Quantification of Biodiversity Loss in Building Life Cycle Assessment: Insights Towards Regenerative Design

Emma Sofie Terkildsen, August Sørensen and Aliakbar Kamari ()
Additional contact information
Emma Sofie Terkildsen: Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
August Sørensen: EKOLAB, Vestergade 48H, 2.tv., 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
Aliakbar Kamari: Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark

Sustainability, 2025, vol. 17, issue 18, 1-39

Abstract: This study examines the incorporation of biodiversity loss into the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of buildings, with a specific focus on the Danish construction sector. Motivated by the ecological crisis reflected in the Planetary Boundaries and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, it addresses regulatory gaps that prioritise climate indicators, such as Global Warming Potential (GWP), while largely ignoring biodiversity. The study analyses 73 Danish building cases for GWP and a custom method linking material quantities to ReCiPe 2016 endpoint data for biodiversity loss. The findings indicate key methodological issues include the quality of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), the regional relevance of assessment methods, and differences in European standards. While average GWP levels mostly meet upcoming Danish limits, variability, especially in Office and Other building categories, supports the need for differentiated regulations. Results show embodied impacts mainly drive GWP, while biodiversity loss is split between embodied and operational impacts. Detached and Terraced houses, which use more bio-based materials, have low embodied GWP but higher biodiversity loss, highlighting trade-offs in regenerative design. The shift in GWP impacts to end-of-life phases stresses the need to consider forest dynamics. Operational impacts rank similarly, despite differences in the data. The study concludes that progress toward regenerative design requires addressing climate and biodiversity together to avoid shifting environmental burdens.

Keywords: biodiversity loss; off-site biodiversity; life cycle assessment; LCA methodology; EPD; regenerative design; regenerative building; embodied carbon; operational carbon; environmental impact (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8369/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8369/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8369-:d:1752319

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().