TY - BOOK
T1 - Evaluation of a Delphi technique based expert judgement method for LCA valuation DELPHI II
AU - Virtanen, Yrjö
AU - Torkkeli, Sirpa
AU - Wilson, Bob
N1 - Project code: K7SU00054
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - Because of the complexity and trade-offs between
different points of the life cycles of the analysed
systems, a method which measures the environmental damage
caused by each intervention is needed in order to make a
choice between the products. However, there is no
commonly agreed methodology for this particular purpose.
In most of the methods the valuation is implicitly or
explicitly based on economic criteria. For various
reasons, however, economically obtained criteria do not
necessarily reflect ecological arguments correctly. Thus,
there is a need for new, ecologically based valuation
methods. One such approach is the expert judgement
method, based on the Delphi technique, which rejects the
economic basis in favour of the judgements of a group of
environmental experts. However, it is not self evident
that the expert judgement based environmental rating of
interventions will be essentially more correct and
certain than other methods. In this study the method was
evaluated at different points of the procedure in order
to obtain a picture of the quality of the indexes
produced. The evaluation was based on an actual Delphi
study made in 1995-1996 in Finland, Sweden and Norway.
The main questions addressed were the significance of the
results and the operational quality of the Delphi
procedure. The results obtained by applying the expert
method indexes were also compared with the results
obtained with other valuation methods for the background
life cycle inventory of the case study. Additional
material included feedback data from panellists of the
case study, collected with a questionnaire. The
questionnaire data was analysed to identify major
dimensions in the criteria for evaluating interventions
and correlation of the final indexes of the Delphi I
study with these dimensions. The rest of the
questionnaire material was used to document panellists'
opinions and experiences of the Delphi process,
familiarity with the environmental impacts of various
interventions, and classification in typologies of
cultural theory. The quality of results and
methodological aspects, such as effects of task
instructions, selection of the index basis, and effects
of the final standardisation were analysed statistically.
Accordingly, the effects of various postulates made on
the conformity of the environmental harm conceptions of
the experts, and the influence of the moderators'
decisions were assessed on the basis of standard
statistical indicators. The state of consensus and its
development in the Delphi process were studied with the
aid of K-entropy analysis.
The study showed that transparency and certainty, which
are essential qualities for an acceptable and trusted
valuation method, are only partially accomplished by the
expert judgement method in the format in which it was
developed in the analysed case. As for the technical
procedure, the method is well documented and transparency
is good. Argumentation of the judgements, however, should
be increased. The quality of the valuation indexes is
explicitly available, but their certainty is very low for
most interventions. The opinions of the experts vary
greatly. How much this depends on different values and
how much on differences in knowledge etc. is impossible
to assess. Also, how much the technique used and the
statistical processing of the experts' answers may have
influenced the eventual scores of different interventions
is difficult to assess.
The application of expert judgement to LCA valuation is a
new idea, and the method is still very much under
development and far from maturity. Nevertheless,
utilisation of expert knowledge can be a significant
addition to model approaches to ecological impact
assessment, which, because of the chaotic behaviour of
ecosystems, are limited and uncertain in predicting the
ecological consequences of interventions to the
environment. This should be taken into account when
considering the results of the evaluation of the case
study, which was the third of its kind in Europe.
AB - Because of the complexity and trade-offs between
different points of the life cycles of the analysed
systems, a method which measures the environmental damage
caused by each intervention is needed in order to make a
choice between the products. However, there is no
commonly agreed methodology for this particular purpose.
In most of the methods the valuation is implicitly or
explicitly based on economic criteria. For various
reasons, however, economically obtained criteria do not
necessarily reflect ecological arguments correctly. Thus,
there is a need for new, ecologically based valuation
methods. One such approach is the expert judgement
method, based on the Delphi technique, which rejects the
economic basis in favour of the judgements of a group of
environmental experts. However, it is not self evident
that the expert judgement based environmental rating of
interventions will be essentially more correct and
certain than other methods. In this study the method was
evaluated at different points of the procedure in order
to obtain a picture of the quality of the indexes
produced. The evaluation was based on an actual Delphi
study made in 1995-1996 in Finland, Sweden and Norway.
The main questions addressed were the significance of the
results and the operational quality of the Delphi
procedure. The results obtained by applying the expert
method indexes were also compared with the results
obtained with other valuation methods for the background
life cycle inventory of the case study. Additional
material included feedback data from panellists of the
case study, collected with a questionnaire. The
questionnaire data was analysed to identify major
dimensions in the criteria for evaluating interventions
and correlation of the final indexes of the Delphi I
study with these dimensions. The rest of the
questionnaire material was used to document panellists'
opinions and experiences of the Delphi process,
familiarity with the environmental impacts of various
interventions, and classification in typologies of
cultural theory. The quality of results and
methodological aspects, such as effects of task
instructions, selection of the index basis, and effects
of the final standardisation were analysed statistically.
Accordingly, the effects of various postulates made on
the conformity of the environmental harm conceptions of
the experts, and the influence of the moderators'
decisions were assessed on the basis of standard
statistical indicators. The state of consensus and its
development in the Delphi process were studied with the
aid of K-entropy analysis.
The study showed that transparency and certainty, which
are essential qualities for an acceptable and trusted
valuation method, are only partially accomplished by the
expert judgement method in the format in which it was
developed in the analysed case. As for the technical
procedure, the method is well documented and transparency
is good. Argumentation of the judgements, however, should
be increased. The quality of the valuation indexes is
explicitly available, but their certainty is very low for
most interventions. The opinions of the experts vary
greatly. How much this depends on different values and
how much on differences in knowledge etc. is impossible
to assess. Also, how much the technique used and the
statistical processing of the experts' answers may have
influenced the eventual scores of different interventions
is difficult to assess.
The application of expert judgement to LCA valuation is a
new idea, and the method is still very much under
development and far from maturity. Nevertheless,
utilisation of expert knowledge can be a significant
addition to model approaches to ecological impact
assessment, which, because of the chaotic behaviour of
ecosystems, are limited and uncertain in predicting the
ecological consequences of interventions to the
environment. This should be taken into account when
considering the results of the evaluation of the case
study, which was the third of its kind in Europe.
KW - LCA
KW - Life Cycle Assessment
KW - Delphi method
KW - DELPHI II
KW - valuation
KW - environmental impacts
KW - statistical analysis
M3 - Report
SN - 951-38-5461-2
T3 - VTT Tiedotteita - Meddelanden - Research Notes
BT - Evaluation of a Delphi technique based expert judgement method for LCA valuation DELPHI II
PB - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
CY - Espoo
ER -