The Experts below are selected from a list of 20442 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Gian Andrea Blengini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Can S-LCA methodology support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in EU policy context?
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Claudia Di Noi, Umberto Eynard, David Pennington, Lucia Mancini, Andreas Ciroth, Gian Andrea BlenginiAbstract:PurposeAccess, affordability and sustainability of Raw Material Supply chains are crucial to the sustainable development of the European Union (EU) for both society and economy. The study investigates whether and how the social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) methodology can support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in Europe. The potential of social indicators already available in an S-LCA database is tested for the development of new metrics to monitor social risks in Raw Material industries at EU policy level.MethodsThe Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database was identified as a data and indicators source to assess social risks in Raw Material industries in EU-28 and extra-EU countries. Six Raw Material country sectors in the scope of the European policy on Raw Materials were identified and aggregated among those available in PSILCA. The selection of indicators for the assessment was based on the RACER (Relevance, Acceptance, Credibility, Ease, Robustness) analysis, leading to the proposal of 9 social impact categories. An S-LCA of the selected Raw Material industries was, thus, performed for the EU-28 region, followed by a contribution analysis to detect direct and indirect impacts and investigate related Supply chains. Finally, the social performance of Raw Material sectors in EU-28 was compared with that of six extra-EU countries.Results and discussionConsidering the overall social risks in Raw Material industries, “Corruption”, “Fair salary”, “Health and safety” and “Freedom of association and collective bargaining” emerged as the most significant categories both in EU and extra-EU. EU-28 shows an above-average performance where the only exception is represented by the mining and quarrying sector. An investigation of the most contributing processes to social impact categories for EU-28 led to the identification of important risks originating in the Supply chain and in extra-EU areas. Therefore, the S-LCA methodology confirmed the potential of a life cycle perspective to detect burdens shifting and trade-offs. However, only a limited view on the sectoral social performance could be obtained from the research due to a lack of social data.ConclusionsThe S-LCA methodology and indicators appear appropriate to perform an initial social sustainability screening, thus enabling the identification of hotspots in Raw Material Supply chains and the prioritization of areas of action in EU policies. Further methodological developments in the S-LCA field are necessary to make the approach proposed in the paper fully adequate to support EU policies on Raw Materials.
Christoph Helbig - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Raw Material criticality assessment as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment examining methods for product level Supply risk assessment
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2019Co-Authors: Alexander Cimprich, Christoph Helbig, Andrea Thorenz, Vanessa Bach, Dieuwertje Schrijvers, Guido Sonnemann, Steven B Young, Thomas SondereggerAbstract:The diversity of Raw Materials used in modern products, compounded by the risk of Supply disruptions—due to uneven geological distribution of resources, along with socioeconomic factors like production concentration and political (in)stability of Raw Material producing countries—has dRawn attention to the subject of Raw Material “criticality.” In this article, we review the state of the art regarding the integration of criticality assessment, herein termed “product‐level Supply risk assessment,” as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment. We describe and compare three methods explicitly developed for this purpose—Geopolitical Supply Risk (GeoPolRisk), Economic Scarcity Potential (ESP), and the Integrated Method to Assess Resource Efficiency (ESSENZ)—based on a set of criteria including considerations of data sources, uncertainties, and other contentious methodological aspects. We test the methods on a case study of a European‐manufactured electric vehicle, and conclude with guidance for appropriate application and interpretation, along with opportunities for further methodological development. Although the GeoPolRisk, ESP, and ESSENZ methods have several limitations, they can be useful for preliminary assessments of the potential impacts of Raw Material Supply risks on a product system (i.e., “outside‐in” impacts) alongside the impacts of a product system on the environment (i.e., “inside‐out” impacts). Care is needed to not overlook critical Raw Materials used in small amounts but nonetheless important to product functionality. Further methodological development could address regional and firm‐level Supply risks, multiple Supply‐chain stages, and Material recycling, while improving coverage of Supply risk characterization factors.
