An analytic framework for social life cycle impact assessment—part 1: methodology

PurposeThis study aims to develop a new framework of social life cycle impact assessment (SLCIA) method based on the United Nations Environment Program/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP/SETAC) Guidelines for analyzing the social impact in Taiwan, particularly in the electronics industry.MethodsAfter reviewing the literature on social life cycle assessment (SLCA), we analyzed existing case studies and developed SLCIA methods based on the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines. We thereafter identified stakeholders, subcategories, and indicators in accordance with the current status of SLCA case studies and opinions from ten experts in the Taiwanese electronics industry. Both quantitative and semi-quantitative indicators were subsequently proposed to assess the social impact of workers in the Taiwanese electronics sector. Each indicator was given the score of 1 to 5 by classifying the social impact percentage of nine scales. To formulate an analytic framework for SLCIA, the weighting values of each subcategory and indicator were determined using the consistent fuzzy preference relations (CFPR) method.Results and discussionSeven subcategories and 19 qualitative and quantitative indicators of worker stakeholders for the electronics sector were identified based on the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines. A score of 1 to 5 is assigned to each quantitative indicator by classifying the social impact percentage of nine scales. The data obtained from companies for each quantitative indicator were subsequently transformed into social impact percentage in terms of the statistical data on social situations at the country or industry level. With regard to semi-quantitative indicators, three implementation levels of management efforts on social performance within five elements were identified. The CFPR method was then employed to determine the weights of each indicator by ten experts. Results indicated that preventing forced work practices, protecting children from having to work, and providing minimum and fair wages for workers are the three most important indicators for assessing social impact.ConclusionsA new SLCIA method that incorporates both quantitative and semi-quantitative indicators was proposed for assessing social impact in the electronics sector in Taiwan. Nine quantitative indicators can be easily organized using available social data from government statistics as performance reference points (PRPs) to determine the social impact exerted by companies. The relative weights were determined to allow for an impact assessment and thus solve the limitation of their currently assumed equal weights. The proposed framework is examined to analyze the social impact of three production sites for semiconductor packaging and manufacturing in Taiwan.

[1]  Yao-Chen Kuo,et al.  Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making approach to enhance risk assessment for metropolitan construction projects , 2013 .

[2]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Warit Jawjit,et al.  Assessing environmental performance by combining life cycle assessment, multi-criteria analysis and environmental performance indicators , 2007 .

[4]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Assessing social impacts in a life cycle perspective-Lessons learned , 2008 .

[5]  Marko Bohanec,et al.  A multi-criteria decision-making model for classifying wood products with respect to their impact on environment , 2010 .

[6]  Alessandra Zamagni,et al.  Social Life Cycle Assessment , 2015 .

[7]  Russell Smyth,et al.  Working Hours in Supply Chain Chinese and Thai Factories: Evidence from the Fair Labor Association's ‘Soccer Project’ , 2013 .

[8]  Rafaela Hillerbrand,et al.  A conceptual framework for impact assessment within SLCA , 2011 .

[9]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .

[10]  Joan Rieradevall,et al.  Application challenges for the social Life Cycle Assessment of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment , 2014 .

[11]  Tsuen-Ho Hsu,et al.  An analytical model for building brand equity in hospitality firms , 2012, Ann. Oper. Res..

[12]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Characterisation of social impacts in LCA , 2010 .

[13]  Liselotte Schebek,et al.  Social aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies—challenges for social life cycle assessment (SLCA) , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[14]  Pun Ngai,et al.  Suicide as Protest for the New Generation of Chinese Migrant Workers: Foxconn, Global Capital, and the State 若手出稼ぎ中国人の抗議自殺−−フォックスコン、グローバル資本、国家 , 2010 .

[15]  Ru-Jen Chao,et al.  Supplier selection using consistent fuzzy preference relations , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[16]  Andreas Jørgensen,et al.  Relevance and feasibility of social life cycle assessment from a company perspective , 2009 .

[17]  Margot J. Hutchins,et al.  Green Manufacturing and Sustainable Manufacturing Partnership Title Understanding Life Cycle Social Impacts in Manufacturing : A processed-based approach , 2013 .

[18]  Gregory A. Norris,et al.  Identifying Social Impacts in Product Supply Chains:Overview and Application of the Social Hotspot Database , 2012 .

[19]  Alvin B. Culaba,et al.  Evaluating Environmental Performance of Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Life‐Cycle Assessment , 2002 .

[20]  Carles M. Gasol,et al.  Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[21]  Laurence Weinberg,et al.  Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process Techniques to Streamlined Life-Cycle Analysis of Two Anodizing Processes , 1999 .

[22]  Stefan Salhofer,et al.  Development of a social impact assessment methodology for recycling systems in low-income countries , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[23]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[24]  M. Hauschild,et al.  A Framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment (10 pp) , 2006 .

[25]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  From the 40s to the 70s—the future of LCA in the ISO 14000 family , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[26]  Carmela Cucuzzella,et al.  Impact assessment in SLCA: sorting the sLCIA methods according to their outcomes , 2010 .

[27]  Andreas Jørgensen,et al.  Methodologies for social life cycle assessment , 2008 .

[28]  Walter Klöpffer,et al.  The Role of SETAC in the Development of LCA , 2006 .

[29]  Åsa Moberg,et al.  Potential hotspots identified by social LCA–Part 2: Reflections on a study of a complex product , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[30]  Chia-Wei Hsu,et al.  Applying hazardous substance management to supplier selection using analytic network process , 2009 .

[31]  Jessica E. Leahy,et al.  Social life cycle assessment of palm oil biodiesel: a case study in Jambi Province of Indonesia , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[32]  Tien-Chin Wang,et al.  A proposed model for measuring the aggregative risk degree of implementing an RFID digital campus system with the consistent fuzzy preference relations , 2013 .

[33]  Saeed Mansour,et al.  Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[34]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! , 2010 .

[35]  Rajendra Kumar Foolmaun,et al.  Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[36]  Stefan Salhofer,et al.  Application of a methodology for the social life cycle assessment of recycling systems in low income countries: three Peruvian case studies , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[37]  Gale Raj-Reichert,et al.  Safeguarding labour in distant factories: Health and safety governance in an electronics global production network , 2013 .

[38]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[39]  J. Connors Industry approach to the conflict minerals legislation , 2012, 2012 SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference.

[40]  Tien-Chin Wang,et al.  Measuring the success possibility of implementing advanced manufacturing technology by utilizing the consistent fuzzy preference relations , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[41]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands , 2011 .

[42]  Giacomo Falcone,et al.  Social life cycle assessment and participatory approaches: A methodological proposal applied to citrus farming in Southern Italy , 2015, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[43]  Pauline Feschet,et al.  2nd International Seminar in Social Life Cycle Assessment—recent developments in assessing the social impacts of product life cycles , 2011 .

[44]  Tien-Chin Wang,et al.  Applying consistent fuzzy preference relations to partnership selection , 2007 .

[45]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Potential hotspots identified by social LCA—part 1: a case study of a laptop computer , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.