Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A critical view on social performance assessment at company level: social life cycle analysis of an algae case

  • SOCIETAL LCA
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Social indicators are not easy to be quantitatively analyzed, although at the local scale, the social impacts might be relevant and important. Using the existing approaches for both quantitative and semi-qualitative measurements, this study aims to assess the social impacts of a company working on algae production systems in Belgium through social life cycle analysis (SLCA). By highlighting the opportunities and challenges on the way of applying the existing SLCA approaches at company level, the objective of this study is to contribute to the development of a suitable and clear SLCA approach when a company is considered as the unit of analysis.

Methods

Based on the list of potential social impact categories suggested by the United Nations Environment Program/Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP/SETAC) guidelines (2009) for SLCA, three stakeholder groups (workers, consumers, and local community) and three subcategories associated with each stakeholder group were identified as the most relevant for carbon capture and utilization technologies. Company and sector level data were collected using existing documents and reports, and the data were analyzed and scored using a combined quantitative and semi-quantitative approach to develop a social assessment model for the case study.

Results and discussion

The company appears to perform well for all the evaluated social indicators except the one related to the subcategory “equal opportunity/discrimination for workers” for which the share of women employed is lower compared with the sector-level data. The results of our assessment were further discussed regarding the challenges and limitations of performing SLCA at the company level. Based on our experience, the validity of the outcomes is significantly influenced by the data availability, the generality of the indicators introduced within the UNEP/SETAC guidelines, and the subjectivity in data collection for the semi-quantitative assessment among others.

Conclusions

By highlighting the difficulties and challenges of applying the SLCA at the company level, our study provides a starting point for improving the quantitative assessment and monitoring social implications at the company level within a regional foreground in Europe.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The calculation of living wage by WageIndicator Foundation considers the following six components: food, housing, transportation, health, education, and other expenditures (e.g., clothing, personal care), all in the local context. More information on https://wageindicator.org/salary/living-wage/belgium-living-wage-series-december-2018

  2. Database can be downloaded free of charge from https://www.see.tuberlin.de/menue/forschung/ergebnisse/fair_wage_aequivalente/.

References

  • Abdul Hamid NN, Lim JS (2018) Techno-economic assessment of an integration of algae-based biorefinery with palm oil mill. Chem Eng Trans 63:169–174. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1863029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez-ChÁvez CR, Edwards S, Moure-Eraso R, Geiser K (2012) Sustainability of bio-based plastics: general comparative analysis and recommendations for improvement. J Clean Prod 23:47–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Anker R (2011) Estimating a living wage: a methodological review. International Labour Office, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Aparcana S, Salhofer S (2013) Application of a methodology for the social life cycle assessment of recycling systems in low income countries: three Peruvian case studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(5):1116–1112

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann H, Tillman A (2004) The hitchhiker’s guide to LCA: an orientation in life cycle assessment methodology and application. Studentlitteratur, Lund

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time!. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):156–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouzid A, Padilla M (2014) Analysis of social performance of the industrial tomatoes food chain in Algeria. Mediterranean journal of economics, agriculture and environment. New Medit 13(1):60–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell PK, Beer T, Batten D (2011) Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from microalgae in ponds. Bioresour Technol 102(1):50–56

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chang Y-C, Wang J-D (1995) Cumulative injury rate and potential workdays and salary lost. Scand J Work Environ Health 21(6):494–503

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chhipi-Shrestha GC, Rehan Sadiq KH (2015) ‘Socializing’ sustainability: a critical review on current development status of social life cycle impact assessment method. Clean Techn Environ Policy 17:579–596

    Google Scholar 

  • Chou C-J, Chen C-W, Conley C (2015) An approach to assessing sustainable product-service systems. J Clean Prod 86:277–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen L, Lin H, Pereira J, Topalova P, Turk R (2016) Individual choice or policies? Drivers of female employment in Europe. IMF Working Paper WP/16/49, Washington D.C

  • Ciroth A, Franze J (2011) LCA of an ecolabeled notebook: consideration of social and environmental impacts along the entire life cycle. GreenDeltaTC GmbH, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Daroch M, Geng S, Wang G (2013) Recent advances in liquid biofuel production from algal feedstocks. Appl Energ 102:1371–1381

