Lingering Difficulties in the Search for Standardization: A Critical Review of Social Life Cycle Assessment Methods Since 2020
Author(s)
Jermak, Megan Elise
Advisor(s)
Editor(s)
Collections
Supplementary to:
Permanent Link
Abstract
Over the past two decades, sustainability analysis has evolved into a multi-faceted framework for holistic Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). The newest, most unstandardized aspect of sustainability analysis, Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) represents a significant challenge, threatening the inclusion of social components in sustainability research and the overall efficacy of LCSA. Lacking methodological consensus, SLCA has evolved through numerous procedural iterations, implemented with varying levels of meticulousness, producing study results that reflect this divergence. Though the landmark 2020 UNEP Guidelines for SLCA coalesce several years of literature to provide a foundation for coherence, several persistent challenges remain.
In support of both ongoing methodological advancement and the consolidation of SLCA practices, this study urges practitioners to refine existing frameworks, tools, and study components to produce more precise and comparable case studies. By constraining framework-building efforts, it postulates that recurring shortcomings in SLCA can be more effectively addressed. Accordingly, this review aggregates emerging approaches and evaluates the current state of SLCA through an analysis of 30 case studies published since the release of the 2020 UNEP Guidelines, identifying five critical gaps: (1) transparency for rigor and replicability, (2) granular data and constrained geospatial bounds for contextualized analysis, (3) data availability, (4) effective application of qualitative methods, and (5) translation of qualitative data into quantitative analysis.
To address these gaps, several specifications are laid out, including improvements to study documentation, multi-reasoned impact allocation, micro- to regional-scale geographic bounds, targeted secondary data sourcing, such as publicly available records and geospatial analysis tools, and the value of corporate partnerships in SLCA. Additionally, complex constructs within the field surrounding qualitative data collection and processing are discussed at length. Ultimately, it is advised that social science expertise see greater integration to improve the operationalization of indispensable qualitative reasoning in SLCA, enabling more robust capture of complex social dimensions.
Moving forward, efforts to codify SLCA must remain flexible, avoiding reductive elements that obscure the complexity of social phenomena, impede cross-study comparability, and fail to modernize alongside rapidly evolving societal and market conditions. This need is especially urgent as pressures tied to the accelerating green transition, geopolitical tensions, and supply chain disruptions introduce novel social risks and uncertainty. Ushering in a new era of industrialization, these forces catalyze deployment of automation, artificial intelligence, and process optimization technologies, carrying with them currently unknown social implications that necessitate subsequent social assessment. Positioned at the intersection of industrial innovation and social responsibility, SLCA, when deployed scrupulously, holds the distinct capacity to drive a green transition that is not only sustainable but just.
Sponsor
Date
Extent
Resource Type
Text
Resource Subtype
Undergraduate Research Option Thesis