. Digital technologies for life cycle assessment: a review and integrated combination framework. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2025; 30, 405–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-024-02409-4
[26]Setyadi A, Soekotjo S, Lestari SD, et al. Trends and Opportunities in Sustainable Manufacturing: A Systematic Review of Key Dimensions from 2019 to 2024. Sustainability, 2025; 17(2), 789. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17020789
[27]Yin RK. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage Publications; 2018.
[28]Braun V and Clarke V. "Using thematic analysis in psychology." Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2006; 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[29]Bryman A and Bell E. Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press; 2017.
[30]Soh SH, Jain A, Yeng Lee L, et al. Techno-economic and profitability analysis of extraction of patchouli oil using supercritical carbon dioxide, Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021; Volume 297, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126661
[31]Seuring S and Müller M. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2008; 16(15), 1699-1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020
[32]Mudersbach M, Jürgens M, Pohler M, et al. Life Cycle Assessment in a Nutshell—Best Practices and Status Quo for the Plastic Sector. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2025; Vol 46, 2300466. https://doi.org/10.1002/marc.202300466
[33]McKinnon A, Browne M, Whiteing A, et al. Green Logistics: Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Logistics. Kogan Page; 2015.

Publishing time:2025-05-08
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License