Durable goods last for years, decades, or even centuries. The environmental implications of the changing social, economic, and material conditions in which these goods are embedded can be overlooked by conventional life cycle assessment (LCA) that assumes a static world. To avoid this oversight, methods such as dynamic LCA (DLCA) are increasingly being used. Despite the growing use of DLCA, numerous questions remain, including how this dynamism is incorporated and what aspects of any given DLCA are dynamic. To answer these questions, we performed a review of 56 DLCAs, of which 44 propose a framework for DLCA covering all International Organization for Standardization phases of an LCA or that carry out a DLCA. Three types of LCA dynamism are identified and assessed for the reviewed literature: dynamic process inventory, dynamic systems, and dynamic characterization, while a further 2 types of LCA dynamism, dynamic scope and dynamic weighting, are proposed but not applied in the assessed literature. We found that the implementation of DLCA varies widely, and inventories accounting for dynamic characteristics are by far the most prevalent expression of DLCA. To reduce confusion surrounding the discussion of DLCA, we propose a definition of DLCA and its subtypes: full DLCA, partial DLCA, and prospective LCA. It is concluded that, among the current array of DLCA definitions, the implementation of partially dynamic LCA (PDLCA), which applies dynamism in only some parts of the LCA, is common and likely to continue. This is because PDLCA offers quantifiable marginal utility in terms of increased validity of the assessment, in relation to conventional LCA methods, but caution is needed in applying PDLCA because of potential for introducing bias into the LCA. To avoid this problem, we propose incorporating system dynamism as part of a sensitivity analysis, particularly in PDLCA that are limited by missing data. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;16:314–323. © 2019 SETAC

中文翻译：

---

定义临时动态生命周期评估：回顾。

耐用品可持续数年，数十年，甚至数百年。嵌入这些商品的不断变化的社会，经济和物质条件所带来的环境影响可以被假定为静态世界的常规生命周期评估（LCA）所忽略。为了避免这种疏忽，越来越多地使用诸如动态LCA（DLCA）之类的方法。尽管DLCA的使用越来越多，但仍然存在许多问题，包括如何结合这种动态性以及任何给定DLCA的动态方面。为了回答这些问题，我们审查了56个DLCA，其中44个提出了DLCA框架，涵盖了LCA或执行DLCA的所有国际标准化组织阶段。对于已审查的文献，确定并评估了三种LCA动态性：动态过程清单，动态系统，以及动态表征，同时提出了另外两种类型的LCA动态性，动态范围和动态权重，但未在评估文献中应用。我们发现DLCA的实现方式千差万别，并且考虑到动态特性的清单是DLCA最普遍的表达方式。为了减少围绕DLCA讨论的困惑，我们提出了DLCA及其子类型的定义：完整DLCA，部分DLCA和预期LCA。结论是，在当前的DLCA定义数组中，仅在LCA的某些部分应用动态性的部分动态LCA（PDLCA）的实施很常见，并且很可能会继续。这是因为PDLCA与传统的LCA方法相比，在评估有效性提高方面提供了可量化的边际效用，但是在应用PDLCA时需要谨慎，因为可能会将偏见引入LCA。为避免此问题，我们建议将系统动态性纳入灵敏度分析的一部分，尤其是在PDLCA中，由于缺少数据而受到限制。Integr环境评估管理2020； 16：314–323。©2019 SETAC