Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Potential hotspots identified by social LCA–Part 2: Reflections on a study of a complex product

  • SOCIETAL LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We present experiences and reflections from social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) case study, the aim of which was to identify social hotspots, test and evaluate the methodology and propose improvements. This paper discusses the usability and applicability of the methodology used based on our experiences from the study. The main issues considered are whether the gathering of data and other information is feasible and straightforward to perform, whether the method provides added value and relevant results and how these can be presented.

Method

We have conducted a generic hotspot assessment on a laptop computer according to the Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products (Benoît and Mazijn 2009). The experiences presented were gathered throughout the case study. The supply chain of the laptop was simplified, and we focused on a limited number of materials. The impacts were assessed in relation to the area of protection on human well-being and to affected stakeholders. Social impacts from the actual use of the product were not included. Methodological sheets were used for guidance on inventory indicators and data sources for data collection. Country-specific data were collected and entered into a spreadsheet. The process has been guided by regular meetings in a reference group, composed of representatives of all stakeholder groups.

Results and discussion

The data collection process was impaired by a lack of data and low data quality. In order to relate the data collected to the product assessed, each country's share of the activity performed in each phase was determined, and the activity percentage was calculated. In order to consider and relate all the phases in the product system, we used an estimated activity variable due to the lack of data. We developed a new approach to impact assessment. By determining the combination of the most extensive activity, as well as the most negative in the range of possible values for involved countries, we identified the hotspots. The results were not further aggregated in order to promote transparency.

Conclusions

We found the S-LCA methodology to be feasible and useful. By handling all relevant issues within one study using a systems perspective on the product life cycle, knowledge can be gained. However, there are still some major challenges. The definition of relevant indicators, data availability, impact pathways, activity variables, results presentation and possible aggregation, the handling of stakeholder context and the restricted assessment of the use phase were identified as major issues to deal with in further studies. Communication, and hence use of the results, is a crucial issue to enable the outcome of a study to result in actions that actually improve human well-being.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baumann H, Tillman A-M (2004) A hitch-hikers guide to life cycle assessment. Studentlitteratur, Lund

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît-Norris C, Aulisio D, Norris, GA, Hallisey-Kepka C, Overakker S, Vickery Niederman G (2011a) A social hotspot database for acquiring greater visibility in product supply chains: overview and application to orange juice. In: M. Finkbeiner (ed) Towards life cycle sustainablity management, doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1899-9_6, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

  • Benoît-Norris C, Vickery-Niederman G, Valdivia S, Franze J, Traverso M, Ciroth A, Mazijn B (2011b) Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(7):682–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît C, Mazijn B (eds) (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx1164xPA-guidelines_sLCA.pdf

  • Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U et al (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Franze J (2011) LCA of an ecolabeled notebook—consideration of social and environmental impacts along the entire life cycle, Berlin 2011, http://www.greendeltatc.com/uploads/media/LCA_laptop_final.pdf

  • Classen M, Althaus HJ, Blaser S, Tuchschmid M, Jungbluth N, Doka G, Faist Emmenegger M, Scharnhorst W (2009) Life cycle inventories of metals. Final report ecoinvent data v2, No 10. EMPA Dübendorf, Swiss Center for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, CH. Online-Version under: www.ecoinvent.ch

  • Dreux-Gerphagnon B, Haoues N (2011) Considering the social dimension in environmental design, in glocalized solutions for sustainability in manufacturing. In: Hesselbach J., Herrmann C. (eds) Proceedings of the 18th CIRP international 130 conference on life cycle engineering, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, 2–4 May 2011. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19692-8_23

  • Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA–part 1: Development of indicators for labour rights. Int Life Cycle Assess 15:247–259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • EICC/GeSi (2008) Social and environmental responsibility in metals supply to the electronic industry. GreenhouseGasMeasurement.com (GHGm), Guelph, Ontario, Canada

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2012) Potential hotspots identified by social LCA–Part 1: A case study of a laptop computer. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0442-7

  • European Commission (2005) DG TREN, Preparatory studies for eco-design requirements of EuPs Lot 3, Personal Computers (desktops and laptops) and Computer Monitors, Final Report (Task 1-8)

