Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited
AbstractTo promote the development of Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA), we conducted a comprehensive review of recently developed frameworks, methods, and characterization models for impact assessment for future method developers and SLCA practitioners. Two previous reviews served as our foundations for this review. We updated the review by including a comprehensive list of recently-developed SLCA frameworks, methods and characterization models. While a brief discussion from goal, data, and indicator perspectives is provided in Sections 2 to 4 for different frameworks/methods, the focus of this review is Section 5 where discussion on characterization models for impact assessment of different methods is provided. The characterization models are categorized into two types following the UNEP/SETAC guidelines: type I models without impact pathways and type II models with impact pathways. Different from methods incorporating type I/II characterization models, another LCA modeling approach, Life Cycle Attribute Assessment (LCAA), is also discussed in this review. We concluded that methods incorporating either type I or type II models have limitations. For type I models, the challenge lies in the systematic identification of relevant stakeholders and materiality issues; while for type II models, identification of impact pathways that most closely and accurately represent the real-world causal relationships is the key. LCAA may avoid these problems, but the ultimate questions differ from those asked by the methods using type I and II models. View Full-Text
Share & Cite This Article
Wu, R.; Yang, D.; Chen, J. Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited. Sustainability 2014, 6, 4200-4226.
Wu R, Yang D, Chen J. Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited. Sustainability. 2014; 6(7):4200-4226.Chicago/Turabian Style
Wu, Ruqun; Yang, Dan; Chen, Jiquan. 2014. "Social Life Cycle Assessment Revisited." Sustainability 6, no. 7: 4200-4226.