Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/21777
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRAFIAANI, Parisa-
dc.contributor.authorVAN PASSEL, Steven-
dc.contributor.authorLebailly, Philippe-
dc.contributor.authorKUPPENS, Tom-
dc.contributor.authorAZADI, Hossein-
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-15T08:29:52Z-
dc.date.available2016-07-15T08:29:52Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationThe Fifth International Conference in Social LCA (SLCA2016), Cambridge, MA, 13-15/06/2016-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/21777-
dc.description.abstractAssessing social impacts of various products, services and human activities has achieved an increasing interest worldwide. The nature of sustainability of biobased industries from a social point of view is how and to what extent they are perceived by society, and how various societies take advantages from such activities. However, an important issue is that social factors are not usually easy to be quantitatively analyzed and although the social impacts might be very remarkable, especially at the local scale, they have been not possible to be investigated in the majority of impact evaluations in the past. Despite the existence of many different methodologies towards Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) to address social impacts of various businesses and industries, most of them impartially address social performances of an industry. The aim of this paper is to highlight the main criteria that need to be taken into account in SLCA approaches for identifying the social indicators and impacts of biobased industries that is a timely topic worldwide toward climate change mitigation goals. Accordingly, considering the general approach of SLCA and particularly its inventory analysis phase for impact categories and indicator determinations, the paper provides an overview of the existing guidelines and frameworks for identifying social indicators and impact categories associated with bio-industries. In conclusion, main impact categories and indicators formulated in the existing frameworks applied to biobased industries are demonstrated as a basic set of applicable elements of social dimensions in evaluating bio-industries’ sustainability when conducting SLCAs. The state of the art for this study mainly includes leading journal articles, international reports and conference papers up to and including 2016 on SLCA in biobased industries. According to the reviewed frameworks in this study, quantitative, midpoint and site-specific data are the main elements taken into account when collecting the data for biobased product social impact assessment. This study also reveals that although SLCA is in its early steps of development and despite in numerous cases, conducting a comprehensive SLCA is not yet feasible, it has been considered to have substantially promising methodological attributes that can help policymakers and other stakeholders to quantify and assess sustainability of bio-industries from the social perspective. Recommendations for further research work concerning SLCA in bio-industries are also presented.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject.otheridentifying social impacts in a circular economy; considering social issues in design and innovations; impact assessment methods-
dc.titleSocial Life Cycle Assessment in Biobased Industries: Identifying Main Indicators and Impacts-
dc.typeConference Material-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate13-15/06/2016-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencenameThe Fifth International Conference in Social LCA (SLCA2016)-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplaceCambridge, MA-
dc.identifier.spage45-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatC2-
