Subcategory Assessment Method for Social LCA: A First Application on the Wine Sector

Ramirez, Paola Karina Sanchez; Petti, Luigia; Ugaya, Cássia Maria Lie

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-03826-1_11

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These three later subcategories seem actually to be tailored to big companies, and might not be relevant for most product chains. Our list stands out from other studies with new criteria on accessibility and product's taste, while our choice for consumer education is also confirmed by two other studies [54,56].…”

Section: For Final Consumers More Basic Criteria and Adapted To Anysupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Workers From the Guidelines Freedom of association and collective bargaining [26,28,47,48,[51][52][53][54][55] Child labor [28,48,[51][52][53][54][55] Fair salary [26][27][28][46][47][48][52][53][54][55], C18…”

Section: Quality Of Social Ties Between Vcas C11mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forced labor [28,48,[52][53][54] Equal opportunities/discrimination [26][27][28]44,[46][47][48][52][53][54]56] Health and safety [25,26,28,44,[46][47][48][50][51][52][53][54][55], C20…”

Section: Quality Of Social Ties Between Vcas C11mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Feedback mechanism [47,52,54,55] Consumer privacy [46,54,55] Transparency [46][47][48]52,54,55], C29…”

Section: Final Consumersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Participation in S-LCA: A Methodological Proposal Applied to Belgian Alternative Food Chains (Part 1)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In social life cycle assessment (S-LCA), the use of a participatory approach to define and select assessment criteria and indicators (C&Is) is recommended given the specificity of social issues, but it has been, for now, rarely implemented and presents methodological challenges. Within a participatory action research project gathering academic researchers and field actors, we tested the applicability of configuring a C&Is list for S-LCA, together with chain actors of three alternative food distribution systems active in Belgium. The purpose of this article is to present the results of this work and to examine the methodological limits, requirements, and contributions of such an approach. The participatory approach is an appropriate method to build a list of C&Is standing out from other studies, with the identification of ambitious and innovative C&Is relating to value-chain actors (VCAs) stakeholder category, on chain governance and transaction modalities. In our case, it required an adaptation work of C&Is to the S-LCA requirements and the use of a specific theoretical approach to articulate C&Is within a coherent framework. Finally, this kind of work seems useful to give ground to the S-LCA Guidelines’ list of subcategories, which was built through a rather top-down expert-based approach.

show abstract

Section: For Final Consumers More Basic Criteria and Adapted To Anysupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Quality Of Social Ties Between Vcas C11mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forced labor [28,48,[52][53][54] Equal opportunities/discrimination [26][27][28]44,[46][47][48][52][53][54]56] Health and safety [25,26,28,44,[46][47][48][50][51][52][53][54][55], C20…”

Section: Quality Of Social Ties Between Vcas C11mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Feedback mechanism [47,52,54,55] Consumer privacy [46,54,55] Transparency [46][47][48]52,54,55], C29…”

Section: Final Consumersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Participation in S-LCA: A Methodological Proposal Applied to Belgian Alternative Food Chains (Part 1)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social Life Cycle Assessment Application: Stakeholder Implication in the Cultural Heritage Sector

Arcese

Pietro

Mugion

2015

Social Life Cycle Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The word “sustainability” is often used to refer to equity within and\ud between generations, as explained in the Brundtland Report (1987). The clarification\ud of the concept in the triple bottom line is often used to illustrate the need to\ud investigate the social, environmental, and economic decisions. The classification of\ud stakeholders is still controversial and not universally agreed upon in the various\ud analysis models, are a common point balance categories: customers, staff, suppliers,\ud and the local community (Hinna 2005; Schwartz 2006a). The Social Life Cycle\ud Assessment (SCLA) methodology can be described as a tool that allows a strategic\ud vision and management of the social sustainability of the product and takes the form\ud of an analysis that lets the company observe the social impact of the product through\ud its sustainability evaluation throughout its life cycle (Benoit et al. Int J Life Cycle\ud Assess 15, 156–163, 2010). The possible solution to this gap can be represented by\ud models of assessment of social impacts based on Life Cycle Thinking, and especially\ud through the application of the Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) methodology\ud that is suitably integrated with the models until now mentioned in the literature\ud (UNEP/SETAC, United Nations Environment Program, Paris SETAC Life Cycle\ud Initiative United Nations Environment Programme, 2009b). The evaluation of the\ud life cycle for the social aspects (social LCA) is a framework that allows the generation,\ud organization, evaluation and communication of social impacts on the life\ud cycle of a product, process, or service. The aim of this study is to create a framework\ud for the social impact evaluation in the cultural heritage sector, through the association\ud of existing Social Life Cycle Assessment tools with data resulting from social\ud evaluation of the relationship between cultural services and stakeholders in order to\ud point out the criticalities of the cultural heritage sector. This study introduced a\ud theoretical framework for the evaluation of social impact on the cultural heritage sector, through the application of SLCA methods, and shows how it could be possible\ud to classify the stakeholder subcategories in order to consistency. It is the\ud preliminary approach of an integrative support to the SAM methods for SLCA

show abstract

Comparing the incomparable? A review of methodical aspects in the sustainability assessment of wood in vehicles

Mair-Bauernfeind

Zimek

Lettner

et al. 2020

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The choice of materials used for a vehicle can contribute to reduce negative environmental and social impacts. Bio-based materials are considered a promising solution; however, the sustainability effects still need to be assessed. Depending on the material assessed, it is questionable which environmental and social impact categories or subcategories should be included since recommendations in guidelines are vague and case studies in this regard are limited. Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the choice of impact categories, methods, and indicators for E-LCA and S-LCA when assessing wood as substitute for conventional materials in automotive applications. Method The research is based on a literature review covering 115 case studies of S-LCAs and E-LCAs focusing either on wood-based products or on components in automotive applications. The selected case studies were analyzed according to the following criteria: considered stakeholder groups and chosen subcategories (S-LCA sample), sector or product system (S-LCA sample), year of publication and geographical scope (S-LCA and E-LCA sample), chosen LCIA method(s) and impact categories, objective(s) of the studies, analyzed materials and used software support (E-LCA samples). Results and discussion For S-LCA some relevant social topics for bio-based product systems, like food security or land- and worker-related concerns, could be identified. The E-LCA literature suggests that the objective and material type determine calculation approaches and impact category choices. Some material-related environmental issues like biodiversity loss in the case of bio-based product systems or ecotoxicity for steel and toxicity in the case of aluminum could be identified. For S-LCA the geographical and sectorial context and the affected stakeholders are the determining factors for methodical choices, however, the results show almost no difference in subcategory choice and geographical context. Influencing factors for methodical choices in E-LCA might be the objective of the study, data availability, the up-to-dateness of the LCIA approach, the geographical scope of the study, the materials analyzed, and the availability of software support. Conclusion Some relevant environmental and social impact categories as well as influencing factors on methodical choices could be identified from existing literature. However, a clear picture on these issues could not be drawn. Further research is needed on the motivation of researches on certain methodical choices as well as on environmental issues connected with materials or geographical-related social topics.

show abstract

Subcategory Assessment Method for Social LCA: A First Application on the Wine Sector

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

Participation in S-LCA: A Methodological Proposal Applied to Belgian Alternative Food Chains (Part 1)

Participation in S-LCA: A Methodological Proposal Applied to Belgian Alternative Food Chains (Part 1)

Social Life Cycle Assessment Application: Stakeholder Implication in the Cultural Heritage Sector

Comparing the incomparable? A review of methodical aspects in the sustainability assessment of wood in vehicles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About