Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) is a tool assessing the social aspects of products and services. This article is a step forward from the Guidelines and wishes to clarify the different impact assessment (IA) methods covered in the Guidelines and how these different methods would provide different types of information regarding the social aspects of the product system. The outcomes resulting from different sLCIA methods are discussed through the analysis of three methods covered by the Guidelines for SLCA (UNEP 2009): the Taskforce’s method, Hunkeler’s (2006) and Weidema’s (2006). In order to highlight the different outcomes, we analyze the “nature” of the indicator results, the sources of the stressors, and the way the IA results are linked to the product system. Different results are provided depending on the sLCIA approach used. We stress that the use of impact pathways allows the assessment of social impacts. The Taskforce’s method, which compares the state of the dimensions of the social context of the product system with international consensus, assesses “social performances.” Regarding the sources of the stressors, the analysis needs to look at other levels than the unit process to capture the social issues. Finally, two approaches are used to connect the indicator results to the product system: one carrying the quantitative link between the inventory indicator and the functional unit all the way to the IA result through impact pathways, and the other, weighting the IA results according to the relative importance of an activity variable. The different features of the sLCIA methods result in different outcomes. Depending on the sources of the stressors, different levels are assessed. When the stressors are collected at an organizational level, e.g., country, sector, or enterprise, the unit assessed becomes the social context, which can be called “context units” parallel to the unit processes. SLCIA methods will also provide different outcomes depending on the characterization models used in the analysis: social impacts versus social performances. Finally, the difference between the outcomes according to the approaches used to link the IA results to the product system will require further reflections. Two types of sLCIA are covered by the Guidelines. One uses Performance Reference Points allowing the evaluation of the relative position of the state of a dimension of a context unit in reference to an international consensus. The second one, closer to LCA, assesses the social impacts derived from the technical nature of the processes, through the use of impact pathways. Choosing between the feasibility of deriving social impacts from social variables through impact pathways or assessing a broader set of social issues through the use of semiquantitative indicators is an ongoing issue and requires further research. Currently, the choice of sLCIA methods is informed by the availability of the characterization models and the indicators.

Impact assessment in SLCA: sorting the sLCIA methods according to their outcomes

Purpose – This paper aims to introduce the special issue on CSR communication attached to the First International CSR Communication Conference held in Amsterdam in October 2011. The aim of the introduction is also to review CSR communication papers published in scholarly journals in order to make a summary of the state of CSR communication knowledge.Design/methodology/approach – The existing literature on CSR communication was approached via systematic review. with a combination of conventional and summative qualitative content analysis. The final dataset contained 90 papers from two main business and management databases, i.e. EBSCOhost and ProQuest.Findings – Papers were coded into three main categories. The results show that the majority of the papers are concerned with disclosure themes. Considerably less salient are papers that fall under process‐oriented themes and the outcomes/consequences of CSR communications. The most important outlets for CSR communication‐related topics are Journal of Business...

CSR Communication: Quo Vadis?

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is changing the rules of branding but it is unclear how. While the literature offers a range of approaches seeking insight to how to manage CSR-related issues, practitioners are left in a state of confusion when having to decide on how to tackle CSR in a way that benefits both the corporate brand and society at large. Based on qualitative empirical research, this article offers a framework for companies to address CSR and their brands strategically, whether as entrepreneurs, performers, vocal converts, or quietly conscientious. We define these categories according to the level of involvement, integration, and the key initiator of the CSR focus. This article concludes with suggestions practitioners should keep in mind when aiming to balance stakeholder tensions and to achieve consistency in their corporate branding and CSR efforts.

/pdf/strategically-leveraging-corporate-social-responsibility-53ubhj366m.pdf

Strategically Leveraging Corporate Social Responsibility

The objective of this paper is to reflect on the consequences of the current economic and financial crisis on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), a concept of great importance nowadays The core approach is the possible link between CSR and the crisis, if both elements can be combined After an introduction to the current economic and financial situation, some conceptualizations about CSR are made to clarify the perspective used for this complex and incompletely defined concept The last part of the paper presents an approach to the combination of both concepts, concluding with the idea that CSR in crisis periods can be converted from being a threat to an opportunity

Crisis and Corporate Social Responsibility: Threat or Opportunity?

Microbial biocatalysis has emerged to a standard technology in the food, feed, pharmaceutical, and fine chemical industries. Since microorganisms are optimized by nature to maximize survival and typically not for the high-level accumulation of any sort of product, effective engineering strategies are required to satisfy the growing demand of new, economically competitive, and environmentally friendly products and processes. Random mutagenesis and subsequent selection used to be successful strateges, despite the fact that genetic changes were often not clear and include potentially unwanted detrimental alterations. The recent advances in systems biology research allow a genome-scale characterization of the complex composition and function of cells. We consider it important to recognize that the comprehensive understanding of a bioprocess is not restricted to the quantitative description of cellular functions but, in addition, includes analyses and evaluations on the reaction and process level. Using today's unprecedented toolbox, new whole-cell catalyst design targets can be systematically identified and the properties of microbial hosts can be specifically fine-tuned according to the requirements of a given bioprocess. This review proposes an integrated strategy as a holistic knowledge-driven approach for systems biotechnology and summarizes recent advances on the basis of selected examples.

https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/elsc.201000009

Systems biotechnology – Rational whole-cell biocatalyst and bioprocess design

Finally in Business: Organising Corporate Social Responsibility in Five.- Finally in Business: Organising Corporate Social Responsibility in Five.- Generic Models for the Business Context.- The SIGMA Management Model.- CSR in the Extractive Industry: An Integrated Approach.- RainbowScore(R): A Strategic Approach for Multi-dimensional Value.- COMPASS to Sustainability.- sustManage(TM) - Integrating Corporate Sustainability.- The Molecule Model.- Global Compact Performance Model.- Generic Models for the Societal Context.- WEV: A New Approach to Supply Chain Management.- A Model for Multi-stakeholder Partnerships on Human Rights in Tourism.- The Guangcai Model.- Community Learning in the Indian Education Sector.- Creating Space for CSR in Melbourne.- Organising Identity.- Integrating People, Planet and Profit.- Reflexivity: Linking Individual and Organisational Values.- Self-Organising Leadership: Transparency and Trust.- The CSR Brand Positioning Grid.- Organising Transactivity.- On Dialogue: A Self-Development Tool.- Stakeholder Engagement: The Experience of Holcim.- Managing Expectations in Partnerships.- A Stepwise Approach to Stakeholder Management.- Fair Labour Association Model.- A Stakeholder Model for Emerging Technologies.- Organising Systems.- Product Stewardship for CSR.- Sabento Model: Social Assessment of Biotechnological Production.- The Branding of CSR Excellence.- The Four Dimensions of Responsible Purchasing.- The Hurdles Analysis: A Way to Greener Public Procurement.- Strategic CSR Communication: Telling Others How Good You Are.- CSR Online: Internet Based Communication.- Organising Accountability.- A Product Sustainability Assessment.- Drawing the Lines in Value Chain Responsibility.- Resource Efficiency Accounting.- The GoodCorporation Framework.- Promoting Human Rights in the Supply Chain.- Organising the Business Proposition.- Assessing the Value Chain Context.- Pursuing Sustainability Through Enduring Value Creation.- Price: Earnings Ratio and Commercial Performance.- A Strategy Model for Sustainable Profits and Innovation.- Modelling the Business Case for Sustainability.- Creating Competitive Advantage: The Sustainable Value Model.- CSR Upside Down: The Need for Up-Front Knowledge Development.

M.C. de Witte

Papers

Management Models for Corporate Social Responsibility