Life Cycle Assessment has long shaped how companies measure environmental impact, but something unexpected is shifting the narrative.
Influencers, once dismissed as outsiders to technical conversations, are now shaping how sustainability is understood by the public. With millions of followers and growing credibility, they are translating complex metrics into digestible messages that resonate far beyond corporate walls. Some simplify the science, while others misrepresent it. And many spark discussions that force LCA specialists to rethink how data is communicated, framed, and even prioritized.
This shift reflects a deeper tension: balancing scientific accuracy with public engagement. Brands are caught in the middle, trying to protect credibility while staying relevant. Sustainability teams are navigating unfamiliar terrain: working with content creators, correcting misinformation, and responding to growing calls for transparency.
Ignoring this wave is no longer an option. But understanding how to respond takes nuance, not panic. In this blog post, let’s explore how influencers are reshaping the sustainability dialogue, what it means for LCA practitioners, and how to stay ahead without losing clarity or control.
Life Cycle Assessment and its role for the public
Life Cycle Assessment helps make the invisible visible. It’s a method for measuring the environmental impact of a product, process, or system, from start to finish. That includes everything from raw material extraction to manufacturing, use, and end-of-life. It’s how companies figure out where emissions, resource use, and waste actually happen, instead of guessing or assuming.
Historically, Life Cycle Assessment has lived in technical reports and regulatory filings. It’s been a language spoken mainly by academics, corporate sustainability teams, consultants, and policymakers — people with access to detailed data, sophisticated software, and time to interpret it. And that made sense, for a while. It was used to shape policy, set procurement standards, and inform internal decisions.
But the landscape is shifting. Consumers are paying closer attention to what companies say about climate impact, and how much of it they can actually prove. Activists, investors, and influencers are asking better questions. Some of the loudest voices in climate communication aren’t publishing in journals, they’re posting on social media, building trust, and calling out greenwash. And the public is listening.
That’s why broader public understanding of Life Cycle Assessment isn’t a nice-to-have anymore. It’s a missing piece in how sustainability is being communicated and often misunderstood. When someone claims that one product is “greener” than another, what data is that based on? How were tradeoffs like water use vs. emissions considered? Without a basic grasp of what Life Cycle Assessment measures — and what it doesn’t — those conversations can slide into oversimplified or misleading territory.
Giving the public a clearer view into how environmental impact is actually calculated can create pressure for more honest claims, better product choices, and stronger policies. It doesn’t require everyone to become an expert. But it does mean bringing Life Cycle Assessment out of the technical corner and into the broader conversation — with transparency, clarity, and relevance. And social media is where that shift is starting to happen.
Social media is changing sustainability narratives
The sustainability conversation isn’t confined to academic journals or policy briefings anymore — it’s streaming live, stitched into Reels, and broken down in 30-second TikToks.
Social media has become an unexpected but significant arena for shaping public understanding of climate issues, product footprints, and even Life Cycle Assessment. For professionals working behind the scenes of emissions models and supply chain data, this shift can feel both promising and precarious.
At its best, social media broadens the reach of sustainability insights. It gives visibility to circular design, ethical sourcing, and material transparency in a way that’s more accessible than a peer-reviewed publication. But it also opens the door to oversimplified claims, aesthetic over substance, and algorithms that prioritize engagement over accuracy.
Still, the conversation is happening, and it’s moving fast. Understanding how these platforms are reshaping public expectations can help sustainability professionals stay ahead of the narrative and correct course when misinformation spreads.
Social platforms to democratize information
Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube have turned sustainability from a specialist topic into a shared conversation. Instead of relying on traditional gatekeepers like academia or industry associations, creators — some with formal training, others with lived experience — now shape how sustainability is understood and discussed. A short video explaining product life cycles or the carbon footprint of fast fashion can reach millions in hours.
This broad access has a real impact. It helps raise baseline awareness around Life Cycle Assessment, Scope 3 emissions, and material impacts among audiences who would otherwise never engage with such topics. Professionals can view this as a prompt: if the public is asking better questions, companies need clearer answers.
Shift from scientific papers to viral posts
Long reports and technical appendices are giving way to content built for scrolls and swipes. Instead of reading through a full Life Cycle Inventory report, people are more likely to see a creator summarize the environmental impact of a product in under a minute.
This trend isn’t inherently negative. Digestible content can build foundational understanding, and sometimes spark deeper interest. But the nuance that sustainability professionals live and breathe often gets flattened. Trade-offs between bioplastics and recycled content, or between transportation emissions and local production, rarely fit into a carousel post. That puts pressure on professionals to communicate better, faster, and more clearly — or risk letting half-truths go unchecked.
Pros and cons of sustainability “simplification” online
Simplifying sustainability for mass audiences can help normalize better choices, like reducing single-use plastics or prioritizing low-impact materials. It builds cultural momentum that regulations alone often struggle to achieve. But there’s a trade-off. Oversimplified content can distort real environmental data or push solutions that look good but underperform when analyzed through Life Cycle Assessment.
The challenge is to meet audiences where they are, without dumbing down the science. Some professionals are doing this well — partnering with creators, correcting misinformation, or experimenting with their own social content. It’s not about turning every specialist into an influencer, but about recognizing that communication has become as critical as calculation.
The role of influencers in LCA & social media
Social media has never been quiet about sustainability, but the volume and velocity have altered. Now, influencers are not just posting about greener products or eco-hacks. They’re reshaping how entire audiences think about sustainability frameworks like Life Cycle Assessment. Some bring science to the surface with surprising clarity. Others drift into oversimplification or amplify trends without grounding them in actual data. Either way, the impact is undeniable.
Influencers are helping bring Life Cycle Assessment out of technical silos and into the cultural mainstream. That’s good news, when it’s accurate. But as this shift unfolds, sustainability professionals need to ask: who’s interpreting the data, how are they doing it, and what’s getting lost along the way?
Let’s unpack the different voices shaping this conversation — and how they’re moving the needle on awareness, understanding, and sometimes, confusion.
Different types of sustainability influencers
From data-heavy scientists to everyday creators sharing small lifestyle changes, sustainability influencers fall along a spectrum. Scientists and LCA specialists often use social platforms to explain carbon accounting or material impacts in plain terms, translating the core of technical assessments into bite-sized education. Their credibility tends to attract a niche but highly engaged audience.
On the other end, lifestyle influencers and climate activists focus more on values and actions — pushing themes like zero-waste living, sustainable fashion, or regenerative farming. Their narratives are more emotional than analytical, but they’re powerful in shaping public sentiment. And somewhere in the middle are hybrid creators: engineers with TikTok followings, PhDs with newsletters, or consultants walking their audience through a product’s full footprint.
Each group offers something different — reach, rigor, relatability — but they’re all part of the same ecosystem, influencing how the broader world perceives Life Cycle Assessment.
Interpretation, promotion, or oversimplification of LCA findings
When influencers discuss Life Cycle Assessment, the quality of interpretation varies. Some share accurate, well-sourced insights about emissions, material choices, or system boundaries. Others reduce a complex assessment to a binary — “this product is sustainable, that one isn’t.” The nuance gets flattened.
This isn’t always intentional. Influencers work within content formats that reward speed, not depth. The problem is when oversimplified claims go viral — like declaring a plant-based product “better for the planet” without mentioning land use, water inputs, or end-of-life considerations. Even well-meaning creators can misrepresent findings if they lack training in Life Cycle Assessment or industrial systems.
Still, the growing interest is promising. It signals a cultural appetite for substance — and an opening for experts to guide the conversation more publicly. Some sustainability teams are already partnering with creators to fact-check content or co-develop more accurate messaging. It’s a way to preserve integrity without losing reach.
Examples of influencers popularizing LCA concepts
A few standout examples show how Life Cycle Assessment is making its way into mainstream discourse.
On YouTube, the channel Engineering with Rosie dives into renewable energy technologies with LCA data front and center — comparing materials, lifetime emissions, and manufacturing processes in detail, but with accessible language. Her videos attract engineers and everyday viewers alike, showing there’s an appetite for real substance.
On Instagram and TikTok, creators like Sustainable Stephanie and Brown Girl Green break down supply chain impacts in relatable ways, often referencing cradle-to-grave footprints when talking about food, clothing, or packaging. While not always using the term “Life Cycle Assessment,” they reference its core concepts — life stages, impact trade-offs, and systems thinking.
Then there are LinkedIn voices — consultants, LCA software users, and corporate sustainability leads — who use the platform to share case studies, challenge claims, and bring rigor to public conversations. Their posts rarely go viral, but they build credibility where it counts—among peers and decision-makers.
- Paul Polman
- Nico Rosberg
- Roger Atkins
- Katharine Hayhoe
- Kate Brandt
- David Carlin
- Isabelle Kocher de Leyritz
- Joel Makower
- Sheri R. Hinish
- Tom Szaky
Through visual storytelling, technical unpacking, or peer-to-peer credibility, each example shows a different pathway to popularizing Life Cycle Assessment. The more diverse these messengers, the stronger the collective signal becomes.