-
a company oriented model for the assessment of Raw Material Supply risks environmental impact and social implications
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018Co-Authors: Christoph Kolotzek, Christoph Helbig, Andrea Thorenz, Armin Reller, Axel TumaAbstract:Abstract Since manufacturers are the main drivers in the selection of the Materials used in their products, they have a special responsibility for investigating the accompanying sustainability aspects. The recently increased attention they pay to these issues is motivated not only by a sense of social responsibility, but also by pressure from customers and competitors. In particular, the three dimensions of sustainability – based on the triple bottom line of economic, environmental and social criteria – are of growing importance for sustainable Supply chain management. Raw Materials and their Supply chains are often at the focus of attention, since manufacturers may need to diversify them for their products. Appropriate assessment models then become essential. Although Raw Material assessments and Raw Material-focused decision support schemes have recently been applied more often in the corporate context, several aspects such as indicator selection, weighting or social assessment are rarely considered. As a result, a comprehensive, sustainability-oriented Raw Material assessment and decision support scheme in the corporate context is not available in the scientific literature. In the design of such a scheme, four questions arise: First, how should a corporate-oriented Raw Material assessment model be structured? Second, how can all three sustainability dimensions be taken into account? Third, how can the application of Raw Material assessments in a corporate-oriented decision-making process increase the sustainability level of a company? And fourth, does a methodically structured Raw Material assessment model have advantages over existing models? To answer these questions, we have developed a model which takes into account state-of-the-art sustainability assessments as well as recent developments in the field of criticality analysis, life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and social life cycle assessment (SLCA). With partners from both academia and industry we identify relevant quantitative indicators for structuring the assessment model and for calculating corresponding indicator weightings, using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). To demonstrate the applicability of the assessment model for decision support and its benefits for companies in identifying potential hotspots in Raw Material Supply chains, we present a case study that includes decision support for selecting capacitor technologies. A sensitivity analysis demonstrates the robustness of the assessments. In short, this article presents a sustainability-oriented Raw Material assessment and decision support model and proposes how it should be applied in a corporate context.
-
how to evaluate Raw Material Supply risks an overview
Resources Policy, 2013Co-Authors: Benjamin Achzet, Christoph HelbigAbstract:Some strategic Raw Materials do have an extremely unsecure Supply situation. Several working groups around the world have made criticality assessments for metallic Raw Materials to analyze the driving impact factors for this instability. However, the influences on Raw Material availability are manifold and therefore criticality assessment methods are very heterogeneous. Here we give an overview about the differences and similarities of Supply risk evaluation in 15 criticality assessment methods. We take the example of Indium, which has been rated in 60% of these criticality studies, and show which data base is used for Supply risk evaluation. Our results show a lack of consensus about which indicators give reliable information for Raw Material Supply risk and how these indicators should be aggregated. We anticipate our essay to be a starting point for more justified indicator selection and weighting in criticality assessments.
Claudia Di Noi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Can S-LCA methodology support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in EU policy context?
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Claudia Di Noi, Umberto Eynard, David Pennington, Lucia Mancini, Andreas Ciroth, Gian Andrea BlenginiAbstract:PurposeAccess, affordability and sustainability of Raw Material Supply chains are crucial to the sustainable development of the European Union (EU) for both society and economy. The study investigates whether and how the social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) methodology can support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in Europe. The potential of social indicators already available in an S-LCA database is tested for the development of new metrics to monitor social risks in Raw Material industries at EU policy level.MethodsThe Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database was identified as a data and indicators source to assess social risks in Raw Material industries in EU-28 and extra-EU countries. Six Raw Material country sectors in the scope of the European policy on Raw Materials were identified and aggregated among those available in PSILCA. The selection of indicators for the assessment was based on the RACER (Relevance, Acceptance, Credibility, Ease, Robustness) analysis, leading to the proposal of 9 social impact categories. An S-LCA of the selected Raw Material industries was, thus, performed for the EU-28 region, followed by a contribution analysis to detect direct and indirect impacts and investigate related Supply chains. Finally, the social performance of Raw Material sectors in EU-28 was compared with that of six extra-EU countries.Results and discussionConsidering the overall social risks in Raw Material industries, “Corruption”, “Fair salary”, “Health and safety” and “Freedom of association and collective bargaining” emerged as the most significant categories both in EU and extra-EU. EU-28 shows an above-average performance where the only exception is represented by the mining and quarrying sector. An investigation of the most contributing processes to social impact categories for EU-28 led to the identification of important risks originating in the Supply chain and in extra-EU areas. Therefore, the S-LCA methodology confirmed the potential of a life cycle perspective to detect burdens shifting and trade-offs. However, only a limited view on the sectoral social performance could be obtained from the research due to a lack of social data.ConclusionsThe S-LCA methodology and indicators appear appropriate to perform an initial social sustainability screening, thus enabling the identification of hotspots in Raw Material Supply chains and the prioritization of areas of action in EU policies. Further methodological developments in the S-LCA field are necessary to make the approach proposed in the paper fully adequate to support EU policies on Raw Materials.
David Pennington - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Can S-LCA methodology support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in EU policy context?
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Claudia Di Noi, Umberto Eynard, David Pennington, Lucia Mancini, Andreas Ciroth, Gian Andrea BlenginiAbstract:PurposeAccess, affordability and sustainability of Raw Material Supply chains are crucial to the sustainable development of the European Union (EU) for both society and economy. The study investigates whether and how the social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) methodology can support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in Europe. The potential of social indicators already available in an S-LCA database is tested for the development of new metrics to monitor social risks in Raw Material industries at EU policy level.MethodsThe Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database was identified as a data and indicators source to assess social risks in Raw Material industries in EU-28 and extra-EU countries. Six Raw Material country sectors in the scope of the European policy on Raw Materials were identified and aggregated among those available in PSILCA. The selection of indicators for the assessment was based on the RACER (Relevance, Acceptance, Credibility, Ease, Robustness) analysis, leading to the proposal of 9 social impact categories. An S-LCA of the selected Raw Material industries was, thus, performed for the EU-28 region, followed by a contribution analysis to detect direct and indirect impacts and investigate related Supply chains. Finally, the social performance of Raw Material sectors in EU-28 was compared with that of six extra-EU countries.Results and discussionConsidering the overall social risks in Raw Material industries, “Corruption”, “Fair salary”, “Health and safety” and “Freedom of association and collective bargaining” emerged as the most significant categories both in EU and extra-EU. EU-28 shows an above-average performance where the only exception is represented by the mining and quarrying sector. An investigation of the most contributing processes to social impact categories for EU-28 led to the identification of important risks originating in the Supply chain and in extra-EU areas. Therefore, the S-LCA methodology confirmed the potential of a life cycle perspective to detect burdens shifting and trade-offs. However, only a limited view on the sectoral social performance could be obtained from the research due to a lack of social data.ConclusionsThe S-LCA methodology and indicators appear appropriate to perform an initial social sustainability screening, thus enabling the identification of hotspots in Raw Material Supply chains and the prioritization of areas of action in EU policies. Further methodological developments in the S-LCA field are necessary to make the approach proposed in the paper fully adequate to support EU policies on Raw Materials.
Andreas Ciroth - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Can S-LCA methodology support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in EU policy context?
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019Co-Authors: Claudia Di Noi, Umberto Eynard, David Pennington, Lucia Mancini, Andreas Ciroth, Gian Andrea BlenginiAbstract:PurposeAccess, affordability and sustainability of Raw Material Supply chains are crucial to the sustainable development of the European Union (EU) for both society and economy. The study investigates whether and how the social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) methodology can support responsible sourcing of Raw Materials in Europe. The potential of social indicators already available in an S-LCA database is tested for the development of new metrics to monitor social risks in Raw Material industries at EU policy level.MethodsThe Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) database was identified as a data and indicators source to assess social risks in Raw Material industries in EU-28 and extra-EU countries. Six Raw Material country sectors in the scope of the European policy on Raw Materials were identified and aggregated among those available in PSILCA. The selection of indicators for the assessment was based on the RACER (Relevance, Acceptance, Credibility, Ease, Robustness) analysis, leading to the proposal of 9 social impact categories. An S-LCA of the selected Raw Material industries was, thus, performed for the EU-28 region, followed by a contribution analysis to detect direct and indirect impacts and investigate related Supply chains. Finally, the social performance of Raw Material sectors in EU-28 was compared with that of six extra-EU countries.Results and discussionConsidering the overall social risks in Raw Material industries, “Corruption”, “Fair salary”, “Health and safety” and “Freedom of association and collective bargaining” emerged as the most significant categories both in EU and extra-EU. EU-28 shows an above-average performance where the only exception is represented by the mining and quarrying sector. An investigation of the most contributing processes to social impact categories for EU-28 led to the identification of important risks originating in the Supply chain and in extra-EU areas. Therefore, the S-LCA methodology confirmed the potential of a life cycle perspective to detect burdens shifting and trade-offs. However, only a limited view on the sectoral social performance could be obtained from the research due to a lack of social data.ConclusionsThe S-LCA methodology and indicators appear appropriate to perform an initial social sustainability screening, thus enabling the identification of hotspots in Raw Material Supply chains and the prioritization of areas of action in EU policies. Further methodological developments in the S-LCA field are necessary to make the approach proposed in the paper fully adequate to support EU policies on Raw Materials.
