Counting Gains to Beyond Zero-Impact Futures

Abstract

The paper provides learning about past failures in the uptake of sustainability imperatives from qualitative discourse analysis of selected public communication, from reviewing a novel framework and from case studies in one scientific field. Resultant concepts, strategies and solutions are offered with potential to quell emerging threats and facilitate ecological remediation. Life cycle assessments (LCA) of certified ecolabelled and business as usual production systems with comparable spatiotemporal resolution and uncertainty were reviewed. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) frameworks cover damages to supply, climate, habitat and human health loss. With a negative range stopping at zero, LCIA excludes positive gains in supply, climate, human and habitat security. Results of risk and benefit analysis considering strength, weakness, opportunity and threat for sustainability reporting exposed gaps creating chasms in communications. In response Evah Associates compiled the life cycle benefit assessment LCBA2020 framework for positive development. LCBA methods were developed to quantify gains in regeneration and reparation of supply, climate, habitat and wellness within planetary boundaries safe operating space. Methods were tested to supplement third party verified LCA of real-world lumber, paper, personal care and recycling product for certified ecolabels as well as whole buildings as-built and as-designed. Benefit and damage metrics are compared for supply, climate, human and habitat outcomes. Results are also shown as carbon drawdown ratings and circularity scores useful for circular economy and United Nations sustainable development goals. The work concludes LCA is one of many impactful methods counting negativity that fails to engage people or quantify sustainability. Recommendations include that positive climate and habitat security narratives can be made compelling. Proof of competitive advantage requires quantification of benefits minus burdens. Justification of investment demands reporting of gain versus loss inside planetary boundaries. Finally, it is an imperative to engage people in counting benefits and gains.

Quantifying Nature Positive

“…Evah LCBA was developed to quantify positive outcomes in Climate Security, Hale Human Health, Ecosystem Replenishment and Supply Viability [17][18]. Figure 3 shows Evah LCBA flows.…”

“…The authors, however, define positive benefits as gains that exceed damages in the same system [17]. In the broadest sense it is vital to recognize that benefits offer solutions far beyond loss reduction [18].…”

“…One guide adds strategies need alignment to create long-term, positive impact to be environmentally restorative [26]. Some researchers argue that maximising positive benefits is more important than minimizing damages considering especially now to reach a 'Net Positive' world by 2030 [9,15,18].…”

“…LCBA uses pre-industrial revolution thresholds for climate, ecosystem and resource regeneration categories as the literature shows climate forcing emissions escalated from C1750 [31]. It lists LCBA categories, divided into benefit layers, units, circularity scores and climate braking factors [17][18]32].…”

Quantifying Nature Positive

“…Today most climate change and sustainability news stories are negatively framed around humanity's losses from damages caused by climate change [12,13,14]. And LCA feeds this negative framing.…”