Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Life Cycle Assessment in a Managerial Perspective: An Integrative Approach for Business Strategy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Life Cycle Assessment

  • 1728 Accesses

Abstract

The attention regarding social, economic and environmental impacts and the increase in the attention on sustainability by the customers and the other general stakeholders has led businesses to adopt several tools for sustainable development patterns and, in particular, for social development patterns. The development of social impacts’ evaluation is one of the cornerstones of products and services sustainability. Concerning that, Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA hereafter) focuses on studying the social impacts of life cycles, but as this is a relatively new analytical approach, no globally shared application tools have yet been developed. The purpose of this study is to analyze the tools of stakeholder management and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to create a pathway of integration between the tools of social responsibility, SLCA and Stakeholder Management Approach. The research has characterized two main phases; the first is devoted to the critical analysis of the literature on the subject, and specifically on SLCA methodology. The objectives to be achieved are to carry out a comprehensive review of the existing literature on the subject for developing a conceptual model for the interpretation of the behaviour observed. In conclusion, we can say that the innovative model is properly inherent in the various interpretations of the stakeholders and the assessment of social impacts of product or services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arcese, G., Lucchetti, M. C., & Merli, R. (2013). Social life cycle assessment as a management tool: Methodology for application in tourism. Sustainability, 5, 3275–3287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arcese, G., & Martucci, O. 2010. Gestione del Rischio e Sostenibilità globale: Un tentativo di integrazione tra strumenti di Risk Management e Social Life Cycle Assessment. In Valutazioni di sostenibilità di tecnologie: quale ruolo per la LCA?”. Ecomondo, Rimini, 03-06 Novembre, Maggioli Editore. ISBN 978-88-3875-935-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arcese, G. (2013). Il Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment per la valutazione della sostenibilità aziendale. PhD Thesis. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10805/2044.

  • Asif, M., Searcy, C., Zutshi, A., et al. (2013). An integrated management systems approach to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56, 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelsson, R., Angelstam, P., Degerman, E., et al. (2013). Social and cultural sustainability: Criteria, indicators, verifier variables for measurement and maps for visualization to support planning. Ambio, 42(2), 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît, C., Norris, G. A., Valdivia, S., et al. (2010). The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: Just in time! International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(2), 156–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billgren, C., & Holmén, H. (2008). Approaching reality: Comparing stakeholder analysis and cultural theory in the context of natural resource management. Land Use Policy, 25(4), 550–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. E. (2002). A Kantian approach to business ethics. In T. Donaldson, P. H. Werhane, & M. Cording (Eds.), Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach (7th ed., pp. 61–71). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bras-Klapwijk, R. M. (1998). Are life cycle assessments a threat to sound public policy making? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 3(6), 333–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H. S., de Jong, M., & Lessidrenska, T. (2009). The rise of the global reporting initiative: A case of institutional entrepreneurship. Environmental Pollution, 18(2), 182–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunklaus, B., Thormark, C., & Baumann, H. (2010). Illustrating limitations of energy studies of buildings with LCA and actor analysis. Building Research and Information, 38(3), 265–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, J., Gochfeld, M., Pletnikoff, K., et al. (2008). Ecocultural attributes: Evaluating ecological degradation in terms of ecological goods and services versus subsistence and tribal values. Risk Analysis, 28(5), 1261–1272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burritt, R., Hahn, T., & Schaltegger, S. (2002). Towards a comprehensive framework for environmental management accounting. Links between business actors and environmental management accounting tools. Australian Accounting Review, 12(2), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contrafatto, M. (2009). Il Social environmental reporting e le sue motivazioni: Teoria, analisi empirica e prospettive. Milano: Giuffré Editore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delams, M., & Toeffel, M. W. (2004). Stakeholder and environmental management practices: An institutional framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, 13, 209–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Schryver, A. M., Brakkee, K. W., Goedkoop, M. J., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2009). Characterization factors for global warming in life cycle assessment based on damages to humans and ecosystems. Environmental Science and Technology, 43(6), 1689–1695.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer, L., Hauschild, M., & Schierbeck, J. (2006). A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11(2), 88–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld, J. R. (1997). The importance of LCAs–warts and all. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 1(2), 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fava, J. A., & Hall, J. (2004). Why take a life cycle approach. Life cycle initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnveden, G. (1999). A critical review of operational valuation/weighting methods for life cycle assessment. Stockholm: Stockholm University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnveden, G., Nilsson, M., Johansson, J., et al. (2003). Strategic environmental assessment methodologies–applications within the energy sector. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 91–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geibler, J., Liedtke, C., Wallbaum, H., et al. (2010). Accounting for the social dimension of sustainability: Experiences from the biotechnology industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 334–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gluch, P., & Baumann, H. (2004). The life cycle costing (LCC) approach: A conceptual discussion of its usefulness for environmental decision-making. Building and Environment, 39(5), 571–580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop, M., & Spriensma, R. (1999). The Eco-indicator’99: A damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessment: Methodology report. Amersfoort, the Netherlands: Pré Consulting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop, M., Heijungs, R., & Huijbregts, M., et al. (2013). ReCiPe 2008: A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. Retrieved October, 9, 2013, from http://www.lcia-recipe.net/.

  • Gould, H. (2001). Culture and social capital. In F. Matarosso (Ed.), Recognising culture: A series of briefing papers on culture and development (pp. 69–75). London: Comedia, the Department of Canadian Heritage and UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granato, J., Inglehart, R., & Leblang, D. (1996). The effect of cultural values on economic development: Theory, hypotheses, and some empirical tests. American Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 607–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business and Society, 39(3), 254–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenfeldt, D. (2003). The future of indigenous values: Cultural relativism in the face of economic development. Futures, 35(9), 917–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guatri, L. (1991). La teoria di creazione del valore: Una via europea. Milan: Egea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinée, J. B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., et al. (2011). Life cycle assessment: Past, present, and future. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(1), 90–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, D. J., & Patterson, M. G. (2012). Cross-cultural environmental research in New Zealand: Insights for ecological economics research practice. Ecological Economics, 73, 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S. G., & Harper, B. L. (1997). A native American exposure scenario. Risk Analysis, 17(6), 789–795.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschild, M. Z. (2005). Assessing environmental impacts in a life-cycle perspective. Environmental Science and Technology, 39(4), 81A–88A.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hauschild, M. Z., Dreyer, L., & Jørgensen, A. (2008). Assessing social impacts in a life cycle perspective—lessons learned. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 57(1), 21–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, J. (2001). The Fourth pillar of sustainability: Culture’s essential role in public panning. Victoria. Melbourne: Common Ground Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Head, L., Trigger, D., & Mulcock, J. (2005). Culture as concept and influence in environmental research and management. Conservation and Society, 3(2), 251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., & Guinée, J. B. (2010). Life cycle assessment and sustainability analysis of products, materials and technologies: Toward a scientific framework for sustainability life cycle analysis. Polymer Degradation and Stability, 95(3), 422–428.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hein, L., Van Koppen, K., De Groot, R. S., et al. (2006). Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 57(2), 209–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen, E. (1999). Every product casts a shadow: But can we see it, and can we act on it? Environmental Science & Policy, 2, 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen, E. (2000). Managers’ interpretations of LCA: Enlightenment and responsibility or confusion and denial? Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(4), 239–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen, E. (2001). Institutionalization of life-cycle thinking in the everyday discourse of market actors. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 4(4), 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen, E. (2002). The institutional logic of life cycle thinking. Journal of Cleaner Production, 10, 427–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellweg, S., Hofstetter, T., & Hungerbuhler, K. (2003). Discounting and the environment: Should current impacts be weighted differently than impacts harming future generations? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 8(1), 8–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., & Bieling, C. (2013). An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecological Indicators, 29, 434–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertwich, E. G., & Hammitt, J. K. (2001). A decision-analytic framework for impact assessment. Part I: LCA and decision analysis. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 6(1), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinna, L. (2005). Come gestire la responsabilità sociale di impresa (2nd ed.). Milanosole, 24 Ore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values (Vol. 5). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstetter, P., Baumgartner, T., & Scholz, R. W. (2000). Modelling the valuesphere and the ecosphere: Integrating the decision makers’ perspectives into LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(3), 161–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howden, K. (2001). Indigenous traditional knowledge and native title. The University of New South Wales Law Journal, 24(1), 60–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, M., Kleijn, R., Bozhilova-Kisheva, K. P., et al. (2013). An approach to LCSA: the case of concrete recycling. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(9), 1793–1803.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hunkeler, D. J. (2006). Societal LCA methodology and case study. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11(6), 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, M. J., & Sutherland, J. W. (2008). An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1688–1698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65(1), 19–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006). ISO 14044 International standard. Environmental management–life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2010). ISO 26000: Social responsibility. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. (2006). Compartmentalising culture: The articulation and consideration of Indigenous values in water resource management. Australian Geographer, 37(1), 19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, P., & Mulvihill, P. (1995). Ancient lands: New perspectives. Towards multi-cultural literacy in landscape management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32(1), 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Javidan, M., House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., et al. (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: A comparative review of GLOBE’s and Hofstede’s approaches. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 897–914.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeswani, H. K., Azapagic, A., Schepelmann, P., et al. (2010). Options for broadening and deepening the LCA approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(2), 120–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, A., Le Bocq, A., Nazarkina, L., et al. (2008). Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 13(2), 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, A., Finkbeiner, M., Jørgensen, M. S., et al. (2010). Defining the baseline in social life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(4), 376–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Gregory, R. S. (2005). Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Operations Research, 53(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketola, T., & Salmi, T. (2010). Sustainability life cycle comparison of biofuels: Sewage the saviour? Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 21(6), 796–811.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, T. F. (2000). What should be the “cultural resources” element of an EIA? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20(1), 5–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer, W. (2008). Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 13(2), 89–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuruppu, N. (2009). Adapting water resources to climate change in Kiribati: The importance of cultural values and meanings. Environmental Science and Policy, 12(7), 799–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, M. B. (2006). The role of planning in achieving indigenous land justice and community goals. Land Use Policy, 23(4), 385–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. A. (2008). Review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10, 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K., Bhagat, R. S., Buchan, N. R., et al. (2005). Culture and international business: Recent advances and their implications for future research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(4), 357–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, N. J. (2005). Toward a cultural model of indigenous entrepreneurial attitude. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 5, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Llobera, J. R. (2003). An invitation to anthropology: The structure, evolution and cultural identity of human societies. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löfgren, B., Tillman, A.-M., & Rinde, B. (2011). Manufacturing actor’s LCA. Journal Of Cleaner Production, 19, 2025–2033.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luckman, P. G. (2006). KiwiGrow(TM): A community and environmental health framework for sustainable development. In U. Mander, C. A. Brebbia, & E. Tiezzi (Eds.), The sustainable city IV: Urban regeneration and sustainability (pp. 155–168). Ashurst: WIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLean, D. (1996). Environmental ethics and human values. In R. C. Cothern (Ed.), Handbook for environmental risk decision making: Values, perceptions and ethics. Boca Raton: CRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macnaghten, P., & Jacobs, M. (1997). Public identification with sustainable development: Investigating cultural barriers to participation. Global Environmental Change, 7(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macombe, C., Leskinen, P., Feschet, P., et al. (2013). Social life cycle assessment of biodiesel production at three levels: A literature review and development needs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 52, 205–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, L. S., Thorne, L., Cecil, L., et al. (2013). A research note on standalone corporate social responsibility reports: Signaling or greenwashing? Critical Perspective on Accounting, 23, 350–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathe, S. (2014). Integrating participatory approaches into social life cycle assessment: The SLCA participatory approach. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,. doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0758-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marimon, F., Alonso-Almeida, M., Rodríguez, M., et al. (2012). The worldwide diffusion of the global reporting initiative: What is the point? Journal of Cleaner Production, 33, 132–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin, L., Ruiz, S., & Rubio, A. (2009). The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 65–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massa, I., Merli, R., & Preziosi, M. (2014). Una revisione critica delle linee guida G4, in atti del XXVI Congresso Nazionale di Scienze Merceologiche. In Conference Proceedings of the 26th AISME Congress on Innovazione, Sostenibilità e Tutela dei Consumatori: l’Evoluzione delle Scienze Merceologiche per la Creazione di Valore e Competitività. ISBN: 978-1-291-74318-0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López, B., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Lomas, P. L., et al. (2009). Effects of spatial and temporal scales on cultural services valuation. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2), 1050–1059.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mettier, T. M., & Hofstetter, P. (2004). Survey insights into weighting environmental damages: Influence of context and group. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(4), 189–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen, P., & Hämäläinen, R. P. (1997). How to benefit from decision analysis in environmental life cycle assessment (LCA). European Journal of Operational Research, 102(2), 279–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state and trends (Vol. 1). Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Murillo, S. A., & Smith, T. M. (2009). Exploring the use and impact of LCA-based information in corporate communications. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 14, 184–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montes de Oca Munguia, O., Harmsworth, G., Young, R., & Dymond, J. (2009). The use of an agent-based model to represent Māori cultural values. 18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress (pp. 2849–2855). Australia: Cairns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriizumi, Y., Matsui, N., & Hondo, H. (2010). Simplified life cycle sustainability assessment of mangrove management: A case of plantation on wastelands in Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16), 1629–1638.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1994). Building consensus: Risk assessment and management in the department of energy’s environmental remediation program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissinen, A., Grönroos, J., Heiskanen, E., et al. (2007). Developing benchmarks for consumer-oriented life cycle assessment-based environmental information on products, services and consumption patterns. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 538–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noll, H.-H. (2002). Towards a european system of social indicators: Theoretical framework and system architecture. Social Indicators Research, 58(1–3), 47–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordic Council of Ministers. (2010). Arctic social indicators: Follow-up to the Artic human development report. Copenhagen: TemaNord.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurse, K. (2006). Culture as the fourth pillar of sustainable development. Small states: Economic review and basic statistics (Vol. 11, pp. 28–40). London: Commonwealth Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2011). Society at a glance 2011—OECD social indicators. Retrieved July 10, 2013, from www.oecd.org/els/social/indicators/SAG.

