The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Annekatrin Lehmann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
application challenges for the Social life cycle assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Marzia Traverso, Julia Martinezblanco, Pere Munoz, Assumpcio Anton, Joan Rieradevall, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:Abstract The paper explains and discusses the challenges confronted during the application of the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology defined by UNEP/SETAC S-LCA guidelines in a case study under the framework of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). The environmental, economic and Social Aspects related to two mineral fertilizers and one industrial compost were assessed. The system boundaries of the LCSA study included fertilizer production and transportation and certain stages of cultivation. Regarding S-LCA, background and foreground processes were taken into account. The Social Hotspots Database (SHDB) was used to include Social Aspects related to background processes. Following the approach of Life Cycle Attribute Assessment – proposed, e.g., in the S-LCA Guidelines – the amount of working time that had been spent on each unit process was used to aggregate the Social Aspects over the life cycle. This work is one of the first examples for applying the S-LCA Guidelines within the LCSA framework, as well as for using SHDB in a real case study. The comparability and reliability of the S-LCA results were highly challenged by the definition of the functional unit and the system boundaries, the choice of stakeholders and indicators, the use of working time for aggregating Social Aspects and the data availability among others. Regarding the latter, it is necessary to find a balance between the use of site-specific primary data and generic data to include the entire life cycle. In addition, for many Social indicators, no definition of the Social targets to achieve is currently agreed upon in the international community. Thus, a complete and robust interpretation of the S-LCA results is not yet possible because of the many methodological obstacles faced. However, because the Social dimension plays a major role in sustainability assessment, and as there is no commonly agreed methodology, every effort to advance the application for S-LCA is highly recommended.
-
Social Aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies challenges for Social life cycle assessment slca
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, E Zschieschang, Marzia Traverso, Matthias Finkbeiner, Liselotte SchebekAbstract:Technologies can contribute to sustainable development (e.g., improving living conditions) and at the same time cause sustainability problems (e.g., emissions). Decisions on alternative technologies should thus ideally be based on the principle to minimize the latter. Analyzing environmental, economic, and Social Aspects related to technologies supports decisions by identifying the “more sustainable” technology. This paper focuses on Social issues. First, it discusses the applicability of the Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) guidelines for a comparative technology analysis, taking the example of two case studies in developing countries. Indicating technologies as “sustainable” also means that they are indeed operated over the expected lifetime, which, in development projects, is often not guaranteed. Consequently, Social Aspects related to implementation conditions should be considered in an SLCA study as well. Thus, a second focus is laid on identifying appropriate indicators to address these Aspects. First, the SLCA guidelines were examined with regard to applying this product-related approach to two real case studies (analysis of technologies/plants for water supply and for decentralized fuel production) for a comparative technology analysis. Suitable indicators are proposed. To address the second focus, a literature research on technology assessment and implementation in developing countries was conducted. Moreover, socioeconomic studies in the investigation areas of the case studies were consulted. Based on this, indicators addressing implementation conditions were identified from the SLCA guidelines and additional literature. The study shows Social issues and indicators found in the SLCA guidelines and considered suitable for a comparative technology analysis in the case studies. However, for a sustainability assessment of technologies, especially in developing countries, further indicators are required to address technology implementation conditions. A set of additional Social indicators like reported trust in institutions or fluctuation of personnel is proposed. Though these indicators were derived based on specific case studies, they can also be suggested to other technologies and are not necessarily limited to developing countries. The study pointed out that an application of the SLCA guidelines considering the whole life cycle was not (yet) feasible for the case studies considered. This is mainly due to the lack of data. Regarding technology implementation, it was examined which indicators are available in this SLCA approach and which could additionally be integrated and applied. This is relevant as a potential contribution of technologies to sustainable development can only be achieved when the technologies are successfully implemented.
-
integration of Social Aspects in decision support based on life cycle thinking
Sustainability, 2011Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Matthias Finkbeiner, Daniela Russi, Alba Bala, Pere FullanaipalmerAbstract:Recently increasing attention has been paid to complementing environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with Social Aspects. The paper discusses the selection of Social impacts and indicators from existing frameworks like Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). Two ongoing case studies, addressing sustainability assessment within decision support, were considered: (1) Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Indonesia; and (2) Integrated Packaging Waste Management in Spain and Portugal (FENIX). The focus was put on Social impacts occurring due to decisions within these systems, such as choice of technologies, practices or suppliers. Thus, decision makers—here understood as intended users of the studies’ results—are not consumers that buy (or do not buy) a product, such as in recent SLCA case-studies, but mainly institutions that decide about the design of the water or packaging waste management system. Therefore, in the FENIX project, a list of Social impacts identified from literature was sent to the intended users to be ranked according to their priorities. Finally, the paper discusses to what extent the entire life cycle is reflected in SLCA impact categories and indicators, and explains how both life-cycle and on-site-related Social impacts were chosen to be assessed. However, not all indicators in the two projects will assess all stages of the life cycle, because of their varying relevance in the different stages, data availability and practical interest of decision makers.
