IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4221-d533736.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Regionalized Socioeconomic Considerations onto Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating Bioeconomy Value Chains: A Case Study on Hybrid Wood–Concrete Ceiling Elements

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Bezama

    (Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Department of Bioenergy, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Jakob Hildebrandt

    (Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Department of Bioenergy, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
    Institute for Process Development, Peat and Natural Materials Research, Zittau/Görlitz University of Applied Sciences, 02763 Zittau, Germany)

  • Daniela Thrän

    (Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Department of Bioenergy, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
    Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gGmbH–DBFZ, Torgauerstr. 116, 04347 Leipzig, Germany)

Abstract

As bioeconomy strategies strive to integrate industrial sectors for achieving innovative materials alternative to the ones produced from non-renewable resources, the development of monitoring systems and tools to assess the implementation of such value chains is still a work in progress. This work intended to integrate the traditional life cycle assessment with a regionalized social life cycle assessment method to evaluate alternative production scenarios of a hybrid construction system with a wood-based lightweight concrete panel as a core component currently in its final stages of technical development. The life cycle impact assessment was carried out by comparing the relative advantages of two product development scenarios against the reference system’s results. The social life cycle assessment was carried out using the model “REgional SPecific cONtextualised Social life cycle Assessment” (RESPONSA), which was developed for assessing wood-based value chains under a regional scope. The results showed that both alternative scenarios present large advantages when compared to the reference system. Moreover, the implementation of the production value chain was found to imply positive socioeconomic advantages in the region, in particular, due to the quality of the jobs found in the organizations associated with the production system.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Bezama & Jakob Hildebrandt & Daniela Thrän, 2021. "Integrating Regionalized Socioeconomic Considerations onto Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating Bioeconomy Value Chains: A Case Study on Hybrid Wood–Concrete Ceiling Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4221-:d:533736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4221/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4221/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhongjia Chen & Hongmei Gu & Richard D. Bergman & Shaobo Liang, 2020. "Comparative Life-Cycle Assessment of a High-Rise Mass Timber Building with an Equivalent Reinforced Concrete Alternative Using the Athena Impact Estimator for Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Ida Karlsson & Johan Rootzén & Alla Toktarova & Mikael Odenberger & Filip Johnsson & Lisa Göransson, 2020. "Roadmap for Decarbonization of the Building and Construction Industry—A Supply Chain Analysis Including Primary Production of Steel and Cement," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-40, August.
    3. Martina Caruso & Rui Pinho & Federica Bianchi & Francesco Cavalieri & Maria Teresa Lemmo, 2020. "A Life Cycle Framework for the Identification of Optimal Building Renovation Strategies Considering Economic and Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Jakob Hildebrandt & Sinéad O'Keeffe & Alberto Bezama & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Revealing the Environmental Advantages of Industrial Symbiosis in Wood‐Based Bioeconomy Networks: An Assessment From a Life Cycle Perspective," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(4), pages 808-822, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Jakob Hildebrandt & Alberto Bezama & Daniela Thrän, 2020. "Insights from the Sustainability Monitoring Tool SUMINISTRO Applied to a Case Study System of Prospective Wood-Based Industry Networks in Central Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-30, May.
    7. Marina Nikolić Topalović & Milenko Stanković & Goran Ćirović & Dragan Pamučar, 2018. "Comparison of the Applied Measures on the Simulated Scenarios for the Sustainable Building Construction through Carbon Footprint Emissions—Case Study of Building Construction in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    9. Huang, Lizhen & Krigsvoll, Guri & Johansen, Fred & Liu, Yongping & Zhang, Xiaoling, 2018. "Carbon emission of global construction sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1906-1916.
    10. Zbigniew Giergiczny & Anna Król & Michał Tałaj & Karol Wandoch, 2020. "Performance of Concrete with Low CO 2 Emission," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    11. Lena Jarosch & Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Matthias Finkbeiner & Daniela Thrän, 2020. "A Regional Socio-Economic Life Cycle Assessment of a Bioeconomy Value Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Pilar Mercader-Moyano & Paula M. Esquivias, 2020. "Decarbonization and Circular Economy in the Sustainable Development and Renovation of Buildings and Neighbourhoods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-6, September.
    13. 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.
    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. Di Letizia, Gerardo & De Lucia, Caterina & Pazienza, Pasquale & Cappelletti, Giulio Mario, 2023. "Forest bioeconomy at regional scale: A systematic literature review and future policy perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Rebolledo-Leiva, Ricardo & Moreira, María Teresa & González-García, Sara, 2023. "Progress of social assessment in the framework of bioeconomy under a life cycle perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    3. Alberto Bezama & Jakob Hildebrandt & Daniela Thrän, 2022. "Analyzing the Potential Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts of Regional Energy Integration Scenarios of a Bio-Based Industrial Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Prisca Ayassamy & Robert Pellerin, 2023. "Social Life-Cycle Assessment in the Construction Industry: A Review of Characteristics, Limitations, and Challenges of S-LCA through Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-19, 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. Di Letizia, Gerardo & De Lucia, Caterina & Pazienza, Pasquale & Cappelletti, Giulio Mario, 2023. "Forest bioeconomy at regional scale: A systematic literature review and future policy perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Escobar, Neus & Laibach, Natalie, 2021. "Sustainability check for bio-based technologies: A review of process-based and life cycle approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Henriette Fischer & Martin Aichholzer & Azra Korjenic, 2023. "Ecological Potential of Building Components in Multi-Storey Residential Construction: A Comparative Case Study between an Existing Concrete and a Timber Building in Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Idiano D’Adamo & Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Enrica Imbert & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2022. "Exploring regional transitions to the bioeconomy using a socio-economic indicator: the case of Italy," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 989-1021, October.
    6. Alberto Bezama & Nora Mittelstädt & Daniela Thrän & Fritz Balkau, 2021. "Trends and Challenges in Regional Life Cycle Management: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Albert, Osei-Owusu Kwame & Marianne, Thomsen & Jonathan, Lindahl & Nino, Javakhishvili Larsen & Dario, Caro, 2020. "Tracking the carbon emissions of Denmark's five regions from a producer and consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    8. Anna Życzyńska & Dariusz Majerek & Zbigniew Suchorab & Agnieszka Żelazna & Václav Kočí & Robert Černý, 2021. "Improving the Energy Performance of Public Buildings Equipped with Individual Gas Boilers Due to Thermal Retrofitting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    9. Jianing Wei & Jixiao Cui & Yinan Xu & Jinna Li & Xinyu Lei & Wangsheng Gao & Yuanquan Chen, 2022. "Social Life Cycle Assessment of Major Staple Grain Crops in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, April.
    10. Khozema Ahmed Ali & Mardiana Idayu Ahmad & Yusri Yusup, 2020. "Issues, Impacts, and Mitigations of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-11, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Edgardo Sica, 2019. "Assessing the Opportunities and Challenges of Green Finance in Italy: An Analysis of the Biomass Production Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    13. Mahboobeh Hemmati & Tahar Messadi & Hongmei Gu, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Cross-Laminated Timber Transportation from Three Origin Points," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Louisa Pollok & Sebastian Spierling & Hans-Josef Endres & Ulrike Grote, 2021. "Social Life Cycle Assessments: A Review on Past Development, Advances and Methodological Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
    15. Zhang, Yanfang & Gao, Qi & Wei, Jinpeng & Shi, Xunpeng & Zhou, Dequn, 2023. "Can China's energy-consumption permit trading scheme achieve the “Porter” effect? Evidence from an estimated DSGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    16. Kailun Feng & Weizhuo Lu & Thomas Olofsson & Shiwei Chen & Hui Yan & Yaowu Wang, 2018. "A Predictive Environmental Assessment Method for Construction Operations: Application to a Northeast China Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-28, October.
    17. Ayrapetyan, David & Hermans, Frans, 2020. "Introducing a multiscalar framework for biocluster research: A meta-analysis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(9).
    18. Liu, Lirong & Huang, Guohe & Baetz, Brian & Huang, Charley Z. & Zhang, Kaiqiang, 2019. "Integrated GHG emissions and emission relationships analysis through a disaggregated ecologically-extended input-output model; A case study for Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 97-109.
    19. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura À. & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2022. "Factors and actions for the sustainability of the residential sector. The nexus of energy, materials, space, and time use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    20. 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.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4221-:d:533736. 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.