<p> Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) are an important decision support tool when identifying environmentally preferable options. LCAs typically compare the environmental performance of products and services that offer the same functionality and therefore satisfy the same needs – just through different technical options (use of different materials, technologies, circular economy options, etc.). These technological advances usually have limitations and trade-offs. Sufficiency, as in abstaining from the need completely or partially, is another approach that typically improves the environmental footprint (subject to behavioral and systemic factors). However, product LCAs are based on clearly defined functional units to allow comparisons based only on the same function, therefore do not consider abstention or waste prevention measures. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate whether LCAs are a suitable decision support tool for situations in which sufficiency options like abstention can be considered alongside traditional technical approaches to improve the environmental footprint. This paper presents a concept for incorporating sufficiency into (product) LCAs without compromising the basic principle of comparability. The principle of comparison between the environmental or carbon footprint of the (abstained) product under study and those of average (rebound) products is tested through case studies. From the case studies it is evident that such comparisons requires a high number of assumptions, often leading to inconclusive ranges of results. In sufficiency cases, traditional product LCAs could be replaced by a new class of LCAs covering the person/consumer analogous to organizational LCAs. This would allow for sufficiency approaches to be considered.</p>