Social life cycle assessment based on input-output analysis of the Portuguese pulp and paper sector.

Social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) is a tool to address social impacts from a life cycle perspective. This work presents the first S-LCA of the Portuguese pulp and paper sector. It presents the social risks and the positive social impacts of the sector, which have not been extensively covered in the scientific literature. Two different approaches were used to compile the social life cycle inventory based on input-output analysis. Approach 1 was based on impact analysis of changes in added value. Approach 2 was based on structural path analysis, supporting the disaggregation by production levels (or tiers). The functional unit was the production of 1 United States Dollar in the Portuguese pulp and paper sector. In the social life cycle impact assessment, the social risk assessment was conducted using the Social Hotspots Database. The positive impacts were addressed considering indicators of employment and remuneration, namely total employment, number of employees, labor compensation, and compensation of employees. Based on Approach 1, the results of the social risks showed the Portuguese pulp and paper industry, commerce and forestry sectors, and the Spanish forestry sector as the critical sectors. Based on Approach 2, Portugal and Spain continued to be the countries having the greatest social risks. Other contributions of countries were identified at different production levels, particularly China in tier 3. In both approaches, the stakeholder category 'worker' was the most critical. Regarding the positive social impacts, Approach 1 showed that Portugal and Spain contribute to the highest employment level linked to the pulp and paper, commerce, and forestry sectors. Approach 2 supported the differentiation of employment and remuneration at different production levels. Tier 2 (direct suppliers) presented the highest employment level and persons engaged and the lowest remuneration level. The results showed that Approach 1 provides a faster and more aggregated assessment of social risks and positive social impacts. Furthermore, Approach 2 allowed a more detailed evaluation, providing a better understanding of the social risks and positive social impacts on the supply chain. Thus, Approach 2 is encouraged for different applications since it produces a better understanding of where social risks and positive social impacts occur, providing better guidance for corrective measures and decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]