Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/21779
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.accessioned2016-07-15T08:46:35Z-
dc.date.available2016-07-15T08:46:35Z-
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/1942/21779-
dc.description.abstractConsidering its potential impacts on development, biobased industries require to be assessed according to the positive and negative effects they can bring to the society. Typically, the implications of biobased industries are considered in terms of economic, environmental and technical indices while social factors are usually neglected in the majority of impact assessments. This is mainly due to the fact that social issues are not easy to be quantitatively analyzed, measured and monitored. Indeed, the following issues need to be addressed: (i) how the social dimension is understood from different stakeholders’ perspective; (ii) how the social pillar can be properly integrated into sustainability evaluation methodologies which are mainly focused on environmental performance and (techno)-economic assessments of biobased industries. This review paper aims to answer these questions firstly through identifying the main social impacts and indicators of the biobased industries at local level in order to find an answer for the second question by analyzing and comparing the current methodologies for assessing social impacts in bioindustries. These methods mainly include Social Impact Assessment (SIA), Socio-economic Impacts Assessment (SEIA) and Social Life Cycle Analysis (SLCA). The latter, although is in its early steps of development, has been considered to have substantially promising methodological attributes for bioindustries’ social sustainability assessment. Although ongoing research tackles the incorporation of the environmental dimension into extended techno-economic assessments, no integration of the social pillar into such assessments has been made. Given that, this review focuses on the social dimension for integrated sustainability assessments of biobased industries to assess the main social impacts resulting from each operation or from the bioenergy sector. The current review focuses on the importance of social sustainability indicators and evaluation techniques. By discussing the methodologies for evaluating social impacts, a systemic methodology for assessing and integrating the social dimension into the sustainability assessments of bioindustries is developed, considering the four main iterative steps of an SLCA framework and three useful SLCA-based approaches including Product Social Impact Assessment; Prosuite and the UNEP SETAC Guidelines for SLCA of Products. It is concluded that the term systemic analysis implies that the whole approach needs the capacity to understand different subsystems and relations between them. Accordingly, the systemic assessment of biobased technologies should simultaneously include technological, economic, social and environmental dimensions. The result of this study identifies social impacts in the bioeconomy and particularly highlight the importance of considering social issues in biobased industries’ design and innovation.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject.otheridentifying social impacts in a circular economy; considering social issues in design and innovations; impact assessment methods-
dc.titleIntegrating social aspects into sustainability assessment of biobased industries: Towards a systemic approach-
dc.typeConference Material-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate13-15/06/2016-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferencenameThe Fifth International Conference in Social LCA (SLCA2016)-
local.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplaceCambridge, MA-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatC2-
dc.relation.references1. The European Committee for Standardization (CEN), 2014. European standards supporting the market for bio-based products. CEN – European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium. 2. Salimbeni, A. 2015. Half a million jobs, €78 billion per year: The socio-economic impact of the European Bio-based Industry. EUBIA, Belgium. http://bioenergy-nw.eu/socio-economic-impact-of-european-bio-based-industry/#.Vr2oZDa_Nok, Viewed March 2016. 3. Kruse, S.A., Flysjö, A., Kasperczyk, N., and Scholz, A.J. 2009. Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycle Assessment an application to salmon production systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 14:8–18. doi: 10.1007/s11367-008-0040-x 4. Bowling, I.M., Maria Ponce-Ortega, J., and El-Halwagi, M.M. 2011. Facility location and supply chain optimization for a biorefinery. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 50(10), 6276- 6286. doi:10.1021/ie101921y 5. Krishnahumar, P., and Ileleji, K.E. 2010. A comparative analysis of the economics and logistics requirements of different biomass feedstock types and forms for ethanol production. Applied Eng. in Agric. 26(5), 899-907. 6. Carolan, J.E., Joshi, S.V., and Dale, B.E. 2007. Technical and financial feasibility analysis of distributed bioprocessing using regional biomass pre-processing centers. Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization, 5(2). 7. Mu, D., Min, M., Krohn B., Mullins, K.A., Ruan R., and Hill, J. 2014. Life cycle environmental impacts of wastewater-based algal biofuels. Environmental science & technology, 48, 11696–704. 8. Grierson, S., and Strezov, V. 2012. Life Cycle Assessment of the Microalgae Biofuel Value Chain: A critical review of existing studies. BIONATURE 2012: The Third International Conference on Bioenvironment, Biodiversity and Renewable Energies. 2012. p. 6. 9. Clarens, A.F., Nassau, H., Resurreccion, E.P., White, MA., and Colosi LM. 2011. Environmental impacts of algae-derived biodiesel and bioelectricity for transportation. Environmental science & technology, 45, 7554–60. 10. Agusdinata, D.B., Zhao, F., Ileleji, K., DeLaurentis, D. 2011. Life cycle assessment of potential biojet fuel production in the United States. Environmental science & technology, 45, 9133–43. 11. Geibler, J.V., Walbaum, H., and Liedke, C. 2006. Development of Sustainable Bioprocesses: Modelling and Assessment, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK, pp: 82–113. 12. 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. doi: 10.5772/19989. In Environmental Impact of Biofuels. Edit. dos Santos Bernardes, M.A. ISBN 978-953-307-479-5. 13. Domac, J., Richards, K., et al. 2005. Socio-economic drivers in implementing bioenergy projects. Biomass and Bioenergy, 28 (2), 97-106. 14. 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. 15. European Union. 2016. Final Report - GLOBAL-BIO-PACT (Global Assessment of Biomass and Bioproduct Impacts on Socio-economics and Sustainability). Project reference: 245085, Funded under: FP7-KBBE. http://cordis.europa.eu/publication/rcn/16662_en.html, Viewed at March 2016. 16. Sujatha Raman, Alison Mohr, Richard Helliwell, Barbara Ribeiro, Orla Shortall, Robert Smith, Kate Millar. 2015. Integrating social and value dimensions into sustainability assessment of lignocellulosic biofuels. Biomass and Bioenergy, 82, 49–62. 17. Santoyo-Castelazo, E., and Azapagic, A. 2014. Sustainability assessment of energy systems: integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 80, 1, 119–138. 18. Zhang, Y., White, M.A., and Colosi, L.M. 2013. Environmental and economic assessment of integrated systems for dairy manure treatment coupled with algae bioenergy production. Bioresource technology. 130, 486–94. 19. Weidema, B. 2006. The integration of economic and social aspects in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(Special Issue 1), 89–96. 20. Valente, C., Modahl, I.S., and Askham, C. 2013. Method development for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) of New Norwegian Biorefinery, Ostfold Research, ISBN 978-82-7520-711-9. 21. Black, A. 2004. The quest for sustainable, healthy communities. Effective Sustainability Education Conference, NSW Council on Environmental Education, UNSW, Sydney, 18–20, February, 2004. 22. Joyce, S.A., and MacFarlane, M. 2002. Social Impact Assessment in the Mining Industry: Current Situation and Future Directions. The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). England. December 2001, No. 46. 23. Tiwari, S., Harrison, J.A., and von Maltiz, G .2010. Chapter 6 Assessing Social Impacts of Bioenergy Projects. pp. 119-147. In Amezaga, J. M., G. von Maltitz and S. Boyes (edits.). 2010, “Assessing the Sustainability of Bioenergy Projects in Developing Countries: A framework for policy evaluation”, Newcastle University, 179 p. 24. Mackenzie. 2007. Issues and recommendations for social and economic impact assessment in the Mackanzie Valley. Yellowknife, Canada, Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board. http://www.reviewboard.ca/upload/ref_library/SEIA_paper.pdf. 25. Hunkeler, D. 2006. Societal LCA methodology and case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess, 11(6), 371–382. 26. Jørgensen, A., Le Bocq, A., Nazarkina, L., and Hauschild, M. 2008. Methodologies for Social Life Cycle Assessment. Int J LCA 13 (2) 96 – 103. 27. 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. In: 7th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri‐Food Sector, 2010. 28. 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. 29. Ekener-Petersen, E., Höglund, J., Finnveden, G. 2014. Screening potential social impacts of fossil fuels and biofuels for vehicles. Energy Policy, 73, 416–426. 30. Prosuite. 2013. Handbook on a novel methodology for the sustainability impact assessment of new technologies. www.prosuite.org 31. Fontes, J et al. 2014. Handbook for product social impact assessment. Version 2.0 - September 2014. PRé Sustainability Stationsplein, The Netherlands. More background information about the handbook and the development process is available on www.product-social-impact-assessment.com/handbook, viewed at march 2016. 32. UNEP-SETAC. 2010. Methodological Sheets for 31 Sub-categories of Impact – Draft for Consultation. UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Available online: http://lcinitiative.unep.fr/default.asp?site=lcinit&page_id=A8992620-AAAD-4B81- 9BAC-A72AEA281CB9, viewed March 2016. 33. GRI. 2013. G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines Implementation Manual, https://g4.globalreporting.org/introduction/how-to-use-guidelines/Pages/default.aspx, viewed March 2016. 34. International Organization for Standardization (2011). ISO 26000 Social Responsibility. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/management_and_leadership_standards/social_res ponsibility.htm, viewed March 2016 35. Palme, U. 2011. Social aspects in work towards sustainable supply chains, TOSCA report. April 2011. 36. ESMAP., The World Bank., and ICMM. 2005. Community Development Toolkit. ISBN: 0-9549954- 3-0. 37. FAO. 2011. The Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) Sustainability Indicators for Bioenergy. First edition, December 2011. 223p. 38. Diaz-Chavez, R.A., Rettenmaier, N., Rutz, D., and Janssen, R. 2012. Global-Bio-Pact set of selected socio-economic sustainability criteria and indicators. WP8 – Task 8.2 – D8.2. October 2012. www.globalbiopact.eu, viewed March 2016. 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. Buchholz, T., Rametsteiner, E., et al., 2009. Multi Criteria Analysis for bioenergy systems assessment. Energy Policy 37, 484-495. 43. Elghali, L., Clift, R., Sinclair, P., Panoutsou, C., and Bauen, A. 2007. Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems. Energy Policy, 35, 6075–6083. 44. Daim, T., Yates, D., Peng, Y., and Jimenez, B. 2009. Technology assessment for clean energy technologies: The case of the Pacific Northwest. Technology in Society, 31, 232–4-243. 45. Nigim, K., Munier, N., and Green, J. 2004. Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources. Renewable Energy, 29, 1775–1791. 46. Antunes, P., Karadzic, V., Santos, R., Beça, P., and Osann, A. 2011. Participatory multi-criteria analysis of irrigation management alternatives: The case of Caia irrigation district, Portugal. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 9(2), 334-349. 47. Halog, A., and Manik, Y. 2011. Advancing Integrated Systems Modelling Framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability, 3, 469-499; doi:10.3390/su3020469 Prosuite, 2012. Approaches to integration in sustainability assessment of technologies. Lisbon, 01 February 2012. Report prepared within the EC 7th framework project. http://www.prosuite.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=c378cd69-f785-40f2-b23e-ae676b939212&groupId=12772 , viewed March 2016.-
local.type.refereedNon-Refereed-
local.type.specifiedPoster-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://programme.exordo.com/slca2016/delegates/presentation/47/-
item.contributorRAFIAANI, Parisa-
item.contributorVAN PASSEL, Steven-
item.contributorLebailly, Philippe-
item.contributorKUPPENS, Tom-
item.contributorAZADI, Hossein-
item.accessRightsClosed Access-
item.fullcitationRAFIAANI, Parisa; VAN PASSEL, Steven; Lebailly, Philippe; KUPPENS, Tom & AZADI, Hossein (2016) Integrating social aspects into sustainability assessment of biobased industries: Towards a systemic approach. In: The Fifth International Conference in Social LCA (SLCA2016), Cambridge, MA, 13-15/06/2016.-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

18
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Download(s)

2
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check


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