• Indicators are useful to support circular economy progress. • Circular economy has different definitions entailing challenges for indicators. • A classification framework to understand what indicators measure is proposed. • Most of the analysed indicators focus on the preservation of materials. • None of the analysed indicators focuses on the preservation of functions.

• A novel method to quantify the ease of disassembly of products is presented. • The method relies on Maynard work measurement methodology (MOST). • The method is unambiguous and robust to be used in policy and by ecolabels. • The method makes a good trade-off between workability and accuracy. • The presented method is applied in a case study for an LCD monitor.

• Second-use entails energy savings but also delays availability of secondary raw materials. • Different perspectives should be used to assess the effects of second-use of batteries. • A dynamic and parametrized MFA model describes the value-chain of batteries in Europe. • Flows of batteries/energy storage capacity/materials are assessed for various scenarios. • More robust data as model input are needed to proper manage the whole battery system.

This paper aims at analysing how secondary materials production and end of life recovery processes are modelled in life cycle-based environmental assessment methods in order to discuss their suitability inproduct policy-support contexts, with a focus on Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) policies. The equations prescribed in three published, widely recognised standards are evaluated. In addition, more recent modelling approaches that have been adopted in the context of two EU product policy initiatives (the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and the Resource Efficiency Assessment of Products (REAPro))are similarly analysed. All of the methods are scrutinised against eight criteria which we deem to be important in product policy-support contexts, including comprehensiveness, accommodation of open-loop and closed-loop product systems, and consideration of recyclability/recoverability rates, to name a few. Based on this analysis, it is suggested that the PEF and REAPro modelling approaches appear to be better suited for use in product policy-support contexts than do the currently widely endorsed methods that we considered.status: publishe

From an environmental perspective, the durability of products is generally seen to be a positive and desirable goal, especially from the point of view of waste management. However, the extension of the lifetime of energy-using products is not necessarily the optimal strategy, as the efficiency of products generally decreases with wear and tear, and their substitution by more energy-efficient products can be more environmentally beneficial in the long run. There is currently no standardised approach to resolving this conflict, although various approaches have been illustrated in the literature based on different perspectives. The present article describes an original method for environmentally assessing the durability of energy-using products in order to identify if and to what extent the potential extension of the product’s lifetime could have life-cycle benefits. The method is based on the comparison, within a life-cycle perspective, of two scenarios of different lifetimes of a target product and its potential substitution with (one or more) better performing alternatives. The method considers some key parameters of durability, including the average lifetime of the product(s), the annual energy consumption, the impacts of lifetime extension (e.g. through repair) and the environmental performance of the replacement product. A general index and a simplified index have been derived from the method. The applicability and relevance of the simplified durability index is shown in two case studies (of washing machines). The results of the assessment can be used for ecodesign purposes by manufacturers (e.g. for the identification of technical design options for extending the lifetime of products) or by policy makers (e.g. in setting requirements for product policies). The applicability and robustness of the method are discussed, including potential limitations (e.g. allocation of co-products/co-services, variability of impacts on manufacturing or end-of-life), difficulties (e.g. for products with short technological cycles), and possible improvement (e.g. the impacts of repair on extending the lifetime, the effects of different usages). The two case study applications of the method show that some life-cycle environmental benefits can be gained by extending the lifetime of the products, even if it would delay their replacement with more energy-efficient products. However, the benefits and their relevance are variable, mostly depending on the selected impact category, the extension of the lifetime, the impact of repair, and the efficiency of the replacement product.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen