Social evaluation of municipal solid waste management systems from a life cycle perspective: a systematic literature review

• Published in: The international journal of life cycle assessment Vol. 27; no. 5; pp. 719 - 739
• Main Authors: Costa, Alline Marchesin, Mancini, Sandro Donnini, Paes, Michel Xocaira, Ugaya, Cássia Maria Lie, de Medeiros, Gerson Araujo, de Souza, Ricardo Gabbay
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.05.2022; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Best practice; Bibliometrics; Community involvement; Community participation; Content analysis; Decisions; Developing countries; Earth and Environmental Science; Environment; Environmental Chemistry; Environmental Economics; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology; Evaluation; Guidelines; Landfills; LDCs; Life cycle analysis; Life cycle assessment; Life cycles; Literature reviews; Living conditions; Local communities; Management systems; Municipal solid waste; Municipal waste management; Safety; Scientific papers; Social factors; Societal Lca; Solid waste management; System effectiveness; Waste management; Working conditions; Working hours; Life cycle assessment; Waste management; S-LCA; Municipal solid waste; Social life cycle assessment; Societal LCA; Social impact
• ISSN: 0948-3349; 1614-7502
• DOI: 10.1007/s11367-022-02057-6

Purpose The social aspects of municipal solid waste management (MSWM) systems are underpinning their sustainability and effectiveness. The assessment of these systems from a life cycle perspective is widespread throughout environmental life cycle assessment (LCA), but few studies have used social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). The present study is an innovative review with the objective to analyse and describe the current level of development of S-LCA applications in MSWM, and to identify the main methodological challenges and best practices, aiming at recommending approaches to harmonise future S-LCA applications in MSWM. Materials and methods A systematic review of the literature found 36 relevant scientific articles. These were submitted to bibliometric and content analysis, which includes an analysis of how methodological aspects of the four phases of S-LCA were applied in comparison with best practice and existing guidelines. Results and discussion There was a predominance of case studies in developing countries (59%) and evaluation of the stages of collection/transportation, pre-processing (sorting) and landfilling (55%). There were more studies focusing on stakeholders, “workers” and “local communities” and in the impact subcategories “employment”, “working hours”, “health and safety/working conditions”, “community involvement/participation” and “health and safety/living conditions of community”. There was great variability in the application of the method (47% of the studies included methodological developments). However, the 39% based on UNEP guidelines were closer to a methodological consensus. Conclusion In general, studies need more detail and clarity in describing the methodological decisions used. Improvements are needed for issues that limit the S-LCA method, including the difficulties of covering the entire life cycle, relating impacts to the functional unit, standardizing impact assessment methods, addressing allocation and data quality issues and interpretation of results and their limitations. Improvements can be achieved by using participatory methods in the selection of categories, subcategories and impact indicators, as well as by clarifying the definition of a product system and detailing “cut-off criteria” of processes/organizations and the impact of these decisions on results.