Benefits of influencer involvement in LCA awareness
Influencers are rewriting how Life Cycle Assessment reaches people — not through white papers or technical webinars, but through conversation, curiosity, and connection.
Their platforms stretch far beyond the typical sustainability bubble. They translate complex data into questions that matter to everyday people. What’s the carbon footprint of this cotton shirt? Why does packaging matter more than we thought?
Influencers are reshaping LCA awareness by bringing it closer to everyday life and pushing companies toward higher standards in the process.
Make LCA more relatable to everyday choices
When an influencer shows how the emissions tied to their plane ride compared to a month of vegan meals, it makes Life Cycle Assessment personal. The abstract becomes tangible. Instead of graphs, we get context with data placed inside everyday routines. It’s the difference between “2.4 kg CO₂” and “this sweater leaves a bigger footprint than you think.” That’s where awareness starts to stick.
Amplify lesser-known sustainability issues through emotional storytelling
Influencers often spotlight the blind spots in supply chains, and not just carbon, but water stress, toxicity, and land degradation. Through personal stories, they help audiences connect emotionally with impacts buried in spreadsheets. A travel vlogger might reflect on coral bleaching. A chef might talk about fertilizer runoff. These moments aren’t lectures but invitations to care. That’s how lesser-known issues rise to public consciousness.
Push companies toward transparency and better data disclosure
Public sustainability claims can’t survive on aesthetics alone anymore. When influencers question product claims or request full Life Cycle Assessment results, it pressures brands to respond and disclose. The comment section becomes a stage for accountability. No third-party audit needed. Just a well-informed audience and a public ask: where’s the data? And when it’s missing, silence speaks volumes. Influencers know this, and use it wisely.
When LCA gets lost in translation in the social media world
As Life Cycle Assessment enters the social media spotlight, something gets lost between the science and the storytelling. The data is there, the models are sound, but nuance doesn’t always trend. When LCA insights are simplified, misquoted, or misused for impact, sustainability professionals are left cleaning up the narrative. This section unpacks how complexity gets flattened, where greenwashing creeps in, and why clear communication is no longer optional.
Misinformation or oversimplification risks
Life Cycle Assessment is built for nuance while social media is not. Swipe-fast platforms reward certainty, not context, which means environmental claims pulled from assessments can spread without their limitations. Emissions per kilogram? That’s one story. Emissions per use? Another entirely. When details disappear, so does scientific integrity. Oversimplifying LCA outputs can mislead audiences, undermining both public understanding and the credibility of the sustainability professionals behind the work.
Greenwashing fueled by partial or misunderstood LCA claims
Companies don’t always lie but they often cherry-pick. Partial Life Cycle Assessment results, stripped of context, can make products look more sustainable than they are. Social media accelerates that. A single number, misinterpreted or misrepresented, becomes a selling point. Meanwhile, environmental impacts from upstream or end-of-life stages get buried. This creates a surface-level story that satisfies algorithms but misleads decision-makers and consumers alike.
The need for better communication between LCA experts and social media figures
When experts stay silent, others fill the gap. Content creators mean well, but without input from LCA professionals, critical details fall through. Think of it as a broken game of telephone: technical findings get filtered, reframed, then fed to millions. That’s why better collaboration matters. Translating assessments into digestible, accurate insights requires shared language, regular exchange, and patience from both sides of the conversation.
Algorithms reward bold claims, not accurate ones
Outcomes from Life Cycle Assessment are rarely black and white. Social platforms are built to amplify bold statements, not conditional insights. This pushes sustainability claims toward extremes, encouraging posts that oversell product benefits or vilify entire sectors. The result? A distorted conversation that rewards clarity over accuracy, engagement over ethics, and confidence over caution. That’s a problem for both science and strategy.
Lack of transparency around data quality and boundaries
Not all assessments are equal, but few on social media know to ask. Without transparency around data sources, temporal relevance, or system boundaries, Life Cycle Assessment results can mislead even well-meaning audiences. Was that carbon footprint cradle-to-gate or cradle-to-grave? Did it include scope 3 emissions? Most posts won’t say. When data quality gets skipped in favor of simplicity, trust in the process starts to erode.
Responsible collaboration between brands and experts
As Life Cycle Assessment starts showing up in creator content, it’s worth asking: how can brands and experts get involved without compromising scientific integrity or audience trust? The answer lies in thoughtful collaboration.
Responsible partnerships start with shared intent. Brands and technical experts should treat influencers as creative collaborators, not just promotional channels. Co-creating content means bringing science to the table early — not as a post, but as part of the script. Fact-checking should be standard, not an afterthought.
It’s how some environmental creators have built successful campaigns with LCA consultants: by turning complex findings into digestible, visually engaging stories. These aren’t just flashy reels — they’re credible, nuanced explanations that help audiences think critically about materials, supply chains, and certifications.
Accuracy doesn’t have to be sacrificed for reach. It just needs planning. Briefs should highlight which claims require third-party validation. Experts should be available to answer follow-ups as scripts evolve. And creators need breathing room to make the content feel authentic, not staged.
When it works, the impact is bigger than a trending post. It reshapes how sustainability is communicated, and who gets to be part of that conversation.
Emerging trends dictating the future of LCA & social media
Life Cycle Assessment is making its way into newsfeeds, comment threads, and creator-led discussions. As social media grows into a public arena for sustainability storytelling, a new wave of expectations is taking shape. Audiences want more than declarations.
They want data. They want proof. They want to understand what impact really means. At the same time, creators are getting smarter, tools are getting sharper, and the line between science and storytelling is starting to blur in productive ways.
These emerging trends suggest that Life Cycle Assessment won’t just be influenced by social media — it’ll be shaped by it.
Rise of interactive tools to be shared on social media
Interactive tools are gaining momentum, especially as shareable content. Think carbon footprint calculators embedded in Instagram stories, or “choose your impact” quizzes reshared on LinkedIn. These tools don’t just inform; they invite action. They turn passive scrolling into moments of engagement. For professionals, this shift means audiences are arriving with some baseline knowledge — and sometimes, misconceptions. It’s an opportunity to correct, clarify, and elevate the discussion with actual Life Cycle Assessment data.
More sophisticated sustainability literacy among audiences
Sustainability audiences are getting sharper. Not only do they ask better questions, they also spot greenwashing faster. They want data, not fluff. They notice when something doesn’t add up. For Life Cycle Assessment specialists, this means communications have to rise to meet that awareness. Simplifying doesn’t mean dumbing down. It means choosing transparency over slogans, and context over soundbites. The pressure is on, but the potential to build real credibility is growing in parallel.
Growing call for transparency and traceable data on social platforms
Sustainability claims on social media are under scrutiny, and rightly so. Consumers, professionals, and watchdog accounts now demand traceable, third-party verified data — not vague references to “eco-friendly” practices. For Life Cycle Assessment professionals, this is both a challenge and a chance. The documentation behind impact claims can no longer stay hidden in PDFs. Traceability needs to be accessible, not buried. Those willing to share real numbers, backed by science, are earning trust that marketers can’t buy.
Visual storytelling rooted in real impact data
Data visualizations are evolving, moving beyond bar charts and emissions tables into social-first formats like carousels, reels, and explainer threads. When rooted in Life Cycle Assessment data, these visuals help bridge the gap between technical insight and public understanding. But they only work when they’re honest. Oversimplifying or cherry-picking for aesthetics risks eroding credibility. The opportunity lies in crafting visuals that are both accurate and accessible, showing impact in a way that invites curiosity, not just applause.
Scientists and analysts stepping into the creator space
More scientists, analysts, and compliance experts are stepping into the social media conversation — and not just in comments or corporate videos. They’re building their own followings, using platforms like LinkedIn and YouTube to explain methodologies, challenge claims, and share behind-the-scenes views of the Life Cycle Assessment process. This shift is changing the tone of sustainability discussions. It’s not just marketers driving the narrative anymore — it’s the people doing the work, and that adds needed depth.
A new era for sustainability communication
The conversation around sustainability is no longer confined to boardrooms or peer-reviewed journals. It’s unfolding on phones, in scrolls, and through voices that don’t always come from technical backgrounds. Influencers are reshaping how Life Cycle Assessment is perceived—sometimes enhancing public understanding, other times distorting it. This blog unpacked how scientific nuance meets viral content, where oversimplification creates risk, and how professionals can respond with both clarity and credibility. It explored the range of influencer types—from science communicators to lifestyle creators—and showed how each is shaping sustainability narratives in distinct ways. It also highlighted the power of collaboration, the pitfalls of data misinterpretation, and the rising demand for transparency.
The takeaway? Sustainability professionals need to stay present in the conversation—not to chase trends, but to ensure truth holds its ground. Social media won’t replace Life Cycle Assessment, but it will continue to shape its impact.
To stay connected with evolving conversations at the intersection of data, communication, and sustainability, follow P6 on LinkedIn.