Matthias Finkbeiner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
application challenges for the Social life cycle assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Marzia Traverso, Julia Martinezblanco, Pere Munoz, Assumpcio Anton, Joan Rieradevall, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:Abstract The paper explains and discusses the challenges confronted during the application of the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology defined by UNEP/SETAC S-LCA guidelines in a case study under the framework of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). The environmental, economic and Social Aspects related to two mineral fertilizers and one industrial compost were assessed. The system boundaries of the LCSA study included fertilizer production and transportation and certain stages of cultivation. Regarding S-LCA, background and foreground processes were taken into account. The Social Hotspots Database (SHDB) was used to include Social Aspects related to background processes. Following the approach of Life Cycle Attribute Assessment – proposed, e.g., in the S-LCA Guidelines – the amount of working time that had been spent on each unit process was used to aggregate the Social Aspects over the life cycle. This work is one of the first examples for applying the S-LCA Guidelines within the LCSA framework, as well as for using SHDB in a real case study. The comparability and reliability of the S-LCA results were highly challenged by the definition of the functional unit and the system boundaries, the choice of stakeholders and indicators, the use of working time for aggregating Social Aspects and the data availability among others. Regarding the latter, it is necessary to find a balance between the use of site-specific primary data and generic data to include the entire life cycle. In addition, for many Social indicators, no definition of the Social targets to achieve is currently agreed upon in the international community. Thus, a complete and robust interpretation of the S-LCA results is not yet possible because of the many methodological obstacles faced. However, because the Social dimension plays a major role in sustainability assessment, and as there is no commonly agreed methodology, every effort to advance the application for S-LCA is highly recommended.
-
Social Aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies challenges for Social life cycle assessment slca
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, E Zschieschang, Marzia Traverso, Matthias Finkbeiner, Liselotte SchebekAbstract:Technologies can contribute to sustainable development (e.g., improving living conditions) and at the same time cause sustainability problems (e.g., emissions). Decisions on alternative technologies should thus ideally be based on the principle to minimize the latter. Analyzing environmental, economic, and Social Aspects related to technologies supports decisions by identifying the “more sustainable” technology. This paper focuses on Social issues. First, it discusses the applicability of the Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) guidelines for a comparative technology analysis, taking the example of two case studies in developing countries. Indicating technologies as “sustainable” also means that they are indeed operated over the expected lifetime, which, in development projects, is often not guaranteed. Consequently, Social Aspects related to implementation conditions should be considered in an SLCA study as well. Thus, a second focus is laid on identifying appropriate indicators to address these Aspects. First, the SLCA guidelines were examined with regard to applying this product-related approach to two real case studies (analysis of technologies/plants for water supply and for decentralized fuel production) for a comparative technology analysis. Suitable indicators are proposed. To address the second focus, a literature research on technology assessment and implementation in developing countries was conducted. Moreover, socioeconomic studies in the investigation areas of the case studies were consulted. Based on this, indicators addressing implementation conditions were identified from the SLCA guidelines and additional literature. The study shows Social issues and indicators found in the SLCA guidelines and considered suitable for a comparative technology analysis in the case studies. However, for a sustainability assessment of technologies, especially in developing countries, further indicators are required to address technology implementation conditions. A set of additional Social indicators like reported trust in institutions or fluctuation of personnel is proposed. Though these indicators were derived based on specific case studies, they can also be suggested to other technologies and are not necessarily limited to developing countries. The study pointed out that an application of the SLCA guidelines considering the whole life cycle was not (yet) feasible for the case studies considered. This is mainly due to the lack of data. Regarding technology implementation, it was examined which indicators are available in this SLCA approach and which could additionally be integrated and applied. This is relevant as a potential contribution of technologies to sustainable development can only be achieved when the technologies are successfully implemented.
