Towards prospective life cycle sustainability analysis: exploring complementarities between social and environmental life cycle assessments for the case of Luxembourg’s energy system

Rugani, Benedetto; Benetto, Enrico; Igos, Elorri; Quinti, G.; Declich, Andrea; Feudo, F.

doi:10.1051/mattech/2014043

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Social Hotspot Database (SHDB) (Benoît- Norris et al 2012) was used in four cases (Ekener-Petersen et al 2014;Martínez-Blanco et al 2014;Rugani et al 2014;Revéret et al 2015), two of which (Martínez-Blanco et al 2014;Revéret et al 2015) used it in combination with other methods, Life Cycle Working Environment (LCWE) and Potential Hotspot Analysis (PHA).…”

Section: Main Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment

Petti¹,

Serreli²,

Cesare

2016

Int J Life Cycle Assess

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The main purpose of this review is to investigate the methodology of social life cycle assessment (SLCA) through its application to case studies. In addition, the following research aims to define the trends related to the SLCA by researchers and consultants. This study will help to map the current situation and to highlight the hot spots and weaknesses of the application of the SLCA theory. Methods: The SLCA could be considered as a useful methodology to provide decision support in order to compare products and/or improve the social effects of the life cycle of a product. Furthermore, the results of the case studies analyzed may influence decision makers significantly. For this reason, a systematic literature review of case studies was carried out in which SLCA was applied in order to analyze closely the application of the stages of this methodology. In this study, the major phases of the technical framework for a SLCA were analyzed. Specific attention was paid to detect the positive impacts that emerged in the case studies, which were also studied by administering a questionnaire to the authors of the analyzed case studies and to a number of experts in the field of SLCA. Results and discussion: The 35 case studies examined in this paper, even though they do not deviate from the 40 identified by the previous processing, are still significantly different in terms of outcome produced. It is important to clarify that the authors who developed the case studies considered the steps defined in the SETAC/SETAC guidelines, borrowed from the ISO 14044 standard. Conclusions: The data resulting from this analysis could help both practitioners and researchers to understand what the issues are, on which it is still necessary to investigate and work, in order to solidify the SLCA methodology and define its role in the context of life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA). (Résumé d'auteur

show abstract

Section: Main Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment

Petti¹,

Serreli²,

Cesare

2016

Int J Life Cycle Assess

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A study by Norris [78] used the term "handprint", as opposed to "footprint", to quantify potential environmental benefits from a product or process. Steen and Palander [79], and Rugani [80] argued that this could be used as part of sustainability assessment. We conclude that both benefits and impacts could be part of the assessment, since improving sustainability performance is not merely a matter of reducing the risks of negative consequences, but also entails the promotion of positive benefits [79][80][81].…”

Section: Impacts and Benefits In S-lca Compared With Lca (Issue 5)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability decision making is a complex task for policy makers, considering the possible unseen consequences it may entail. With a broader scope covering environmental, economic, and social aspects, Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is a promising holistic method to deal with that complexity. However, to date, this method is limited to the hotspot analysis of a product, service, or system, and hence only assesses direct impacts and overlooks the indirect ones (or consequences). This critical literature review aims to explore the challenges and the research gaps related to the integration of three methods in LCSA representing three pillars of sustainability: (Environmental) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC), and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). The challenges and the research gaps that appear when pairing two of these tools with each other are identified and discussed, i.e., the temporal issues, different perspectives, the indirect consequences, etc. Although this study does not aim to remove the shadows in LCSA methods, critical research gaps are identified in order to be addressed in future works. More case studies are also recommended for a deeper understanding of methodological trade-offs that might happen, especially when dealing with the consequential perspective.

show abstract

“…Assessing the energy system in Luxemburg in a prospective approach, Rugani et al [54] used data from the Social Hotspot Database, the first database for social data on social issues on country and, if available, sector level [81]. The social impacts were assessed using S-LCA in a Business as usual (BAU) future scenario based on projections, up till 2025.…”

Section: Social Life Cycle Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods for assessing future scenarios from a sustainability perspective

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Future scenarios are often used to address long-term challenges characterised by uncertainty and complexity, as they can help explore different alternative future pathways. Scenarios can therefore be a useful tool to support policy and guide action towards sustainability. But what sustainability aspects are put forward in scenarios and how are they assessed? This paper aims to explore how to assess future scenarios, categorised according to Börjeson et al. (Futures 38:723-739, 2006) i.e. predictive, explorative and normative scenarios. By conducting a literature review and a document analysis, we map tools and methods that are currently used to assess environmental and social sustainability aspects in scenarios. We also draw on experiences from methods for impact assessments of Swedish municipal comprehensive plans, which can be considered as future scenarios. We identify whether some sustainability aspects are less recurrent than others in the reviewed assessments or even left out. We find that there is no single tool that can be used to assess scenarios. Some quantitative tools based on databases may be more suitable for assessing scenarios within a shorter time horizon, whereas qualitative assessment methods might better fit the purpose of long-term transformative scenarios. We also find that assessment frameworks may be useful to guide the assessment, as to what its intended purpose is and which sustainability aspects to include. Finally we discuss whether further assessment tools are needed in order to include a wider array of potential environmental or social consequences of the content of scenarios.

show abstract

Towards prospective life cycle sustainability analysis: exploring complementarities between social and environmental life cycle assessments for the case of Luxembourg’s energy system

Cited by 13 publications

References 29 publications

Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment

Systematic literature review in social life cycle assessment

Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment

Methods for assessing future scenarios from a sustainability perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About