Better methods are necessary to fully account for anthropogenic impacts on ecosystems and the essential services provided by ecosystems that sustain human life. Current methods for assessing sustainability, such as life cycle assessment (LCA), typically focus on easily quantifiable indicators such as air emissions with no accounting for the essential ecosystem benefits that support human or industrial processes. For this reason, more comprehensive, transparent, and robust methods are necessary for holistic understanding of urban technosphere and ecosphere systems, including their interfaces. Incorporating ecosystem service indicators into LCA is an important step in spanning this knowledge gap.

For urban systems, many built environment processes have been investigated but need to be expanded with life cycle assessment for understanding ecosphere impacts. To pilot these new methods, a material inventory of the building infrastructure of Phoenix, Arizona can be coupled with LCA to gain perspective on the impacts assessment for built structures in Phoenix. This inventory will identify the origins of materials stocks, and the solid and air emissions waste associated with their raw material extraction, processing, and construction and identify key areas of future research necessary to fully account for ecosystem services in urban sustainability assessments. Based on this preliminary study, the ecosystem service impacts of metropolitan Phoenix stretch far beyond the county boundaries. A life cycle accounting of the Phoenix’s embedded building materials will inform policy and decision makers, assist with community education, and inform the urban sustainability community of consequences.

This paper’s intent is to explore the environmental gap analysis tool, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), as it pertains to the decision-making process.

As LCA is more frequently utilized as a measurement of environmental impact, it is prudent
to understand the historical and potential impact that LCA has had or can have on its inclusion in public policy domain - specifically as it intersects the anticipatory governance framework and the supporting decision-making precautionary principle framework. For that purpose, LCA will be examined in partnership with the Precautionary Principle in order to establish practical
application.

LCA and Precautionary Principle have been used together in multiple functions. In two
case studies, the California Green Chemistry Initiative and in Nanotechnology uncertainty, there is a notion that these practices can create value for one another when addressing complex issues.

The recommendations presented in this paper are ones that recognize the current
dynamics of the LCA field along with the different sectors of decision makers. For effective
catalytic initiatives, adoptions of these recommendations are best initially leveraged by
government entities to lead by example. The proposed recommendations are summarized into
the following categories and explored in further detail later in the paper:
       1. Improvement in data sharing capabilities for LCA purposes.
       2. Common consensus on standards and technical aspects of LCA structure.
       3. Increased investment of resource allocation for LCA use and development.