-
integration of Social Aspects in decision support based on life cycle thinking
Sustainability, 2011Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Matthias Finkbeiner, Daniela Russi, Alba Bala, Pere FullanaipalmerAbstract:Recently increasing attention has been paid to complementing environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) with Social Aspects. The paper discusses the selection of Social impacts and indicators from existing frameworks like Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). Two ongoing case studies, addressing sustainability assessment within decision support, were considered: (1) Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Indonesia; and (2) Integrated Packaging Waste Management in Spain and Portugal (FENIX). The focus was put on Social impacts occurring due to decisions within these systems, such as choice of technologies, practices or suppliers. Thus, decision makers—here understood as intended users of the studies’ results—are not consumers that buy (or do not buy) a product, such as in recent SLCA case-studies, but mainly institutions that decide about the design of the water or packaging waste management system. Therefore, in the FENIX project, a list of Social impacts identified from literature was sent to the intended users to be ranked according to their priorities. Finally, the paper discusses to what extent the entire life cycle is reflected in SLCA impact categories and indicators, and explains how both life-cycle and on-site-related Social impacts were chosen to be assessed. However, not all indicators in the two projects will assess all stages of the life cycle, because of their varying relevance in the different stages, data availability and practical interest of decision makers.
Liselotte Schebek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social Aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies challenges for Social life cycle assessment slca
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, E Zschieschang, Marzia Traverso, Matthias Finkbeiner, Liselotte SchebekAbstract:Technologies can contribute to sustainable development (e.g., improving living conditions) and at the same time cause sustainability problems (e.g., emissions). Decisions on alternative technologies should thus ideally be based on the principle to minimize the latter. Analyzing environmental, economic, and Social Aspects related to technologies supports decisions by identifying the “more sustainable” technology. This paper focuses on Social issues. First, it discusses the applicability of the Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) guidelines for a comparative technology analysis, taking the example of two case studies in developing countries. Indicating technologies as “sustainable” also means that they are indeed operated over the expected lifetime, which, in development projects, is often not guaranteed. Consequently, Social Aspects related to implementation conditions should be considered in an SLCA study as well. Thus, a second focus is laid on identifying appropriate indicators to address these Aspects. First, the SLCA guidelines were examined with regard to applying this product-related approach to two real case studies (analysis of technologies/plants for water supply and for decentralized fuel production) for a comparative technology analysis. Suitable indicators are proposed. To address the second focus, a literature research on technology assessment and implementation in developing countries was conducted. Moreover, socioeconomic studies in the investigation areas of the case studies were consulted. Based on this, indicators addressing implementation conditions were identified from the SLCA guidelines and additional literature. The study shows Social issues and indicators found in the SLCA guidelines and considered suitable for a comparative technology analysis in the case studies. However, for a sustainability assessment of technologies, especially in developing countries, further indicators are required to address technology implementation conditions. A set of additional Social indicators like reported trust in institutions or fluctuation of personnel is proposed. Though these indicators were derived based on specific case studies, they can also be suggested to other technologies and are not necessarily limited to developing countries. The study pointed out that an application of the SLCA guidelines considering the whole life cycle was not (yet) feasible for the case studies considered. This is mainly due to the lack of data. Regarding technology implementation, it was examined which indicators are available in this SLCA approach and which could additionally be integrated and applied. This is relevant as a potential contribution of technologies to sustainable development can only be achieved when the technologies are successfully implemented.
Julia Martinezblanco - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
application challenges for the Social life cycle assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Marzia Traverso, Julia Martinezblanco, Pere Munoz, Assumpcio Anton, Joan Rieradevall, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:Abstract The paper explains and discusses the challenges confronted during the application of the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology defined by UNEP/SETAC S-LCA guidelines in a case study under the framework of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). The environmental, economic and Social Aspects related to two mineral fertilizers and one industrial compost were assessed. The system boundaries of the LCSA study included fertilizer production and transportation and certain stages of cultivation. Regarding S-LCA, background and foreground processes were taken into account. The Social Hotspots Database (SHDB) was used to include Social Aspects related to background processes. Following the approach of Life Cycle Attribute Assessment – proposed, e.g., in the S-LCA Guidelines – the amount of working time that had been spent on each unit process was used to aggregate the Social Aspects over the life cycle. This work is one of the first examples for applying the S-LCA Guidelines within the LCSA framework, as well as for using SHDB in a real case study. The comparability and reliability of the S-LCA results were highly challenged by the definition of the functional unit and the system boundaries, the choice of stakeholders and indicators, the use of working time for aggregating Social Aspects and the data availability among others. Regarding the latter, it is necessary to find a balance between the use of site-specific primary data and generic data to include the entire life cycle. In addition, for many Social indicators, no definition of the Social targets to achieve is currently agreed upon in the international community. Thus, a complete and robust interpretation of the S-LCA results is not yet possible because of the many methodological obstacles faced. However, because the Social dimension plays a major role in sustainability assessment, and as there is no commonly agreed methodology, every effort to advance the application for S-LCA is highly recommended.
Marzia Traverso - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
application challenges for the Social life cycle assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, Marzia Traverso, Julia Martinezblanco, Pere Munoz, Assumpcio Anton, Joan Rieradevall, Matthias FinkbeinerAbstract:Abstract The paper explains and discusses the challenges confronted during the application of the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology defined by UNEP/SETAC S-LCA guidelines in a case study under the framework of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). The environmental, economic and Social Aspects related to two mineral fertilizers and one industrial compost were assessed. The system boundaries of the LCSA study included fertilizer production and transportation and certain stages of cultivation. Regarding S-LCA, background and foreground processes were taken into account. The Social Hotspots Database (SHDB) was used to include Social Aspects related to background processes. Following the approach of Life Cycle Attribute Assessment – proposed, e.g., in the S-LCA Guidelines – the amount of working time that had been spent on each unit process was used to aggregate the Social Aspects over the life cycle. This work is one of the first examples for applying the S-LCA Guidelines within the LCSA framework, as well as for using SHDB in a real case study. The comparability and reliability of the S-LCA results were highly challenged by the definition of the functional unit and the system boundaries, the choice of stakeholders and indicators, the use of working time for aggregating Social Aspects and the data availability among others. Regarding the latter, it is necessary to find a balance between the use of site-specific primary data and generic data to include the entire life cycle. In addition, for many Social indicators, no definition of the Social targets to achieve is currently agreed upon in the international community. Thus, a complete and robust interpretation of the S-LCA results is not yet possible because of the many methodological obstacles faced. However, because the Social dimension plays a major role in sustainability assessment, and as there is no commonly agreed methodology, every effort to advance the application for S-LCA is highly recommended.
-
Social Aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies challenges for Social life cycle assessment slca
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2013Co-Authors: Annekatrin Lehmann, E Zschieschang, Marzia Traverso, Matthias Finkbeiner, Liselotte SchebekAbstract:Technologies can contribute to sustainable development (e.g., improving living conditions) and at the same time cause sustainability problems (e.g., emissions). Decisions on alternative technologies should thus ideally be based on the principle to minimize the latter. Analyzing environmental, economic, and Social Aspects related to technologies supports decisions by identifying the “more sustainable” technology. This paper focuses on Social issues. First, it discusses the applicability of the Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) guidelines for a comparative technology analysis, taking the example of two case studies in developing countries. Indicating technologies as “sustainable” also means that they are indeed operated over the expected lifetime, which, in development projects, is often not guaranteed. Consequently, Social Aspects related to implementation conditions should be considered in an SLCA study as well. Thus, a second focus is laid on identifying appropriate indicators to address these Aspects. First, the SLCA guidelines were examined with regard to applying this product-related approach to two real case studies (analysis of technologies/plants for water supply and for decentralized fuel production) for a comparative technology analysis. Suitable indicators are proposed. To address the second focus, a literature research on technology assessment and implementation in developing countries was conducted. Moreover, socioeconomic studies in the investigation areas of the case studies were consulted. Based on this, indicators addressing implementation conditions were identified from the SLCA guidelines and additional literature. The study shows Social issues and indicators found in the SLCA guidelines and considered suitable for a comparative technology analysis in the case studies. However, for a sustainability assessment of technologies, especially in developing countries, further indicators are required to address technology implementation conditions. A set of additional Social indicators like reported trust in institutions or fluctuation of personnel is proposed. Though these indicators were derived based on specific case studies, they can also be suggested to other technologies and are not necessarily limited to developing countries. The study pointed out that an application of the SLCA guidelines considering the whole life cycle was not (yet) feasible for the case studies considered. This is mainly due to the lack of data. Regarding technology implementation, it was examined which indicators are available in this SLCA approach and which could additionally be integrated and applied. This is relevant as a potential contribution of technologies to sustainable development can only be achieved when the technologies are successfully implemented.
