Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ecological modernization, techno-politics and social life cycle assessment: a view from human geography

  • SOCIAL LCA IN PROGRESS
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Although Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) is a growing field of inquiry and intervention, to date, there has been a dearth of engagement between this field and critical social scientists interested in questions of the societal impacts of goods and services. In response, this paper is written from the perspectives of two human geographers, new to the field of SLCA. Our aim is to offer an ‘outsiders’ perspective of, and commentary on, the growing field of SLCA, which we frame as a form of political intervention that seeks to have real-world impacts on the lives and futures of diverse peoples and places.

Methods

To address these questions, we explore SLCA’s underpinning assumptions by critically reviewing the worldviews that inform its methods, including debates in the literature about sustainable development and corporate social responsibility.

Results and discussion

SLCA’s normative and practical applications resonate strongly with an ecological modernization framework. This framework forwards social change via incremental and institutional interventions that promotes continued development, and privileges objectivity, impartiality and the search for a totalizing knowledge of the impacts of good and services.

Conclusions

Exploring SLCA’s epistemological foundations illuminates, and in turn, can help to address some of the key challenges SLCA currently faces. Drawing attention to SLCA’s inheren raison d’etre encourages more debate about the overall intentions and limits of the field, and represents not a weakness but rather its inherent quality of exploring the complex world of social impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bair J (2008) Analyzing economic organization: embedded networks and global chains compared. Econ Soc 37(3):339–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee SB (2003) Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Org Stud 24:143–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee SB (2008) Corporate social responsibility: the good, the bad and the ugly. Crit Soc 34(1):51–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry J (2012) The politics of actually existing unsustainability: human flourishing in a climate-changed, carbon constrained world. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beloe S, Elkington J, Prakash-Mani K, Thorpe J, Zollinger P (2004) Gearing up: from corporate responsibility to good governance and scalable solutions, Global Compact. Retrieved June 2015 from www.ibram.org.br/sites/1300/1382/00000768.pdf

  • Benoit C, Mazijn B (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. Life Cycle Initiative

  • Benoit C, Norris G, Valdvivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bumpus A, Liverman D (2008) Accumulation by decarbonisation and the governance of carbon offsets. Econ Geogr 84:127–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carbo J, Langella I, Viet D, Haase S (2014) Breaking the ties that bind: from corporate sustainability to socially sustainable systems. Bus Soc 119:175–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castree N (2005) The epistemology of particulars: human geography, case studies and ‘context’. Geoforum 36(5):541–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper C (2013) Physics envy: why energy policy is more art than science. J World Energy Law Bus 6(1):67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran AM (2014) Strengths and limitations of life cycle assessment. In: Klöpffer W (ed) Background and future prospects in life cycle assessment. Springer, New York and London, pp 189–206

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin NK (2009) The elephant in the living room: or extending the conversation about the politics of evidence. Qual Res 9(2):139–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dikeç M (2005) Space, politics, and the political. Environ Plan D 23:171–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drexhage J, Murphy D (2010) Sustainable Development: from Brundtland to Rio 2012. United Nations, Background Paper, Retrieved June 2015 from http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/climatechange/shared/gsp/docs/GSP1-6_Background%20on%20Sustainable%20Devt.pdf

  • Ebrahim A (2003) Making sense of accountability: Conceptual perspectives for northern and southern nonprofits. Nonprofit Manag and Leadership 14(2):191–212

  • Dreyer L, Hauschild M, Schierbeck J (2005) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecomodernism.org (2015) ‘An ecomodernist manifesto’. Retrieved June 2015 from http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5515d9f9e4b04d5c3198b7bb/t/552d37bbe4b07a7dd69fcdbb/1429026747046/An+Ecomodernist+Manifesto.pdf

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2013) Potential hotspots identified by social LCA—part 1: a case study of a laptop computer. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(1):127–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escobar A (1992) Imagining a post-development era: critical thought, development and social movements. Soc Text 31/32:20–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fava J, Consoli F, Denison R, Dickson K, Mohin T, Vigon B (1993) A conceptual framework for life cycle impact assessment, workshop report society of environmental toxicology and chemistry (SETAC). Foundation for Environmental Education, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher DR, Freudenburg WR (2001) Ecological modernization and its critics: assessing the past and looking toward the future. Soc Nat Resour 14(8):701–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flint C (2003) Dying for a "P"? Some questions facing contemporary political geography. Poli Geogr 22:617–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster JB (2012) The planetary rift and the new human exemptionalism a political-economic critique of ecological modernization theory. Org Environ 25(3):211–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freidberg S (2013) Calculating sustainability in supply chain capitalism. Econ Soc 42(4):571–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freidberg S (2014) Footprint technopolitics. Geoforum 55:178–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freidberg S (2015) From behind the curtain: talking about values in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.1007/s11367-015-0879-6

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajer M (1995) The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernisation and the policy process. Clarendon Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton C, Gemenne F, Bonneuil C (2015) The anthropocene and the global environmental crisis: rethinking modernity in a new epoch. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem Stud 14(3):575–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey D (1996) Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey D (2014) Seventeen contradictions and the end of capitalism. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson K (2013) ‘Weak’ or ‘strong’ sustainable consumption? Efficiency, de-growth and the 10 year framework programme. Environ Plan C 31(6):1082–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson T (2009) Prosperity without growth. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A (2013) Social LCA—a way ahead? Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(2):296–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products (with comments by Helias A. Udo de Haes, p. 95). Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (2014) Background and Future Prospects in Life Cycle Assessment. Springer, London

  • Latour B (1987) Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Macombe C, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Loeillet D (2011) 2nd International Seminar in Social Life Cycle Assessment—recent developments in assessing the social impacts of product life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(9):940–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macombe C, Lagarde V, Falque A, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Gillet C, Loeillet D (2013) Social LCAs: socio-economic effects in value chains. Fruitrop Thema, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams A, Siegel DS, Wright PM (2006) Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. Manag Stud 42:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Mol AP, Spaargaren G (2000) Ecological modernisation theory in debate: a review. Environ Polit 9(1):17–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Mylan J (2015) Understanding the diffusion of sustainable product-service systems: insights from the sociology of consumption and practice theory. J Clean Prod 97:13–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky M, Siegel DS, Waldman DA (2011) Strategic corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Bus Soc 50:6–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormond J (2015) New regimes of reponsibilization: practicing product carbon footprinting in the new carbon economy. Econ Geogr. doi:10.1111/ecge.12095

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent J, Cucuzella C, Reveret JP (2013) Revisiting the role of LCA and SLCA in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1642–1652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr A (2014) The wrath of capital: neoliberalism and climate change. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Redclift M (1987) Sustainable development: exploring the contradictions. Methuen, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P (2004) Political ecology. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose G (1997) Situating knowledges: positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Prog Hum Geogr 21(3):305–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schor JB (2010) Plenitude: the new economics of true wealth. Penguin Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau J, Weiss DJ (2013) Physics envy: trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Behav Brain Sci 36(3):306–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons H (2009) Case study research in practice. Sage, London

  • Sneddon C, Howarth RB, Norgaard RB (2006) Sustainable development in a post-Brundtland world. Ecol Econ 57:253–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren G, Mol AP (1992) Sociology, environment, and modernity: ecological modernization as a theory of social change. Soc Nat Resour 5(4):323–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren G, Van Vliet B (2000) Lifestyles, consumption and the environment: the ecological modernization of domestic consumption. Environ Pollut 9(1):50–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton PW (2007) The environment: a sociological introduction. Polity Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP (2013) Greening the Economy through Life Cycle Thinking, United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved June 2015, from http://www.unep.fr/scp/publications/details.asp?id=DTI/1536/PA

  • WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson RG, Pickett K (2011) The spirit level. Tantor Media, Inc., Connecticut

    Google Scholar 

  • York R, Rosa E, Dietz T (2010) Ecological modernization theory: theoretical and empirical challenges. In: Redclift M, Woodgate G (eds) The international handbook of environmental sociology. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Cheltenham, pp 77–90

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant EP/K026380/1 ‘Closed Loop Emotionally Valuable E-waste Recovery (CLEVER)’.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geography and Environment, The University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QY, UK

    Kersty Hobson & Nicholas Lynch

Authors
  1. Kersty Hobson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicholas Lynch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Lynch.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Marzia Traverso

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hobson, K., Lynch, N. Ecological modernization, techno-politics and social life cycle assessment: a view from human geography. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23, 456–463 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-1005-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-1005-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation