Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Positive impacts in social life cycle assessment: state of the art and the way forward

  • SOCIAL LCA IN PROGRESS
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Social life cycle assessment (SLCA) is a methodology under continuous development, which may be applied at different scales: from products to economic sectors up to systems at region (meso) and country (macro) scales. Traditionally, SLCA has been focusing on the assessment of negative social externalities, whereas also positive social impacts could be associated to human interventions. The purpose of the present study is to understand how positive impacts are defined in published literature and how they could be assessed through indicators. The aim is to clarify the concept among scholars and to support decision making in business and policy context.

Methods

The study uses a systematic review approach in order to analyse the types of indicators adopted. In the field of SLCA and according to Paragahawewa et al. (2009), “[I]ndicators are ‘pointers’ to the state of the impact categories (and/or subcategories) being evaluated by the SLCA”. Indicators can be quantitative, semi-quantitative or qualitative (UNEP/SETAC 2009). This review was carried out in order to identify and analyse positive impacts and indicators. After careful scrutiny, 47 papers containing theoretical frameworks were considered, as well as 46 papers presenting case studies.

Results and discussion

Compared to environmental life cycle assessment (E-LCA), where the presence of positive impacts is lower, evaluating benefits or positive impacts can still play a major role in SLCA (Benoît et al. 2010). A quarter of the analysed papers on theoretical frameworks take into account the topic of positive impacts and indicators. Results from case study analysis highlight as “workers”, was the most considered stakeholder (in 100 % of the analysed papers), and as the majority of positive indicators used in the case study analysed are recorded in relation to “other value chain actors”. Within the concept of “positive impacts”, no reference should be made merely to the utility of a product or service. In a broader sense, we could refer to solutions improving the conditions of one or various stakeholders involved. In other words, these are solutions that carry a positive contribution to one or more stakeholders without harming others.

Conclusions

So far, positive impacts are barely covered in literature. There is a clear need of streamlining definition and indicators, especially if they should be applied in a policy context complementing traditional—and often monetary-based, cost-benefit analysis (CBA).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The inventory is the phase of a S-LCA where data are collected, the systems are modelled, and the LCI results are obtained (UNEP/SETAC 2009:58). Inventory analysis involves data collection and calculation procedures to quantify relevant inputs and output of a product system (ISO 14040 2006: 13).

  2. “outcome of a life cycle inventory analysis that catalogues the flows crossing the system boundary and provides the starting point for life cycle impact assessment” (ISO 14040 2006:4).

  3. Further information can be found in Fig. 4 of Neugebauer et al. (2014).

  4. “[t]he footprint of a product is the total sum of all the negative impacts of pollution released and resources consumed over the entire supply chain and life cycle of the product” (Norris 2015).

  5. In Table 4, were included all the indicators built to assess a positive impact in the meaning of the authors, and not only to assess a performance that go beyond compliance.

  6. Working hours, child labour, forced labour, health and safety.

  7. Freedom of association and collective bargaining, fair salary, equal opportunities/discrimination, social benefits/social security.

  8. Fair competition and respect of intellectual property rights.

  9. Promoting social responsibility and supplier relationships.

References

  • Albrecht S, Brandstetter P, Beck T, et al. (2013) An extended life cycle analysis of packaging systems for fruit and vegetable transport in Europe. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1549–1567

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aparcana S, Salhofer S (2013a) Development of a social impact assessment methodology for recycling systems in low-income countries. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1106–1115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aparcana S, Salhofer S (2013b) Application of a methodology for the social life cycle assessment of recycling systems in low income countries: three Peruvian case studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1116–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcese G, Lucchetti M, Merli R (2013) Social life cycle assessment as a management tool: methodology for application in tourism. Sustainability 5:3275–3287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer BH, Cooper C, Ruhanen L (2005) The positive and negative impacts of tourism. In: Theobald WF (ed) Glob. Tour. Elsevier Inc., p 79–102

