View article

Current life cycle assessment (LCA) interpretation practices typically emphasize hotspot identification and improvement assessment. However, these interpretation practices fail in the context of a decision‐driven comparative LCA where the goal is to select the best option from a set of dissimilar alternatives. Interpretation of comparative LCA results requires understanding of the trade‐offs between alternatives—instances in which one alternative performs better or worse than another—to identify the environmental implications of a specific decision. In this case, analysis must elucidate relative trade‐offs between decision alternatives, rather than absolute description of the alternatives individually. Here, typical practices fail. This article introduces a probability distribution‐based approach to assess the significance of performance differences among alternatives that allows LCA practitioners to focus analyses on those …