Purpose: The aim of this study is to test the Subcategory Assessment Method (SAM) by applying it to a real product (Natura’s cocoa soap). Methods: The case study was performed by first following the four phases of Social Life Cycle Assessment and by considering a functional unit to support the cleaning baths of a person over 1 year, which resulted in a reference flow for 10 cocoa soaps that weighed 150 g each. A cradle to gate life cycle assessment was undertaken, and then, SAM was applied. Results and discussion: The results showed that SAM can support the evaluation of subcategories and stakeholders along the life cycle by providing a social profile of the organisations involved. The case study revealed the processes with better performance: the cultivation and production of palm oil, cocoa butter production/final picking and logistics. The worst social profile was found in the cocoa cultivation process, which was provided by a small organisation (a cooperative). In fact, the results showed that applying SAM in small organisations does not reflect the social behaviours of the organisations because the basic requirements are based on international references, which typically involve activities that are difficult to find in small and family organisations. Moreover, the magnitude of positive actions does not affect the assessment. Conclusions: Applying SAM indeed enabled the stages to be identified in which the subcategories’ basic requirements, which highlight strengths and weaknesses, have or have not been met. Nevertheless, SAM must be improved for small organisations and for the magnitude of positive actions. © 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in Natura’s cocoa soap

Sanchez Ramirez, Paola Karina
;
Petti, Luigia;
2016-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study is to test the Subcategory Assessment Method (SAM) by applying it to a real product (Natura’s cocoa soap). Methods: The case study was performed by first following the four phases of Social Life Cycle Assessment and by considering a functional unit to support the cleaning baths of a person over 1 year, which resulted in a reference flow for 10 cocoa soaps that weighed 150 g each. A cradle to gate life cycle assessment was undertaken, and then, SAM was applied. Results and discussion: The results showed that SAM can support the evaluation of subcategories and stakeholders along the life cycle by providing a social profile of the organisations involved. The case study revealed the processes with better performance: the cultivation and production of palm oil, cocoa butter production/final picking and logistics. The worst social profile was found in the cocoa cultivation process, which was provided by a small organisation (a cooperative). In fact, the results showed that applying SAM in small organisations does not reflect the social behaviours of the organisations because the basic requirements are based on international references, which typically involve activities that are difficult to find in small and family organisations. Moreover, the magnitude of positive actions does not affect the assessment. Conclusions: Applying SAM indeed enabled the stages to be identified in which the subcategories’ basic requirements, which highlight strengths and weaknesses, have or have not been met. Nevertheless, SAM must be improved for small organisations and for the magnitude of positive actions. © 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Ramirez2016_Article_SubcategoryAssessmentMethodFor.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Descrizione: Article
Tipologia: PDF editoriale
Dimensione 660.66 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
660.66 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11564/643996
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 34
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 28
social impact