Past and future of Social Life Cycle Assessment: Historical evolution and research trends

Huarachi, Diego Alexis Ramos; Piekarski, Cassiano Moro; Puglieri, Fábio Neves; Francisco, Antônio Carlos de

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121506

Cited by 106 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 132 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Standards ISO 14040:2006 and ISO 14044:2006 establish a generic framework for the elaboration of LCA. However, Social Impact Assessment methodologies at product level need flexibility due to their immaturity and specific background requirements [22,23] for S-LCA. In fact, it is recommended to use a simultaneous work with both quantitative and qualitative indicators, because the former may not cover social dimensions completely [24].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental and economic impact assessment of products have a long record, while social performance analysis of products have less references in the scientific literature due its particularities and the adaptations needed for the features of the studied subject. In addition, there is a lack of a methodological framework of its application in the analysis of value chains, with the aim of estimating the impacts of technical innovations from the social point of view. This paper describes the theoretical framework and impact assessment approach for the Social Life Cycle Assessment of product value chains under a circular economy approach by applying a scoring system in different subcategories and indicators, considering the plastic packaging sector as a case study. Twelve subcategories have been chosen, because of their relevance to the case study, related to the impacts on the labor conditions, consumers’ well-being, end-of-life of the product, local community conditions, technology and suppliers, among others. The validation of the methodology in the plastic packaging sector is done by considering the main stakeholders involved in the value chain and the particularities of the sector.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While recognizing the importance of integrating social impacts in life cycle assessment (LCA) started in the 1990s (O'Brien et al 1996), there has been struggle to develop a standardized methodology for S-LCA (Huertas-Valdivia et al 2020). A comprehensive overview of the history of S-LCA development can be found in Benoît et al (2010) andRamos Huarachi (2020). Essential improvements to integrate he social dimension in LCA were proposed by Dreyer et al (2006) and Gauthier (2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cause-effect chains in S-LCA based on DPSIR framework using Markov healthcare model: an application to “working hours” in Canada

Hannouf

Assefa

Hannouf

et al. 2021

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study has two aims: first, propose the use of the driver-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR) framework to expand the normal focus of impact pathways in social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) on endpoint impacts to a systematic analysis to find links between the main sources of social issues and impacts; second, develop a new impact assessment method to quantify the lifetime health and economic outcomes associated with social subcategories, for the first time, using decision analytic models. Methods The DPSIR framework is mapped to the corresponding elements of the S-LCA context in relation to the social subcategories defined in the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets. Next, a more robust approach is developed for cause-impact chains between social subcategories and impacts on human well-being based on decision-analytic models (decision trees and Markov models) using healthcare approaches and data. Finally, the health and economic consequences associated with social subcategories are quantified by using Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and costs based on medical literature and healthcare studies. Results and discussion The method was applied to the “working hours” social subcategory in Canada. The cause-effect chain is built using DPSIR framework in relation to the current social issue in Canada of working more than standard hours. Results of the decision analytic model show that working standard hours is more effective and cost-saving than working more than standard hours from the Canadian healthcare perspective. Working standard hours compared to more than standard hours led to an increase of 0.73 QALY and decrease in cost of $6702 per worker. Based on an estimated 2.4 million Canadian workers working more than standard hours, this resulted in a total gain of 1.7 million QALYs and saving of $16 billion overall. Using cost-effectiveness analysis, possible interventions at multiple entry points of the cause-effect chain within DPSIR framework are proposed to reduce the negative health impacts and associated costs of working more than standard hours in Canada. Conclusions Applying the method on other subcategories could help decision-makers establish the cause-effect aspects of the social performance of their product systems using a quantitative systematic analysis from a life cycle perspective. This approach supports corporate decision-makers to quantify social impacts associated with their product supply chains by calculating QALYs and healthcare costs of their socio-economic conditions enabling them to identify possible interventions to improve the social performance.

show abstract

“…Prior to this study, other authors [15,16] conducted bibliometric analyses to examine life-cycle assessment (LCA). Most recently, Ramos Huarachi and his colleagues [17] employed VOSviewer software to analyze the most significant S-LCA literature, identifying the historical evolution of the concept (distinguishing four stages of research) and highlighting the main frameworks for social life-cycle impact assessment (SLCIA) methods (type I and type II). These authors assert that "there is still a long way ahead to achieve scientific maturity" in S-LCA and strongly recommend continuing research on themes in S-LCA and social sustainability [17] (p.1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most recently, Ramos Huarachi and his colleagues [17] employed VOSviewer software to analyze the most significant S-LCA literature, identifying the historical evolution of the concept (distinguishing four stages of research) and highlighting the main frameworks for social life-cycle impact assessment (SLCIA) methods (type I and type II). These authors assert that "there is still a long way ahead to achieve scientific maturity" in S-LCA and strongly recommend continuing research on themes in S-LCA and social sustainability [17] (p.1). Our paper thus aims to provide an objective supplement to prior evaluations of the literature through visual classification of the main topics, authors, and journals on S-LCA.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Life-Cycle Assessment: A Review by Bibliometric Analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the literature on social life-cycle assessment (S-LCA) published in the last 15 years (2003–2018) using bibliometric methods. Applying scientific mapping and analyzing publication performance, the study describes the structure of and trends in S-LCA publications in terms of related subject categories, authors, journals, countries, and highly cited articles. Challenges and research gaps in the S-LCA literature were also explored. The content of related papers published in the ISI Web of Science databases was examined to identify the main themes investigated, evolution of publication activity, and most representative elements. Analyses were conducted with SciMAT software. This tool enables researchers to map research specialties by extracting qualitative information in the specialized literature and representing it using quantitative measures. The results show rapid and exponential growth of the S-LCA research line in the past ten years, with a clear upward trend in related publications (mostly case studies), especially after publication of the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products in 2009: 66% of all articles published on S-LCA were published during the period 2015–2018, primarily by European authors. The findings also delineate S-LCA as a highly fragmented research field that has been applied to diverse sectors (agriculture, bioenergy, transport, water management, chemical products, electronics, etc.), mainly in non-European countries. Critical questions concerning methods, framework, paradigms, and indicators remain to be resolved. This study provides insight into the publication performance of S-LCA, characterizing its intellectual structure and salient authors and works. In identifying hotspots in the S-LCA research, the study provides a useful state-of-the-art reference guide for academics and reveals critical research gaps and potential research avenues for future studies to advance in consolidating the discipline.

show abstract

Past and future of Social Life Cycle Assessment: Historical evolution and research trends

Cited by 106 publications

References 132 publications

Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector

Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector

Cause-effect chains in S-LCA based on DPSIR framework using Markov healthcare model: an application to “working hours” in Canada

Social Life-Cycle Assessment: A Review by Bibliometric Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About