dc.relation.references1. EU. 2015. European Bioeconomy: policies, research and innovation, investments, markets and regulations. Vilnius Innovation Forum Vilnius 3-4 September 2015. 32p. 2. Haer, T. 2012. Environmental, Social and Economic Sustainability of Biobased Plastics; Bio-polyethylene from Brazil and polylactic acid from the U.S. Master thesis, CIO, Center for Isotope Research IVEM, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies. University of Groningen. http://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/14446149/EES-2012-128T_ToonHaer.pdf 3. Jørgensen, A., Le Bocq, A., Nazarkina, L., and Hauschild, M. 2008. Methodologies for Social Life Cycle Assessment. Int J LCA 13 (2), 96 – 103. 4. Kruse, S., Flysjö, A., Kasperczyk, N., and Scholz, A.J. 2008. Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycle assessment—an application to salmon production systems. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14(1):8-18 · January 2008. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 5. Lehtonen, M. 2011. Social sustainability of the Brazilian bioethanol: power relations in a centre-periphery perspective. Biomass Bioenergy 35, 2425–2434. 6. Domac, J., Richards, K., et al. 2005. Socio-economic drivers in implementing bioenergy projects. Biomass and Bioenergy, 28 (2), 97-106. 7. Rutz, R. J., van Eijck, J., Faaij, A., et al. 2011. Sustainability of biofuels and bioproducts: socio economic impact assessment.19th European Biomass Conference & Exhibition, 6-10 June 2011, Berlin, Germany. 8. Siebert, A., Sinéad O’Keeffe, A.B., and Thrän, D. 2016. Social life cycle assessment: in pursuit of a framework for assessing wood-based products from bioeconomy regions in Germany. Int J Life Cycle Assess. DOI 10.1007/s11367-016-1066-0 9. Hunkeler, D. 2006. Societal LCA methodology and case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(6):371–382 10. Macombe, C (ed). 2013. Social LCAs: socio-economic effects in value chains. FruiTrop, Montpellier. 11. UNEP/SETAC, 2009. Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, United Nations Environment Program, Paris SETAC Life Cycle Initiative United Nations Environment Programme ISBN: 978-92-807-3021-0. 12. Benoit, C., Norris, G.A., Valdivia, S., Ciroth, A., Moberg, A., Bos, U., Prakash, S., Ugaya, C., and Beck, T. 2010. The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: Just in time!. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15(2), 156 163. 13. Bork, C.A.S., De Barba Junior, D.J., and de Oliveira Gomes, J. 2015. Social Life Cycle Assessment of three companies of the furniture sector. The 22nd CIRP conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Procedia CIRP 29,150 – 155 14. Flysjö, A .2006. Indicators as a Complement to Life Cycle Assessment – A Case Study of Salmon. Presentation held 17th of June 2006 , Lausanne. 15. Ekener-Petersen, E., Höglund, J., and Finnveden, G. 2014. Screening potential social impacts of fossil fuels and biofuels for vehicles. Energy Policy, 73, 416–426. 16. Aparcana, S., and Salhofer, S. 2013. Application of a methodology for the social life cycle assessment of recycling systems in low income countries: three Peruvian case studies. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18 (5), 1116–1128. 17. Foolmaun, R.K., and Ramjeeawon, T. 2013. Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(1), 155–171 18. Prosuite. 2013. Handbook on a novel methodology for the sustainability impact assessment of new technologies. www.prosuite.org 19. Halog, A., and Manik, Y. 2011. Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 3(12):469–499 20. Macombe, C (ed). 2013. Social LCAs: socio-economic effects in value chains. FruiTrop, Montpellier. 21. German, L. and Schoneveld, G. (2012). ‘A review of social sustainability considerations among EU-approved voluntary schemes for biofuel, with implications for rural livelihood’. Energy Policy 51:765-778. 22. IUCN, 2014. A Global Assessment of the Environmental and Social Impacts Caused by the Production and Use of Biofuels. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 42pp. 23. Carrera, D.G., and Mack, A. 2010. Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy, 38, 1030–1039. 24. Kulshreshtha, S., McConkey, B. G., Liu, T. T., Dyer, J. A., Vergé, X. P. C., and Desjardins, R. L. 2011. Biobased Economy – Sustainable Use of Agricultural Resources, Environmental Impact of Biofuels, Dr. Marco Aurelio Dos Santos Bernardes (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307-479-5, InTech, http://www.intechopen.com/books/environmental-impact-of-biofuels/biobased-economy-sustainable-use-of- agricultural-resources 25. Edrisi, S.A., and Abhilash, P.C. 2015. Book Review: Socio-Economic Impacts of Bioenergy Production. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 3, 174. 26. Diaz-Chavez, R. 2014. Indicators for Socio-Economic Sustainability Assessment. Chapter 2 In D. Rutz, R. Janssen (eds.), Socio-Economic Impacts of Bioenergy Production, 17. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-03829-2_2, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland. 27. Vermeulen, S., and Vorley, B. 2007. Biofuels: Strategic Choices for Commodity Development Countries. In: Common Fund for Commodities, available from: http://www.globalbioenergy.org/uploads/media/0711_CFC__Strategic_Choices_ on_Biofuels.pdf 28. Dale, V.H., Efroymson, R.A., Kline, K.L., Langholtz, M.H., Leiby, P.N., Oladosu, G.A., Davis, M.R., Downing, M.E., and Hilliard. R.E. 2013. Indicators for assessing socioeconomic sustainability of bioenergy systems: A short list of practical measures. Ecological Indicators, 26, 87–102. 29. Jørgensen, A. 2013. Social LCA A way ahead? Int J Life Cycle Assess, 18 (2), 296 299. 30. Weidema, B.P. 2006. The integration of Economic and Social Aspects in Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Int J LCA 11 (1) (Special Issue), 89–96 31. Dreyer, L.C., Hauschild, M., and Schierbeck, J. 2006. A Framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11(2), 88-97 32. Fan, Y., Wu, R., Chen, J., and Apul, D. 2015. A Review of Social Life Cycle Assessment Methodologies, pp: 1-23. In Social Life Cycle Assessment, An Insight, edited by Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu. Springer Singapore. DOI 10.1007/978-981-287-296-8 33. Ramirez, P.K.S., and Petti, L. 2011. Social life cycle assessment: methodological and implementation issues. The Annals of The "Ştefan cel Mare" University of Suceava. Fascicle of The Faculty of Economics and Public Administration, 11, 1(13). 34. Parent, J., Cucuzzella, C., and Revéret, J.P. 2012. Revisiting the role of LCA and SLCA in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 1, 11. 35. Grießhammer, R., Benoît, C., Dreyer, L.C., Flysjö, A., Manhart, A., Mazijn, B., Méthot, A., Weidema, B.P. 2006. Feasibility Study: Integration of social aspects into LCA. Discussion paper from UNEP-SETAC Task Force In- tegration of Social Aspects in LCA meetings in Bologna (January 2005), Lille (May 2005) and Brussels (November 2005). Freiburg, Germany. 36. Bare, J.C., P. Hofstetter, D. Pennington and H.A. Udo de Haes. 2000. Life Cycle Impact Assessment Workshop Summary: Midpoints vs Endpoints – The Sacrifices and Benefits. International journal of life cycle assessment 5(6), 319-326. 37. Ekener-Petersen, E. 2013. Tracking down Social Impacts of Products with Social Life Cycle Assessment. Doctoral Thesis. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. 57pp. 38. Mathe, S. 2014. Integrating participatory approaches into social life cycle assessment: the SLCA participatory approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(8), 1506–1514. 39. FAO. 2011. The Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) Sustainability Indicators for Bioenergy. First edition, December 2011. 223p. 40. Global-Bio-Pact. 2013. Global-Bio-Pact Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct Impacts on Socio-economics and Sustainability. FP7 EU funded project. http://www.globalbiopact.eu/. Accessed September 2014. 41. Hasenheit, M., Gerdes, H., Kiresiewa, Z., and Beekman, V. 2016. Summary report on the social, economic and environmental impacts of the bioeconomy. February 2016. http://bio-step.eu/fileadmin/BioSTEP/Bio_documents/BioSTEP_D2.2_Impacts_of_the_bioeconomy.pdf 42. Blom, M., and Solmar, C. 2009. How to socially assess biofuels: a case study of the UNEP/SETAC code of practice for social-economical LCA – University Publication - Master’s thesis in cooperation with the Division of Quality and Environmental Management at Luleå University of Technology, commissioned by Enact. 43. Myaka, C.M.N. 2010. Social Life Cycle Assessment of Biodiesel in South Africa: An Initial Assessment. EcoBalance2010, The 9 International Conference on EcoBalance November 9-12, 2010, Tokyo, Japan . 44. Chingono, T.T., and Mbohwa, C. 2015. Social Impacts of Biofuels Production in the Kwa-Zulu Natal and Western Cape Regions of South Africa. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2015 Vol II WCECS 2015, October 21-23, 2015, San Francisco, USA. 45. Valente, C., Saur Modahl, I., and Askham, C. 2013. Method development for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) of New Norwegian Biorefinery . Project title: Nytt Norsk Bioraffineri, Report no.: OR.39.13. 62p. http://ostfoldforskning.no/uploads/dokumenter/publikasjoner/715.pdf 46. Köppen, S., Fehrenbach, H., Markwardt, S., and Hennecke, S. 2014. Implementing the GBEP Indicators for Sustainable Bioenergy in Germany. Final Report, ifeu - Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung gGmbH and IINAS - International Institute for Sustainability Analysis and Strategy GmbH, Heidelberg, Darmstadt, Berlin October 2014 . http://www.iinas.org/tl_files/iinas/downloads/bio/IFEU_IINAS_2014_GBEP_Application_indicators_in_Germany.pdf 47. Van Dam, J., Faaij, A., Rutz, D., and Janssen, R. 2010. Socio-economic impacts of biomass feed- stock production, Global BioPact project. Utrecht: Utrecht University. 48. Hayashi, T., van Ierland, E.C., and Zhu, X. 2014.. A holistic sustainability assessment tool for bioenergy using the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) sustainability indicators. Biomass and Bioenergy, 66, 70–80. 49. FAO, 2014. Pilot Testing of GBEP Sustainability Indicators for Bioenergy in Colombia. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4058e.pdf 50. Sbarra, R., and J. Hilbert. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of the Soy chain in Argentina. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability'. Buenos Aires, Argentina, INT A. 51. Wright, A. 2011. Socio-Economic Impacts of the Palm oil chain in Indonesia. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability. Jakarta, Green Light Biofuels. 52. Gerber Machado, P., and Walter, A. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of the Sugarcane chain in Brazil. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability'. Campinas, UNICAMP. 53. Cárdenas, A. and Fallot, A. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of the sugarcane-to-ethanol production chain in Costa Rica. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability'. Turrialba Cartago, Costa Rica, CATIE. 54. Sawe, E. N., J. Shuma, et al. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of the Jatropha chain in Tanzania. Case study within in the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability. Dar-es- Salaam, TATEDO. 55. Burrel, T., Ouattara, O., et al. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of Jatropha production and its conversion routes in Mali. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability'. Bamako, Mali, Mali-Folkecenter Nyetaa. 56. Sleen, P. v., Vis, M., et al. 2011. Socio-economic impacts of lignocellulosic biomass in Canada. Case study within the Global-Bio-Pact project 'Global assessment of biomass and bioproduct impacts on socio-economics and sustainability. Enschede (the Netherlands), Oxford (UK), BTG, Proforest. 57. Rebecca A. Efroymson, Virginia H. Dale, Matthew H. Langholtz. 2016. Socioeconomic indicators for sustainable design and commercial development of algal biofuel systems. GCB Bioenergy. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12359 58. Segnestam, L. 1999. Environmental Performance Indicators. A second edition note. World Bank. Environmental Economic Series. (Paper No. 71), Washington, D.C.-
local.type.refereedNon-Refereed-
local.type.specifiedPresentation-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://programme.exordo.com/slca2016/delegates/presentation/21/-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.contributorRAFIAANI, Parisa-
item.contributorVAN PASSEL, Steven-
item.contributorLebailly, Philippe-
item.contributorKUPPENS, Tom-
item.contributorAZADI, Hossein-
item.accessRightsOpen Access-
item.fullcitationRAFIAANI, Parisa; VAN PASSEL, Steven; Lebailly, Philippe; KUPPENS, Tom & AZADI, Hossein (2016) Social Life Cycle Assessment in Biobased Industries: Identifying Main Indicators and Impacts. In: The Fifth International Conference in Social LCA (SLCA2016), Cambridge, MA, 13-15/06/2016.-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
19473.pdfConference material599.15 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

82
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Download(s)

360
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.