Holistic sustainability evaluation methods including the social dimension for industry and agriculture

SETAC 18th LCA Case Study Symposium

Peter Saling, Jan Schoeneboom, Markus Frank, Martijn Gipmans

Our purpose

2

Platzhalter für Bild

We create chemistry for a sustainable future

3

Sustainable DevelopmentBalancing all three dimensions

Production Costs Commodity

Prices

Farm Profit International Trade

Employment

Subsidies

Health & Safety

Professional Training

International Communities

Equal Opportunities

Consumer Attitudes

Training

Land access

Raw Material Consumption

Global Warming

Resource Depletion

EnergyLand use change

Eco-Toxicity

Waste

BiodiversityWater Use

Soil degradationAcidification Sustainability

EvaluationMeet theexpectationsof society

Society

Ensurethe profitabilityof business

Economy

Care for theenvironment

Ecology

4

Sustainability Assessment Methods

Eco-Efficiency Analysis... including all life cycle costs… comparison of products or processes… ecological and economic aspects

have equal weight in the assessment … normalized and aggregated results... method validated by TÜV and NSF… 450 studies finalized

Life Cycle Assessment... evaluation of environmental impacts… absolute results

Life Cycle Inventory... quantification of inputs and outputs

SEEBALANCE andAgBalance... including social aspects

ISO

140

40 &

140

44IS

O 1

4045

AgBalance

Procedure for complete sustainabilityassessment!

Define customer benefit

Identify products / processes Establish life cycle

determination of social profiles for each stage

determination of ecological impacts for

individual life cycle segments

determination of costs for all life cycle

segments

aggregation of stakeholder effects

aggregation of the impacts to form „effect

categories“calculation of total life

cycle costs

normalization of social effects

normalization of environmental impact normalization of costs

Summary and Overall result

Society Ecology Economy

Environmental Assessment

Environmental Burden

low

high

1,0

Resource Consumption

Energy Consumption

Emissions

Tox-Potential

Risk Potential

Land Use

Effect Category Ecological Fingerprint

Aggregation and weighting

of impact categories

Calculation of relative product

position0,00

0,50

1,00

Energy

Emissions

Toxicitypotential

Risk potential

Resources

Land Use

● Alt.1 ● Alt.2 ● Alt.3 ● Alt.4

Calculation NormalizationWeighting Aggregation

Cradle to gateCradle to grave

Eco-efficiencyCF of Aluminium vs. Nylon 6 and Nylon 66

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

Cradle to gateper kg

Cradle to graveSame customer

benefit (automotive part

(PAIM))

0,5

1,0

1,50,51,01,5

aluminium

PA 6.6 lost core

PA 6 two shell

8

-1,5

1,0

3,5-1,51,03,5

Costs [normalized]

Envi

ronm

ent [

norm

aliz

ed]

Lucantin Red,chemical

Paprika,Capsanthin,Capsorubin

High eco-efficiency

Low eco-efficiency

Eco-Efficiency Portfolio of alternativesfor Red Pigments as a final result

Customer benefit:

Providing pigment for 100.000 eggs with pigment enriched diets fitting the yolk color fan of 13

In the Base case the Lucantin Red, chemical, is the most eco-efficient alternative

Sector of significantdifferences

Process evaluation andoptimization with a life-cycle basedEco-Efficiency WEB-based calculator

www.eeaman.com

0,4

1,0

1,60,41,01,6

www.eeaman.com

Employees

Working Accidents

Fatal Working Accidents

Occupational Diseases

Toxicity Potential

Wages and Salaries

Professional Training

Strikes and Lockouts

Social-Profile

Local and National Community

Employment

Qualified Employees

Gender Equality

Integration of Disabled Persons

Part-time Workers

Family Support

FutureGenerations

Number of Trainees

Research and Development

Investments

Social Security

International Community

Child Labor

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)

Imports from developing Countries

Consumers

Toxicity Potential

Other Risks

...

Assessing Impacts Overview of Social Impact Categories in SEEBALANCE

I. Schmidt, M. Meurer, P. Saling, A. Kicherer, W. Reuter, C. Gensch, SEEbalance - Managing Sustainability of Products and Processes with the Socio-Eco-Efficiency Analysis by BASF, Greener Management International, Greenleaf publishing Sheffield, S. Seuring (guest editor), Issue 45, Spring 2004, 79 - 94.

0,00

0,50

1,00Employees

Users

Local and nationalCommunityFuture Generations

InternationalCommunity

Ref.: CEM I + heating CEM I + X-SEED

Social Fingerprint and overal result

The X-SEED mix design has economical, ecological and social advantages

This gives a positive score in the final result of SEEBALANCE

12

AgBalance Method DevelopmentMeasure sustainability in agriculture

Eco-EfficiencySEEBALANCE®

SUSTAINABLEAGRICULTURE

Holistic method for life cycle assessment in agricultural and food value chain production processes

Helps to make informed decisions on how to manage improvement

16 categories, 69 indicators, more than 200 evaluation factors

Independent assurance of functionality and coherence received by

AgBalance™

13

Comprehensive data as a profound basis for clear statements

SUSTAINABILITY SCORE

Society

Economy

Ecology+-

Dimensions

Water use

Biodiversity

Land use

SoilEnergy consumption

Emissions

Macro economic

Fixed costs

Variable costs

Consumer

Local & national community

International community

Future generation

Farmer/Entrepreneur

Resource consumption

Eco-toxicity potential

CategoriesSubsidies

Maintenance/ General repair

GVP

Farm profits

Seed

Soil preparation

Insurances Labour

Investment

Crop protection

Fertilization

Machinery

Deprecations

Soil compaction

Soil erosion

Eco-Toxicity Farming intensity

Crop rotation

Potential for intermixing

Renewable Energy

Greenhouse gases

Acidification potential

Ozone depletion potential

Photochem. ozone creation potential

Water emissions

Solid waste

Assessed total water use

State indicator

Agri-environmental schemes

Nutrients balance

Eco-Toxicity potential

Abiotic resource depletion

Non-renewable Energy

Air emissions

Gender equality

Access to land

Residues in feed & food

Unauthorized / unlabeled GMO

Fair trade

Trainees

Social security

Association membership

Professional training

Imports from developing countries

Wages

Risk potential

Toxicity potential Integration

Wider economic effects

N-surplus

Soil carbon balance

Actual Agricultural area

Assessed total area (prechain)

Wages/salaries (prechain and downstream chain)

Strikes and lockouts

Functional product characteristics

Other risksEmployment

Qualified employees

Employees

Part time workers

Family support

R&D

Capital investments

Foreign direct investment

Child labour

Other fixed costs

Protected areas

Toxicity potential(Farmer)

Indicators

Life Cycle Impact Assessment Aggregation & Weighting

AgBalance™ Case StudyEnvironmental Dimension

14

Positive development from 1998 to 2008

Potential for biodiversity development improved due to increased adoption of conservation programs (“Natura 2000”) and better ecotox profile of agrochemicals used

More efficient land use

Consumption of water, energy and resource per functional unit reduced

State-of-the-art inputs, conservation programs and efficiency gains

AgBalance™

19982008

AgBalance™ Case StudySocial Dimension

15

Small changes from 1998 to 2008

Employment opportunities reduced (trade-off between society and economy)

Higher number of trainees in agriculture in the region

Payments to social security insurances have decreased

Increased imports of oil seed rape from countries with lower income index

Higher work-time efficiency shows tradeoff between society and economy

AgBalance™

19982008

AgBalance Method DevelopmentMeasure sustainability in agriculture

16

AgBalance™

How to use the sustainability evaluation tools?

Strategic Decisions Investment decisions Technology decisions Site decisions Evaluate product portfolio

Marketing, Customers Demonstration

of product advantages Improved customer relations Product Differentiation Better understand

competitive advantages

Research and development Quantification of

the most important factors Drive sustainable

products and processes Drive production/

process improvements

Stakeholder and Government Dialogue Communication

with authorities Impact assessment Corporate KPI Company Reporting