With climate change, biodiversity loss, and mounting pollution ravaging the people and the environment, the tools we use to measure environmental impact matter just as much as the actions we take. For a country like Nigeria that grapples with rapid population growth, industrialisation, and complex ecological challenges, there is a need for precise, context-specific sustainability tools.
One prominent environmental sustainability assessment tool is life cycle assessment (LCA). LCA is a powerful tool for quantifying the environmental impacts of products, services and emerging technology from resource extraction to disposal. Yet, like any tool, its effectiveness depends on the quality of data. In most developing countries, including Nigeria, LCA studies often rely on weighting factors that have been developed in Europe, Japan and the United States. This practice introduces a significant layer of uncertainty to LCA results. Imagine assessing Nigeria's gas flaring crisis or oil spill incidents using a framework designed for Switzerland. The environmental priorities, policy targets, industrial activities, and societal impacts are quite different. Yet, that's exactly what many LCA practitioners are forced to do in the absence of locally tailored data and impact assessment methods. The use of OECD country developed method not only reduces transparency but also undermines the usefulness of LCA for Nigerian policymakers, businesses, and academia.
The recent paper by Mohammed Isah and colleagues in The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment introduces a critical development in this arena: a Nigeria-specific, policy-based weighting method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). This innovative framework is a tailored adaptation of the Swiss-developed Ecological Scarcity Method (ESM), and it could significantly alter how Nigeria evaluates environmental burdens and makes sustainability decisions. The research doesn't just fill a methodological gap; it challenges the status quo and redefines what environmental accountability could look like not only in Nigeria but also in the Global South. Their paper introduces a timely alternative: a method that aligns Nigeria's environmental policy targets, own emission levels and resource use, and own development priorities.
What the study did and why it matters
The researchers applied the ESM to develop Nigeria-specific eco-factors, numerical values that quantify environmental damage in relation to national targets. By using 2010 environmental data as a base year and comparing it to 2030 policy goals, they calculated the "distance-to-target" (DtT) for 25 different emissions and resource use indicators. The greater the distance from the target, the higher the eco-factor - indicating a more severe environmental burden.
The results are eye-opening. Emissions like nitrogen oxides (NOx), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), and land use change rank among the highest weighted environmental concerns. Meanwhile, emissions like greenhouse gases (GHGs), though important globally, register with relatively lower weights in the Nigerian context -- reflecting the country's comparatively smaller carbon footprint.
On the other hand, the absence of clear emission reduction targets for pollutants such as carcinogenic substances in air and heavy metals in water suggests policy blind spots that could have dire health and environmental implications. These gaps in emission reduction target-setting mean that some pollutants are effectively invisible in national sustainability planning, even if their impacts are severe.
Policy-Based Weighting: Science That Reflects Local Realities
One of the strengths of the policy-based DtT approach is its transparency and reproducibility. Unlike panel or monetary weighting which rely on subjective expert opinions or controversial valuations of environmental damage in monetary terms, the DtTmethod grounds its calculations in government-defined policy targets. It's a method that respects national sovereignty while aligning with international best practices.
In Nigeria, where environmental challenges are intertwined with economic and social development, such a method is not just useful, it's necessary. Gas flaring, for example, isn't just an ecological issue; it's a symptom of a fossil fuel-dependent economy struggling to balance economic development, and energy security with environmental responsibility. Similarly, land degradation due to mining or agriculture isn't just about biodiversity; it's about food security, livelihoods, and resilience to climate shocks.
The Power of localized environmental data
What this study makes clear is that you cannot manage what you cannot measure, and you certainly cannot measure effectively if you're using someone else's environmental assessment method. Nigeria's environmental data is complex and often patchy. But by using publicly available data from government agencies, international organizations, and academic studies, the authors demonstrate that it's possible to build a robust LCIA framework grounded in local realities.
Moreover, the method's adaptability means it can be continuously improved as better data becomes available or as policy priorities evolve. This flexibility is crucial for a country like Nigeria, where the pace of change - economically, demographically, and environmentally is rapid.
Challenges Remain -- but So Does the Opportunity
To be sure, the study does not claim to solve all the challenges facing LCA in Nigeria. The authors acknowledge limitations, such as missing data for waste and noise emissions, and the absence of targets for substances like radioactive waste or some airborne toxins. But these limitations are also opportunities: clear signposts for where future policy, research and data collection efforts should focus.
For Nigeria's policymakers, this research offers more than a technical framework, it provides a strategic tool. By identifying the substances and sectors that carry the highest environmental burdens, it becomes easier to target interventions, allocate resources, and track progress. For businesses and industries, it offers a pathway toward credible sustainability assessments that can enhance reputation and improve access to green finance. And for researchers, it opens the door to more rigorous, localized environmental analysis that can inform everything from academic inquiry to product innovation.
A Blueprint for the Global South
Though the focus of their study is Nigeria, the implications extend far beyond its borders. Many developing countries face similar issues: limited access to environmental data, lack of context-specific tools, and a heavy reliance on frameworks developed in the Global North. The Nigeria-specific DtT method provides a replicable model that other countries can adapt using their own data and policy targets. In a world increasingly shaped by both global environmental treaties and local sustainability challenges, this balance -- between global principles and local precision -- is exactly what we need.
Conclusion
The ultimate value of any method lies in its application. Now that Nigeria has a scientifically sound, locally grounded, policy-aligned weighting method for LCIA, the next step is political and institutional. Will Nigerian policymakers incorporate these eco-factors into regulatory frameworks, businesses embrace them to guide product design and sustainability reporting, and will international development partners support their refinement and broader adoption?
If the answer is yes, then Nigeria will have taken a bold and important step toward environmental self-determination, one where sustainability is not just imported rhetoric but indigenous practice.