IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v82y2018ip2p1839-1853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: Towards a systemic approach

Author

Listed:
  • Rafiaani, Parisa
  • Kuppens, Tom
  • Dael, Miet Van
  • Azadi, Hossein
  • Lebailly, Philippe
  • Passel, Steven Van

Abstract

The majority of impact assessments for the biobased economy are primarily focused on the environmental and (techno-)economic aspects, while social aspects are rarely considered. This study proposes a modified systemic approach for a social sustainability impact assessment of the biobased economy, based on a review on the common methodologies for assessing social impacts. Accordingly, the proposed approach follows the four general iterative steps of social life cycle analysis (SLCA) as it considers all life cycle phases of the biobased economy. The systemic approach considers the potential social impacts on local communities, workers, and consumers as the main three groups of the stakeholders. The review showed that the most common social indicators for inventory analysis within the biobased economy include health and safety, food security, income, employment, land- and worker-related concerns, energy security, profitability, and gender issues. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was also highlighted as the broadly utilized methodology for aggregating the results of impact assessments within the biobased economy. Taking a life cycle perspective, this study provides a holistic view of the full sustainability of research, design, and innovation in the biobased economy by suggesting the integration of the social aspects with techno-economic and an environmental life cycle assessment. Our proposed systemic approach makes possible to integrate the social impacts that are highly valued by the affected stakeholders into the existing sustainability models that focus only on environmental and techno-economic aspects. We discuss the steps of the proposed systemic approach in order to identify the challenges of applying them within the biobased economy. These challenges refer mainly to the definition of the functional unit and system boundaries, the selection and the analysis of social indicators (inventory analysis), the aggregation of the inventory to impact categories, and the uncertainties associated with the social sustainability evaluation. The result of this review and the proposed systemic approach serve as a foundation for industry and policy makers to gain a better insight into the importance of social sustainability impacts assessment within the biobased economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafiaani, Parisa & Kuppens, Tom & Dael, Miet Van & Azadi, Hossein & Lebailly, Philippe & Passel, Steven Van, 2018. "Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: Towards a systemic approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P2), pages 1839-1853.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p2:p:1839-1853
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032117310584
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Enrica Imbert, 2018. "Social Life Cycle Approach as a Tool for Promoting the Market Uptake of Bio-Based Products from a Consumer Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    3. de Souza, Lorena Mendes & Mendes, Pietro A.S. & Aranda, Donato A.G., 2018. "Assessing the current scenario of the Brazilian biojet market," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 426-438.
    4. Alexandra Lavers Westin & Yuliya Kalmykova & Leonardo Rosado, 2019. "Method for Quantitative Evaluation of Sustainability Measures: A Systems Approach for Policy Prioritization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Juan Aranda & David Zambrana-Vásquez & Felipe Del-Busto & Fernando Círez, 2021. "Social Impact Analysis of Products under a Holistic Approach: A Case Study in the Meat Product Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, November.
    6. Sanz-Hernández, Alexia & Jiménez-Caballero, Paula & Zarauz, Irene, 2022. "Gender and women in scientific literature on bioeconomy: A systematic review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    7. Eleonora Cardillo & Maria Cristina Longo, 2020. "Managerial Reporting Tools for Social Sustainability: Insights from a Local Government Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-23, May.
    8. Mai-Moulin, T. & Hoefnagels, R. & Grundmann, P. & Junginger, M., 2021. "Effective sustainability criteria for bioenergy: Towards the implementation of the european renewable directive II," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    9. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A New Socio-economic Indicator to Measure the Performance of Bioeconomy Sectors in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Flávio Mattos & João Luiz Calmon, 2023. "Social Life Cycle Assessment in Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems with Contribution of Waste Pickers: Literature Review and Proposals for New Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    12. Nirvana Angela Marting Vidaurre & Ricardo Vargas-Carpintero & Moritz Wagner & Jan Lask & Iris Lewandowski, 2020. "Social Aspects in the Assessment of Biobased Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, November.
    13. Ricardo J. Bonilla-Alicea & Katherine Fu, 2019. "Systematic Map of the Social Impact Assessment Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-30, July.
    14. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Sara González García & Enrica Imbert & Lucía Lijó & María Teresa Moreira & Almona Tani & Valentina Elena Tartiu & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2019. "Transitioning towards the bio‐economy: Assessing the social dimension through a stakeholder lens," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1135-1153, September.
    15. Leonardo Marcelino & Jesper Sjöström & Carlos Alberto Marques, 2019. "Socio-Problematization of Green Chemistry: Enriching Systems Thinking and Social Sustainability by Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Manuel Raul Pelaez-Samaniego & Juan L. Espinoza & José Jara-Alvear & Pablo Arias-Reyes & Fernando Maldonado-Arias & Patricia Recalde-Galindo & Pablo Rosero & Tsai Garcia-Perez, 2020. "Potential and Impacts of Cogeneration in Tropical Climate Countries: Ecuador as a Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-26, October.
    17. Parisa Rafiaani & Zoumpolia Dikopoulou & Miet Dael & Tom Kuppens & Hossein Azadi & Philippe Lebailly & Steven Passel, 2020. "Identifying Social Indicators for Sustainability Assessment of CCU Technologies: A Modified Multi-criteria Decision Making," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 15-44, January.
    18. Ehsani, Afsaneh & Jaghdani, Tinoush Jamali & Götz, Linde, 2022. "Red Meat Consumption as a Benchmark for Food Security During Crises: Case Study of Meat Crisis and Covid-19 Pandemic in Iran," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329614, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    19. Alberto Bezama & Carlo Ingrao & Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Resources, Collaborators, and Neighbors: The Three-Pronged Challenge in the Implementation of Bioeconomy Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Rizal Taufiq Fauzi & Patrick Lavoie & Luca Sorelli & Mohammad Davoud Heidari & Ben Amor, 2019. "Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Van Schoubroeck, Sophie & Van Dael, Miet & Van Passel, Steven & Malina, Robert, 2018. "A review of sustainability indicators for biobased chemicals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 115-126.

    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:eee:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p2:p:1839-1853. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.