Designing the social life cycle of products from the systematic competitive model

PurposeChanges affecting how product chains function can have a profound impact on human communities. Certain social life cycle assessment (LCA) methods aim to anticipate the important social effects of changes taking place in the functioning of a product’s life cycle. They therefore must identify the groups that are most affected. This paper aims to help identify the groups affected by competition beyond those usually highlighted. The objective is to propose rules to identify the organisations involved in the social life cycle of a product within a context of competition. Once these organisations are identified, it is possible to deduce which groups are affected.MethodsWe analyse how published social LCA studies describe the product system and determine its boundaries. We deduce the necessity of constructing (1) a new model (the systematic competitive model) when there is competition and (2) a cut-off criterion (significant dependency). These allow us to describe the system and determine its boundaries, and thus to draw the social life cycle, in a context of competition. We conducted a simple case study (calculation of the number of rural jobs created/destroyed by a new agricultural filière) in which two methods of representing a product system are compared. The first method is the value chain (which does not take into account the situation prior to the establishment of the planned new filière), the second method introduces the systematic competitive model, which includes the short term effects of competition with the planned activities.ResultsThe case study shows that it is possible to define the social life cycle by proceeding in this way. The two ways of representing the same real system produce very different results. The list of organisations affected and the nature of the impact to be assessed determine which actors are affected.ConclusionsThe use of the systematic competitive model is indispensable when competition is intense. The organisations to be included in the boundaries of the social LCA (SLCA) study are those whose behaviour with social effects is significantly affected by the changes. Furthermore, there are numerous other phenomena linked to products that provoke important social impacts, but we do not yet know how to model them. They call for further research. Environmental LCA (ELCA) and SLCA studies of the same real system will be coherent, even if the descriptions of the system and the rules of fixing the boundaries differ, provided they reflect the same scenario.

[1]  John J. Reap,et al.  A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment , 2008 .

[2]  A. Flysjö,et al.  Socioeconomic indicators as a complement to life cycle assessment—an application to salmon production systems , 2008 .

[3]  T. Ekvall A market-based approach to allocation at open-loop recycling , 2000 .

[4]  V. Šošić Poverty and labor market policies in Croatia , 2005 .

[5]  M. Porter Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[6]  Hans-Jürgen Dr. Klüppel,et al.  The Revision of ISO Standards 14040-3 - ISO 14040: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework - ISO 14044: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines , 2005 .

[7]  Matthias Finkbeiner,et al.  Defining the baseline in social life cycle assessment , 2010 .

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

[9]  G. Gereffi,et al.  The governance of global value chains , 2005 .

[10]  Thomas Swarr,et al.  Societal life cycle assessment—could you repeat the question? , 2009 .

[11]  Frank Vanclay,et al.  Conceptualizing Social Change Processes and Social Impacts , 2003 .

[12]  Bill Pritchard,et al.  Fairness and Ethicality in Their Place: The Regional Dynamics of Fair Trade and Ethical Sourcing Agendas in the Plantation Districts of South India , 2010 .

[13]  Bo Pedersen Weidema,et al.  ISO 14044 also Applies to Social LCA , 2005 .

[14]  David Hunkeler,et al.  The Future of Life Cycle Assessment , 2005 .

[15]  Margot J. Hutchins,et al.  An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions , 2008 .

[16]  G. Kralik,et al.  Harmonization of welfare standards for the protection of pigs with the EU rules: the case of Croatia , 2009 .

[17]  Adam Brandenburger,et al.  Co-opetition : 1. a revolutionary mindset that combines competition and cooperation in the marketplace : 2. the game theory strategy that's changing the game of business , 1997 .

[18]  Bo Pedersen Weidema,et al.  Marginal production technologies for life cycle inventories , 1999 .

[19]  Walter Klöpffer,et al.  Life-Cycle based methods for sustainable product development , 2003 .

[20]  J. M. Earles,et al.  Consequential life cycle assessment: a review , 2011 .

[21]  B. Weidema Market aspects in product life cycle inventory methodology , 1993 .

[22]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Why and how should we assess occupational health impacts in integrated product policy? , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  William E. Rothschild How to Gain (And Maintain) the Competitive Advantage in Business , 1984 .

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

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

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

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

[28]  Bo Pedersen Weidema,et al.  Avoiding or Ignoring Uncertainty , 2009 .

[29]  G. Norris,et al.  Life Cycle Attribute Assessment , 2009 .

[30]  Roland Clift,et al.  Social and environmental life cycle assessment (SELCA) , 1996 .

[31]  G. Norris Social Impacts in Product Life Cycles - Towards Life Cycle Attribute Assessment , 2006 .

[32]  David Hunkeler,et al.  Societal LCA Methodology and Case Study (12 pp) , 2006 .