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer L, Hauschild M, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer L, Hauschild M, Schierbeck J (2010) Characterisation of social impacts in LCA. Part. 2: implementation in six company case studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:385–402

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Economic Commission for Europe (2018) idelines on producing leading, composite and sentiment indicators - draft. Conference of European Statisticians, Sixty-sixth plenary session, Geneva, 18–20 June 2018. https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ece/ces/2018/CES_7-Guidelines_on_LCS_indicators_for_CES_Interim_consultation_for_upload.pdf Accessed 22 Aug 2019

  • Efroymson RA, Dale VH, Langholtz MH (2017) Socioeconomic indicators for sustainable design and commercial development of algal biofuel systems. GCB Bioenergy 9:1005–1023

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2013) Potential hotspots identified by social LCA—part 1: a case study of a laptop computer. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:127–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekener-Petersen E, Höglund J, Finnveden G (2014) Screening potential social impacts of fossil fuels and biofuels for vehicles. Energ Policy 73:416–426

    Google Scholar 

  • Essencia (2017) Sustainable development report 2017 of the Belgian chemicals, plastics and life sciences industry. www.essensciaforsustainability.be. Accessed 21 Jan 2019

  • European Commission (2016) Labour force participation of women. European Semester Thematic Factsheet. Nov 14. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/european-semester_thematic-factsheet_labour-force-participation-women_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2019

  • Falcone PM, Imbert E (2018) Social life cycle approach as a tool for promoting the market uptake of bio-based products from a consumer perspective. Sustainability 10(4):1031. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falcone PM, González García S, Imbert E et al (2019) Transitioning towards the bioeconomy: assessing the social dimension through a stakeholder lens. Corp Soc Resp Environ Ma 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1791

  • FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2006) Inequality analysis; The Gini index. http://www.fao.org/3/a-am352e.pdf%20 Accessed 09 Feb 2019

  • Foolmaun RK, Ramjeeawon T (2013) Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:155–171

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franze J, Ciroth A (2011) A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the Netherlands. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:366–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrido SR, Parent J, Beaulieu L, Revéret J-P (2018) A literature review of type I SLCA—making the logic underlying methodological choices explicit. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(3):432–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2006) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines, Amsterdam

  • Gnansounou E, Raman JK (2016) Life cycle assessment of algae biodiesel and its co products. Appl Energ 161:300–308

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greco S, Ishizaka A, Tasiou M, Torrisi G (2019) On the methodological framework of composite indices: a review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Soc Indic Res 141(1):61–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop MJ, Indrane D, de Beer IM (2018) Product social impact assessment handbook–2018 Amersfoort, September 1st, 2018. https://product-social-impact-assessment.com.

  • Gouveia L, Batista AP, Sousa I, Raymundo A, Bandarra NM (2008) Chapter 2. Microalgae in novel food products. In: Food Chemistry Research Developments. https://www.repository.utl.pt/bitstream/10400.5/2434/1/REP-I.Sousa-CapLivro%20algasGouveia.pdf. Accessed 04 Feb 2019

  • Guzi M, Kahanec M (2018) Estimating living wage globally. Amsterdam, WageIndicator Foundation, December. https://wageindicator.org/documents/publicationslist/publications-2018/living-wage_english_20181221.pdf. Accessed 24 Oct 2019

  • Handler RM, Shonnard DR, Kalnes TN, Lupton FS (2014) Life cycle assessment of algal biofuels: influence of feedstock cultivation systems and conversion platforms. Algal Res 4:105–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannouf M, Assefa G (2018) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment: a case study of high-density polyethylene production in Alberta, Canada. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(1):116–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasenheit M, Gerdes H, Kiresiewa Z, Beekman V (2016) Summary report on the social, economic and environmental impacts of the bioeconomy. http://www.biostep.eu/fileadmin/BioSTEP/Bio_documents/BioSTEP_D2.2_Impacts_of_the_bioeconomy.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2019

  • Hosseinijou S, Mansour S, Shirazi M (2014) Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:620–645

    Google Scholar 

  • Idris MNM, Hashim H, Lim JS, Ho CS (2017) Economic assessment of microalgae-based CO2 utilization in power plant sector in Malaysia. Chem Eng Trans 56:643–648

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment - principles and framework. International Organization of Standardization

  • ISO (2010) Guidance on social responsibility. https://www.iso.org/standard/42546.html Accessed 14 April 2019

