Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This study aims to establish a consensus-based framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment (S-LCIA) or Social Life Cycle Performance Assessment(S-LCPA) tailored for Zero-tailpipe Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) by identifying and classifying social impact subcategories and indicators as mandatory and optional along with providing necessary Interpretation parameters. This framework is primarily focused on improving consistency and transparency in S-LCIA or S-LCPA and interpretation application across ZEVs which is also a goal of TranSensus LCA (TSLCA) project.</p> Methods <p>The categorization of social impact subcategories as mandatory and optional is done through a four-step filtration method, involving: (1) a materiality assessment based on policy relevance and TSLCA stakeholder input, (2) alignment with industry practices such as Drive Sustainability’s Sustainability Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ), (3) matching with subcategories from UNEP guidelines, and (4) indicator availability in social databases such as PSILCA and SHDB. Furthermore, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is used to select relevant indicators based on feasibility, achievability, interpretability, and relevance. This filtration method is followed by a voting session in which experts from S-LCA and ZEVs participated to select the impact categories and indicators along with interpretation parameters.</p> Results and discussion <p>The process resulted in identifying a set of 9 mandatory and 14 optional social impact subcategories. The peer voting resulted in the selection of interpretation parameters that is found necessary based on specific factors, including system boundaries, data inputs, and stakeholder perspectives within the TranSensus project.</p> Conclusions and recommendations <p>The proposed framework ensures harmonization based on a consensus from different stakeholders in the application of impact assessment and interpretation guaranteeing transparency and replicability in S-LCA for ZEVs and is transferable to other sectors. It provides practitioners with a clear foundation for socially responsible impact assessments, particularly in complex product systems like zero-emission vehicles.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Harmonizing social life cycle impact assessment and interpretation: a consensus framework for zero-tailpipe emission vehicles

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月21日

查看全文
  • Davis Jose,
  • Erasmo Cadena Martinez,
  • Katharina Gompf,
  • Nilay Elginoz,
  • Anne Grau,
  • Diana Bartaune,
  • Lasse Schmidt,
  • Elise Monnier,
  • Gladys Moreac-Njeim,
  • Takunda-Yeukai Chitaka,
  • Rose Mankaa,
  • Marzia Traverso

摘要

Purpose

This study aims to establish a consensus-based framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment (S-LCIA) or Social Life Cycle Performance Assessment(S-LCPA) tailored for Zero-tailpipe Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) by identifying and classifying social impact subcategories and indicators as mandatory and optional along with providing necessary Interpretation parameters. This framework is primarily focused on improving consistency and transparency in S-LCIA or S-LCPA and interpretation application across ZEVs which is also a goal of TranSensus LCA (TSLCA) project.

Methods

The categorization of social impact subcategories as mandatory and optional is done through a four-step filtration method, involving: (1) a materiality assessment based on policy relevance and TSLCA stakeholder input, (2) alignment with industry practices such as Drive Sustainability’s Sustainability Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ), (3) matching with subcategories from UNEP guidelines, and (4) indicator availability in social databases such as PSILCA and SHDB. Furthermore, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is used to select relevant indicators based on feasibility, achievability, interpretability, and relevance. This filtration method is followed by a voting session in which experts from S-LCA and ZEVs participated to select the impact categories and indicators along with interpretation parameters.

Results and discussion

The process resulted in identifying a set of 9 mandatory and 14 optional social impact subcategories. The peer voting resulted in the selection of interpretation parameters that is found necessary based on specific factors, including system boundaries, data inputs, and stakeholder perspectives within the TranSensus project.

Conclusions and recommendations

The proposed framework ensures harmonization based on a consensus from different stakeholders in the application of impact assessment and interpretation guaranteeing transparency and replicability in S-LCA for ZEVs and is transferable to other sectors. It provides practitioners with a clear foundation for socially responsible impact assessments, particularly in complex product systems like zero-emission vehicles.