A critical view on social performance assessment at company level: social life cycle analysis of an algae case

Abstract

Purpose Social indicators are not easy to be quantitatively analyzed, although at the local scale, the social impacts might be relevant and important. Using the existing approaches for both quantitative and semi-qualitative measurements, this study aims to assess the social impacts of a company working on algae production systems in Belgium through social life cycle analysis (SLCA). By highlighting the opportunities and challenges on the way of applying the existing SLCA approaches at company level, the objective of this study is to contribute to the development of a suitable and clear SLCA approach when a company is considered as the unit of analysis. Methods Based on the list of potential social impact categories suggested by the United Nations Environment Program/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP/SETAC) guidelines (2009) for SLCA, three stakeholder groups (workers, consumers, and local community) and three subcategories associated with each stakeholder group were identified as the most relevant for carbon capture and utilization technologies. Company and sector level data were collected using existing documents and reports, and the data were analyzed and scored using a combined quantitative and semi-quantitative approach to develop a social assessment model for the case study. Results and discussion The company appears to perform well for all the evaluated social indicators except the one related to the subcategory "equal opportunity/discrimination for workers" for which the share of women employed is lower compared with the sector-level data. The results of our assessment were further discussed regarding the challenges and limitations of performing SLCA at the company level. Based on our experience, the validity of the outcomes is significantly influenced by the data availability, the generality of the indicators introduced within the UNEP/SETAC guidelines, and the subjectivity in data collection for the semi-quantitative assessment among others. Conclusions By highlighting the difficulties and challenges of applying the SLCA at the company level, our study provides a starting point for improving the quantitative assessment and monitoring social implications at the company level within a regional foreground in Europe.

Proposed Green Development Reporting Framework for Enterprises from a Life-Cycle Perspective and a Case Study in China

“…Therefore, further attention should be paid to social LCA (SLCA) in the following research. SLCA, as an important aspect of LCA research, has been well-applied, and gradually applied from the product to the enterprise level, with indicators related to stakeholders and quantitative/semi-quantitative methods [55][56][57]. This can improve the social responsibility and social image of enterprises.…”

Social Life Cycle Assessments: A Review on Past Development, Advances and Methodological Challenges

“…For instance, 58 out of 67 studies analyzed the impact on workers (87%), while only 24 (36%) examined consumers and 23 (34%) value chain actors. From those 24 studies evaluating the impact on consumers, only six consider all sub-categories recommended by the Guidelines [70,129,132]. In addition, as all analyzed studies were published before the revised UNEP/SETAC Guideline 2020, it is no surprise that none of them assessed the impact on children in particular.…”

Exploring Social Sustainability Handprint—Part 1: Handprint and Life Cycle Thinking and Approaches

“…Numerous approaches [79] including (1) social reporting, database development, and data source sharing/provision within the supply chain and business partners; (2) identification of the main social improvement opportunities, impacts, and risks (e.g., within the supply chain); and (3) social perspective on understanding the opportunities and risks associated with the initial production process development phase [80] Integration of (1) multiple ways to address, define, measure, and understand social sustainability; (2) social sustainability reporting;…”

“…Life cycle approaches comprise many challenges and limitations that need to be considered in the assessment of social sustainability handprints. Previous studies have recognized many challenges and limitations related to S-LCA approaches, encompassing (1) linking of social indicators and impacts to products, lack of assessment of the social performance of products, and product-level data covering whole life cycles [59]; (2) assessment of social benefits and impacts considering the perception of social issues based on various culture, value, and lifestyle-related aspects [65]; and (3) application to company-level assessment of social implications, including identification of specific indicators for detailed analysis of social impacts, the need for more detailed data, data availability (e.g., site-specific data covering all stakeholders and companies involved in the whole life cycle), and general guideline indicators [80].…”

“…(1) Identification of specific indicators for more detailed analysis of social impacts (existing indicators are too general), including more detailed data (obtaining company-level data is already difficult); (2) enhancement of communication between business/supply chain partners (reports on social performance, sharing/provision of data, and development of databases); (3) screening of production processes to determine the main social impacts, improvement opportunities, and risks that may influence the whole supply chain; (4) understanding possible risks and opportunities from the social perspective (in the initial development phase of a production process); and (5) evaluation of the social impact of company performance for internal assessment and optimization purposes [80] Integration of (1) identified specific social sustainability indicators; (2) detailed analysis of social sustainability impacts;…”