Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework

被引:76
|
作者
Ramirez, Paola Karina Sanchez [1 ]
Petti, Luigia [1 ]
Haberland, Nara Tudela [2 ]
Lie Ugaya, Cassia Maria [2 ]
机构
[1] Gabriele dAnnunzio Univ, Dept Econ Studies DEC, I-65127 Pescara, Italy
[2] Univ Tecnol Fed Parana, Grad Sch Mech Engn & Mat PPGEM, BR-80230901 Curitiba, Parana, Brazil
来源
关键词
Characterization model; SAM; Social impact assessment; Social life cycle assessment; Stakeholders; Subcategory assessment method; IMPACTS;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-014-0761-y
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The aim of this work is to propose an objective method for evaluating subcategories in social life cycle impact assessment (S-LCIA). Methods for assessing subcategories have been available since 2006, but a number of these either fail to include all the subcategories envisaged in the guidelines for S-LCA (UNEP/SETAC 2009) or are subjective in their assessment of each subcategory. The methodology is characterized by four steps: (i) the use of the organization as unit process, in which it was decided to assess the social profile of the organization responsible for the processes involved in the product life cycle, (ii) definition of the basic requirement to assess each subcategory, (iii) definition of levels based on the environment context or organizational practice and the data availability and (iv) assignment of a quantitative value. The result of the method applied was the development of the subcategory assessment method (SAM). SAM is a characterization model that evaluates subcategories during the impact assessment phase. This method is based on the behaviour of organizations responsible for the processes along the product life cycle, thereby enabling a social performance evaluation. The method, thus, presents levels for each subcategory assessment. Level A indicates that the organization exhibits proactive behaviour by promoting basic requirement (BR) practices along the value chain. Level B means that the organization fulfils the BR. Levels C and D are assigned to organizations that do not meet the BR and are differentiated by their context. The greatest difficulty when developing SAM was the definition of the BR to be used in the evaluation of the subcategories, though many indications were present in the methodological sheets. SAM makes it possible to go from inventory to subcategory assessment. The method supports evaluation across life cycle products, thereby ensuring a more objective evaluation of the social behaviour of organizations and applicable in different countries. When using SAM, it is advisable to update the data for the context environment. The method might be improved by using data for the social context that would consider not only the country, but also the region, sector and product concerned. A further improvement could be a subdivision of the levels to better encompass differences between organizations. It is advisable to test SAM by applying it to a case study.
引用
收藏
页码:1515 / 1523
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework
    Paola Karina Sanchez Ramirez
    Luigia Petti
    Nara Tudela Haberland
    Cássia Maria Lie Ugaya
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014, 19 : 1515 - 1523
  • [2] Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in Natura's cocoa soap
    Ramirez, Paola Karina Sanchez
    Petti, Luigia
    Brones, Fabien
    Lie Ugaya, Cassia Maria
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2016, 21 (01): : 106 - 117
  • [3] Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in Natura’s cocoa soap
    Paola Karina Sanchez Ramirez
    Luigia Petti
    Fabien Brones
    Cássia Maria Lie Ugaya
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2016, 21 : 106 - 117
  • [4] An analytic framework for social life cycle impact assessment—part 1: methodology
    Sheng-Wen Wang
    Chia-Wei Hsu
    Allen H. Hu
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2016, 21 : 1514 - 1528
  • [5] An analytic framework for social life cycle impact assessment-part 1: methodology
    Wang, Sheng-Wen
    Hsu, Chia-Wei
    Hu, Allen H.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2016, 21 (10): : 1514 - 1528
  • [6] 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
  • [7] 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
  • [8] A graphical representation for consequential life cycle assessment of future technologies. Part 1: methodological framework
    Chen, I-Ching
    Fukushima, Yasuhiro
    Kikuchi, Yasunori
    Hirao, Masahiko
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2012, 17 (02): : 119 - 125
  • [9] A graphical representation for consequential life cycle assessment of future technologies. Part 1: methodological framework
    I-Ching Chen
    Yasuhiro Fukushima
    Yasunori Kikuchi
    Masahiko Hirao
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2012, 17 : 119 - 125
  • [10] Radiological impacts in Life Cycle Assessment. Part I: General framework and two practical methodologies
    Paulillo, Andrea
    Clift, Roland
    Dodds, Jonathan M.
    Milliken, Andrew
    Palethorpe, Stephen J.
    Lettieri, Paola
    [J]. SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 708