  • Orlitzky, M., Siegel, D. S., & Waldman, D. A. (2011). Strategic corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Business and Society, 50(1), 6–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S. (2011). Pilot of a tool for cultural impact assessment in local government RMA decisions: Based on the Waiora concept of Maori wellbeing. Coromandel: Tumana Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent, J., Cucuzzella, C., & Revéret, J.-P. (2010). Impact assessment in SLCA: Sorting the sLCIA methods according to their outcomes. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15, 164–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plieningera, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., et al. (2013). Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy, 33, 118–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prado-Lorenzo, J. M., Gallego-Alvarez, I., & Garcia-Sanchez, I. M. (2009). Stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility reporting: The ownership structure effect. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 94–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • RMA Quality Planning Resource. (2012). Consent support guidance note FAQ’s about cultural impact assessments. Auckland: RMA Quality Planning Resource.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandran, N. (2000). Monitoring sustainability: Indices and techniques of analysis. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roca, L. C., & Searcy, C. (2012). An analysis of indicators disclosed in corporate sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production, 20, 103–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roccas, S., & Sagiv, L. (2010). Personal values and behavior: Taking the cultural context into account. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(1), 30–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, A., & Pickering, K. (2002). The politics of reintegrating Australian Aboriginal and American Indian indigenous knowledge into resource management: The dynamics of resource appropriation and cultural revival. Human Ecology, 30(2), 187–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Perrini, F. (2010). Investigating stakeholder theory and social capital: CSR in large firms and SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saastamoinen, O. (2005). Multiple ethics for multidimensional sustainability of forestry? Silva Carelica, 49, 37–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacconi, L. (Ed.). (2005). Guida critica alla responsabilità sociale e al governo d’impresa. Roma: Bancaria Editrice.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAI (Social Accountability International) (2013). SA8000® Guidance—2008 Standard. Retrieved June 3, 2014, from http://sa-intl.org/_data/n_0001/resources/live/SA8000ConsolidatedGuidance2013.pdf.

  • Saint-Arnaud, M., Asselin, H., Dube, C., et al. (2009). Developing criteria and indicators for Aboriginal forestry: Mutual learning through collaborative research. In M. G. Stevenson & D. C. Natcher (Eds.), Changing the culture of forestry in Canada: Building effective institutions for aboriginal engagement in sustainable forest management (Vol. 60). Edmonton: CCI Press Occasional Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sala, S., Farioli, F., & Zamagni, A. (2013). Life cycle sustainability assessment in the context of sustainability science progress (part 2). International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(9), 1686–1697.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Satterfield, T., Gregory, R., Klain, S., et al. (2013). Culture, intangibles and metrics in environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 117, 103–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaich, H., Bieling, C., & Plieninger, T. (2010). Linking ecosystem services with cultural landscape research. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 19(4), 269–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W.-P., & Sullivan, J. (2002). Weighting in life cycle assessments in a global context. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 7(1), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology, 48(1), 23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2006a). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2–3), 137–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S. (2006b). God as a managerial stakeholder? Journal of Business Ethics, 66(2–3), 291–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scrimgeour, F., & Iremonger, C. (2004). Maori sustainable economic development in New Zealand: Indigenous practices for the quadruple bottom line. Hamilton: University of Waikato.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiller, R., & Lake, C. (2003). Investing in culture–the 4th bottom line. Ethical Investor, 22, 14–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, J. (2008). The cultural values model: An integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 84(2), 127–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, J., & Moller, H. (2009). Cross-cultural environmental research and management: Challenges and progress. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 39(4), 139–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, M. G. (1996). Indigenous knowledge in environmental assessment. Arctic, 49(3), 278–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Te Ao Marama Inc. (2004). Cultural impact assessment on the Ngai Tahu spiritual and cultural relationship with the Manawapopore/Hikuraki (Mavora Lakes) area.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tengberg, A., Fredholm, S., Eliasson, I., et al. (2012). Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and identity. Ecosystem Services, 2, 14–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traverso, M., & Finkbeiner, M. (2009). Life cycle sustainability dashboard. In LCM Conference. Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sato, Y. (2009). Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests: The montreal process (4th ed., p. 48). ISBN 978-0-9825274-0-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Westview, Oxford: Political Cultures Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrift, N., & Whatmore, S. (2004). Cultural geography: Critical concepts in the social sciences. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tipa, G., & Teirney, L. D. (2003). A cultural health index for streams and waterways: Indicators for recognising and expressing Māori values. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traverso, M., Asdrubali, F., Francia, A., et al. (2012). Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: An implementation to photovoltaic modules. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17(8), 1068–1070.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A. (2000). Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 435–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A. (2002a). Life-cycle assessment and the precautionary principle. Environmental Science and Technology, 36(3), 70A–75A.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A. (2002b). Risk analysis, life cycle assessment—the common challenge of dealing with the precautionary frame (based on the toxicity controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands). Risk Analysis, 22(5), 821–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udo de Haes, H. A. (2000). Weighting in life cycle assessment: Is there a coherent perspective? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 3(4), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP, SETAC (2009). Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. Belgium: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC).