  • Finnis J, Grisez G, Boyle J (1987) Practical principles, moral truth & ultimate ends. Am J Jurisprud 32:99–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Franze J, Ciroth A (2011) A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:366–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GRI (2007) Sustainability reporting guidelines. Version 3.0. Global reporting initiative. Amsterdam. http://www.globalreporting.org/NR/rdonlyres/ED9E9B36-AB54-4DE1-BFF2-5F735235CA44/0/G3_GuidelinesENU.pdf . Accessed [9 June 20112010]

  • ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management–life cycle assessment–principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization

  • ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental Management – life cycle assessment – requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization

  • ISO 26000 (2010) Guidance on social responsibility. International Organization for Standardization Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A (2010) Developing the social life cycle assessment—addressing issues of validity and usability, PhD thesis, DTU Management Engineering, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark

  • Jørgensen A, Hauschild MZ, Jørgensen MS, Wangel A (2009) Relevance and feasibility of social life cycle assessment from a company perspective. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(3):204–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Lai LCH, Hauschild MZ (2010) Assessing the validity of impact pathways for child labour and well-being in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(1):5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kölsch D (2009) Sozioökonomische Bewertung von Chemikalien unter REACh. In: Feifel S et al (eds) Ökobilanzierung 2009—Ansätze und Weiterentwicklungen zur Operationalisierung von Nachhaltigkeit. KIT Scientific Publishing, Karlsruhe

    Google Scholar 

  • Macombe C, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Loeillet D (2010) Reporting the social indicators to the functional unit for food product. Theoretical contribution regarding the collection of relevant data. Author produced version of the paper presented at LCAfood 2010 VII, International conference on life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector. Available at : http://www.life-cycle.org/?p=413

  • 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 16:940–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manhart A, Grießhammer A (2006) Social impacts of the production of notebook PCs, Öko-Institut e.V., 2006

  • PROSA – Product Sustainability Assessment Guideline (2007), Öko-Institut e.V. –Institute for applied ecology, Freiburg, Germany. www.prosa.org

  • Reitinger C, Dumke M, Barosevcic M, Hillerbrand R (2011) A conceptual framework for impact assessment within SLCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:380–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resolve (2010) Tracing a path forward: a study of the challenges of the supply chain for target metals used in electronics, 2010. Resolve, Washington, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Accountability International (2008) Social accountability 8000. International Standard, SAI, SA8000®: 2008, Social Accountability International: New York. http://www.sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/2008StdEnglishFinal.pdf

  • Finnwatch & Swedwatch (2010) Make IT fair, voice from the inside: local views on mining reform in eastern DR Congo, 2010. Finnwatch, & Swedwatch, Helsinki/Stockholm

  • United Nations Development Program (2000), United Nations Millennium Development Goals 2000, www.undp.org/mdg/basics.shtml

  • US EIA (2011) The U.S. energy information administration, http://www.eia.gov/countries, Accessed 20 April 2011

  • Vanclay (2003) Social impact assessment. international principles. Special Publications Series No. 2 May 2003, IAIA; Fargo, US

  • Weidema B (2005) ISO 14044 also applies to social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(6):381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni A, Amerighi O, Buttol P (2011) Strengths or bias in social LCA? Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(7):596–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Financial support from Vinnova and other partners of the Centre for Sustainable Communications at KTH Royal Institute of Technology is gratefully acknowledged. We want to thank the participants in our internal and external reference groups for constructive and interesting discussions and also Professor Göran Finnveden for valuable comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, Division of Environmental Strategies Research, KTH–Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden

    Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen & Åsa Moberg

  2. Centre for Sustainable Communications, KTH–Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden

    Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen & Åsa Moberg

Authors
  1. Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Åsa Moberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Thomas Swarr

Preamble

We have conducted a case study of S-LCA on a generic laptop computer. The results of the study are presented in two related papers. This second paper (Part 2) discusses the usability and applicability of the methodology proposed in the Guidelines based on our experiences from the study. The first paper (Part 1) (Ekener-Petersen and Finnveden 2012) presents the social hotspots of a generic laptop identified in our study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ekener-Petersen, E., Moberg, Å. Potential hotspots identified by social LCA–Part 2: Reflections on a study of a complex product. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18, 144–154 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0443-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0443-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation