How prospective LCA handles time in circularity-oriented assessments: Evidence and gaps

Prospective life cycle assessment (pLCA) is increasingly used to support circular economy (CE) strategies, however how time is represented, across foreground interventions and evolving background systems, remains heterogeneous and often underreported, with implications for comparability and decision quality. This study reviews how CE-oriented pLCA operationalizes and conceptualizes time evolution and identifies recurring temporal design choices relevant for impact assessment practice. We conducted a systematic literature review (Scopus and Web of Science), identifying 121 eligible publications. We extracted (i) the circular loops and R-strategies addressed, (ii) operational time handling (background databases and models, foreground management approaches, scenarios and elements of change), (iii) conceptual framings of time (as resource, structure, and process). Results show that applications focus on material recovery and recirculation (83%), while slowing and intensifying strategies are rarely assessed (6%), narrowing is marginal (3%), and dematerializing/service substitution cases are absent. Across studies, foreground changes are often reported, but background modelling is frequently opaque: 70 out of 121 studies (58%) do not specify the background model, and many omit explicit time slices or scenario labels, limiting interpretability and cross-study comparison. Finally, four temporal design configurations are identified, combining weak or partial foreground–background coupling with snapshot or pathway-based temporal evolution. This study makes temporal considerations in circularity-oriented pLCA actionable by translating a fragmented literature into four recurring temporal design configurations and a decision rule with requirements for selecting and documenting them. We conclude with recommendations to improve transparency, and increase the decision relevance of pLCA. • This research investigates how pLCA handles time in circularity-oriented assessment. • How temporal evolution is operationalized and conceptualized is revealed. • Common temporal configurations emerge with different applicability features. • Temporal configurations are linked to temporal evolution included in the assessment. • It emerges that temporal choices should be treated as part of the assessment design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Published
2026-04-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2026.108478
Primary Topic
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How prospective LCA handles time in circularity-oriented assessments: Evidence and gaps

Alessandro Marson, Sara Toniolo, Sara Zanni
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
article

How prospective LCA handles time in circularity-oriented assessments: Evidence and gaps

Alessandro Marson, Sara Toniolo, Sara Zanni
article en

Abstract

Prospective life cycle assessment (pLCA) is increasingly used to support circular economy (CE) strategies, however how time is represented, across foreground interventions and evolving background systems, remains heterogeneous and often underreported, with implications for comparability and decision quality. This study reviews how CE-oriented pLCA operationalizes and conceptualizes time evolution and identifies recurring temporal design choices relevant for impact assessment practice. We conducted a systematic literature review (Scopus and Web of Science), identifying 121 eligible publications. We extracted (i) the circular loops and R-strategies addressed, (ii) operational time handling (background databases and models, foreground management approaches, scenarios and elements of change), (iii) conceptual framings of time (as resource, structure, and process). Results show that applications focus on material recovery and recirculation (83%), while slowing and intensifying strategies are rarely assessed (6%), narrowing is marginal (3%), and dematerializing/service substitution cases are absent. Across studies, foreground changes are often reported, but background modelling is frequently opaque: 70 out of 121 studies (58%) do not specify the background model, and many omit explicit time slices or scenario labels, limiting interpretability and cross-study comparison. Finally, four temporal design configurations are identified, combining weak or partial foreground–background coupling with snapshot or pathway-based temporal evolution. This study makes temporal considerations in circularity-oriented pLCA actionable by translating a fragmented literature into four recurring temporal design configurations and a decision rule with requirements for selecting and documenting them. We conclude with recommendations to improve transparency, and increase the decision relevance of pLCA. • This research investigates how pLCA handles time in circularity-oriented assessment. • How temporal evolution is operationalized and conceptualized is revealed. • Common temporal configurations emerge with different applicability features. • Temporal configurations are linked to temporal evolution included in the assessment. • It emerges that temporal choices should be treated as part of the assessment design.

Environmental Impact Assessment ReviewVol. 120
University of Verona (IT), University of Padua (IT), University of Bologna (IT)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.