  • Atkinson AB, Cantillon B, Marlier E, Nolan B (2002) Social indicators: the EU and social inclusion. OUP, Oxford. doi:10.1093/0199253498.001.0001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baumann H, Arvidsson R, Tong H, Wang Y (2013) Does the production of an airbag injure more people than the airbag saves in traffic? Opting for an empirically based approach to social life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 17:517–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belfiore E, Bennett O (2007) Rethinking the social impacts of the arts. Int J Cult Policy 13:135–151. doi:10.1080/10286630701342741

  • Benoît C, Vickery-Niederman G (2011) Social sustainability assessment literature review. Sustain Consort White Pap, p 1–34

  • Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, et al. (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:156–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît Norris C (2014) Data for social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:261–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît Norris C, Revéret J-P (2015) Partial organization and social LCA development: the creation and expansion of an epistemic community. In: Muthu SS (ed) Soc. life cycle assess. - an insight. Springer, Singapore, pp. 199–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît-Norris C (2012) Social life cycle assessment: a technique providing a new wealth of information to inform sustainability-related decision making. In: Curran MA (ed) Life Cycle Assess. Handb A Guid. Environ. Sustain. Prod. Scrivener Publishing LLC, p 433–452

  • Benoit-Norris C, Cavan DA, Norris G (2012) Identifying social impacts in product supply chains: overview and application of the social hotspot database. Sustainability 4:1946–1965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît-Norris C, Vickery-Niederman G, Valdivia S, et al. (2011) Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:682–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bienge K, von Geibler J, Lettenmeier M et al (2009) Sustainability hot spot analysis: a streamlined life cycle assessment towards sustainable food chains. 9th Eur. IFSA Symp. Vienna, pp 1–10

  • Blom M, Solmar C (2009) How to Socially Assess Biofuels. Master’s thesis. Luleå University of Technology. http://epubl.luth.se/1402-1617/2009/077/LTU-EX-09077-SE.pdf. Accessed 21 Jul 2016

  • Bocoum I, Macombe C, Revéret J-P (2015) Anticipating impacts on health based on changes in income inequality caused by life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:405–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond AJ, Dockerty T, Lovett A, Riche AB, Haughton AJ, Bohan DA, Sage RB, Shield IF, Finch JW, Turner MM, Karp A (2011) Learning how to deal with values, frames and governance in sustainability appraisal. Reg Stud 45(8):1157–1170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bossel H (1999) Indicators for sustainable development: theory, method, applications. International Institute for Sustainable Development, Winnipeg. https://www.iisd.org/pdf/balatonreport.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2016

  • Bouzid A, Padilla M (2014) Analysis of social performance of the industrial tomatoes food chain in Algeria. New Medit 1:60–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Brizius JA, Campbell MD (1991) Getting results: a guide for government accountability. Council of Governors Policy Advisors, Washington, DC

  • Brouwer R, Van Ek R (2004) Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands. Ecol Econ 50:1–21. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.01.020

  • CEPS (2013) Assessing the costs and benefits of regulation. Study for the European Commission, Secretariat General. http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/131210_cba_study_sg_final.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2016

  • Chang Y-J, Sproesser G, Neugebauer S, et al. (2015) Environmental and social life cycle assessment of welding technologies. Procedia CIRP:293–298

  • Chhipi-Shrestha GK, Hewage K, Sadiq R (2014) “Socializing” sustainability: a critical review on current development status of social life cycle impact assessment method. Clean Techn Environ Policy. doi:10.1007/s10098-014-0841-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Cinelli M, Coles SR, Jørgensen A, et al. (2013) Workshop on life cycle sustainability assessment: the state of the art and research needs—November 26, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1421–1424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Franze J (2011) LCA of an ecolabeled notebook. http://www.greendelta.com/uploads/media/LCA_laptop_final.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2015

  • De Luca AI, Iofrida N, Strano A, et al. (2015) Social life cycle assessment and participatory approaches: a methodological proposal applied to citrus farming in Southern Italy. Integr Environ Assess Manag 9999:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Cesare S, Silveri F, Petti L (2014) The Role of indicators in Social Life Cycle Assessment : results from a literature review. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268796670_The_Role_of_indicators_in_Social_Life_Cycle_Assessment_results_from_a_literature_review. Accessed 8 Feb 2016

  • Drewnowski J (1972) Social indicators and welfare measurement: remarks on methodology. J Dev Stud 8(3):77–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:88–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:247–259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • EC (1991) A social portrait of Europe. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/a-social-portrait-of-europe-pbCA5789241/

  • EC (2015a) Beyond GDP initiative. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/beyond_gdp/index_en.html. Accessed 29 Nov 2015

  • EC (2015b) Social situation of EU, Periodic reports available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=22. Accessed 29 Nov 2015

  • EC (2015c) Europe 2020 targets. http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/targets/index_en.htm. Accessed 29 Nov 2015

  • EC (2015d) Better Regulation Guidelines COM(2015) 215 final and SWD(2015) 110 final

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2013) Potential hotspots identified by social LCA—part 1: a case study of a laptop computer. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:127–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Moberg Å (2013) Potential hotspots identified by social LCA–part 2: reflections on a study of a complex product. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:144–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Höglund J, Finnveden G (2013) Social and socioeconomic impacts from vehicle fuels. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:721761/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Accessed 5 Mar 2015

  • Ekvall T (2011) Nations in social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:1–2. doi:10.1007/s11367-010-0235-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feschet P, Macombe C, Garrabé M, et al. (2013) Social impact assessment in LCA using the Preston pathway: the case of banana industry in Cameroon. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:490–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2:3309–3322. doi:10.3390/su2103309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontes J (2014) Handbook for product social impact assessment. http://www.dsm.com/content/dam/dsm/cworld/en_US/documents/handbook-for-product-social-impact-assessment.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2015

  • Foolmaun RK, Ramjeawon T (2013a) Life cycle sustainability assessments (LCSA) of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Environ Dev Sustain 15:783–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foolmaun RK, Ramjeeawon T (2013b) Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:155–171

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franze J, Ciroth A (2011) A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:366–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin N, Nelson JA, Ackerman F, Weisskopf T (2008) Consumption and the consumer society. http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/education_materials/modules/Consumption_and_the_Consumer_Society.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2016

  • Grießhammer R, Benoît C, Dreyer LC et al (2006) Feasibility study : integration of social aspects into LCA. http://www.saiplatform.org/uploads/Library/UNEP-SETACLifeCycleInitiativeTFonSocialIssues-FeasibilityStudy.pdf. Accessed 26 Mar 2015

  • Horsch K (1997) Indicators: definition and use in a results-based accountability system. http://www.hfrp.org/publications-resources/browse-our-publications/indicators-definition-and-use-in-a-results-based-accountability-system. Accessed 15 Nov 2015

  • Hosseinijou SA, Mansour S, Shirazi MA (2014) Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:620–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu C-W, Wang S-W, Hu AH (2013) Development of a new methodology for impact assessment of SLCA. In: Nee AYC, Song B, Ong S-K (eds) Proc. 20th CIRP Int. Conf. Life Cycle Eng. Springer, Singapore, pp. 469–473

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu M, Kleijn R, Bozhilova-Kisheva KP, Di Maio F (2013) An approach to LCSA: the case of concrete recycling. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1793–1803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles (1994) Guidelines and principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assess 12(2):107–152

  • ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management - life cycle assessment - principles and framework

  • Jørgensen A (2010) Developing the Social Life Cycle Assessment:-addressing issues of validity and usability. http://orbit.dtu.dk/fedora/objects/orbit:82775/datastreams/file_5100400/content Accessed 4 Feb 2015

  • Jørgensen A (2013) Social LCA—a way ahead? Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:296–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Dreyer LC, Wangel A (2012) Addressing the effect of social life cycle assessments. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:828–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Hauschild MZ, Jørgensen MS, Wangel A (2009) Relevance and feasibility of social life cycle assessment from a company perspective. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:204–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Lai LCH, Hauschild MZ (2010b) Assessing the validity of impact pathways for child labour and well-being in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen A, Le Bocq A, Nazarkina L, Hauschild M (2008) Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:96–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloëpffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labuschagne C, Brent AC (2006) Social sustainability social indicators for sustainable project and technology life cycle management in the process industry. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:3–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Lähtinen K, Myllyviita T, Leskinen P, Pitkänen SK (2014) A systematic literature review on indicators to assess local sustainability of forest energy production. Renew Sust Energ Rev 40:1202–1216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann A, Russi D, Bala A, et al. (2011) Integration of social aspects in decision support, based on life cycle thinking. Sustainability 3:562–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann A, Zschieschang E, Traverso M, et al. (2013) Social aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies—challenges for social life cycle assessment (SLCA). Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1581–1592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthe T, Kägi T, Reger J (2013) A systems approach to sustainable technical product design. J Ind Ecol 17:605–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macombe C, Loeillet D (2013) Social life cycle assessment, for who and why? In: Macombe C (ed) Social LCAs socio-economic effects in value chains. FruiTrop Thema, p 35–52

  • Macombe C, Feschet P, Garrabé M, Loeillet D (2011) 2nd International Seminar in Social Life Cycle Assessment—recent developments in assessing the social impacts of product life cycles. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:940–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macombe C, Leskinen P, Feschet P, Antikainen R (2013) Social life cycle assessment of biodiesel production at three levels: a literature review and development needs. J Clean Prod 52:205–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manhart A, Grießhammer R (2006) Social impacts of the production of notebook PCs. http://www.prosa.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/notebooksurvey_final_engl.pdf. Accessed 4 Jun 2015

  • 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 18:1386–1392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Blanco J, Lehmann A, Muñoz P, et al. (2014) Application challenges for the social life cycle assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment. J Clean Prod 69:34–48. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moberg Å, Picha M, Erlandsson-Segerström B et al (2009) Using a life-cycle perspective to assess potential social impacts of ICT services: a pre-study. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:355953/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2015

  • Molteni M (2007) Gli stadi di sviluppo della CSR nella strategia aziendale. Impresa Progetto 2:1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriizumi Y, Matsui N, Hondo H (2010) Simplified life cycle sustainability assessment of mangrove management: a case of plantation on wastelands in Thailand. J Clean Prod 18:1629–1638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazarkina L, Le Bocq A (2006) Social aspects of Sustainability assessment: Feasibility of Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). EDF 2006, Moretsur-Loing, France

  • Nemarumane T, Mbohwa C (2015) Social impact assessment of sugar production operations in South Africa: a social life cycle assessment perspective. In: Muthu SS (ed) Soc. life cycle assess. - an insight. Springer, Singapore, pp. 71–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer S, Traverso M, Scheumann R, et al. (2014) Impact pathways to address social well-being and social justice in SLCA—fair wage and level of education. Sustainability 6:4839–4857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris G (2015) Doing more good than harm: footprints, handprints, and beneficience. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic979867.files/Basic%20Beneficience%20Primer.pdf. Accessed 26 Nov 2015

  • Norris GA (2006) Social impacts in product life cycles towards life cycle attribute assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:97–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris GA (2013) The new requirement for social leadership: healing. Uncertainty, divers. Common Good Chang. Norms New Leadersh. Paradig

  • Paragahawewa U, Blackett P, Small B (2009) Social Life Cycle Analysis (S-LCA): some methodological issues and potential application to cheese production in New Zealand. http://www.saiplatform.org/uploads/Library/SocialLCA-FinalReport_July2009.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2015

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parent J, Cucuzzella C, Revéret J-P (2013) Revisiting the role of LCA and SLCA in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1642–1652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier N, Ustaoglu E, Benoit C, Norris G (2013) Social Sustainability in trade and development policy contact information. doi:10.2788/659

  • Pelletier N, Ustaoglu E, Benoit C, Norris G, Rosenbaum E, Vasta A, Sala S (2016) Social sustainability in trade and development policy. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1059-z (this issue)

    Google Scholar 

  • Petti L, Campanella P (2009) The social LCA: the state of art of an evolving methodology. Ann “Stefan cel Mare” Univ Suceava Fascicle Fac Econ Public Adm 9:47–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Petti L, Ugaya CML, Di Cesare S (2014) Systematic review of Social- Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA ) case studies. In: Macombe C, Loeillet D (eds) Pre-proceedings of the 4th International Seminar in Social LCA. Frui Trop Thema, p 34–41

  • Pizzirani S, McLaren SJ, Seadon JK (2014) Is there a place for culture in life cycle sustainability assessment? Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1316–1330. doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0722-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reitinger C, Dumke M, Barosevcic M, Hillerbrand R (2011) A conceptual framework for impact assessment within SLCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:380–388. doi:10.1007/s11367-011-0265-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren J, Manzardo A, Mazzi A, et al. (2015) Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:842–853

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Revéret J-P, Couture J-M, Parent J (2015) Socioeconomic LCA of milk production in Canada. In: Muthu SS (ed) Soc. life cycle assess. - an insight. Springer, Singapore, pp. 25–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Sala S, Farioli F, Zamagni A (2013) Progress in sustainability science: lessons learnt from current methodologies for sustainability assessment: part 1. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1653–1672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samson R (2012) Environmental and socioeconomic life cycle assessment of Canadian milk. https://www.dairyresearch.ca/file.php?filename=/var/www/cdrplive/files/news/19/LCA-DFCExecSum_e.pdf. Accessed 21 Jul 2016

  • Sanchez Ramirez PK, Petti L (2011) Social life cycle assessment: methodological and implementation issues. Ann “Ştefan cel Mare” Univ Suceava Fascicle Fac Econ Public Adm 11:11–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez Ramirez PK, Del Sordo M, Petti L (2013) La Social Life Cycle Assessment del Pomodoro Cuore di bue. DEc Working Paper Series. no. 27

  • Sanchez Ramirez PK, Petti L, Brones F, Ugaya CML (2016) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in Natura’s cocoa soap. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:106–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez Ramirez PK, Petti L, Haberland NT, Ugaya CML (2014) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1515–1523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulenkorf N, Edwards D (2012) Maximizing positive social impacts: strategies for sustaining and leveraging the benefits of intercommunity sport events in divided societies. J Sport Manag 26:379–390

  • Seager TP, Melton J, Eighmy TT (2004) Working towards sustainable science and engineering: introduction to the special issue on highway infrastructure. Resour Conserv Recycl 42(3):205–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon EB, Freeman HE (1970) Notes on social indicators: promises and potential. Policy Sci 1(1):97–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slootweg R, Vanclay F, van Schooten M (2001) Function evaluation as a framework for the integration of social and environmental impact assessment. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 19:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan S, O’Fallon LR, Dearry A (2003) Creating healthy communities, healthy homes, healthy people: initiating a research agenda on the built environment and public health. Am J Public Health 93:1446–1450. doi:10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1446

  • Swarr TE (2009) Societal life cycle assessment-could you repeat the question? Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:285–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The European Network For Rural Development (ENRD) (2014) How to set the indicators? https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/en/leader/leader-tool-kit/the-strategy-design-and-implementation/the-strategy-design/how-to-set-the-indicators

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen A, Schneider L (2012b) Life cycle sustainability dashboard. J Ind Ecol 16:680–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treccani (2012) Utilità. Dizionario di Economia e Finanza. http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/utilita_res-cc18589b-8cd0-11e2-b3e0-00271042e8d9_(Dizionario-di-Economia-e-Finanza)/. Accessed 25 July 2016

  • Ugaya CML, Brones F, Corrêa S (2011) S-LCA: preliminary results of Natura’s cocoa soap bar. http://www.lcm2011.org/papers.html?file=tl_files/pdf/paper/13_Session_Life_Cycle_Sustainability_Assessement_I/6_Ugaya-SLCA_Preliminary_results_of_Naturas_cocoa_soap_bar-763_b.pdf

  • Umair S, Björklund A, Ekener-Petersen E (2013) Social life cycle inventory and impact assessment of informal recycling of electronic ICT waste in Pakistan. In: Hilty LM, Aebischer B, Andersson G, Lohmann W (eds) Proc. First Int. Conf. Inf. Commun. Technol. Sustain. Zurich, p 52–58

  • Umair S, Björklund A, Petersen EE (2015) Social impact assessment of informal recycling of electronic ICT waste in Pakistan using UNEP SETAC guidelines. Resour Conserv Recycl 95:46–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN (2015b) Sustainable development goals. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/

  • UNEP/SETAC (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. http://www.cdo.ugent.be/publicaties/280.guidelines-sLCA.pdf. Accessed 18 Jan 2015

  • UNEP/SETAC (2013) The Methodological Sheets For Subcategories in Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). http://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/S-LCA_methodological_sheets_11.11.13.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2015

  • United Nations (UN) (2015a) Millennium development goals. http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

  • United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (2014) Human development index. http://hdr.undp.org/en/data

  • Valdivia S, Ugaya CML, Hildenbrand J, et al. (2012) A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment—our contribution to Rio + 20. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1673–1685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay (2003a) International principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 21:5–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay F (2002) Conceptualising social impacts. Environ Impact Assess Rev 22:183–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay F (2003b) Why have principles for social impact assessment? Int Assoc Impact Assess 2:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinyes E, Oliver-Solà J, Ugaya C, et al. (2013) Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:445–455

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wan H (2012) Assessing CSR and applying social life cycle assessment: a case study on biochemical oxygen demand online monitor. Master’s thesis. Uppsala University. http://www.greenbusinessregion.se/file/assesing-csr-and-applying-social-life-cycle-assesment.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2016

  • Weldegiorgis FS, Franks DM (2014) Social dimensions of energy supply alternatives in steelmaking: comparison of biomass and coal production scenarios in Australia. J Clean Prod 84:281–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm M, Hutchins M, Mars C, Benoit-Norris C (2015) An overview of social impacts and their corresponding improvement implications: a mobile phone case study. J Clean Prod 102:302–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock M, Narayan D (2000) Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Res Obs 15(2):225–249. doi:10.1093/wbro/15.2.225

  • World Bank (2012) Designing a results framework for achieving results: a how-to guide. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTEVACAPDEV/Resources/designing_results_framework.pdf

  • Wu R, Yang D, Chen J (2014) Social life cycle assessment revisited. Sustainability 6:4200–4226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu M, Halog A (2015) Solar photovoltaic development in Australia—a life cycle sustainability assessment study. Sustainability. doi:10.3390/su7021213

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni A, Amerighi O, Buttol P (2011) Strengths or bias in social LCA? Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:596–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni A, Pesonen H-L, Swarr T (2013) From LCA to life cycle sustainability assessment: concept, practice and future directions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1637–1641

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economic Studies, University «G. D’Annunzio», Viale Pindaro 42, 65127, Pescara, Italy

    Silvia Di Cesare & Luigia Petti

  2. CIRAD, UPR GECO, Boulevard de la Lironde, 34398, Montpellier Cedex 5, France

    Silvia Di Cesare

  3. IRSTEA, UMR ITAP – ELSA, 361 rue Jean-François Breton, 34196, Montpellier Cedex 5, France

    Federica Silveri

  4. European Commission-Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability - Sustainability Assessment Unit, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, T.P. 270, 21027, Ispra, VA, Italy

    Serenella Sala

Authors
  1. Silvia Di Cesare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Federica Silveri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Serenella Sala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luigia Petti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvia Di Cesare.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Catherine Macombe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Di Cesare, S., Silveri, F., Sala, S. et al. Positive impacts in social life cycle assessment: state of the art and the way forward. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23, 406–421 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1169-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1169-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation