Life cycle assessment (LCA) and related tools are commonly used to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of waste treatment scenarios. This manuscript presents a mini-review of studies published over the last 10 years in Italy and aims to investigate how life cycle thinking tools are applied to assess the environmental sustainability of local-level waste policies. Results reveal that different waste flows, technologies and policies have been investigated independently and in varying detail. Review suggests that boundary selection significantly affects LCA results; integration of different waste systems is therefore crucial to avoid spatial or temporal shifts of environmental impacts. Moreover, the description of methodological characteristics, limitations and transversal aspects of Italian waste management studies allows various stakeholders to assess the reliability of past and future research for waste policy planning and rebound effects prevention. This review also highlights the need to define minimum requirements of transparency and ease of reporting of the studies to private and public stakeholders. Finally, the paper investigates whether using both the organisational LCA and the life cycle sustainability approach for the overall waste management process may be useful to develop a standard method to address multi-functionalities and multiple sites.

生命周期评估 (LCA) 和相关工具通常用于评估废物处理方案的潜在环境影响。这份手稿对过去 10 年在意大利发表的研究进行了小型回顾，旨在研究如何应用生命周期思维工具来评估地方级废物政策的环境可持续性。结果表明，已经对不同的废物流、技术和政策进行了独立和不同的详细调查。审查表明边界选择显着影响 LCA 结果；因此，不同废物系统的整合对于避免环境影响的空间或时间变化至关重要。此外，方法学特征的描述，意大利废物管理研究的局限性和横向方面使各利益相关者能够评估过去和未来废物政策规划和反弹影响预防研究的可靠性。该审查还强调需要确定透明度和向私人和公共利益相关者报告研究报告的便利性的最低要求。最后，本文调查了在整个废物管理过程中同时使用组织 LCA 和生命周期可持续性方法是否有助于开发一种标准方法来解决多功能和多站点问题。该审查还强调需要确定透明度和向私人和公共利益相关者报告研究报告的便利性的最低要求。最后，本文调查了在整个废物管理过程中同时使用组织 LCA 和生命周期可持续性方法是否有助于开发一种标准方法来解决多功能和多站点问题。该审查还强调需要确定透明度和向私人和公共利益相关者报告研究报告的便利性的最低要求。最后，本文调查了在整个废物管理过程中同时使用组织 LCA 和生命周期可持续性方法是否有助于开发一种标准方法来解决多功能和多站点问题。