IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jecomi/v6y2018i1p17-d135809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Performance of an Italian Textile Product

Author

Listed:
  • Paola Lenzo

    (Department of Economics, University of Messina, Messina 98122, Italy)

  • Marzia Traverso

    (Institute of Sustainability in Civil Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen 52062, Germany)

  • Giovanni Mondello

    (Department of Business Studies, University of Roma Tre, Roma 00154, Italy)

  • Roberta Salomone

    (Department of Economics, University of Messina, Messina 98122, Italy)

  • Giuseppe Ioppolo

    (Department of Economics, University of Messina, Messina 98122, Italy)

Abstract

Companies are more and more interested in the improvement of sustainability performance of products, services and processes. For this reason, appropriate and suitable assessment tools supporting the transition to a green economy are highly necessary. Currently, there are a number of methods and approaches for assessing products’ environmental impact and improving their performances; among these, the Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) approach has emerged as the most comprehensive and effective to achieve sustainability goals. Indeed, the LCT approach aims to reduce the use of resources and emissions to the environment associated with a product’s life cycle. It can be used as well to improve socio-economic performance through the entire life cycle of a product. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) are undoubtedly the most relevant methodologies to support product-related decision-making activities for the extraction and processing of raw materials, manufacturing, distribution, use, reuse, maintenance, recycling and final disposal. While LCA is an internationally standardized tool (ISO 14040 2006), LCC (except for the ISO related to the building sector) and S-LCA have yet to attain international standardization (even if guidelines and general frameworks are available). The S-LCA is still in its experimental phase for many aspects of the methodological structure and practical implementation. This study presents the application of LCA and S-LCA to a textile product. The LCA and S-LCA are implemented following the ISO 14040-44:2006 and the guidelines from UNEP/SETAC (2009), respectively. The functional unit of the study is a cape knitted in a soft blend of wool and cashmere produced by a textile company located in Sicily (Italy). The system boundary of the study includes all phases from cradle-to-gate, from raw material production through fabric/accessory production to the manufacturing process of the product itself at the Sicilian Company. Background and foreground processes are taken into account using primary and secondary data. The analysis evaluates the environmental and social performances related to the specific textile product, but also outlines the general behaviour of the company. The case study also highlights pro and cons of a combined LCA and S-LCA to a textile product in a regional context.

Suggested Citation

  • Paola Lenzo & Marzia Traverso & Giovanni Mondello & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Ioppolo, 2018. "Sustainability Performance of an Italian Textile Product," Economies, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:17-:d:135809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/6/1/17/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/6/1/17/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Finkbeiner & Erwin M. Schau & Annekatrin Lehmann & Marzia Traverso, 2010. "Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(10), pages 1-14, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Muhammad Saad Baloch & Abubakr Saeed & Ishtiaq Ahmed & Judit Oláh & József Popp & Domicián Máté, 2018. "Role of Domestic Financial Reforms and Internationalization of Non-Financial Transnational Firms: Evidence from the Chinese Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Hana Stverkova & Michal Pohludka, 2018. "Business Organisational Structures of Global Companies: Use of the Territorial Model to Ensure Long-Term Growth," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-9, June.
    3. Mélanie Schmutz & Roland Hischier & Claudia Som, 2021. "Factors Allowing Users to Influence the Environmental Performance of Their T-Shirt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Roope Husgafvel, 2021. "Exploring Social Sustainability Handprint—Part 1: Handprint and Life Cycle Thinking and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-36, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kristina Henzler & Stephanie D. Maier & Michael Jäger & Rafael Horn, 2020. "SDG-Based Sustainability Assessment Methodology for Innovations in the Field of Urban Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, June.
    2. Hannah Karlewski & Annekatrin Lehmann & Klaus Ruhland & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2019. "A Practical Approach for Social Life Cycle Assessment in the Automotive Industry," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-60, August.
    3. Oana Țugulea, 2017. "City Brand Personality—Relations with Dimensions and Dimensions Inter-Relations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Cristina López & Rocío Ruíz-Benítez & Carmen Vargas-Machuca, 2019. "On the Environmental and Social Sustainability of Technological Innovations in Urban Bus Transport: The EU Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Mauro Sciarelli & Mario Tani & Giovanni Landi & Ornella Papaluca, 2019. "The Impact of Social Responsibility Disclosure on Corporate Financial Health: Evidences from Some Italian Public Companies," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(3), pages 109-122, March.
    6. Julian Gaus & Sven Wehking & Andreas H. Glas & Michael Eßig, 2022. "Economic Sustainability by Using Life Cycle Cost Information in the Buying Center: Insights from the Public Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-28, February.
    7. Diana Carolina Gámez-García & José Manuel Gómez-Soberón & Ramón Corral-Higuera & Héctor Saldaña-Márquez & María Consolación Gómez-Soberón & Susana Paola Arredondo-Rea, 2018. "A Cradle to Handover Life Cycle Assessment of External Walls: Choice of Materials and Prognosis of Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    8. Man Yu & Anthony Halog, 2015. "Solar Photovoltaic Development in Australia—A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-35, January.
    9. Serenella Sala & Rana Pant & Michael Hauschild & David Pennington, 2012. "Research Needs and Challenges from Science to Decision Support. Lesson Learnt from the Development of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(7), pages 1-14, June.
    10. Henke, S. & Theuvsen, L., 2014. "Social Life Cycle Assessment: Eine sozioökonomische Analyse der Biogasproduktion," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    11. Thies, Christian & Kieckhäfer, Karsten & Spengler, Thomas S. & Sodhi, Manbir S., 2019. "Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 1-21.
    12. Stella Stoycheva & Alex Zabeo & Lisa Pizzol & Danail Hristozov, 2022. "Socio-Economic Life Cycle-Based Framework for Safe and Sustainable Design of Engineered Nanomaterials and Nano-Enabled Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, May.
    13. Rafael Horn & Hanaa Dahy & Johannes Gantner & Olga Speck & Philip Leistner, 2018. "Bio-Inspired Sustainability Assessment for Building Product Development—Concept and Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    14. Giuseppe Ioppolo & Stefano Cucurachi & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Saija & Lei Shi, 2016. "Sustainable Local Development and Environmental Governance: A Strategic Planning Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Aurelio Tommasetti & Riccardo Mussari & Gennaro Maione & Daniela Sorrentino, 2020. "Sustainability Accounting and Reporting in the Public Sector: Towards Public Value Co-Creation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Jaume Freire-Gonz lez & Ignasi Puig-Ventosa, 2015. "Energy Efficiency Policies and the Jevons Paradox," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 5(1), pages 69-79.
    17. Tobias Engelmann & Daniel Fischer & Marianne Lörchner & Jaya Bowry & Holger Rohn, 2019. "“Doing” Sustainability Assessment in Different Consumption and Production Contexts—Lessons from Case Study Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    18. Anna Maria Ferrari & Lucrezia Volpi & Martina Pini & Cristina Siligardi & Fernando Enrique García-Muiña & Davide Settembre-Blundo, 2019. "Building a Sustainability Benchmarking Framework of Ceramic Tiles Based on Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-30, January.
    19. Sabrina Neugebauer & Silvia Forin & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2016. "From Life Cycle Costing to Economic Life Cycle Assessment—Introducing an Economic Impact Pathway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-23, April.
    20. Maria Ljunggren Söderman & Ola Eriksson & Anna Björklund & Göran Östblom & Tomas Ekvall & Göran Finnveden & Yevgeniya Arushanyan & Jan-Olov Sundqvist, 2016. "Integrated Economic and Environmental Assessment of Waste Policy Instruments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:17-:d:135809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.