Skip to main content
Top
Published in:
Cover of the book

2020 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

1. Functional Unit Definition Criteria in Life Cycle Assessment and Social Life Cycle Assessment: A Discussion

Authors : Ioannis Arzoumanidis, Manuela D’Eusanio, Andrea Raggi, Luigia Petti

Published in: Perspectives on Social LCA

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The definition of a Functional Unit (FU) is essential for building and modelling a product system in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). A FU is a quantified description of the function of a product that serves as the reference basis for all calculations regarding impact assessment. A function may be based on different features of the product under study, such as performance, aesthetics, technical quality, additional services, costs, etc. Whilst the FU definition is typical in LCA, this does not seem to be a common practice in Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), even though a FU definition is required. Unlike LCA, where quantitative data are mainly collected and processed, the assessment of the social and socio-economic impacts in S-LCA is based on a prevalence of qualitative and semi-quantitative data, a fact that renders the assessment to be somehow unfriendly. Moreover, whilst in LCA a product-oriented approach is typical, S-LCA tends to be a business-oriented methodology, where the emphasis of the social assessment lies on the behaviour of the organisations that are involved in the processes under study rather than on the function that is generated by a product. Indeed, several S-LCA case studies were found in the literature in which the FU is not discussed, let alone defined. The objective of this article is to contribute to analysing the criteria used for the definition of a FU in LCA and verifying whether these criteria can be suitable for S-LCA case studies applications. For this reason, a literature review was carried out on LCA in order to identify whether and how this issue has been tackled with so far. In addition, a second literature review was performed in order to verify how the FU has been introduced in the framework of the S-LCA methodology. Finally, an investigation of the analysis results, in terms of the selected FU, is proposed in view of an ever-growing need for a combination of the LCA and S-LCA methodologies into a broader Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA).

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
1.
go back to reference Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M. Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability. 2010;2(10):3309–22.CrossRef Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M. Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability. 2010;2(10):3309–22.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kloepffer W. Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2008;13(2):89–95.CrossRef Kloepffer W. Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2008;13(2):89–95.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference ISO 14040. Environmental management – life cycle assessment – principles and framework. Geneva, 2006. ISO 14040. Environmental management – life cycle assessment – principles and framework. Geneva, 2006.
4.
go back to reference D’Eusanio M, Zamagni A, Petti L. La social life cycle assessment a supporto del supply chain management, 11th conference of the Italian LCA network, resource efficiency e sustainable development goals: il ruolo del life cycle thinking, Siena, 2017, p. 279–287. D’Eusanio M, Zamagni A, Petti L. La social life cycle assessment a supporto del supply chain management, 11th conference of the Italian LCA network, resource efficiency e sustainable development goals: il ruolo del life cycle thinking, Siena, 2017, p. 279–287.
5.
go back to reference Macombe C, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Loeillet D. 2nd International seminar in social life cycle assessment – recent developments in assessing the social impacts of product life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2011;16(9):940–3.CrossRef Macombe C, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Loeillet D. 2nd International seminar in social life cycle assessment – recent developments in assessing the social impacts of product life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2011;16(9):940–3.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Di Cesare S, Silveri F, Sala S, Petti L. Positive impacts in social life cycle assessment: state of the art and the way forward. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2016:1–16. Di Cesare S, Silveri F, Sala S, Petti L. Positive impacts in social life cycle assessment: state of the art and the way forward. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2016:1–16.
7.
go back to reference United Nations Environment Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, Paris, 2009. United Nations Environment Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products, Paris, 2009.
8.
go back to reference Weidema B, Wenzel H, Petersen C, Hansen K. The product, functional unit and reference flows in LCA, environmental news 70, 2004, Danish Ministry of the Environment – Environmental Protection Agency. Weidema B, Wenzel H, Petersen C, Hansen K. The product, functional unit and reference flows in LCA, environmental news 70, 2004, Danish Ministry of the Environment – Environmental Protection Agency.
11.
go back to reference Arzoumanidis I, Raggi A, Petti L. Environmental assessment of beekeeping products and services – a life cycle assessment case study including honey and pollination, proceedings of the 10th congress of the Hellenic Society of Agricultural Engineers, Athens, 2017, p. 426–435. Arzoumanidis I, Raggi A, Petti L. Environmental assessment of beekeeping products and services – a life cycle assessment case study including honey and pollination, proceedings of the 10th congress of the Hellenic Society of Agricultural Engineers, Athens, 2017, p. 426–435.
12.
go back to reference Bjørn A, Laurent A, Owsianiak M, Olsen SI, History LCA. In: Hauschild MZ, Rosenbaum RK, Olsen SI, editors. Life cycle assessment – theory and practice. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 17–41.CrossRef Bjørn A, Laurent A, Owsianiak M, Olsen SI, History LCA. In: Hauschild MZ, Rosenbaum RK, Olsen SI, editors. Life cycle assessment – theory and practice. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 17–41.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hosseinijou SA, Mansour S, Shirazi MA. Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2014;19(3):620–45.CrossRef Hosseinijou SA, Mansour S, Shirazi MA. Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2014;19(3):620–45.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Yıldız-Geyhan E, Altun-Çiftçioğlu GA, Neşet Kadırgan MA. Social life cycle assessment of different packaging waste collection system. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2017;124:1–12.CrossRef Yıldız-Geyhan E, Altun-Çiftçioğlu GA, Neşet Kadırgan MA. Social life cycle assessment of different packaging waste collection system. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2017;124:1–12.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Raffiani P, Kuppens T, Van Deal M, Azadi H, Lebailly P, Van Passel S. Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: towards a systemic approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2018;82(2):1839–53.CrossRef Raffiani P, Kuppens T, Van Deal M, Azadi H, Lebailly P, Van Passel S. Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: towards a systemic approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2018;82(2):1839–53.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Functional Unit Definition Criteria in Life Cycle Assessment and Social Life Cycle Assessment: A Discussion
Authors
Ioannis Arzoumanidis
Manuela D’Eusanio
Andrea Raggi
Luigia Petti
Copyright Year
2020
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01508-4_1