Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment
Purpose In social life cycle assessment (SLCA), to measure the social performance, it is necessary to consider the subcategory indicators related to each stakeholder dimension, such as workers, local community, society, consumers and value chain participants. Current methods in SLCA scientific liter...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The international journal of life cycle assessment 2017-12, Vol.22 (12), p.2007-2017 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2017 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 2007 |
container_title | The international journal of life cycle assessment |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles Margni, Manuele Baptiste, Pierre |
description | Purpose
In social life cycle assessment (SLCA), to measure the social performance, it is necessary to consider the subcategory indicators related to each stakeholder dimension, such as workers, local community, society, consumers and value chain participants. Current methods in SLCA scientific literature consider a standard arbitrary linear score set to translate qualitative performances into a quantitative assessment for all subcategory indicators, i.e., it translate a A, B, C, D scoring into a 4, 3, 2, 1 ordinal scale. This assumption does not cover the complexity of the subcategory indicators in the social life cycle assessment phase. The aim of this paper is to set out a customized scoring and weighting approach for impact assessment in SLCA beyond the assumption of arbitrary linearity and equal weighting.
Methods
This method overcomes the linearity assumption and develops specific value functions for each subcategory indicator and an approach to establish the weighting factors between the indicators for each social dimension (workers, local community, and society). The value function and weighting factors are based on the considered opinions of SLCA experts in Québec.
Results and discussion
The results show that value functions with different shapes used to score the performance of the product within each subcategory indicator influence SLCA results and have the potential to reverse the conclusions. The customized score is more realistic than the linear score because it can better capture the complexity of the subcategory indicators based on SLCA expert judgment.
Conclusions
Our approach addresses a methodological weakness of the impact assessment phase of SLCA through a more representative performance of the potential social impacts based on the judgment of the SLCA expert rather than a simplified assumption of linearity and equal weighting among indicators. This approach may be applied to all types of product systems.
Recommendations
The value functions and weighting factors cannot be generalized for all cases and the proposed approach must be adapted for each study. We stopped at the aggregation of the subcategory indicators based on expert judgment at the stakeholder level. If a complete aggregation in a single score is required, we recommend developing a framework that accounts for the value judgment of the decision-maker rather than the SLCA expert. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1961507460</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1961507460</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-8126b6232ccd91a7aeffabdecd5fbd0429f36c540b378c07b708078f91bbe3d83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK7-AG8Bz9VJkzbtURa_YMGLnkOaJt0s_dpMi-z-ertbBS-ehoHnfYd5CLllcM8A5AMyxlMZAZMRizOIxBlZsJSJSCYQn5MF5CKLOBf5JblC3ALEDPJkQQ6rEYeu8QdbUjRd8G1FdVvSL-urzXDa-j502mwsUtcFuht1O3i3_wV1VQVb6RMaLI71gNS3FDvjdU1r7yw1e1Nb6ptem4FqRIvY2Ha4JhdO12hvfuaSfD4_faxeo_X7y9vqcR0ZnoohylicFmnMY2PKnGmprXO6KK0pE1eUIOLc8dQkAgouMwOykJCBzFzOisLyMuNLcjf3Tn_sRouD2nZjaKeTiuUpS0CKFCaKzZQJHWKwTvXBNzrsFQN1VKxmxWpSrI6KlZgy8ZzB_ijOhj_N_4a-ASb5gdE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1961507460</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles ; Margni, Manuele ; Baptiste, Pierre</creator><creatorcontrib>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles ; Margni, Manuele ; Baptiste, Pierre</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
In social life cycle assessment (SLCA), to measure the social performance, it is necessary to consider the subcategory indicators related to each stakeholder dimension, such as workers, local community, society, consumers and value chain participants. Current methods in SLCA scientific literature consider a standard arbitrary linear score set to translate qualitative performances into a quantitative assessment for all subcategory indicators, i.e., it translate a A, B, C, D scoring into a 4, 3, 2, 1 ordinal scale. This assumption does not cover the complexity of the subcategory indicators in the social life cycle assessment phase. The aim of this paper is to set out a customized scoring and weighting approach for impact assessment in SLCA beyond the assumption of arbitrary linearity and equal weighting.
Methods
This method overcomes the linearity assumption and develops specific value functions for each subcategory indicator and an approach to establish the weighting factors between the indicators for each social dimension (workers, local community, and society). The value function and weighting factors are based on the considered opinions of SLCA experts in Québec.
Results and discussion
The results show that value functions with different shapes used to score the performance of the product within each subcategory indicator influence SLCA results and have the potential to reverse the conclusions. The customized score is more realistic than the linear score because it can better capture the complexity of the subcategory indicators based on SLCA expert judgment.
Conclusions
Our approach addresses a methodological weakness of the impact assessment phase of SLCA through a more representative performance of the potential social impacts based on the judgment of the SLCA expert rather than a simplified assumption of linearity and equal weighting among indicators. This approach may be applied to all types of product systems.
Recommendations
The value functions and weighting factors cannot be generalized for all cases and the proposed approach must be adapted for each study. We stopped at the aggregation of the subcategory indicators based on expert judgment at the stakeholder level. If a complete aggregation in a single score is required, we recommend developing a framework that accounts for the value judgment of the decision-maker rather than the SLCA expert.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0948-3349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7502</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Agglomeration ; Aggregates ; Communities ; Complexity ; Customization ; Decision making ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Environment ; Environmental Chemistry ; Environmental Economics ; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology ; Indicators ; Life cycle analysis ; Life cycle assessment ; Life cycle engineering ; Life cycles ; Linearity ; Societal Lca ; Stakeholders ; Value analysis ; Weighting ; Workers</subject><ispartof>The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2017-12, Vol.22 (12), p.2007-2017</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017</rights><rights>The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment is a copyright of Springer, (2017). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-8126b6232ccd91a7aeffabdecd5fbd0429f36c540b378c07b708078f91bbe3d83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-8126b6232ccd91a7aeffabdecd5fbd0429f36c540b378c07b708078f91bbe3d83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Margni, Manuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baptiste, Pierre</creatorcontrib><title>Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment</title><title>The international journal of life cycle assessment</title><addtitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</addtitle><description>Purpose
In social life cycle assessment (SLCA), to measure the social performance, it is necessary to consider the subcategory indicators related to each stakeholder dimension, such as workers, local community, society, consumers and value chain participants. Current methods in SLCA scientific literature consider a standard arbitrary linear score set to translate qualitative performances into a quantitative assessment for all subcategory indicators, i.e., it translate a A, B, C, D scoring into a 4, 3, 2, 1 ordinal scale. This assumption does not cover the complexity of the subcategory indicators in the social life cycle assessment phase. The aim of this paper is to set out a customized scoring and weighting approach for impact assessment in SLCA beyond the assumption of arbitrary linearity and equal weighting.
Methods
This method overcomes the linearity assumption and develops specific value functions for each subcategory indicator and an approach to establish the weighting factors between the indicators for each social dimension (workers, local community, and society). The value function and weighting factors are based on the considered opinions of SLCA experts in Québec.
Results and discussion
The results show that value functions with different shapes used to score the performance of the product within each subcategory indicator influence SLCA results and have the potential to reverse the conclusions. The customized score is more realistic than the linear score because it can better capture the complexity of the subcategory indicators based on SLCA expert judgment.
Conclusions
Our approach addresses a methodological weakness of the impact assessment phase of SLCA through a more representative performance of the potential social impacts based on the judgment of the SLCA expert rather than a simplified assumption of linearity and equal weighting among indicators. This approach may be applied to all types of product systems.
Recommendations
The value functions and weighting factors cannot be generalized for all cases and the proposed approach must be adapted for each study. We stopped at the aggregation of the subcategory indicators based on expert judgment at the stakeholder level. If a complete aggregation in a single score is required, we recommend developing a framework that accounts for the value judgment of the decision-maker rather than the SLCA expert.</description><subject>Agglomeration</subject><subject>Aggregates</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>Complexity</subject><subject>Customization</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Chemistry</subject><subject>Environmental Economics</subject><subject>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Life cycle analysis</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>Life cycle engineering</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Linearity</subject><subject>Societal Lca</subject><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>Value analysis</subject><subject>Weighting</subject><subject>Workers</subject><issn>0948-3349</issn><issn>1614-7502</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK7-AG8Bz9VJkzbtURa_YMGLnkOaJt0s_dpMi-z-ertbBS-ehoHnfYd5CLllcM8A5AMyxlMZAZMRizOIxBlZsJSJSCYQn5MF5CKLOBf5JblC3ALEDPJkQQ6rEYeu8QdbUjRd8G1FdVvSL-urzXDa-j502mwsUtcFuht1O3i3_wV1VQVb6RMaLI71gNS3FDvjdU1r7yw1e1Nb6ptem4FqRIvY2Ha4JhdO12hvfuaSfD4_faxeo_X7y9vqcR0ZnoohylicFmnMY2PKnGmprXO6KK0pE1eUIOLc8dQkAgouMwOykJCBzFzOisLyMuNLcjf3Tn_sRouD2nZjaKeTiuUpS0CKFCaKzZQJHWKwTvXBNzrsFQN1VKxmxWpSrI6KlZgy8ZzB_ijOhj_N_4a-ASb5gdE</recordid><startdate>20171201</startdate><enddate>20171201</enddate><creator>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles</creator><creator>Margni, Manuele</creator><creator>Baptiste, Pierre</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20171201</creationdate><title>Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment</title><author>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles ; Margni, Manuele ; Baptiste, Pierre</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-8126b6232ccd91a7aeffabdecd5fbd0429f36c540b378c07b708078f91bbe3d83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Agglomeration</topic><topic>Aggregates</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>Complexity</topic><topic>Customization</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Chemistry</topic><topic>Environmental Economics</topic><topic>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Life cycle analysis</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>Life cycle engineering</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Linearity</topic><topic>Societal Lca</topic><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>Value analysis</topic><topic>Weighting</topic><topic>Workers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Margni, Manuele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baptiste, Pierre</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles</au><au>Margni, Manuele</au><au>Baptiste, Pierre</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle><stitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</stitle><date>2017-12-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2007</spage><epage>2017</epage><pages>2007-2017</pages><issn>0948-3349</issn><eissn>1614-7502</eissn><abstract>Purpose
In social life cycle assessment (SLCA), to measure the social performance, it is necessary to consider the subcategory indicators related to each stakeholder dimension, such as workers, local community, society, consumers and value chain participants. Current methods in SLCA scientific literature consider a standard arbitrary linear score set to translate qualitative performances into a quantitative assessment for all subcategory indicators, i.e., it translate a A, B, C, D scoring into a 4, 3, 2, 1 ordinal scale. This assumption does not cover the complexity of the subcategory indicators in the social life cycle assessment phase. The aim of this paper is to set out a customized scoring and weighting approach for impact assessment in SLCA beyond the assumption of arbitrary linearity and equal weighting.
Methods
This method overcomes the linearity assumption and develops specific value functions for each subcategory indicator and an approach to establish the weighting factors between the indicators for each social dimension (workers, local community, and society). The value function and weighting factors are based on the considered opinions of SLCA experts in Québec.
Results and discussion
The results show that value functions with different shapes used to score the performance of the product within each subcategory indicator influence SLCA results and have the potential to reverse the conclusions. The customized score is more realistic than the linear score because it can better capture the complexity of the subcategory indicators based on SLCA expert judgment.
Conclusions
Our approach addresses a methodological weakness of the impact assessment phase of SLCA through a more representative performance of the potential social impacts based on the judgment of the SLCA expert rather than a simplified assumption of linearity and equal weighting among indicators. This approach may be applied to all types of product systems.
Recommendations
The value functions and weighting factors cannot be generalized for all cases and the proposed approach must be adapted for each study. We stopped at the aggregation of the subcategory indicators based on expert judgment at the stakeholder level. If a complete aggregation in a single score is required, we recommend developing a framework that accounts for the value judgment of the decision-maker rather than the SLCA expert.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0948-3349 |
ispartof | The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2017-12, Vol.22 (12), p.2007-2017 |
issn | 0948-3349 1614-7502 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1961507460 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Agglomeration Aggregates Communities Complexity Customization Decision making Earth and Environmental Science Environment Environmental Chemistry Environmental Economics Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology Indicators Life cycle analysis Life cycle assessment Life cycle engineering Life cycles Linearity Societal Lca Stakeholders Value analysis Weighting Workers |
title | Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T01%3A34%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Customized%20scoring%20and%20weighting%20approaches%20for%20quantifying%20and%20aggregating%20results%20in%20social%20life%20cycle%20impact%20assessment&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20life%20cycle%20assessment&rft.au=do%20Carmo,%20Breno%20Barros%20Telles&rft.date=2017-12-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2007&rft.epage=2017&rft.pages=2007-2017&rft.issn=0948-3349&rft.eissn=1614-7502&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1961507460%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1961507460&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |