Garvens, Hans-Jürgen2024-06-162024-06-162023https://doi.org/10.60810/openumwelt-1789https://openumwelt.de/handle/123456789/1235The critical peer review (CPR) of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies is a task of value. The majority of benefits lie in the projects and are not realized from the outside. The effect to the outside concerns communication. A peer review can be conducted on various levels. As a measure of quality assurance and to assist the interpretation of results, it is already meaningful to ask some colleagues for their opinion. For credibility and reliability, external reviews are most suitable. The best option is to include interested parties, which will also support communication. Communication of LCA results need to be suitable for the respective target audience. Often results are over-interpreted or simplified too much. The publication of an assertion "A is better than B" is meaningless without some background information and some limitations of that statement. The background information and limitations are meaningless, if the target audience cannot understand them. © 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG1 Online-Resourcehttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/VerkehrTeil eines Buches