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (1972). Resolutions and recommendations 3.3: Studies and development of culture (Vol. 1). Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2001). UNESCO universal declaration on cultural diversity. Resolution 15 adopted by the General Conference at its 31st session (Vol. 1). Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2003). Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2005). Convention on the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions. Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2009). Investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO (2010). Towards a UNESCO suite of indicators on culture and development: Literature review.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2007). United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples (Vol. G. A. Res. 61/295) Geneva: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdivia, S., Ugaya, C. M. L., Hildenbrand, J., et al. (2013). A UNEP/SETAC approach towards a life cycle sustainability assessment—our contribution to Rio+20. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(9), 1673–1685.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, K., Poortvliet, P. M., Maas, M., et al. (2005). An enquiry concerning the principles of cultural norms and values: The impact of uncertainty and mortality salience on reactions to violations and bolstering of cultural worldviews. The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 91–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Geibler, J., Liedtke, C., Wallbaum, H., & Schaller, S. (2006). Accounting for the social dimension of sustainability: Experiences from the biotechnology industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 334–346. doi:10.1002/bse.540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, F. (2002). Conceptualising social impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22(3), 183–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn, T. J., & Quiggin, J. (2007). Accommodating indigenous cultural heritage values in resource assessment: Cape York Peninsula and the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Ecological Economics, 61(2), 334–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinyes, E., Oliver-Solà, J., Ugaya, C., et al. (2013). Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(2), 445–455.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walz, R., Herrchen, M., Keller, D., & Stahl, B. (1996). Impact category ecotoxicity and valuation procedure. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 1(4), 193–198.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema, B. P., & Lindeijer, E. (2001). Physical impacts of land use in product life cycle assessment. Lyngby: Final report of the EURENVIRON-LCAGAPS sub-project on land use.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weidema, B. P. (2006). The integration of economic and social aspects in life cycle impact assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11(1—SI), 89–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, J. A. (2005). Social and cultural change: Social science for a dynamic world (2nd ed.). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, F. (2005). Ambiguities in decision-oriented life cycle inventories: The role of mental models and values. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, F., & Scholz, R. W. (2002). Ambiguities in decision-oriented life cycle inventories: The role of mental models. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 7(6), 330–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. C. (2013). A critical review of environmental sustainability reporting in the consumer goods industry: Greenwashing or good business? Journal of Management and Sustainability, 3(4). doi:10.5539/jms.v3n4p1.

  • Wood, R., & Hertwich, E. G. (2012). Economic modelling and indicators in life cycle sustainability assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(9), 1710–1721.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Culture and Development. (1995). Our creative diversity: Report of the world commission on culture and development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni, A. (2012). Life cycle sustainability assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17, 373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni, A., Buttol, P., & Buonamici, R., et al. (2009). D20 blue paper on life cycle sustainability analysis. Project CALCAS co-ordination action for innovation in life-cycle analysis for sustainability.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni, A., Amerighi, O., & Buttol, P. (2011). Strengths or bias in SLCA? International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 16(7), 596–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, Z., Jiang, H., & Qin, L. (2007). Life cycle sustainability assessment of fuels. Fuel, 86(1), 256–263.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Studies, Università Di Roma Tre, 00154, Rome, Italy

    G. Arcese, M. C. Lucchetti & O. Martucci

Authors
  1. G. Arcese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. C. Lucchetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. O. Martucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Arcese .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sustainability Consultant, Global Sustainability Services, SGS (HK) Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

    Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Arcese, G., Lucchetti, M.C., Martucci, O. (2015). Social Life Cycle Assessment in a Managerial Perspective: An Integrative Approach for Business Strategy. In: Muthu, S. (eds) Social Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-296-8_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation