Search

Food production's environmental, economic, and social challenges should be demystified through quantitative data. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to investigate the ecoregional sustainability of the Amazon biome from the perspective of the environmental life cycle, economic feasibility, and social life cycle analysis, emphasizing the pillars of sustainability in the production of three commodities: soybean, beef cattle, and Brazil nuts. Carbon footprint, net present value, and worker endpoint were the metrics evaluated. According to the results found in this study, the livestock presented greater environmental burdens in terms of carbon balance when compared to the production of Brazil nuts and soybean production with carbon balances in the order of 4.75 tCO2eq/ha, −0.02 tCO2eq/ha, and −1.20 tCO2eq/ha, respectively. From an economic viewpoint, the extractive production of Brazil nuts presented the highest net profit per hectare/year (USD 559.21), followed by the agricultural system (USD 533.94) and livestock (USD 146.19). Finally, in relation to the social aspect of the production systems analyzed, the negative impacts linked to beef cattle production are related to the subcategories of forced labor and equal opportunities, and the positive impacts linked to soybean production are related to the subcategories of salary and benefits. The results highlight a genuine and sustainable balance in Brazil nuts extraction, presenting it as an investment for a sustainable future while demystifying the multifaceted information related to food production as a whole, in order to assist in decision-making and the formulation of public policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi Part C: Tasarım ve Teknoloji is the property of Gazi University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Food production’s environmental, economic, and social challenges should be demystified through quantitative data. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to investigate the ecoregional sustainability of the Amazon biome from the perspective of the environmental life cycle, economic feasibility, and social life cycle analysis, emphasizing the pillars of sustainability in the production of three commodities: soybean, beef cattle, and Brazil nuts. Carbon footprint, net present value, and worker endpoint were the metrics evaluated. According to the results found in this study, the livestock presented greater environmental burdens in terms of carbon balance when compared to the production of Brazil nuts and soybean production with carbon balances in the order of 4.75 tCO2eq/ha, −0.02 tCO2eq/ha, and −1.20 tCO2eq/ha, respectively. From an economic viewpoint, the extractive production of Brazil nuts presented the highest net profit per hectare/year (USD 559.21), followed by the agricultural system (USD 533.94) and livestock (USD 146.19). Finally, in relation to the social aspect of the production systems analyzed, the negative impacts linked to beef cattle production are related to the subcategories of forced labor and equal opportunities, and the positive impacts linked to soybean production are related to the subcategories of salary and benefits. The results highlight a genuine and sustainable balance in Brazil nuts extraction, presenting it as an investment for a sustainable future while demystifying the multifaceted information related to food production as a whole, in order to assist in decision-making and the formulation of public policies.

The sustainability performances of campuses are of importance as it could model the effective sustainable initiatives that could be then applied to campuses by decision-makers and designers. Studies have been conducted on the environmental and economic assessment of campuses in specification with the identification of their carbon footprint and cost analysis, respectively. The studies have lacked a showcase of an ideal sustainable campus along with its urban and architectural features, facilities, and services through analyzing their social aspects as well. The objective of this study was to evaluate the sustainability of the Abdullah Gul University Sumer Campus to model a sustainable campus integrating the Environmental Life Cycle Assessment(E-LCA), the Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and the Social Life Cycle Assessment using life cycle sustainability assessment approaches for the use-phase analysis of the campus. E-LCA was applied to quantify the global warming potential and cumulative energy demand based on International Organization for Standardization 14,040 and 14,044 by considering the gate-to-gate approach. The environmental assessment results showed that the global warming potential of the campus was 2.92 tCO2 eq./person, and the cumulative energy demand was found as 15.4 GJ/person. In LCC, the total cost of the campus was calculated as 200 US Dollars/person, and the energy cost is found as a major contributor with 86% of the total cost for the year of 2019. In the social performance assessment, it is found that the university has a weak social performance for the local community, the consumer, the worker, and the society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study is to draw a comprehensive image of the relationship between life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) impact using the three dimensions, namely life cycle costing (LCC), life cycle assessment (LCA), and social life cycle (SLC), and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs). By systematically reviewing and analyzing 43 articles from 17 different peer-reviewed journals between 1998 and 2021, the analysis shows that SOFC-related applications may substantially contribute to a cleaner energy sector in the future via high-level temperature power generation. The result indicated that SOFCs have better implications for environmental performance, as well as being the least cost-effective option for commercially competitive purposes. The review revealed several gaps in the literature; several studies assessed LCA using particular or very few indicators, and the few indicators may not sufficiently assess the environmental impact of SOFCs. Further, limited studies shed the light on the association between SLC and SOFCs. Future LCSA studies ought to adopt dynamic criteria, especially environmental impact analysis considering social and economic factors, to enable a feasible comparison of results. Future studies should also target various industrial sectors in developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transition toward sustainable urban transportation has gained importance in recent decades. However, urban transportation has not been addressed for all dimensions of sustainability. This study presents a life cycle sustainability assessment of a light rail transit system in Kayseri, Turkey, by integrating environmental, economic, and social aspects. The sustainability performance of the light rail transit system is evaluated using a cradle‐to‐grave approach to assess three aspects of sustainability. For the environmental evaluation, a life cycle assessment was applied using SimaPro 8.4.1 PhD version based on ISO 14040 and 14044. The method, which includes nine environmental impact categories, was employed to assess the environmental performance of the light rail transit system with a functional unit of 1 passenger‐km. For the economic assessment, life cycle costing was utilized with the functional unit of USD for 1 passenger‐km. A social life cycle assessment was applied to assess the social performance of the light rail transit system based on guidelines published by the United Nations Environment Programme in collaboration with the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. For the determination of social impacts, 11 subcategories and 18 social indicators were selected. The results showed that the global warming potential and abiotic depletion potential of the light rail system per passenger‐km were 2.4E − 02 kg CO2 eq. and 2.7E − 01 MJ, respectively, with a service life of 50 years. The total life cycle cost of the light rail system was calculated as 0.046 USD for 1 passenger‐km. The results also revealed that the main contributor to the total life cycle cost was energy cost, with 92% (2.88E + 08 USD) of the total cost. In the social performance evaluation, it is found that the industry performs well for society, the local community, and workers but has a weaker social performance for the consumer due to a weak feedback mechanism. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:1070–1082. © 2021 SETAC KEY POINTS: Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) implementation, the environmental, economic and social performance of a light rail system were assessed with a holistic approach.The majority of emissions with 50% contribution originate from the operation and maintenance phases of the light rail system.For the light rail system, energy costs are the main contributor (92%), which should be reduced to lower the overall life cycle cost.Social performance of a light rail system has the lowest score on consumers among the all stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: A comprehensive sustainable research requires investigation on all the relevant environmental, financial and social impacts. The objective of this research is to evaluate the sustainability performance of different flooring systems using a multi-criteria method. Included flooring systems are ceramic tile, laminate, concrete and wood, and criteria consist of carbon dioxide emission, ozone layer depletion, cost and social impacts. Methods: The method of this study entails four stages. In the first stage, the life cycle assessment (LCA) is conducted to rank the flooring systems based on carbon dioxide emission (CO2) and ozone layer depletion (OLD). The second stage entails the life cycle cost assessment (LCCA) which focuses on alternatives based on their related cost. The LCA and LCCA cover the four phases of production and construction, transportation, maintenance and end of life. In the third stage, the social life cycle assessment (SLCA) is performed involving four main social indicators namely workers, local community, society and consumers. The final stage entails the implementation of the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach to evaluate the different options resulting from the LCA, LCCA and SLCA to propose the most sustainable flooring system by taking into consideration the combination of all the stated criteria. Results and discussion: The result of the LCA indicates that wood flooring is the least environmental impact per functional unit as it causes fewer carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (17%) than the second least environmental impact per functional unit (laminated flooring). However, the result of the LCCA suggests that concrete flooring is the lowest costing system, i.e. 30% less than the second best option (wood flooring). On the other hand, the SLCA result indicates that laminated flooring is the least negative social impact with a 28% better score than concrete flooring. The results of the MCDM show that wood is the most sustainable floor system with a utility degree of 100%, higher than laminated flooring at 78%. However, in equal weighting scenario, laminated flooring is shown to be the best choice. Conclusions: The presented approach in this research has been successfully applied on a case study. It provides valuable insight on the assessment of flooring systems so as to assist decision-makers and architects in prioritising and selecting the most sustainable flooring systems to be used in residential buildings in Malaysia. This methodology can be applied in other countries with a similar climate and cultural preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this research is to assess the sustainability performance of different concrete and stone walls being used in residential buildings in Malaysia in terms of environmental issues, economic concerns, and social aspects. The concrete walls consist of crib wall (CW), cantilever reinforced concrete wall (CRCW), and keystone wall (KW), while stone walls include gabion wall (GW) and rubble masonry wall (RMW). Four different assessment criteria such as global warming potential (GWP), ozone layer depletion (OLD), cost present value (CPV), and social impacts (SI) were considered. Methods: In this study, life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to evaluate the considered walls based on individual criteria of GWP and OLD, while life cycle cost (LCC) and social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) were performed based on CPV and SI, respectively. In S-LCA, three main social indicators such as workers, local community, and society were taken into account. Then, a multi-criteria decision-analysis (MCDA) approach is implemented to assess and prioritize alternative walls, which is resulted from LCA, LCC, and S-LCA, by considering combination of abovementioned criteria. Results and discussion: The primary results of LCA for GWP criterion shows that the GW and RMW are the best options with respective emissions of 12784 KG CO2eq and 20020 KG CO2eq. On the other hand, the result for OLD indicates that the best alternatives are GW and RMW with respective emissions of 178.99 CFC-11 eq and 224.88 CFC-11 eq. The results of LCC declare that RCW is the best option by 595600 MYR which is 14% less than the second-best option (RMW). The S-LCA results show that the CW is the best option with 10% better than the second option (KW). The MCDA results revealed that the sustainability performance of the GW was the highest among alternatives followed by RWW, RCW, KW, and CW. Conclusions: The presented approach in this research has been successfully applied on a case study. It provides valuable insight on the assessment of earth-retaining systems assisting decision makers in prioritizing and selecting the most sustainable retaining walls to be used in residential buildings in Malaysia and other countries with similar climate conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of impact assessments for the biobased economy are primarily focused on the environmental and (techno-)economic aspects, while social aspects are rarely considered. This study proposes a modified systemic approach for a social sustainability impact assessment of the biobased economy, based on a review on the common methodologies for assessing social impacts. Accordingly, the proposed approach follows the four general iterative steps of social life cycle analysis (SLCA) as it considers all life cycle phases of the biobased economy. The systemic approach considers the potential social impacts on local communities, workers, and consumers as the main three groups of the stakeholders. The review showed that the most common social indicators for inventory analysis within the biobased economy include health and safety, food security, income, employment, land- and worker-related concerns, energy security, profitability, and gender issues. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was also highlighted as the broadly utilized methodology for aggregating the results of impact assessments within the biobased economy. Taking a life cycle perspective, this study provides a holistic view of the full sustainability of research, design, and innovation in the biobased economy by suggesting the integration of the social aspects with techno-economic and an environmental life cycle assessment. Our proposed systemic approach makes possible to integrate the social impacts that are highly valued by the affected stakeholders into the existing sustainability models that focus only on environmental and techno-economic aspects. We discuss the steps of the proposed systemic approach in order to identify the challenges of applying them within the biobased economy. These challenges refer mainly to the definition of the functional unit and system boundaries, the selection and the analysis of social indicators (inventory analysis), the aggregation of the inventory to impact categories, and the uncertainties associated with the social sustainability evaluation. The result of this review and the proposed systemic approach serve as a foundation for industry and policy makers to gain a better insight into the importance of social sustainability impacts assessment within the biobased economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals, great concern has arisen on how to diminish the impacts that result from construction activities. In such context, Modern Methods of Construction (MMC) rise as a powerful way to reduce life cycle impacts through optimizing the consumption of materials. This paper focuses on the sustainability assessment of different modern construction techniques applied to concrete structures of single-family houses. The life cycle performance in terms of sustainability is compared between a conventional reference design, a precast design, a lightweight slab design with pressurized hollow discs, and a design based on double-wall structural elements. The sustainability is assessed through a set of 38 indicators that address not only the economic and environmental response of the designs, but also their social impacts as well. Five of the best known Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques (SAW, COPRAS, TOPSIS, VIKOR and MIVES) are applied to derive the life-cycle performance of each design into a single sustainability score. Since there is no consensus on which MCDM method works best in sustainability assessments, a Global Structural Sustainability Index (GSSI) combining and weighting the above is proposed here to aid the analysis of the results obtained. The results show that consideration of the three dimensions of sustainability leads to balanced designs whose preference need not coincide with those derived from each one-dimensional life cycle approach. • A traditional baseline solution is compared with three non-conventional MMC alternatives. • 38 indicators characterize the sustainability of a home's structural envelope. • GSSI index uses five MCDM techniques to aggregate the different sustainability criteria. • Methodology seeks to reduce the economic, environmental and social impacts on structures. • Concrete slab, lightened with pressurized discs, achieves the best sustainability result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social and Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (SELCA) is an analytical tool for profiling and evaluating the interaction between the social and technological systems within the life cycle of given service. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (ELCA) and Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) are undertaken with their own objectives using independent methodologies. Integrating the outcomes of the two assessments provides more comprehensive and insightful descriptions of the potential impacts of a life cycle, including the key social factors through which the life cycle is sustained and modified. The SELCA approach is outlined using the examples of two fuel cycles of coal and waste in energy-generation. There are some methodological issues in combining ELCA and SLCA which we highlight in order to encourage further work on the integration of environmental and social processes in LCA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]