  • Jørgensen A, Le BA, Nazarkina L, Hauschild MZ (2008) Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):96–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MI, Shin JH, Kim JD (2018) The promising future of microalgae: current status, challenges, and optimization of a sustainable and renewable industry for biofuels, feed, and other products. Microb Cell Fact 17(1):36

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller M, Salerno A, Tuffner P et al (2012) Characteristics and potential of microalgal cultivation strategies: a review. J Clean Prod 37:377–388

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lardon L, Hélias A, Sialve B, Steyer J-P, Bernard O (2009) Life-cycle assessment of biodiesel production from microalgae. Environ Sci Technol 43:6475–6481

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzo P, Traverso M, Salomone R, Ioppolo G (2017) Social life cycle assessment in the textile sector: an Italian case study. Sustainability 9:2092. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madugu FU (2015) Modelling and analysis of the techno-economic and social impacts of an algal oil production facility. School of Energy, Environment and Agrifood Offshore Renewable and Energy Engineering, Cranfield University

  • Manhart A, Grieβhammer R (2006) Social impacts of the production of notebook PCs—contribution to the development of a product sustainability assessment (PROSA). http://www.prosa.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/notebooksurvey_final_engl.pdf. Accessed 09 Feb 2019

  • Manik Y, Leahy J, Halog A (2013) Social life cycle assessment of palm oil biodiesel: a case study in Jambi Province of Indonesia. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(7):1386–1392

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin M, Røyne F, Ekvall T, Moberg Å (2018) Life cycle sustainability evaluations of bio-based value chains: reviewing the indicators from a Swedish perspective. Sustainability 10(2):547. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Blanco J, Lehmann A, Muñoz P, Antón A, Traverso M, Rieradevall J, Finkbeiner M (2014) Application challenges for the social LCA of fertilizers within life cycle sustainability assessment. J Clean Prod 69:34–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Blanco J, Lehmann A, Chang Y-J, Finkbeiner M (2015) Social organizational LCA (SOLCA)—a new approach for implementing social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1586–1599

    Google Scholar 

  • Menetrez MY (2012) An overview of algae biofuel production and potential environmental impact. Environ Sci Technol 46:7073–7085

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Méthot A (2005) FIDD: a green and socially responsible venture capital fund. Presentation on the Life Cycle Approaches for Green Investment—26th LCA Swiss Discussion Forum, 2005, Lausanne, Switzerland

  • Montero MJ, Araque RA, Rey JM (2009) Occupational health and safety in the framework of corporate social responsibility. Saf Sci 47(10):1440–1445

    Google Scholar 

  • Musaazi MK, Mechtenberg AR, Nakibuule J, Sensenig R, Miyingo E, Makanda JV, Hakimian A, Eckelman MJ (2015) Quantification of social equity in life cycle assessment for increased sustainable production of sanitary products in Uganda. J Clean Prod 96:569–579

    Google Scholar 

  • Nef (2004) Measuring social impact: the foundation of social return on investment (SROI). http://with-one-voice.com/sites/default/files/London%20Business%20School%20%20Measuring%20social%20impact_0.pdf. Accessed 18 Feb 2019

  • Neugebauer S, Traverso M, Scheumann R, Chang Y-J, Wolf K, Finkbeiner M (2014) Impact pathways to address social well-being and social justice in SLCA—fair wage and level of education. Sustainability 6:4839–4857

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer S, Emara Y, Hellerström C, Finkbeiner M (2017) Calculation of fair wage potentials along products’ life cycle–introduction of a new midpoint impact category for social life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 143(1):1221–1232

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (2012) Sustainable development of algal biofuels in the United States. Committee on the Sustainable Development of Algal Biofuels. National Research Council of the National Academies. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofori Agyekum E, Fortuin KPJ, van der Harst E (2017) Environmental and social life cycle assessment of bamboo bicycle frames made in Ghana. J Clean Prod 143:1069–1080

    Google Scholar 

  • Omann I (2007) A multicriteria tool for evaluating the impacts of product service systems on sustainable development: an application in Austrian companies. SERI Working paper 5:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent J, Cucuzzella C, Revéret J-P (2010) Impact assessment in SLCA: sorting the sLCIA methods according to their outcomes. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:164–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent J, Cucuzzella C, Reveret J (2013) Revisiting the role of LCA and SLCA in the transition towards sustainable production and consumption. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1642–1652

    Google Scholar 

  • Petti L, Ramirez PKS, Traverso M, Ugaya CML (2018) An Italian tomato “Cuore di Bue” case study: challenges and benefits using subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(3):569–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Plaza M, Herrero M, Cifuentes A, Ibanez E (2009) Innovative natural functional ingredients from microalgae. J Argic Food Chem 57:7159–7170

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prasara-A J, Gheewala SH (2018) Applying social life cycle assessment in the Thai sugar industry: challenges from the field. J Clean Prod 172:335–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafiaani P, Kuppens T, Van Dael M, Azadi H, Lebailly P, Van Passel S (2018) Social sustainability assessments in the biobased economy: towards a systemic approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82(2):1839–1853

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafiaani P, Dikopoulou Z, Van Dael M, Kuppens T, Azadi H, Lebailly P, Van Passel S (2019) Identifying social indicators for sustainability assessment of CCU technologies: a modified multi-criteria decision making technique. Soc Indic Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02154-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Raj-Reichert G (2013) Safeguarding labour in distant factories: health and safety governance in an electronics global production network. Geoforum 44:23–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez PKS, Petti L, Haberland NT, Ugaya CML (2014) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 1: methodological framework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:1515–1523

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez PKS, Petti L, Brones F, Ugaya CML (2016) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in Natura’s cocoa soap. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:106–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizwan M, Lee JH, Gani R (2015) Optimal design of microalgae-based biorefinery: economics, opportunities and challenges. Appl Energ 150:69–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronzon T, Santini F, M’Barek R (2015) The bioeconomy in the European Union in numbers. Facts and figures on biomass, turnover and employment; European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies: Seville, Spain

  • Schmidt I, Meurer M, Saling P, Kicherer A, Reuter W, Gensch C (2004) SEEbalance—managing sustainability of products and processes with the socio-eco-efficiency analysis by BASF. Green Manage Int 45:79–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Siebert A, Bezama A, O’Keeffe S, Thrän D (2018) Social life cycle assessment indices and indicators to monitor the social implications of wood-based products. J Clean Prod 172:4074–4084

    Google Scholar 

  • Sousa-Zomer TT, Miguel PLC (2018) The main challenges for social life cycle assessment (SLCA) to support the social impacts analysis of product-service systems. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(3):607–616

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spierling S, Knüpffer E, Behnsen H, Mudersbach M, Krieg H, Springer S, Albrecht S, Herrmann C, Endres H-J (2018) Bio-based plastics - A review of environmental, social and economic impact assessments. J Clean Prod 185:476–491

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillemaeckers S, Vanhoutte G, Taverniers L, Lavrysen L, van Braeckel D, Mazijn B, Rivera JD (2004) Integrated product assessment—the development of the label ‘Sustainable Development’ for products ecological, social and economical aspects of integrated product policy. Belgian Science Policy, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Spruijt J (2017) Market analysis and competitiveness of the PUFAChain in ‘van der Voort MPJ, Spruijt J, Potters J, de Wolf PL, Elissen HJH (2017) Socio-economic assessment of Algae-based PUFA production’ Public Output report of the PUFAChain project, Göttingen, December 2017, 79 pp. www.pufachain.eu. Accessed 10 Feb 2019

  • Telles do Carmo BB, Margni M, Baptiste P (2016) Social impacts profile of suppliers: a S-LCA approach. IFAC PapersOnLine 49(2):36–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Thévenon O (2013) Drivers of female labour force participation in the OECD. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 145, OECD Publishing

  • Thomassen G, Egiguren Vila U, Van Dael M et al (2016) A techno-economic assessment of an algal-based biorefinery. Clean Technol Environ 18:1849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-016-1159-2

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomassen G, Van Dael M, Van Passel S (2018) The potential of microalgae biorefineries in Belgium and India: an environmental techno-economic assessment. Bioresour Technol 267:271–280

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Asdrubali F, Francia A, Finkbeiner M (2012a) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(8):1068–1079

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen A, Schneider L (2012b) Life cycle sustainability dashboard. J Ind Ecol 16:680–688

    Google Scholar 

  • Traverso M, Bell L, Saling P, Fontes J (2018) Towards social life cycle assessment: a quantitative product social impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:597–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Ugaya C, Brones F, Corrêa S (2011) S-LCA: preliminary results of Natura’s cocoa soap bar. Proceedings of Life Cycle Mangement conference, 2011, Berlin

  • UNDP (2018) http://hdr.undp.org/en/data. Accessed 11 Oct 2018

  • UNEP/SETAC (2013) The methodological sheets for subcategories in social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, Paris. https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/S-LCA_methodological_sheets_11.11.13.pdf. Accessed 07 Feb 2019

  • UNEP-SETAC (2009) Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. United Nations Environmental Programme. Belgium: Druk in der weer. http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/dtix1164xpa-guidelines_slca.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2019

  • van Haaster B, Ciroth A, Fontes J, Wood R, Ramirez A (2017) Development of a methodological framework for social life-cycle assessment of novel technologies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(3):423–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinyes E, Oliver-Solà J, Ugaya C, Rieradevall J, Gasol C (2013) Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:445–455

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WageIndicator Foundation (2018) WageIndicator.org. https://wageindicator.org/salary/wages-in-context. Accessed 18 March 2019

  • Wang S-W, Hsu C-W, Hu A-H (2016) An analytic framework for social life cycle impact assessment—part 1: methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1514–1528

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang S-W, Hsu C-W, Hu AH (2017) An analytical framework for social life cycle impact assessment—part 2: case study of labor impacts in an IC packaging company. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(5):784–797

    Google Scholar 

  • WBCSD (World Business Council for Sustainable Development) ( (2016) Social life cycle metrics for chemical products) Social life cycle metrics for chemical products. November 2016, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.wbcsd.org/Projects/Chemicals/Resources/Social-Life-Cycle-Metrics-for-Chemical-Products. Accessed 13 Feb 2019

  • WHO (2019) Age standardized disability-adjusted life year (DALY) rate (per 100 000 population). http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/metrics_daly/en/. Accessed 24 Oct 2019

  • Wilson MH, Mohler DT, Groppo JG, Grubbs T, Kesner S, Frazar EM, Shea A, Crofcheck C, Crocker M (2016) Capture and recycle of industrial CO2 emissions using microalgae. Appl Petrochem Res 6(3):279–293

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Lin K-H, Jo-Shu C (2018) Economic and life-cycle greenhouse gas optimization of microalgae-to-biofuels chains. Bioresour Technol 267:550–559

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y, Zhang B, Cheng J, Pu S (2015) Socio-economic impacts of algae-derived biodiesel industrial development in China: an input–output analysis. Algal Res 9:74–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann AW, Schomäcker R (2017) Assessing early-stage CO utilization technologies-comparing apples and oranges? Energy Technol 5(6):850–860

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamalloa C, Vulsteke E, Albrecht J et al (2011) The techno-economic potential of renewable energy through the anaerobic digestion of microalgae. Bioresour Technol 102:1149–1158

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu L, Huo S, Qin L (2015) A microalgae-based biodiesel refinery: sustainability concerns and challenges. Int J Green Energy 12:595–602

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UHasselt-Hasselt University, Centre for Environmental Sciences, Agoralaan, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium

    Parisa Rafiaani, Tom Kuppens, Gwenny Thomassen, Miet Van Dael, Hossein Azadi & Steven Van Passel

  2. Economics and Rural Development, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, 5030, Gembloux, Belgium

    Parisa Rafiaani, Hossein Azadi & Philippe Lebailly

  3. Unit Separation and Conversion Technologies, VITO, Boeretang 200, 2400, Mol, Belgium

    Gwenny Thomassen & Miet Van Dael

  4. Research Group Sustainable Systems Engineering (STEN), Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Gwenny Thomassen

  5. Department of Engineering Management, University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13, 2000, Antwerp, Belgium

    Gwenny Thomassen & Steven Van Passel

  6. Department of Geography, Ghent University, Krijgslaan, 281 S8, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Hossein Azadi

Authors
  1. Parisa Rafiaani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom Kuppens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gwenny Thomassen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Miet Van Dael
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hossein Azadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Philippe Lebailly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Steven Van Passel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parisa Rafiaani.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Marzia Traverso

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rafiaani, P., Kuppens, T., Thomassen, G. et al. A critical view on social performance assessment at company level: social life cycle analysis of an algae case. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 363–381 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01702-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01702-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation