Discussing features of social measures important in SLCA impact indicators' selection

Yazdan Soltanpour (), Iuri Peri and Leila Temri ()
Additional contact information
Yazdan Soltanpour: UMR MOISA - Marchés, Organisations, Institutions et Stratégies d'Acteurs - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - Montpellier SupAgro - Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques - CIHEAM-IAMM - Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier - CIHEAM - Centre International de Hautes Études Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier, Unict - Università degli studi di Catania = University of Catania, Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier
Iuri Peri: Unict - Università degli studi di Catania = University of Catania
Leila Temri: UMR MOISA - Marchés, Organisations, Institutions et Stratégies d'Acteurs - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - Montpellier SupAgro - Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques - CIHEAM-IAMM - Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier - CIHEAM - Centre International de Hautes Études Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier, Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: There have been several attempts to formalize Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) methodology and make it as robust as the environmental part of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). "Guidelines for SLCA of products" (UNEP/SETAC, 2009) and progressively "The Methodological Sheets for Sub-categories in SLCA" (UNEP/SETAC, 2013) have provided recommendations on how to conduct the first two phases of SLCA (i.e., goal and scope definition and life cycle inventory). The research on the third phase (life-cycle impact assessment) was, at that time, not considered sufficiently mature to be included (Sureau et al. 2017). With S-LCA conceived by the same practitioners who created LCA, it is not surprising that they attempted to model social impacts in the same way it was done for environment alone (Iofrida et al. 2017). Most of the applications take into account values, stakeholders' perceptions, subjectivities, and participation in an interpretivist way, but often without clarifying the theoretical underpinnings (Iofrida et al. 2017). In the following we attempt to clarify the role of these features of societal measures in the selection of the end-point social impact indicators in SLCA.

Date: 2018-09-10
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02734339v1
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in 6. International Conference on Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), Università degli Studi di Catania (UniCT). ITA.; Ecoinnovazione Srl. ITA.; RWTH Aachen University. DEU., Sep 2018, Pescara, Italy. 256 p

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02734339v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02734339

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().