RCI Report Highlights Gaps in Biodiversity Assessment Methods for LCA
Review of nine leading approaches finds significant progress, but no single method captures all biodiversity dimensions and major drivers of biodiversity loss
Biodiversity is becoming an increasingly important factor in sustainability assessments, but accurately measuring biodiversity impacts within life cycle assessments (LCA) remains challenging. A new report by the Renewable Carbon Initiative (RCI), supported by nova-Institute, reviews and compares nine advanced methods for assessing terrestrial biodiversity impacts in LCA.
The report, titled “Biodiversity in Sustainability Assessments – in Particular Life-Cycle-Assessments (LCA)”, examines approaches developed or significantly advanced over the past decade and evaluates their coverage, data requirements, regionalisation, methodological characteristics and practical applicability.
Nine Biodiversity Assessment Methods Reviewed
The report analyses the following approaches:
- ReCiPe2016
- IMPACT World+
- LC-IMPACT
- Product Biodiversity Footprint
- Biodiversity Impact Assessment+
- BioMAPS
- Global Extinction Potential
- UNEP-GLAM
- Biodiversity Value Increment
The methods are assessed based on the biodiversity levels and drivers of biodiversity loss they cover, their data requirements and regionalisation capabilities, as well as their availability in established LCA software.
No Single Method Covers All Biodiversity Dimensions
The review finds that no current method fully captures the three key dimensions of biodiversity:
- Species diversity
- Genetic diversity
- Ecosystem diversity
At the same time, none of the reviewed approaches covers all five major drivers of biodiversity loss:
- Land and sea-use change
- Climate change
- Pollution
- Direct exploitation of organisms
- Invasive alien species
While significant methodological progress has been made, the report identifies continued challenges related to data availability, uncertainty, impact-pathway modelling and interpretation.
UNEP-GLAM and BioMAPS Highlighted for Risk Screening
For high-level biodiversity risk screening, the report identifies UNEP-GLAM and BioMAPS as particularly relevant emerging approaches. BioMAPS was also incorporated into the European Environmental Footprint methodology.
However, the authors recommend that LCA methods should be used alongside a broader set of assessment tools. These may include certification schemes, field measurements and other site-specific biodiversity evaluations.
Method Selection Can Influence Environmental Priorities
The report notes that the selection of a biodiversity assessment method can influence the environmental hotspots identified in an LCA. This can subsequently affect strategic priorities and the allocation of resources.
To address this issue, the authors recommend conducting sensitivity analyses using different assessment methods rather than relying on a single approach.
Due to existing uncertainties, the report also advises that biodiversity-related LCA results should not yet be used as the sole basis for consumer communication.
Expert View on the Current State of Biodiversity Assessment
“We have known for years that biodiversity is a critically important issue, but our ability to account for it in life cycle assessments remains limited,” says Dr. Matthias Stratmann, Head of Sustainability at nova-Institut GmbH.
“This work does not solve the problem, but it highlights which models and tools are currently the most advanced. Practitioners can use the methodology to select and apply suitable approaches, while researchers can build on their expertise to further develop these tools.”
Two-Part Report on Biodiversity and the Bioeconomy
The report is the first part of a two-part series examining biodiversity in relation to biomass production and the bioeconomy.
The second part of the series is expected to be published in autumn 2026.