nach oben

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Erschienen in:

18.05.2020 | SOCIETAL LCA

Social Organizational Life Cycle Assessment: an approach for identification of relevant subcategories for wine production in Italy

verfasst von: Manuela D’Eusanio, Annekatrin Lehmann, Matthias Finkbeiner, Luigia Petti

Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Ausgabe 6/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose

This study proposes a systematic approach for identifying the relevant social issues of a sector or company to be integrated within the Social Organizational Life Cycle Assessment framework. The approach is implemented through the Pugh matrix analysis in a wine company located in Abruzzo, Italy.

Methods

The Pugh matrix is suitably modelled for social organizational life cycle assessment by considering the subcategories, i.e. social issues, and the stakeholder categories proposed by the Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment UNEP/SETAC. The model is implemented by involving 31 consumers, 28 workers, 36 local community, and 7 value chain actors who were interviewed and asked to give a score by comparing pairwise the subcategories of each stakeholder, respectively.

Results

The results allowed the identification of the most relevant subcategories for the case under study. For example, the health and safety issue is evident as being relevant for different stakeholders (i.e. worker, local community and consumers). Furthermore, starting from the relevant subcategories, a set of indicators was identified. The indicators are allocated at two levels depending on the kind of data used for assessing the indicators (sites visit, consultation of reports or surveys and questionnaires).

Conclusions

This study proposes and implements a model within the Social Organizational Life Cycle Assessment framework as well as Social Life Cycle Assessment in order to support decision-makers in sustainability decisions, taking into account the entire value chain over time.

Vorheriger Artikel Modeling life-cycle social assessment in sustainable pavement management at project level

Nächster Artikel A national-level LCA of a water supply system in a Mediterranean semi-arid climate—Israel as a case study

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

In the S-LCA guidelines (2009), information gathered at first hand are called primary data and refer here usually to the site-specific subcategories and indicators assessed.

Ahmad S, Vedagiri P, Krishna Rao KV (2017) Prioritization of pavement maintenance sections using objective based analytic hierarchy process. Int J Pavement Res and Technol 10:158–170CrossRef

Amaeshi K, Osuji O, Nnodim P (2008) Corporate social responsibility in supply chains of global brands: a boundaryless responsibility? Clarifications, exceptions and implications. J Bus Ethics 81(1):223–234CrossRef

Andrews E, Lesage P, Benoît C, Parent J, Norris G, Revéret JP (2009) Life cycle attribute assessment. Case study of Quebec greenhouse tomatoes. J Ind Ecol 13(4):565–578CrossRef

Arcese G, Lucchetti MC, Massa I (2017) Modeling social life cycle assessment framework for the Italian wine sector. J Clean Prod 140:1027–1036CrossRef

Carter CR, Rogers DS (2008) A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory. Int J Phys Distr and Log Manag 38(5):360–387CrossRef

Cervone HF (2009) Applied digital library project management: using Pugh matrix in complex decision-making situations. OCLC Syst Serv 25(4):228–232CrossRef

Chauvel AM (1993) Risolvere un problema. Editoriale Itaca, Milano

Corona B, Bozhilova-Kisheva KP, Olsen SI, San MG (2017) Social life cycle assessment of a concentrated solar power plant in Spain. J Ind Ecol 21(6):1566–1577CrossRef

Council Regulation (EC) (2006) On the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs. No 510/2006 20 March 2006

Craft RC, Leake C (2002) The Pareto principles in organizational decision making. Manag Decis 40(8):729–733CrossRef

Cruz JM (2008) Dynamics of supply chain networks with corporate social responsibility through integrated environmental decision-making. Eur J Oper Res 184:1005–1031CrossRef

D’Eusanio M, Lehmann A, Zamagni A, Finkbeiner M, Petti L (2018) How experiences and existing data of companies can be used to define the goal and scope in a social organisational life cycle assessment (SO-LCA). Pre-proceedings of the 6th Social Life Cycle Assessment Conference, People and Places for Partnership, 10-12th September, Pescara (Italy), pp. 208-214. ISBN: 978-9562141-1-3

D’Eusanio M, Zamagni A, Petti L (2019) Social sustainability and supply chain management: methods and tools. J Clean Prod 235:178–189CrossRef

De Luca AI, Iofrida N, Strano A, Falcone G, Gulisano G (2015) Social life cycle assessment and participatory approaches: a methodological proposal applied to citrus farming in southern Italy. Integr Environ Assess Manag 11(3):383–396CrossRef

De Luca AI, Iofrida N, Leskinen P, Stillitano T, Falcone G (2017) Life cycle tools combined with multi-criteria and participatory methods for agricultural sustainability: insights from a systematic and critical review. Sci Total Environ 595:352–370CrossRef

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

Fallahpour A, Olugu EU, Musa SN, Wong KY, Noori S (2017) A decision support model for sustainable supplier selection in sustainable supply chain management. Comput Ind Eng 105:391–410CrossRef

Fontes J, Bolhuis A, Bogaers K, Saling P, van Gelder R, Traverso M, Das Gupta J, Bosch H, Morris D,Woodyard D, Bell L, van der Merwe R, Laubscher M, Jacobs M, Challis D (2014). Handbook of product social impact assessment. http://product-social-impactassessment.com

Fontes J, Tarne P, Traverso M, Bernstein P (2018) Product social impact assessment. Int J Cycle Assess 23:547–555CrossRef

Forin S, Martínez-Blanco J, Finkbeiner M (2018, 2018) Facts and figures from road testing the guidance on organizational life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1533-x

Fraser EDG, Dougill AJ, Mabee WE, Reed M, McAlpine P (2006) Bottom up and top down: analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. J Environ Manag 78:114–127CrossRef

Frey, DD, Herder PM, Wijnia Y, Subrahmanian, E, Katsikopoulos, K, Clausing DP (2007) An evaluation of the Pugh controlled convergence method. Proceedings of ASME DETC: Design Engineering Technical Conference, 2007, Las Vegas

Frey DD, Herder PM, Wijnia Y, Subrahmanian E, Katsikopoulos K, Clausing DP (2009) The Pugh controlled convergence method: model-based evaluation and implications for design theory. Res Eng Design 20:41–58CrossRef

Ghadimi P, Dargi A, Heavey C (2017) Sustainable supplier performance scoring using audition check-list based fuzzy inference system: a casa application in automotive spare part industry. Resour Conserv Recy 105:12–27

Gold S, Seuring S, Beske P (2010) Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organizational resources: a literature review. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 17(4):230–245

Halog A, Manik Y (2011) Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 3(12):469–499CrossRef

Honkala S, Hamalainen M, Salonen M (2007) Comparison of four existing concept selection methods. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED ‘07, 28–31 August 2007, Cite des sciences et de l’industrie, Paris, France

Hutchins MJ, Sutherland JW (2008) An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions. J Clean Prod 16(15):1688–1698CrossRef

International Organisation of Wine and Vine (OIV) (2018). OIV statistical report on world vitiviniculture, November 2018 http://wwwoivint/public/medias/6371/oiv-statistical-report-on-world-vitiviniculture-2018pdf Accessed 4 February 2019

Iofrida N, De Luca AI, Silveri F, Falcone G, Stilitano T, Gulisano G, Strano A (2018) Psychosocial risk factors’ impact pathway for social life cycle assessment: an application to citrus life cycles in South Italy. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24(4):767–780CrossRef

ISO (2006a). Environmental management: life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization report. ISO 14040:2006(E)

ISO (2006b). Environmental management systems: life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization report.ISO 14044:2006(E)

ISO (2014) ISO/TS 14072: environmental management life cycle assessment requirements and guidelines for organizational life cycle assessment. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

Istat (2017) Stima delle superfici e produzioni delle coltivazioni agrarie, floricole e delle piante intere da vaso. Abruzzo, Provincia Chieti. Dati I.stat http://dati.istat.it/. Accessed 4 February 2019

Istituto di Servizi per il Mercato Agricolo Alimentare - ISMEA (2018). Tendenze Vino Report, n.2/2018, Agosto 2018. http://www.ismeamercati.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/8852. Accessed 4 Febrary 2019

Jorgensen A, Finkbeiner M, Jorgensen MS, Hauschild MZ (2010) Defining the baseline in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:376–384CrossRef

Karklina K, Slisane D, Romagnoli F, Blumberga D (2015) Social life cycle assessment of biomethane production and distribution in Latvia. Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, 2:128-132, ISSN:2256-070X

Kühnen M, Hahn R (2017) Indicators in social life cycle assessment. A review of frameworks, theories and empirical experience. J Ind Ecol 21(6):1547–1565CrossRef

Lehmann L, Motoshita M, Finkbeiner M (2018) How can social organizational LCA (SOLCA) benefit from existing and improve future sustainability reporting of companies? In: Proceedings of the 6th Social LCA Conference: Social LCA. People and Places for Partnership, Sept 10–12, 2018, Pescara, Italy. Cirad, ISBN: 978-2-9562141-1-3

Loch CH, Wu Y (2008) Social preferences and supply chain performance: an experimental study. Manag Sci 54(11):1835–1849CrossRef

Mani V, Agarwal R, Gunasekaran A, Papadopoulos T, Dubey R, Childe SJ (2016) Social sustainability in the supply chain: construct development and measurement validation. Ecol Indic 71:270–279CrossRef

Manik Y, Leahy J, Halog A (2013) Social life cycle assessment of palm oil biodiesel: a case study in Jambi Province of Indonesia. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1386–1392CrossRef

Martínez-Blanco J, Lehmann A, Chang YJ, Finkbeiner M (2015a) Social organizational LCA (SOLCA): a new approach for implementing social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1586–1599CrossRef

Martínez-Blanco J, Inaba A, Quiros A, Valdivia S, Milà-i-Canals L, Finkbeiner M (2015b) Organizational LCA: the new member of the LCA family—introducing the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative guidance document. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(8):1045–1047CrossRef

Martínez-Blanco J, Inaba A, Finkbeiner M (2015c) Scoping organizational LCA—challenges and solutions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(6):829–841CrossRef

Martínez-Blanco J, Forin S, Finkbeiner M (2017) Launch of a new report: “road testing organizational life cycle assessment around the world: applications, experiences and lessons learned”. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:159CrossRef

Mathé S (2014) Integrating participatory approaches into social life cycle assessment: the SLCA participatory approach. Int J Life Cycle Assesst 19:1506–1514CrossRef

Mathivathanan D, Kannan D, Haq AN (2017) Sustainable supply chain management practices in Indian automotive industry: a multi-stakeholder view. Resourc Conserv Recy 128:284–305CrossRef

Mendoza GA, Prabhu R (2000) Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study. Forest Ecol Manag 131:107–126CrossRef

Menghini S, Marinelli N (2011) Sostenibilità e mercati nelle teorie del benessere e del comportamento dei consumatori. Ital J Agron 6(2):55–59

Merli R, Preziosi M, Acampora A (2018) Sustainability experiences in the wine sector: toward the development of an international indicators system. J Clean Prod 172:3791-3805

Parent J, Cucuzzella C, Revéret JP (2010) Impact assessment in SLCA: sorting the sLCIA methods according to their outcomes. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:164–171CrossRef

Pugh S (1981) Concept selection: a method that works. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design ICED, Rome, Italy

Pullman ME, Maloni MJ, Carter CR (2009) Food for thought: social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes. J Supply Chain Manag 45(4):38–54CrossRef

Raggi A, Arzoumanidis I, Petti L (2018) Life cycle thinking for sustainable tourism in online booking platforms. Chapter 7. In: Cantino V, Culasso F, Racca G (eds) Smart tourism. McGraw-Hill Education, Milan, pp 111–122

Raudberget D (2010) The decision process in set-based concurrent engineering—an industrial case study. International Design Conference – Design 2010, May, 17-20, Dubrovnik – Croatia

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

Ren J, Manzardo A, Mazzi A, Zuliani F, Scipioni A (2015) Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multi-criteria decision-making. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20(6):842–853CrossRef

Sureau S, Mazijin B, Russo Garrido S, Achten WMJ (2018) Social life-cycle assessment frameworks: a review of criteria and indicators proposed to assess social and socioeconomic impacts. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:904–920CrossRef

Traverso M, Bell L, Saling P, Fontes J (2018) Towards social life cycle assessment: a quantitative product social impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:597–606CrossRef

Traverso M, Asdrubali F, Francia A, Finkbeiner M (2012) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(8):1068-1079

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. Life-Cycle Initiative, United Nations Environment Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Paris

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) (2015) Guidance on organizational life cycle assessment. Life-Cycle Initiative, United Nations Environment Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Paris

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) (2013) The methodological sheets of sub-categories of impact in a social life cycle assessment. Life-Cycle Initiative, United Nations Environment Programme and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Paris

United Nations General Assembly, 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030. Resolution 25 September 2015 A/RES/70/1

Vachon S, Mao Z (2008) Linking supply chain strength to sustainable development: a country-level analysis. J Clean Prod 16:1552–1560CrossRef

Valente C, Brekke A, Modahl IA (2018) Testing environmental and social indicators for bio refineries: bioethanol and biochemical production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:581–596CrossRef

WCED (1987) Our common future: the Bruntland Report. Oxford University Press from the World Commission on Environment and Development, New York, p 400

Weidema BP (2005) The integration of economic and social aspects in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:89–96CrossRef

White S, Pettit J (2004) Participatory approaches and the measurement of human well-being, WIDER Research Paper, No. 2004/57. The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNUWIDER), ISBN 9291906468, Helsinki

Yawar SA, Seuring S (2017) Management of social issues in supply chains: a literature review exploring social issues, actions and performance outcomes. J Bus Ethics 141:621–643CrossRef

Zimmer K, Frohling M, Breum P, Schultmann F (2017) Assessing social risks of global supply chains: a quantitative analytical approach and its application to supplier selection in the German automotive industry. J Clean Prod 149:96–109CrossRef

Titel: Social Organizational Life Cycle Assessment: an approach for identification of relevant subcategories for wine production in Italy
verfasst von: Manuela D’Eusanio
Annekatrin Lehmann
Matthias Finkbeiner
Luigia Petti
Publikationsdatum: 18.05.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Ausgabe 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Elektronische ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01746-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2020

Primary data priorities for the life cycle inventory of construction products: focus on foreground processes

Life cycle assessment of a hot-pressing machine to manufacture particleboards: hotspots, environmental indicators, and solutions

Correction to: An integrated social life cycle assessment of freight transport systems

Are the factors recommended by UNEP-SETAC for evaluating biodiversity in LCA achieving their promises: a case study of corrugated boxes produced in the US

Integrating regionalized Brazilian land use change datasets into the ecoinvent database: new data, premises and uncertainties have large effects in the results

Upcycling shipping containers as building components: an environmental impact assessment