Social aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies-challenges for social life cycle assessment (SLCA)

被引:113
|
作者
Lehmann, Annekatrin [1 ,2 ]
Zschieschang, Eva [2 ,3 ]
Traverso, Marzia [1 ]
Finkbeiner, Matthias [1 ]
Schebek, Liselotte [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Berlin, Dept Environm Technol, Chair Sustainable Engn, D-10623 Berlin, Germany
[2] Karlsruhe Inst Technol, Inst Technol Assessment & Syst Anal ITAS, D-76021 Karlsruhe, Germany
[3] HS Pforzheim, Inst Ind Ecol INEC, D-75175 Pforzheim, Germany
[4] Tech Univ Darmstadt, Inst IWAR, D-64287 Darmstadt, Germany
来源
关键词
Comparative analysis; Indicators; Products; Social life cycle assessment (SLCA); Sustainability assessment; Technology; INTEGRATION; INDICATORS;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-013-0594-0
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Technologies can contribute to sustainable development (e.g., improving living conditions) and at the same time cause sustainability problems (e.g., emissions). Decisions on alternative technologies should thus ideally be based on the principle to minimize the latter. Analyzing environmental, economic, and social aspects related to technologies supports decisions by identifying the "more sustainable" technology. This paper focuses on social issues. First, it discusses the applicability of the social life cycle assessment (SLCA) guidelines for a comparative technology analysis, taking the example of two case studies in developing countries. Indicating technologies as "sustainable" also means that they are indeed operated over the expected lifetime, which, in development projects, is often not guaranteed. Consequently, social aspects related to implementation conditions should be considered in an SLCA study as well. Thus, a second focus is laid on identifying appropriate indicators to address these aspects. First, the SLCA guidelines were examined with regard to applying this product-related approach to two real case studies (analysis of technologies/plants for water supply and for decentralized fuel production) for a comparative technology analysis. Suitable indicators are proposed. To address the second focus, a literature research on technology assessment and implementation in developing countries was conducted. Moreover, socioeconomic studies in the investigation areas of the case studies were consulted. Based on this, indicators addressing implementation conditions were identified from the SLCA guidelines and additional literature. The study shows social issues and indicators found in the SLCA guidelines and considered suitable for a comparative technology analysis in the case studies. However, for a sustainability assessment of technologies, especially in developing countries, further indicators are required to address technology implementation conditions. A set of additional social indicators like reported trust in institutions or fluctuation of personnel is proposed. Though these indicators were derived based on specific case studies, they can also be suggested to other technologies and are not necessarily limited to developing countries. The study pointed out that an application of the SLCA guidelines considering the whole life cycle was not (yet) feasible for the case studies considered. This is mainly due to the lack of data. Regarding technology implementation, it was examined which indicators are available in this SLCA approach and which could additionally be integrated and applied. This is relevant as a potential contribution of technologies to sustainable development can only be achieved when the technologies are successfully implemented.
引用
收藏
页码:1581 / 1592
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Towards social life cycle assessment: a quantitative product social impact assessment
    Traverso, Marzia
    Bell, Lynn
    Saling, Peter
    Fontes, Joao
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2018, 23 (03): : 597 - 606
  • [22] Use of education as social indicator in the assessment of sustainability throughout the life cycle of a building
    Ruano, Marco
    Garcia Cruzado, Marcos
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2012, 37 (04) : 416 - 425
  • [23] Development and demonstration of a social sustainability assessment tool for the construction project life cycle
    Kordi, Nurul Elma
    Belayutham, Sheila
    Ibrahim, Che Khairil Izam Che
    [J]. CONSTRUCTION INNOVATION-ENGLAND, 2024,
  • [24] Development of a methodological framework for social life-cycle assessment of novel technologies
    van Haaster, Berthe
    Ciroth, Andreas
    Fontes, Joao
    Wood, Richard
    Ramirez, Andrea
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2017, 22 (03): : 423 - 440
  • [25] Development of a methodological framework for social life-cycle assessment of novel technologies
    Berthe van Haaster
    Andreas Ciroth
    João Fontes
    Richard Wood
    Andrea Ramirez
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2017, 22 : 423 - 440
  • [26] THE ROLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL LIFE CYCLE COSTING IN SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF THE TECHNOLOGIES
    Janik, Agnieszka
    [J]. ECOLOGY, ECONOMICS, EDUCATION AND LEGISLATION CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, SGEM 2016, VOL III, 2016, : 677 - 684
  • [27] Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies
    Assefa, G.
    Frostell, B.
    [J]. TECHNOLOGY IN SOCIETY, 2007, 29 (01) : 63 - 78
  • [28] Social Organisational Life Cycle Assessment and Social Life Cycle Assessment: different twins? Correlations from a case study
    Manuela D’Eusanio
    Bianca Maria Tragnone
    Luigia Petti
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2022, 27 : 173 - 187
  • [29] Social Organisational Life Cycle Assessment and Social Life Cycle Assessment: different twins? Correlations from a case study
    D'Eusanio, Manuela
    Tragnone, Bianca Maria
    Petti, Luigia
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2022, 27 (01): : 173 - 187
  • [30] Environmental Challenges in the Residential Sector: Life Cycle Assessment of Mexican Social Housing
    Carolina Gamez-Garcia, Diana
    Saldana-Marquez, Hector
    Manuel Gomez-Soberon, Jose
    Paola Arredondo-Rea, Susana
    Consolacion Gomez-Soberon, Maria
    Corral-Higuera, Ramon
    [J]. ENERGIES, 2019, 12 (14)