Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeAssessment of the social aspects of sustainability of products is a topic of significant interest to companies, and several methodologies have been proposed in the recent years. The significant environmental health and safety concerns about nano-enabled products calls for the early establishment of a clear benefit-risk framework in order to decide which novel products should be developed further. This paper proposes a method to assess the social impacts of nano-enabled products through the life cycle that is (a) quantitative, (b) integrates performance and attitudinal dimensions of social impacts and (c) considers the overall and stakeholder balance of benefits and costs. Social life cycle assessment (s-LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are integrated to address this need, and the method is illustrated on a case study of a nano-enabled product.MethodsThe s-LCA framework comprises 15 indicators to characterize the social context of the product manufacture placed within the classification structure of benefit/cost and worker/community. The methodology includes four steps: (a) normalization of company level data on the social indicator to country level data for the year, (b) nested weighting at stakeholder and indicator level and its integration with normalized scores to create social indicator scores, (c) aggregation of social indicator scores into benefit score, cost score and net benefit scores as per the s-LCA framework and (d) classification of social indicator scores and aggregated scores as low/medium/high based on benchmarks created using employment and value-added proxies.Results and discussionA prospective production scenario involving novel product, a nano-copper oxide (n-CuO)-based paint with biocidal functionality, is assessed with respect to its social impacts. The method was applied to 12 indicators at the company level. Classification of social indicator scores and aggregated scores showed that the n-CuO paint has high net benefits.ConclusionsThe framework and method offer a flexible structure that can be revised and extended as more knowledge and data on social impacts of nano-enabled products becomes available. The proposed method is being implemented in the social impact assessment sub-module of the SUN Decision Support (SUNDS) software system. Companies seeking to improve the social footprint of their products can also use the proposed method to consider relevant social impacts to achieve this goal.

PurposeThe interpretation of differences between alternative systems in life cycle assessment (LCA) can be problematic when different impact categories point to different directions. Using shadow prices is one way to overcome this problem, as the results are expressed in a monetary value, making comparison easy for decision makers. However, for the International Reference Life Cycle Data System midpoint impact categories ‘water depletion’ and ‘land use’, the shadow prices were missing. In the current paper, these were derived from literature sources.MethodsAbatement-based shadow prices (Pa) were established from the costs of the abatement measures minus the additional benefits. The damage-based shadow price (Pd) was based on the economic damage per unit of impact. Damage to ecosystems or human health was not included, as monetary values were lacking. As a consequence, Pd is an underestimation. Pa prices for land use, based on soil organic carbon (SOC) depletion, were derived from the cost of abatement measures like adding organic matter to agricultural soil or changing tillage. The response of crop yield to SOC, for several countries and crops, was used for the Pd calculation. For water depletion, Pa was based on water saving measures and desalination techniques, and Pd was based on economic losses due to water unavailability.Results and discussionThe following shadow prices were found for SOC depletion: Pa of 0.10 € kg−1 SOC and Pd of 0.0286 € kg−1 SOC. For water depletion, Pa of 15.8 € m−3 eq. was based on replacing turf with less-water-consuming planting. The value of water for irrigation was the base for the Pd 5.17 € m−3 eq. Freshwater and SOC Pa values unexpectedly exceeded the Pd values. This originated partly from the methods used. Pd was established by averaging marginal costs, while Pa used the most expensive measure, and this may lead to Pa exceeding Pd. Furthermore, the damage-based Pd for SOC and water depletion was mainly based on crop yield, and other types of ecological or societal damage will exist. Including these damages that lacked reliable data will increase Pd.ConclusionsThe shadow prices presented here are the first science-based global estimates. For LCA, the Pd values should preferably be used. The values are regarded as conservative estimates since only economic damage was included as other damages like ecological damage could not be monetised. The estimated shadow prices were derived for impacts where economic data is relatively scarce, and this limited the quality of the estimates. More extensive studies are needed to further improve the quality of the estimated prices.

The significant uncertainties associated with the (eco)toxicological risks of engineered nanomaterials pose challenges to the development of nano-enabled products toward greatest possible societal benefit. This paper argues for the use of risk governance approaches to manage nanotechnology risks and sustainability, and considers the links between these concepts. Further, seven risk assessment and management criteria relevant to risk governance are defined: (a) life cycle thinking, (b) triple bottom line, (c) inclusion of stakeholders, (d) risk management, (e) benefit–risk assessment, (f) consideration of uncertainty, and (g) adaptive response. These criteria are used to compare five well-developed nanotechnology frameworks: International Risk Governance Council framework, Comprehensive Environmental Assessment, Streaming Life Cycle Risk Assessment, Certifiable Nanospecific Risk Management and Monitoring System and LICARA NanoSCAN. A Sustainable Nanotechnology Decision Support System (SUNDS) is proposed to better address current nanotechnology risk assessment and management needs, and makes. Stakeholder needs were solicited for further SUNDS enhancement through a stakeholder workshop that included representatives from regulatory, industry and insurance sectors. Workshop participants expressed the need for the wider adoption of sustainability assessment methods and tools for designing greener nanomaterials.

This paper summarizes the 76th LCA Discussion Forum end its main findings. Main issues when addressing emerging technologies identified were: the lack of primary data, the need for (shared) future background scenarios and (guidlines for) a common methodology. The following recommendations have been derived by the organizers: 1) Specific foreground inventories are always tailor-made, but consistency can be improved through lists of mandatory considerations. 2) Continue sharing (future) technology data and proxy processes, that can be readily replicated to new studies and assist in developing inventories. 3) Streamline and unify the process of including scenarios for background systems. New approaches may provide first important solutions to efficiently include consistent future scenarios in prospective LCA.