An integrated social life cycle assessment of freight transport systems
- 36 Downloads
The climate change concerns have generated the need to develop strategies to reduce the oil dependency in transport sector. Many of these strategies have not achieved the proposed objectives by the scant emphasis on social and socio-economic aspects of the life cycle of the transport system components. Therefore, an approach for the integrated social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) of freight transport services is proposed in this paper.
The proposed S-LCA approach was developed based on the UNEP/SETAC guidelines (2009). Twenty-six social impact subcategories were selected, and a systemic definition of the transport system boundaries was introduced. A multilevel inventory analysis method was proposed, including a list of generic and specific indicators for each social impact subcategory, based on secondary and primary sources. For the impact assessment phase, a multilevel valuation scale method was applied to obtain social performance indexes (SPI) of the companies in the supply chain for five social impact categories and five stakeholders. In addition, bearing in mind the stakeholders’ perceptions, an aggregated SPI of the system in a scale of 1 to 5 was calculated for the case study in a freight company in Malaysia.
Results and discussion
The most relevant impact categories for the interviewed stakeholders were workers’ and human rights. Results exposed that freedom of association, working hours, health and safety, and equal opportunities were the most critical issues in the supply chain. Technological development, corruption, and transparency in social and environmental issues were other critical aspects. The impact assessment method did not analyze the social impacts generated due to the social conducts of companies, but provided information about the priorities that should be considered to improve the supply chain social performance. The aggregation of results in SPI made difficult to identify the aspects with the best or worst performance, being more useful for comparison purposes or for giving a quick landscape of the analyzed service.
This approach contributes in the purpose of analyzing services, with a broader view, by integrating different components in the supply chain. The methods for inventory analysis and impact assessment allow including upstream activities, which can be applied in different sectors. The multilevel valuation scale method allows weighting different inventory analyses results and including stakeholders’ perceptions, reducing biases from some information sources and in the result characterization. However, improvement is needed in the design of weighting factors of activities for reducing uncertainties in the performance indexes.
KeywordsDeveloping countries Freight transport Fuels Impact assessment method S-LCA Social life cycle assessment Roads Vehicles
The authors want to acknowledge the collaboration of Asian Trucker Media, Malaysian Container Truckers, Dr. Sanath Kumaran and the interviewed stakeholders in the data collection process.
This work was based on the Ph.D. thesis by Jose Luis Osorio granted by Colciencias call 646/2014. Part of this study was developed with the support of the CIRCE Institute and the aids of the Aragon Government (T46_17R and S33_17R).
- Benoît-Norris C, Parent J, Kuenzi I, Revéret J-P (2007) Developing a Methodology for Social Life Cycle Assessment: The North American Tomato’s CSR case. In: 3rd International Conference on Life cycle management. Zürich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
- Blom M, Solmar C (2009) How to Socially Assess Biofuels - A Case Study of the UNEP/SETAC Code of Practice for social- economical LCA. Luleå University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
- Commission of the European Communities (2001) White paper. European policy for 2010: time to decide. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- den Boer E, Brouwer F, Schroten A, van Essen H (2009) Are trucks taking their toll ? The environmental, safety and congestion impacts of lorries in the EU. DelftGoogle Scholar
- EEGFTF (2011) Future Transport Fuels, Report of the European Expert Group on Future Transport. Fuels, DüsseldorfGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (1995) ExternE - Externalities of energy: Vol.1 - Summary. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (2001) Green paper: Towards a European Strategy for the Security of Energy Supply. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (2003) External Costs: Research results on socio-environmental damages due to electricity and transport. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (2013) Clean Power for Transport: A European alternative fuels strategy. COM (2013) 17 final. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- European Commission (2014) EU Transport in Figures. Statistical Pocketbook 2014. BelgiumGoogle Scholar
- Fontes J, Alvarado C, Saling P et al (2016) Handbook for product social impact assessment 3.0. PRé Sustainability, LE AmersfoortGoogle Scholar
- Garrido J (1999) Impactos medioambientales y sociales del transporte. Geographicalia 37:37–52Google Scholar
- Garrigues Medio Ambiente SL (2013) Manual para la Gestión Ambiental en el Sector Transporte en AndalucíaGoogle Scholar
- Goedkoop MJ, Indrane D, de Beer I. (2018) Product Social Impact Assessment Handbook - 2018, 4.0. AmersfoortGoogle Scholar
- International organization for standardization (2006) ISO 14040:2006. Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and frameworkGoogle Scholar
- Ipsos Business Consulting (2017) Market Review of Building Materials in the Construction Industry. Kuala LumpurGoogle Scholar
- Martinez-Blanco J, Finkbeiner M, Iniba A (2015a) Guidance on Organizational Life Cycle Assessment. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle InitiativeGoogle Scholar
- Omokaro O (2009) Oil and gas extraction in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria: The social and environmental challenges. FOG - Freib Online Geosci 24:14–20Google Scholar
- Petron Corp. (2016) Petron Corporation - Final Prospectus. Mandaluyong CityGoogle Scholar
- Petron Corp. (2018) Petron Malaysia. In: Our profile. www.petron.com.my. Accessed 4 Mar 2018
- PLUS Malaysia Bhd (2018) PLUS. In: Background. www.plus.com.my. Accessed 4 Mar 2018
- Quantis, Ageco, Ciraig, Uqam (2012) Environmental and Socioeconomic Life Cycle Assessment Of Canadian Milk. MontrealGoogle Scholar
- SAI (2014) Social Accountability 8000. New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Martin Schmied (2012) Calculating GHG emissions for freight forwarding and logistics services in accordance with EN 16258. European Association for Forwarding, Transport, Logistics and Customs Services (CLECAT), BernGoogle Scholar
- SHDB project (2016) Social Hotspots Database. http://socialhotspot.org/user-portal-2/portal-info/. Accessed 8 Feb 2016
- The Walk Free Foundation (2017) The Global Slavery Index 2016Google Scholar
- UD Trucks (2018) Going the extra mile. AgeoGoogle Scholar
- UEM Group Bhd (2016) Sustainability report 2015-2016: 50 Years of Sustainable Value & Uniting Lives. Kuala LumpurGoogle Scholar
- UNEP (2009) Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, ParisGoogle Scholar
- UNEP/SETAC (2013) The Methodological Sheets for Subcategories in Social Life Cycle Assessment ( S-LCA ). UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle InitiativeGoogle Scholar
- UNICEF (2017) UNICEF Data: Monitoring the Situation of Children and Women. In: Child Labour. http://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/child-labour/. Accessed 17 Dec 2017
- USDOL (2016) List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor. Washington.Google Scholar
- VTT (2011) Existing methods and tools for calculation of carbon footprint of transport and logistics. COFRET Deliv 2:1Google Scholar
- WEF (2016) The Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017. GenevaGoogle Scholar