1

PROSA – Product Sustainability Assessment

PROSAplus Guideline

2

PROSA–ProductSustainabilityAssessmentPROSAplus Guideline

PublisherÖko-Institute.V.–InstituteforAppliedEcology

POBox500240D-79028FreiburgPhone:0049-761-45295-0Email:info@oeko.dewww.oeko.dewww.prosa.org

AuthorsMartinMöllerFlorianAntonyRainerGrießhammerJensGrögerRasmusPrieß

LayoutTobiasBinnig–gestalter.de

DieserLeitfadenistauchindeutscherSpracheverfügbar.ThisguidelineisalsoavailableinGerman.

CopyrightsTitle:Auto©Moose–stock.adobe.com(P.16),Fernseher©4thLifePhotography–stock.adobe.com,P.15©Luftbildfotograf–stock.adobe.com,P.23©TIMDAVIDCOLLECTION–stock.adobe.com,P.26©chattrakarn–stock.adobe.com,andere©privatoderÖko-Institute.V.

Thisbrochurewasproducedaspartofthejointresearchproject“SDGAssessment–Furtherdeve-lopmentofasustainabilityassessmentmethodbasedonthesustainabilitygoalsoftheUnitedNations(Agenda2030)”.TheprojectonwhichthisbrochureisbasedwasfundedbytheFederalMinistryonEducationandResearchinthefundingprogrammeSocial-EcologicalResearchunderthefundingcode01UT1901B.Theprojectteamisresponsibleforthemethod.

ThejointprojectwascarriedoutbytheZNU–CentreforSustainableLeadershipattheUniversityofWitten/Herdecke(projectmanagement)incooperationwithOeko-Institute.V.TheprojectteamconsistedofDrUlrikeEberle(projectmanagement),JuliusWenzig,DirkPieper(allZNU)andMartinMöller(deputyprojectmanagement),RasmusPrieß,JensGröger,DrFlorianAntony(allOeko-Institut)andProf.Dr.RainerGrießhammer.

3

PROSA – Product Sustainability Assessment

PROSAplusGuideline

1 PROSAinbrief 4

2 Pathfinder 6

3 LifeCycleAssessment(LCA)asoriginalmethod 8

3.1Comparisonofelectriccarswithpetrolanddieselcars 8

3.2Interpretationmodelstocaptureaggregateenvironmentalimpact 11

3.3ProductEnvironmentalFootprint(PEF)andaggregationmodel 12

4 LifeCycleCosting 14

5 Eco-EfficiencyAnalysis 17

6 SocialLifeCycleAssessment(SLCA) 19

6.1SocialIndicators 20

6.2ThePROSASLCA 22

7 BenefitAnalysis 24

7.1Societalutility(„publicvalue“) 26

7.2ConsumerresearchinPROSA 29

8 Sustainabilitycriteriaonthebasisofthe2030Agenda 30

9 Sustainabilityassessmentandaggregation 34

10 ProFitS 36

10.1TheProFitSsoftware 36

10.2Dataentry 36

11 ProductPortfolioAnalysis 44

Annex 48

Referencesandwebsite 54

4

New challenges

Strategicproductportfolioplanning,productdevelopmentandproductmar-ketinghavebecomemorecomplicated.Digitalisation,targetedtransformationssuchasthetransitionintheenergysec-tor,globalmarketswithdiverseculturesandrapidlychangingconsumerattitudespresentaneedtodeployintegratedprospectivemanagementmethodsinthedevelopmentofproductsandservices.Thegrowinginfluenceofsocialframe-workconditionsisafurtherreasonforusingsuchtools.ThissettingincludesstatutoryrequirementssuchasSocio-EconomicBenefitAnalysisundertheEuropeanUnion’schemicalslawintheshapeofREACHandtheMEEuPinte-gratedassessmentmethodrequiredbytheEUEco-DesignDirective.Inaddition,market-drivenelementssuchasfinancialratingandvoluntaryagreementssuchascorporatereportingareplayinganincreasinglyimportantrole,butalsothesharpeyeofNGOsandthemediaonthesocialacceptabilityofproductionpro-cessesincountriesoftheglobalnorthandglobalsouthisdecisive.

Veryfewmethodstotacklethesenewchallengeshaveyetbeendevelopedwhichareclearlycharacterizedandproveninpractice.PROSAisonesuchmethod.PROSAgivesparticularatten-tiontotheanalysisofsocialandsocietalaspects,andtotheconsiderationofutilityaspectsandconsumerresearch.Intheprocessofdevelopingtheindividualtoolsthatmakeupthemethod,carewastakentoengageincloseinternationalexchangeandharmonization,forin-stancewithSETAConLifeCycleCosting,withUNEP-SETAConSocialLCAandwithmajorindustrialcompaniesonapplica-tioninpractice.ThepresentPROSAplusmanual(asofJanuary2021)presentsthestateoftheartofthePROSAmethod(updateoftheinitialversionfrom2007).

PROSA (Product Sustainability Assessment)

isamethodforthestrategicanalysisandevaluationofproductportfolios,prod-uctsandservices.Thegoalistoidentifysysteminnovationsandoptionsforactiontowardssustainabledevelopment.PROSAstructuresthedecision-makingprocessesthatthisrequires,reducingcomplexitytokeyelements.

Importantfieldsofapplicationinclude: Strategicplanningandproduct

portfolioanalysisincompanies, productdevelopmentandmarketing, productpolicyanddialogue

processes, sustainableconsumptionandproduct

information.

Thankstotheopenstructure,PROSAcanalsobeusedtoanalysesustainabilityatotherlevels,suchastechnologiesorcompanies.

PROSAspanscompleteproductlifecycles;itassessesandevaluatestheenvi-ronmental,economicandsocialopportu-nitiesandrisksoffuturedevelopmenttrajectories.PROSAisaprocess-drivenanditerativemethodologywhichgivesdueregardtotimeandcostrestrictions.Itcallsasfaraspossibleonexisting,well-establishedindividualtools:MegatrendAnalysis,LifeCycleAssessment(LCA),LifeCycleCosting(LCC),SocialLifeCycleAssessment(SLCA),supplementedbytheBenefitAnalysisdevelopedbyOeko-Institut.AnewfeatureofPROSAplusisthewell-foundedandpredefinedselec-tionofsustainabilityindicatorsbasedonthe2030Agenda.

Figure1showsthebasicstructureofPROSA.

1 PROSA in brief

5

Figure1:BasicstructureofPROSA

ProFits evaluation model

Social Life-Cycle Ass. (SLCA)

Benefit Analysis (BA)

Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA)

Life-Cycle Costing (LCC)

Life-Cycle Costing

BeneGrade

Rohstoffe & Vorketten

Produktion

Handel

Anwendung

Gesellschaft

Definition of objective Analysis of market Brainstorming Sustainability assessment Strategy development and context on the basis of Agenda 2030

Development phases

Core tools

Megatrend Analysis

SocioGrade

EcoGrade

ProfitS

Eco-Efficiency

Prod

uktli

nie

Systemebenen

PROSAisanopen-endedmethodologythatdoesnotpredefineoutcomes.Itplacesaparticularfocusontheevalua-tionprocessandonevaluationmodels.Prevailingnormativedisparitiesandcon-flictsamongindividualstakeholders,cul-turesand(world)regionsaswellaschangingsocialvaluesareidentifiedclearly–asarepotentialapproachestowardscommoninnovation.PROSAmoderates,inatargetedmanner,oppos-inginterestsanddecision-makingsitua-tionsthatariseincorporateproductdevelopmentorinproductpolicyanddialogueprocesses.

Thefollowingelementsareseenasman-datoryelementsofPROSA:

Focusonsysteminnovation, clearprocessmanagement

(“Pathfinder”), benefitanalysis, inclusionofthecompleteproduct

line, analysisofsustainabilityaspectson

thebasisofthe2030Agenda.

Inthefollowing,thismanualexplainshowtousePROSAandillustratesthemethodwithcasestudies.

As a further development of the PROSA method, PROSAplus offers a number of advantages in its application, because the instrument

actsasastrategicradarforopportu-nitiesandrisks,

identifiesfuturemarketsandnewconsumerneeds,

takesaccountofpresentandfuturesocietalsettings,

helpstoavoidmisinvestments, inspiresbyrelayingtheviewsandval-

uesofdifferentstakeholders,regionsandcultures,

highlightsandreducescomplexitytotheessentialsandsetsclearpriorities.

Thesequenceofworkisguidedbythetypicalphasesofstrategyformulationprocesses.Theso-calledPathfinderstructurestheimplementationofPROSA.

6

Productsustainabilityassessmentspresentmajorchallenges.Thesechal-lengeswillbemasteredsuccessfullyandefficientlyifworkproceduresanddecision-makingprocesseshaveaclearandwell-reasonedstructure–which,inPROSA,isimposedbyaspecialprocesstoolcalledthePathfinder.ThePathfinderspecifiesthewayPROSAiscarriedout–thechronologicalsequence,theselectionof(core)tools–andprovidesaidssuchasindicatorlists,timeandcostmanage-mentstructures,graphicsroutinesandinterpretationframeworks.

ThePathfindersetsouttheprototypi-calperformanceofPROSA(cf.figureontheright).Whenusedbycompanies,thecompany’sownspecificmanagementtools,checklistsorinterpretationframe-workscanbeusedreadily.Astrategyteamshouldbeformedwithinthecom-panytocarryoutorsupportPROSA.

Thesequenceoftheprocessisguidedbythetypicalphasesofstrategyfor-mulationprocesses:definitionofob-jective,analysisofmarketandsetting,brainstorming,evaluationandstrategyformu-lation.TheperformanceofPROSAisprocess-ledanditerative–initial,orientinganalysesarepursuedingreaterdepthlateron,newideasorunexpectedfindingscanchangethecourseoftheprocessorcancausepreviousphasestobereworked.

Core tools and new toolsAsetofcoretoolsisusedtosupportworkintheindividualphases.Mostofthetoolsarematureandincommonuse.Theyarealreadydeployedinmostlargecompaniesandinpublicproductpolicy.Theseincludemegatrendanalysis,consumerresearchandLifeCycleAssess-ment(LCA).ThreenewcoretoolswerespeciallydevelopedforPROSA:SocialLCA(togetherwiththeUNEP-SETACLifeCycleInitiative),BenefitAnalysisandtheProFitS(ProductsFittoSustainability)as-sessmentsoftware.

Process-led and iterativeDependinguponcontext,certaintoolscangaingreaterorlesserimportanceorcanprovetolackrelevanceinthespecificcase.Conversely,othertoolscanbeusedwithoutdifficultywhentheyarerequired–a“joker”isplacedtomarkthepositionofsuchspecialtoolsintheprocess.Suchtoolsmayincludesafetyanalysesforfacilitieswheremajoracci-dentsareanissue,(eco)toxicologicalriskassessment,noisestudies,pre-investmentappraisalsetc.PROSAisusedtoselectanddeterminethedepthofanalysisofthedifferenttoolsandindicators,anditensuresintegrationofthevariousfind-ings.

Theassignmentofindividualstepsandtoolstospecificphasesistobeunder-stoodasarecommendation.Dependinguponcontext,thestepsarecarriedoutindifferentdepths.CoretoolscanalsobeappliedinotherorseveralphasesofthePROSAprocess.Forinstance,evaluationtakesplaceinthelastphase,butimpor-tantpre-evaluationsalreadytakeplaceinthefirstphases–whendeter-miningthegoal,identifyingstakeholders,prioritiz-ingideasandselectingindicators.Depar-turesfromtherecommendedorplannedsequenceofworkarepossiblewithoutfurtherado–buttheyshouldbedecideduponandreasonedclearly.

Thenextsectionsofthismanualpresentindetailandexplainwithcasestudiesthefollowingtoolsandtheselectionofindicators:

LifeCycleAssessment, LifeCycleCosting, Eco-EfficiencyAnalysis, SocialLCA, BenefitAnalysis, Selectionofsustainabilityindicators

basedonthe2030Agenda, Evaluationandaggregation, Theintegratedinterpretationframe-

workand ProFitSsoftware.

TheProductPortfolioSustainabilityAnalysisispresentedattheendofthis

2 Pathfinder

7

brochure,asitrepresentsaspecialusecaseofPROSAincompanies.IfsuchaProductPortfolioAnalysisiscarriedout,itisofcourseatthebeginningoftheinvestigation.

TheannextothisbrochurecontainsseveralchecklistsandoverviewsdesignedtoaidtheperformanceofPROSA.Thesecanreadilybesubstitutedbycompany-specificchecklistswheresuchexist:

“Actors”checklist, “Stakeholderinvolvement”checklist, “Opportunitiesandrisksarisingfrom

cooperatingwithactors”checklist, “Integrationofthesub-methodsin

PROSA”checklist, Listofsocialindicators.

Figure 2 – Sequence of PROSA and tasks of the individual phases

Phase

Definition of objective

Analysis of market and

context

Brainstorming

Sustainability assessment

Strategy planning

Tools and aids

ActorAnalysisStakeholderInvolvementChecklistActorCooperationChecklist

ProductPortfolioAnalysis

IndicatorList

IntegrationChecklist

Life-CycleAssessment(LCA)

Life-CycleCosting(LCC)

SocialLCA(SLCA)

ConsumerResearchBenefitAnalysis

Joker

ProFitS”(ProductsFittoSustainability)integratedinterpretationframeworkandpartialevaluationframeworksforindividualdimensions.

Task and outcome of phase

Concretizethetaskandcapacities(humanandfinan-cial)andsetschedule

Carryoutinternalandexternalactoranalysisandclarifyinvolvementofinternalandexternalactors(companies,stakeholders)

Selectpriorityproductfields

Comprehensivecharacterizationoftheproductanditssetting(society,market,technology,countryorregionetc.),whereappropriatesynopsisofconceivablesystemdevelopmentsinconsistentscenarios

Collectvisions,ideas,productorsystemalternatives.Prioritizethesefortheassessmentphase

Adoptionoftheproduct-andcompany-relatedsus-tainabilityindicatorsandthebenefitindicatorsofthe2030Agenda.

Ifnecessary,expandtoincludemoredetailedindicators.

In-depthsustainabilityassessment

Analyseenvironmentalaspectsthroughouttheproductlifecycle

Analyseeconomicaspectsthroughouttheproductlifecycle

Analysesocial/societaldeterminantsthroughouttheproductlifecycle

Identifyconsumergroupsandtheirneedsandutilitydemands

Ifrequired,assessfurtherorotheraspectsusingspecialtoolssuchassafetyanalyses,toxicologicalanalyses,noisestudiesetc.(“Joker”tomarkthepositionofsuchtoolsintheprocess)

Derivedevelopmentpathsandconcretestrategicop-tionsforactionandsubsequentlyevaluatethese.Theevaluationincludesabenefit-sustainabilityap-praisalandanexaminationwhetherminimumsustain-abilitycriteriaarecompliedwith.Optionsforactioncanalsorelatetocommunicationorre-organization(modificationofstrategyoroftheorganization,or-ganizationallearningetc.).

8

TheimplementationofLifeCycleAssess-mentsisdescribedindetailintheISOstandards14040and14044,LCAbeingawidelyknownandprovenmethodol-ogy.Inmanycompanies,itisusedforproductdevelopment,inpoliticsforsomeproduct-relatedlegislation(suchastheEcodesignDirectiveandthePackag-ingAct),andforconsumerinformationandproductlabels.ThebasicstructureoftheLCAcomprisesfourphases(goalandscopedefinition,inventoryanalysis,impactassessmentandinterpretation;seeISO14040).TheothercoretoolsofPROSAsuchasLifeCycleCosting(LCC)andSocialLifeCycleAssessment(SLCA)aswellastheintegratedproductsustain-abilityanalysisemploythebasicmeth-odologicalapproachofLCAasdirectlyaspossibleor,wherenecessary,inamodi-fiedform.

ThemethodologicaldescriptionoftheLCAcanbedispensedwithatthispointduetotheexistingstandards.ProspectiveLCAsposeaparticularchallengebe-causehereitisnecessarytousealargernumberofassumptionswithacompara-blyhighlevelofuncertainty.Thefol-lowingcomparisonofelectriccarswithpetrolanddieselcarsshowsontheonehandtheefficiencyoftheLCAmethod,andontheotherhandthegreatimpor-tanceofwell-foundedassumptionsanddataaswellassensitivitycalculations.

3.1 Comparison of electric cars with petrol and diesel cars

TheaimofthisLCAistocompareclas-sicpetrolanddieselcarswithbatteryelectricvehicles(hereinafterreferredtoas‘electriccars’)intermsoftheircon-tributiontoclimatechangemitigation,ineachcaseinrelationtonewcars.Theresultsserveasabasisforproduct-andmobility-relateddecisionsaswellasforconsumerdecisions.Thereby,itisgener-allyassumedthatalternativeformsofmobility(long-distancerail,publictrans-port,cycling,carsharing)havealreadybeenconsideredorexhausted,andthat

thepurchaseofanowncarisconsiderednecessary.

Thefollowingalternativeswerenotincludedinthecomparison:

Plug-inhybridvehicles,becausethesearepredominantlydrivenlikeclassiccars,i.e.withahighproportionjour-neyswithpetrol-ordiesel-poweredvehicles,mainlywithcompanycars,butalsowithprivatecars;

Fuelcellcars,becausetheseonlyhaveadvantagesforfrequentlong-dis-tancejourneysandtherearehardlyanyvehiclesavailableonthemarketanyway;

petrolordieselcarspoweredby“CO2

neutral”power-to-Xfuels,becausethiscombinationhasaveryhighdemandforrenewableelectricitycomparedtobatteryelectriccars.Inaddition,CO2emissionscanbeevenhigherthanwith(fossil)dieselorpetroliftheelectricitydoesnotcomefromadditionalrenewablesources.

Thefollowingframeworkconditionsapplytothecomparison:Thecountryofaccounting(fortheusephase)isGer-many,productionisgloballydistributed.TheGermanelectricitymixisusedasthebasisfortheelectricitysupplyintheusephase.Itisassumedthatrenewableener-giesareincreasinglyusedintheproduc-tionofelectricity(increaseoftheshareto65%by2030inaccordancewiththeGermanGovernment’sClimateActionProgramme).Itisalsoassumedthatthenetworkofelectricchargingstationswillbesufficientlyexpandedinthecomingyears.Theconstructionofthenetworkandthe(earlier)constructionofthecurrentfillingstationnetworkarenotaccountedfor(cut-offcriterion).

Giventhattherearewelloverathou-sanddifferentcarmodels,thecompari-sonismadeusingacasestudy,namelythemostfrequentlysoldcarmodelinGermany:theVWGolf.Asregardselec-triccars,theVW ID.3 Pro Performance(electriccarwith58kWhbattery)ismostsimilartotheGolf.Thedieselandpetrol

3 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as original method

9

versionsmostsimilartotheID.3aretheVW Golf 1.5eTSI Life DSG(petrolcar)andthe VW Golf 2.0 TDI SCR Life.

Thedifferentbenefitaspectsaredis-cussedinchapter7(BenefitAnalysis).InthecaseoftheID.3,thevariantwithahigherbatterycapacity(i.e.58kWhbat-tery)waschosenbecausethisisassoci-atedwithagreaterrangeandisincreas-inglyindemand.

Thedifferentbenefitaspectsaredis-cussedinchapter7(benefitanalysis).InthecaseoftheID.3,thevariantwithahigherbatterycapacity(i.e.58kWhbat-tery)waschosenbecausethisisassoci-atedwithagreaterrangeandisincreas-inglyindemand.

Whenbalancingtheproductionandrecyclingofpassengercars,existingandgenerallyrecognisedLCAdatacanbe

usedforthe“vehiclebody”.Thevehiclebodyaccountsforthelargestshareofgreenhousegasemissionsduringpro-ductionexpressedinCO

2equivalentsorCO2e.Inthecaseofdieselandpetrolpassengercars,thefollowingpartsareaddedtothevehiclebodyintheLCA:Combustionengine,gearbox,additionalcomponents(e.g.fueltank),exhaustsystemandstarterbattery.Fortheelec-triccar,thefollowingpartsareaddedinstead:Electricmotor,(smaller)gearbox,variousadditionalcomponentsfortheelectricdrivetrain(e.g.high-voltagecables,chargingelectronics,inverter/converter)andaboveallalargebattery(inthecaseoftheID.3,alithium-ionbat-tery,theproductionofwhichcausespar-ticularlyhighgreenhousegasemissions(seeFig.3)).TherecyclingoftheID.3issomewhatmorecomplexthanthatoftheGolfdieselorGolfpetrol.

Figure.3-Greenhousegasemissionsofvehicleproductionanddisposalbycomparison

Source:OwncalculationsaccordingtoAgoraandIFEU

14.000

12.000

10.000

8.000

6.000

4.000

2.000

0 ID.3 GolfPetrol GolfDiesel

Disposal/Recycling

Battery

Gearbox(engine)

Vehiclebody

5.407

1.863

6.148

839

14.257

5.407

1.508

694

7.609

5.407

1.324

694

7.425

THG

-Em

issi

onen

ink

gCO

2e

10

TheproductionoftheID.3sissignifi-cantlymoreCO2-intensive(around100kgCO2eperkWhofbatterycapacity),especiallyduetothebattery.Thedataontheproductionofthebatterydifferconsiderably,andthereiscurrently(asof2020)onlyasmallamountofreliableprimarydataavailable.Thereareseveralreasonsforthis:Batterydevelopmentiscomparativelynew,manufacturersarecompetingwithdifferentbatterysys-tems,productiondataisthereforepartlysecret,anddynamictechnicaldevelop-mentandupscalingarereducingCO

2eemissionsperkWhofbatterycapacity.Alotofelectricityisusedintheproductionofthebattery,sothatthetotalemissionsofbatteryproductionalsostilldependsignificantlyontheelectricitymixofthemanufacturingcountry.

Inameta-studyconductedbyAgoraVerkehrswende,23studiesonbatteryproductionwereevaluated.ThedataonCO2eemissionsperbatterycapacityrangedfromabout40to270kg/CO2e.Theaverageofthetenmorerecentstudies(asof2016)wasaround130kWh.AgoraVerkehrswendeassumedanaver-agevalueofaround145kgCO2e/kWhaf-teradetailedevaluation.AmorerecentSwedishstudyreportedarangeof61-106kgCO2e/kWh(Emilsson&Dahllöf2019).Inthefollowing,thehighervalueof106kgCO2e/kWhfromtheSwissstudyisusedasabasis.Fortheproductionofa58kWhbatterythiscorrespondsto6,148kgCO2e/kWh,forasmaller35kWhbat-teryonlyto3,710kgCO2e/kWh.

Fortheusephase,aholdingperiodof12yearsandatotalmileageof180,000kilometresor15,000kilometresperyearareselectedasthefunctionalunit.Thisassumptionontheannualmileageofprivateownersisacompromise:petrolcarsdriveonaverageabout10,400kilo-metres;dieselcars,ontheotherhand,about17,400kilometres;electriccarsabout11,500kilometres(ofcourse,thereisnolong-termexperiencehereyet).Car-sharingcarsandtaxishavemuchhigherannualmileages–upto70,000kilometres.

Theconsumptionvaluesofelectricity,dieselandpetrolper100kmarebasedonthestandardvaluesstatedbythemanufacturersaccordingtotheWLTPtest(therealvaluesarehigher).

WhiletheCO2eemissionsforpetroland

dieselareconstantinafirstapproxima-tion,eveninperspective,verydifferent,time-relatedassumptionscanbemadeforelectricity:

Currenthouseholdelectricitymix(electricitymixoftheyear2020);

Averageovertheperiodofuse(asassumed)andthusoftheaverageelectricitymixoverthenexttwelveyears(because,accordingtothefederalgovernment‘splans,theCO2eemissionsperkWhdecreaseeachyearduetotheincreaseinrenewableenergies);

Assumptionthattheelectriccarsarepredominantlychargedatprivateorcommercialphotovoltaicsystems(withverylowCO2eemissions);

Assumptionthattheelectriccarsarepredominantlychargedatnight(withathenhighershareofcoal-firedelectricityandcorrespondinglysig-nificantlyhigherCO2eemissionsperkWh).

InacompleteLCA,usuallyupto16impactcategoriesareanalysed.SincetheobjectiveoftheLCApresentedistoanalyseonlytheclimaterelevance,thecomparisonislimitedtothegreenhousegasemissionsalongthelifecycle(rawmaterials,productionofthepassengercar,productionofelectricityordieselandpetrol,useandrecyclinganddisposalofthecar).

TheLifeCycleInventory(Tab.1)showsthat,withtheassumptionsdescribed,theID.3producessignificantlylowerCO

2eemissionsoverallthandieselorpetrolcars.ThehigherCO2eemissionscausedbythebatteryproductionoftheID.3arecompensatedforafterabout80,000kilometresofdriving(withthesmaller35kWhbatteryalreadyafterabout60,000kilometres).

11

OtheradvantagesoftheID.3snotinclud-edherearethesignificantlylowernoiselevelsinthecity(athigherspeeds,tyrenoisedominateswithallpassengercars)

andthattherearenopollutantemissionsinthecity(exceptfortheusualtyreabra-sionofallpassengercars).

Sensitivityanalysescanbeusedtoexam-inetheextenttowhichotherassump-tionswouldhaveanimpact.Forreasonsofspace,thisisonlypresentedqualita-tivelybelow:

Thecomparisonshiftspartiallyorcom-pletelyinthedirectionoftheGolfdiesel/petrolunderthefollowingassumptions:

Considerationofproductiononly, assumptionoflargerbatteries(and

largercars), significantlyhighervaluesforbattery

production, onlyasmalltotalmileageorconsider-

ationofthefirstyearsafterpurchaseonly(e.g.3-5years),

chargingofelectriccarsonlyormainlyatnight.

TheID.3performsevenbetterunderthefollowingassumptions:

Useofasmallerbattery, evenhighermileage, chargingmainlyduringtheday, andveryclearly:chargingpredomi-

nantlyatthe(own)PVsystem.

Thesensitivityanalysesalsoshowhowthereplacementofanelectriccarcanbeoptimisedfromanenvironmentalpointofview:assmallacaraspossible,assmallabatteryaspossible,chargingasoftenaspossibleduringthedayandasmuchaspossibleonone‘sownPVsystem.

3.2 Interpretation models to cap-ture aggregate environmental impact

LCAaccordingtoISO14040andISO14044capturesthemostvariedtypesofresourceconsumption(e.g.energycarriers,minerals,orwater)andenvi-ronmentalimpactintheformofimpactcategories(greenhousegases,acidifica-tion,eutrophicationetc.)andreportstheseinrelationtoafunctionalunitas“inventory results”.ThisisfollowedbytheImpact Assessmentasanevalua-tionofpotentialenvironmentalimpacts.IndividualLifeCycleInventoryresults(e.g.emissionsofCO

2andmethane)areclassifiedandassignedtoimpact

Table1–Comparisonofgreenhousegasemissionsinproductionanduse

ID.3 per perfor-mance 150 kW (58 kWh battery)

14.257

12.640

26.897

15,4

0,456

Petrol GolfVW Golf 1.5 eTSI Life DSG

7.609

28.728

36.337

5,7

2,8

Diesel GolfGolf VIII 2.0 TDI SCR Life DSG

7.425

24.536

31.961

4,3

3,17

Emissions(kgCO2e)per180.000kmand12years

Carproduction&disposal(kgCO2e)

Production&useofelectricity/diesel/petrol

Total

Assumption

Consumption/WLTPperkWh/100km(inclcharginglosses)orperlitre/100km)

GreenhousegasemissionsperkWh(averageoftheperiodoftheyears2020-2031)orperlitre(accordingtoDIN16.258)

12

categories(e.g.greenhouseeffect)andcharacterisedorweightedaccordingtotheirspecificcontributionperkilogram(e.g.tokgCO2equivalents).AccordingtotheISOstandard,theinterpretationthentakesplaceasanevaluationoftheim-pactassessmentwithregardtothegoalandscopeofthestudy.Forthispurpose,furthersub-steps(optionalaccordingtotheISOstandard)cantakeplace–anormalisationtocomparablevalues(e.g.tonationalemissionsorlegallypermittedemissionquantities),similareffectscanbegrouped(grouping)ortheirsignifi-canceorweightassessed(weighting).

ISOStandards14040/14044,however,prohibitsuchoverallaggregationifdifferentproductalternativesaretobecomparedandpublished.ThisfeatureoftheISOstandardsstandsinthewayofpracticalapplication–inpractice,aggregationtoanexpressionofoverallenvironmentalimpactmusttakeplaceoutsideoftheLCAinformaltermsiftheprocessistoconformtothestandards.

Inpractice,aggregationsareoftenused,especiallywhenseveralproductsoralternativesarecompared.Forreasonsofpracticabilityandintegrationintoanoverallassessment,itisadvisabletoworkwithassessmentmodelsthatallowag-gregationintoanoverallenvironmentalimpact.Anoverallenvironmentalindica-torisparticularlynecessary,however,ifaneco-efficiencyanalysisistobecarriedout(seep.17)orifalargernumberofeconomicandsocialaspectsarealsocon-sideredinthecontextofasustainabilityassessment.Evenifanoverallaggrega-tioniscarriedout,however,recoursetothebasicdataoftheresultsoftheimpactassessmentontheindividualenvironmentalimpactsshouldalwaysbeensuredforreasonsoftransparencyandtraceability.

Numerouscompanieshavetheir“own”environmentalassessmentmodels,atleastinternally;onlyafew,suchasBASFwithitseco-efficiencyanalysis(Saling2016),publishtheirassessmentapproach.ThePEFaggregationmodelpresentedby

theEUCommissionaspartofits“Prod-uctEnvironmentalFootprint”strategy,ontheotherhand,offerstheopportu-nityforanoverarching,uniformassess-ment.ForPROS,itisthereforerecom-mendedtousethisaggregationmodel.Anotherassessmentmodelcanbeused,butthePEFaggregationmodelshouldthenbesupplementedasasensitivityanalysis.

3.3 Product Environmental Foot-print (PEF) and aggregation model

In2013,theEuropeanCommissionpublishedtheproduct-relatedstrategy“ProductEnvironmentalFootprint”(PEF).TheaimistostandardisetheLifeCycleAssessmentanalysisandevaluationofproductsasfaraspossible.Theback-groundtothiswastheverydifferentanddifficult-to-compareresultsofLifeCycleAssessmentsforindividualproducts,whichwerepossibleduetothecompara-tivelyopenISOstandard.TheEUCom-mission,ontheotherhand,isstrivingforanimproveduseforplanningandlegis-lationaccordingtotheprincipleof“com-parabilitybeforeflexibility”andwiththecreationofproductgroup-specificrules(ProductEnvironmentalFootprintCat-egoryRules–PEFCRs).Forexample,themostrelevantlifecyclephases,processesandenvironmentalimpactsshouldbeidentifiedforeachproductgroup.Theresultsoftheimpactassessmentarethenaggregatedonthebasisofauniformmodelacrossallproductgroups.

Afteralongpilotphase(2013-2018),theexperiencesandfurtherdevelop-mentrequirementsweresummarisedinaworkingdocument(ZamporiandPant2019).Inadditiontoavarietyofmeth-odologicalandprocess-leddiscussions,thepassagesonevaluationwereparticu-larlyrelevant.Fortheselected16impactcategories,impactassessmentsaswellasweightingsbetweentheimpactcatego-riesandaggregationtoasinglescorewerespecified.TheassessmentprocessisdescribedindetailinSalaetal.2018.

13

InthePEF aggregation model,theLifeCycleInventorydataareassessedusingasetofpredefinedimpactassessmentmethods(Salaetal.2018,p.9f.).Thesubsequentstandardisationiscarriedoutinrelationtoglobalpercapitavalues.Theactualweightingofdifferentenvi-ronmentalimpactcategoriesiscarriedoutonthebasisofacombinedmodelinwhichexpertassessmentsandthesocietalperceptionoftherespectiveen-vironmentalproblemwereconsideredinsummary.Inaddition,therobustnessoftheestimationofenvironmentalimpacts(dataqualityanduncertainty)isalsoincludedintheevaluation(seeindetail).Theresultsoftheindividualimpactcat-

egoriesaremultipliedbythecorrespond-ingweightingfactorsandthenaddedtogetherwithoutfurtherweightinginaratioof1:1.Basedontheprioritisationsetbysocietyandscience,thePEFaggre-gationmodelmapssociety’sassessmentoftherelevanceofvariousenvironmen-talproblems.Thegreaterthe(numerical)aggregatevalue,thegreatertheenvi-ronmentalimpact.

Duetotheexistingweaknessesindataqualityanduncertaintyinweighting,theEuropeanCommission’sJointResearchCentrecurrentlyrecommendsnotyetincludingthetoxicity-relatedimpactcat-egoriesinthePEFcalculation(Tab.2).

Table2–RecommendedPEFassessmentmodel(excludingtoxicity-relatedimpactcategories)

Source:Salaetal.2018,p.34

Climatechange

Ozonedepletion

Particulatematter

Ionizingradiation,HH

Photochemicalozoneformation,HH

Acidification

Eutrophication,terrestrial

Eutrophication,freshwater

Eutrophication,marine

Landuse

Wateruse

Resourceuse,mineralandmetals

Resourceuse,fossils

Aggregated weighting set

(A)

15,75

6,92

6,77

7,07

5,88

6,13

3,61

3,88

3,59

11,1

11,89

8,28

9,14

Robustness factors

(B)

0,87

0,6

0,87

0,47

0,53

0,67

0,67

0,47

0,53

0,47

0,47

0,6

0,6

Intermediate Coefficients

C=A*B

13,65

4,15

5,87

3,3

3,14

4,08

2,4

1,81

1,92

5,18

5,55

4,97

5,48

Final weighting factors (incl. robustness)

Cscaledto100

22,19

6,75

9,54

5,37

5,1

6,64

3,91

2,95

3,12

8,42

9,03

8,08

8,92

14

LifeCycleCosting(LCC)isusedtoascer-taintherelevantcostsarisingforoneormoreactorsinrelationtoaproductanditsalternativesinthecourseofaproductlifecycle.Thereisnogenerallyapplicablestandardyetforthepreparationofalifecyclecostanalysis,onlytheDINENdraft60300-3-3:2014-09andrulesonindividu-alapplications,forexamplethetechnicalruleDINSPEC77234:2013-09:Guidelinesfortheassessmentoflifecyclecostsinproduct-servicesystems.

Economicanalysesaregenerallyconsid-eredtobehighlyexactandobjective,butinpracticethereareconsiderableproblemsduetothepooravailabilityofdataanddifferentassumptionsregard-ingthetypesofcosts(fullcosts,partialcosts,budgetcosts,actualcosts,time-de-pendentdynamiccosts,scaling-depend-entcosts),pricesinfluencedbythestate(subsidies,prescribedrecyclingquotasetc.),theassumptionofvaryinginterestratesortypesofdepreciationetc.

LikeaLifeCycleAssessment(LCA),anLCCcanbedividedupintofourparts:

studygoalandscopedefinition, inventoryanalysis(collectingdataon

individualcosts), costassessment, interpretation.

Sincethecostsvarydependingontheactor,itisnecessarytodetermineatthestarttheactor/sforwhomthelife-cyclecostsarebeingascertained.Whileeconomicdatahavetheadvantagethatthereisacorrespondingeconomicunit(leavingasidetheissueofdifferentcur-rencies),itisimportanttoremembernonethelessduringtheinterpretationstagethatcostscannotalwayssimplybeaddedup.Itmakeslittlesense,forexample,simplytocountupthewagesincountriesoftheglobalsouthandtheglobalnorthwithouttakingthecostoflivingineachcaseintoaccount.

Ifacomparisonwithcompetitorprod-uctsisconductedandpublished,theLifeCycleCostingshouldbeaccompaniedbyacriticalreview.

Decisionsandmodellingsthat,basedonexperience,shouldbegivenparticularattentionaresummarizedinthechecklistpresentedbelow(Figure4).

4 Life Cycle Costing (LCC)

Points to be given particular attention in the Life Cycle Costing

Determiningtheactorfromwhoseperspectivecostsarebeingascertained

Definitionofgoalandscopeofthestudy,andofthefunctionalunit

Prospectiveorretrospective

Fullcostsand/orpartialcosts

Actualcostsand/orbudgetcosts

Dynamicand/orstaticprocedures

Pricesand/orcosts

Inclusionofexternalorinformalcosts

Inclusionofhiddencostsandpossibleliabilityrisks

Marketprices,pricesinfluencedbylegalregulations(subsidiesetc.)

Taxesandcontributions

Handlingofdiscounting

Handlingofdepreciation(linear,degressive)

Handlingofdifferentcurrencies

Handlingofdifferentcostsoflivingindifferentcountries

Normalization

ConductofaCriticalReviewifLCCistobemadepubliclyavailable

4

4

Figure4–ChecklistforLifeCycleCosting

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

15

Example of life-cycle costs of three cars

InthechapteronLifeCycleAssessments,threecarswerecomparedtoeachother(theID.3electriccarwiththepetrolGolfandthedieselGolf).Thecompari-sonshowedthattheID.3hadthebestperformancefromaCO2pointofview.Butwhataboutthecosts?Thecalcula-tionbelowshowsthattherearemanyinfluencingfactorsandthattheperiodoftimeoverwhichcostsareincurredalsoaffectstheresult.

ThecalculationwasbasedonacostcomparisonbyADAC(ADAC2020)andsupplementedbytheCO2priceofpetrolanddieselapplicablefortheperiod2021-2024.Furthermore,thefuelpricesweremodifiedandthepricesatthetimeofthepreparationofthepresentLCA(September2020)wereusedasabasis.Asfarastransferable,thesameassump-tionsweremadeforthecomparisonasfortheLCAcomparison(seep.8),relating,forexample,tothesizeofthebattery.AswiththeADACcalculation,thefiveyears2020-2024weretakenastherelevanttimeperiod,i.e.notaperiodof12yearsasintheLCA.ThereasonforthisisthatthereisstillnoexperienceoftheresidualvalueofelectriccarsortheID.3forthislongerperiod.Thedeprecia-tioninthefirstfiveyearswasassumedbyADACtobecomparabletothatofdieselandpetrolcars;however,thegovern-mentpurchasepremiumwastakenintoaccount.Furthermore,electriccarswerealsoexemptfromvehicletax.

Thenewpricesofthethreecarsare€29,687(petrolGolf),€32,207(dieselGolf)and€35,575(ID.3).However,in2020therewasagovernmentsubsidyforelectriccarsof€6,000,combinedwitharebatebythemanufacturersof€3,000plusVAT,sothatthetotalsubsidyamountedto€9,570andthereducedpurchasepriceoftheID.3wasonly€26,005.

TheadditionalcostsduetoCO2pricing

werecalculatedasanaverageoverthe

fiveyearsof€0.076perlitreofpetroland€0.085perlitreofdiesel(CO2pric-ingstartedin2021with€25pertonneofCO2andisincreasedinstepsupto€45in2024;VATisaddedtotheaver-ageCO2price).FortheID.3,itwasas-sumedthat85%ofitischargedathomeand15%isfast-chargedatexternalchargingstations(withdoublethepriceof63cents/kWh).Forhomecharging,thecostsofanewlyinstalledwallboxwereassumed(atacostof€1,000;servicelife10years,calculatedproratafor5years).

Forfinancingtherelativelyhighpurchasepriceofthethreecars,noborrowingorinterestwasassumedbyADAC.

Thecalculationofthelife-cyclecostsoverthefive-yearholdingperiodisshowninFig.5.TheID.3isthereforealsothemostfavourablefromafinancialpointofview.

16

Beyondthecostcomparisonofthethreecars,furtherinterestingconclusionscanbedrawnfromLifeCycleCosting.Theaveragepriceperkilometreisveryhighforallthreecars,withtheID.3beingthecheapest(41centsperkilometre),whilethecostsofthepetrolGolf(49cents/km)andthedieselGolf(52cents/km)aresig-nificantlyhigher.Therealcostsof“own-ing”carsareusuallysignificantlyunder-estimatedbyconsumers.Acombinationofrailtravelandcarsharingwouldbesignificantlycheaper.Mostly,consumersonlylookatfuelcosts(whichareclearlydisplayedatthefuelpump)andcom-plainaboutpossiblepriceincreasesforpetrolordiesel.However,fuelcostsmakeuponlyasmallpartoftheaveragecosts:only10%forthedieselGolfandonly16%forthepetrolGolf;theelectricitycostsoftheID.3are14%.

Thecostbreakdownalsoshowswhyaswitchfromdrivingtopublictransportissodifficult.Ifyouownandrunacar,thepurchaseandfixedcostsarealreadyover70%,whilethevariablecostsperkmarecomparativelylow.

Figure5–LifeCycleCosting(Holdingperiod:5years,75,000kmmileage)

Source:OwncalculationsaccordingtoAgoraandifeu

40.000

35.000

30.000

25.000

20.000

15.000

10.000

5.000

0 ID.3 PetrolGolf DieselGolf

Workshopcosts(inspection,main-tenance,oilchange,repairs,tyrereplace-ment)

Otherfixedcosts(insurance,parking,generalinspection/emissionsinspection)

Vehicletax

Otheroperatingcosts(maintenance,Ad-Blue)

Energycosts

Valueloss

16.740

4.181

4.680

1.250500

3.300

30.651

20.040

5.917

1.343

36.540

22.200

4.005

1.650

38.775

5.380

3.360

500

6.190

1.130

3.600

Life

-cyc

lec

osts

in

Euro

17

5 Eco-Efficiency Analysis

Eco-EfficiencyAnalysisisatoolforcom-parativeassessmentsofenvironmentalandeconomicaspectsinPROSA–andindeedingeneralwhereversocialaspectsdonotplayamajorroleordataonsuchaspectsaredifficulttocollect.

Theterm“eco-efficiency”isusedindifferentways,forexamplefortheeco-efficiencyofnationaleconomies,ofindividualcompanies(e.g.ineco-ratingschemes)orofproductsandservicesasinPROSA.

Efficiencygenerallydescribestheratiobetweentarget(value)andinputandmustnotbeconfusedwitheffective-ness,whichcharacterizestheoutcome(regardlessofinput).Inbothprocessmanagementandpolitics,efficiencyandeffectivenessaregenerallyaimedatinparallel–adefinedgoalistobeattainedfullyortothegreatestpossibleextent(effectiveness)withthelowestpossibleinput(efficiency).

Eco-efficiencyanalysescapturetherela-tionshipbetweengoalattainment(low-estpossibleenvironmentalimpact)andresourceinput(costs).Usuallyonlypartialaspectsareconsidered,e.g.intheformofenergyefficiencyanalyses,materialef-ficiencyanalyses,CO

2efficiencyanalysesetc.Comprehensiveeco-efficiencyanaly-sesaremethodologicallymuchmorede-manding,becausehereanumericalag-gregationofthevariousenvironmentalimpactsmustbecarriedoutinadvance.Whencomparingseveralalternativesandconsideringnumerousenvironmentalimpactindicators,however,thisquicklybecomesunmanageableandstandsinthewayofanintegrated,comprehensiveassessment.ForPROSAplus,anaggrega-tionisthereforerecommended,basedontheEU‘sPEFaggregation(seep.13).

Thecomparisonoftwoalternativesplacesthereductioninenvironmentalimpactinrelationtotheadditionalcostsorsavings(expressedinmonetaryunits).Thelargerthisvalue,themoreeco-effi-cientthealternativeis.ThefindingsoftheLCAandLifeCycleCostingsubstudies

shouldbepresentedinbothnumeri-calandgraphicformfortheindividualalternatives.

Eco-Efficiency Analysis in PROSAProductEco-EfficiencyAnalysisisanassessmenttoolwithinPROSA.ItplacesthefindingsofanLCAandthoseofLifeCycleCostinginrelationtoeachother.Theimplementationoftheeco-efficiencyanalysisisbasedonDINENISO14045.WhenperforminganEco-EfficiencyAnalysis,caremustbetakenthatwhensettingthegoalofthestudy,thescopeofinventoryanalysis,thefunctionalunitandtheallocationrules,etc.,similarun-derlyingdefinitionsareapplied(cf.alsoFigure26intheannexofthisbrochure).

Case study CO2 efficiency of doing

laundry

WithinthecontextoftheEcoTopTenproductinitiative,itwasexaminedforthecaseofthewashingmachineproductgroup(RüdenauerandGrießhammer2004)whatcontributionfurtherproductinnovationsand,respectively,moreef-ficientuserbehaviouronthepartofcon-sumerswhenwashing(i.e.lowerwashingtemperatures,optimizedloadingofthemachine)candeliver.

Thefunctionalunitwasdefinedas“washingtheamountoflaundryarisinginoneyearinanaverageprivatehouse-hold”.Thecostswerecalculatedforoneprivatehousehold(purchasecostsofthewashingmachineattributabletooneyearofuse;costsofwater,electric-ityanddetergentconsumption;costsofwastewaterdisposal).Thefollowingfouralternativeswerestudied:

Alternative A:Low-costwashingma-chineandaverageuserbehaviour

Alternative B:Moreefficientwashingmachine(lowerwaterandelectricityconsumption,automaticloaddetec-tion)andaverageuserbehaviour

Alternative C:Low-costwashingma-chineandoptimizeduserbehaviour(optimizedloadingandlowerwash-ingtemperaturesthantheaverage)

18

Alternative D:Moreefficientwashingmachineandoptimizeduserbehav-iour

Table3andFigure6showthefindings.Inaddition,inordertoaidcompari-son,thefindingswerenormalized–i.e.

greenhousegasemissionsexpressedasaproportionofthegreenhousegasemissionsofanaveragehousehold,andcostsexpressedasaproportionoftheannualconsumerspendingofanaveragehousehold.ThescaleinFigure6issetaccordingly.

Figure6–Globalwarmingpotentialandlife-cyclecostsofvariousalternatives

0 95 190

150

100

50

0kgC

O2-E

quiv

alen

ts

Euro

AlternativeA

AlternativeB

AlternativeC

AlternativeD

Table3–Comparisonofwashingmachinesanduserbehaviour,annualfigures

Alternative GWP LCC Savings Extra costs Efficiency (GWP) compared to Baseline A

kgCO2- Euro kgCO2- Euro kgCO2- equivalents equivalents equivalents/Euro

A(reference) 139 117

B 130 118 9 1 9

C 84 80 55 -37 -1,49

D 82 84 57 -33 -1,73

GWP=GlobalWarmingPotentialLCC=LifeCycleCosts

Conclusions for product developmentTheCO2EfficiencyAnalysisrevealsthatthebehaviouraloptionsaresubstantiallymoreeco-efficient(thisisduetothecircumstancethatithasbecomeusualtodaytowashinefficiently,usingexces-sivewashingtemperaturesandloadingthemachinepoorly).

Thereasonforthegreatimportanceofappropriatewashingbehaviouristhatlittlescopenowremainstofurtherreducewaterandenergyconsumptionthroughtechnologicalrefinementofwashingmachines.Itisinthefieldofdetergentsthatfurthertechnicalop-timizationisstillpossible,forinstancebyintroducingspeciallow-temperaturedetergents.

19

6 Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA)

Socialaspectsareofgreatimportance.Traditionally,theyhavebeenacknowl-edgedincorporatemanagementbymeansofconsumerresearch,lateralsoinissuemanagementandinsustainabilityreportingand,forafewyearsnow,inanarrowersenseunder“humanrightsduediligenceobligations”.Theterm“social”refersgenericallytobothsocialandsoci-etalaspects.ConcerningSocialLifeCycleAssessments,threedifferentdirectionscanbedistinguished:

Onamoretheoreticalandacademiclevel,moremethodologicallyorientedworkisbeingunder-takenon“SocialLCA”.

Atthepracticallevel,possiblenega-tivesocialimpactsincompaniesandtheirsupplychainsareanalysed,es-peciallywithregardtohumanrightsduediligence.Inmostcases,thesup-plychainsofcompaniesareexaminedwithregardtocompliancewithsocialstandardsand,ifnecessary,certified.Methodologically,therequirementsoftheGlobalReportingInitiative(GRI)areimportantinthisrespect.

Socialaspectsareofcoursealsorecordedinintegratedsustainabilityassessmentsofproducts,softwaretoolsbeingincreasinglyusedforthispurpose.Asarule,twomethodsareusedtothisend–theproduct-related

analysisoftheproductsalongtheproductlines,combinedwiththecompany-relatedanalysisofsocialas-pectsand,ifapplicable,othersustain-abilityaspects.Thereasonforthisisusuallythelargenumberofsuppliercompaniesintheupstreamchains,astheexampleofthenotebookmanu-facturingchainshows(Fig.7).Againstthisbackground,itishardlypossibletorecordthemanufacturingpathsofdozensorhundredsofsuppliersonaproduct-specificbasis.Instead,poten-tialsuppliers‘compliancewithsocialstandardsisanalysedandcertifiedifitismet,andprimaryproductsareonlypurchasedfromcertifiedsuppli-ers.

WithintheframeworkoftheUNEPLifeCyleinitiative,anattemptwasmadetointegratethedifferentdevelopmentsmoreclosely.Tothisend,methodde-scriptionswerepresented,andindicatorsdescribedandcategorised(Grießham-meret.al.2006;UNEP-SETAC-LifeCycleInitiative2009).Attheendof2020,revisedandsystematisedguidelineswerepublished,supplementedbyproposalsfortheSLCAsoforganisations(Benoîtetal.2020).

ComputedisassemlbyinEthiopia(Source:Öko-Institut)

LeadsmelterinGhane(Source:Öko-Institut)

20

6.1 Social Indicators

Duetothesheernumberofpotentialsocialaspectsforanalysis,thedefini-tivetaskofselectingtheaspectsandindicatorstobestudiedindepthisofpivotalimportance.Thekeysocialas-pectsgenerallyoriginateinfourareas:repercussionsonworkers(e.g.wagesbelowtheminimumsubsistenceincome,orchildlabour);repercussionsontheregionalornearbylivingpopulation(e.g.throughdestructionofthehabitatofanindigenouspopulation),repercussionsoftheproductontheuser(e.g.privacyviolation),andindirectrepercussionsonsociety(e.g.corruption).IncontrasttoLCA,asyetandfortheforeseeablefuture,thereisnouniversallyacceptedlistofsocialindicators.InthecontextofthefirstmethoddescriptionofPROSA(Grießhammeretal.2007),Oeko-Institutprovidedanextensivelistofsocialindica-tors,arrangedaccordingtofourstake-holdergroups(cf.Figure27).Thelistwasextractedinamulti-stageprocessfromseveraldozenlistsofindicatorsrunningtoover3,000proposedsocialindicators.

Inanyevent,itincludestheindicatorscontainedinthemostimportantlawsorcodesonthetheme(ILO-standards,SA8000,StiftungWarentestcorecri-teria,etc.).TheindicatorsproposedbyPROSAcanbeaugmentedand/orreplacedtomeetcontext-andproduct-specificneeds.Itisrecommendedthatthenumberofindicatorstobestudiedshouldbekeptwithinreasonablelimits.A2017overviewofindicatorstypicallyusedinresearchandpractice(Kuehnenand2017)showedthattheindicatorsselecteduntilthenwerepredominantlyfromthefieldoflabourrightsandhealth.

InthenewSLCAGuidelines(Benoîtetal.2020),afifthstakeholdercategorywasintroducedintheformofvaluechainactors–themainreasonforthiswasthatthemostlysmallerupstreamsupplierscanhavesignificantlydifferentintereststhanthemostlydominantcompaniesattheendofthesupplychain.Typicalim-pactcategorieswereassignedtoeachofthefivestakeholdergroups(seeTable4).

Production stages Products and intermediate products

6. Marketing Brandednotebook

5. Finalassembly Notebook

4. Assemblyofcomplex Motherboard LCD Optical Harddisk Keyboard Touchpad components andnetwork display drive card

Batterypack Powersupply Coolingsystem Case Other

3. Manufacturing Microchips Passive Printed Cables Operator Plug ofsinglecomponents electronic circuit controls connections components boards

Screw Battery- connections cells

2. Refiningofraw Siliconwafers Glass Rawplastic Copper Copper-zinc Aluminium materials products products products products products

... Palladium Tantalum products products

1. Resourceextraction Quartzsand Crudeoil Copperore Zincore Bauxite ...

Palladiumore Tantalumore ... Scrapmetal

Figure7–StructureofthenotebookPCproductionchain

21

Table4–Listofstakeholdercategoriesandimpactsubcategories

Stakeholder categories

Subcategories

Worker

1.Freedomofassociation

andcollectivebargaining

2.Childlabor

3.Fairsalary

4.Workinghours

5.Forcedlabor

6.Equalopportu-nities/discrimi-

nation

7.Healthandsafety

8.Socialbenefits/socialsecurity

9.Employmentrelationship

10.Sexualharassment

11.Smallholdersincludingfarmers

Local

community

1.Accesstoma-terialresources

2.Accesstoimmaterialresources

3.Delocalizationandmigration

4.Culturalheritage

5.Safeandhealthyliving

conditions

6.Respectofindigenousrights

7.Communityengagement

8.Localemplo-yment

9.Securelivingconditions

Value Chain Actors

(not including consumers)

1.Faircompe-tition

2.Promotingsocialresponsi-

bility

3.Supplierrelati-onships

4.Respectofintellectual

propertyrights

5.Wealthdistri-bution

Consumer

1.Healthandsafety

2.Feedbackmechanism

3.Consumerprivacy

4.Transparency

5.End-of-liferesponsibility

Society

1.Publiccommitments

tosustainabilityissues

2.Contributiontoeconomicdevelopment

3.Preventionandmitigationofarmedconflicts

4.Technologydevelopment

5.Corruption

6.Ethicaltreat-mentsofanimals

7.Povertyallevi-ation

Children

1.Educationpro-videdinthelocal

community

2.Healthissuesforchildrenas

consumers

3.Childrenconcernsregar-dingmarketing

practices

Itwasshownthatthetypicalimpactcategoriesfitthe17goalsofthe2030Agenda(Benoîtetal.2020,p.24),butnoallocationtothe169individualindicatorsofthe2030Agendawasmade.

Theauthorsdistinguishbetweentwodif-ferentapproaches–the“ReferenceScaleApproach”andthe“ImpactPathwayAp-proach”–thelatterbeingmethodologi-callyequivalenttoLCA.

Special features of the SLCAComparedtoLCA,therearesomespecialfeaturesofSocialLifeCycleAssessmentthatcanbehandledwelliftheyaretakenintoaccountatanearlystage:

Socialaspectscanbehighlydiverseandweightedinhighlydisparate

waysbydifferentstakeholdergroupsindifferentcountriesandregions.Socialevaluationsalsochangemuchmorequicklyovertimethanenviron-mentalevaluations,forexample.

Majorimportancethereforeattachestothepre-selectionofthesocialaspectstobeconsideredindepth.Pre-selectionisthusapartofthenor-mativeevaluation.

Sofar,theavailabilityofdatahasbeenpoor.Normally,neitherquanti-tativenorqualitativedataalonewillprovidesufficientinformation;bothkindsareneeded.

TheSLCAalsoincludespotentialposi-tiveimpacts.AccordingtotheLifeCycleInitiative,thesecanbedividedintothreetypes(Benoîtetal.2020,p.29ff.):

Source:Benoîtetal.2020,p.17

22

1.TypeA–Positivesocialperform-ancegoingbeyondbusinessasusual;

2.TypeB–Positivesocialimpactthroughpresence(productorcom-panyexistence);

3.TypeC–Positivesocialimpactthroughproductutility.

6.2 The PROSA SLCA

SLCAisoneofthecoretoolsusedwithinPROSA.Inthecourseofimplementation,caremustbetakentocoordinatethekeyparameterswithLCAandLifeCycleCosting(cf.IntegrationChecklistintheAnnex).Itispossible,however,tocarryoutSLCAasafree-standinganalysisorincombinationwith(either)LCAorLifeCycleCosting.Theprocedureisbrieflydescribedbelow.TheSLCAguidelinescanbereferredtoindetail(UNEP2020).

Socialaspectsareinvestigatedthrough-outtheproductlinenormallyincompar-isontosomealternative.Stakeholdersshouldbeinvolvedasfaraspossible(cf.Figure24intheannex).Themethodo-logicalprocedurecorrespondstothatfortheLifeCycleAssessment(LCA)andiscarriedoutinfoursteps.

(1) Goal and scope definitionDefiningthegoalofthestudy,systemboundaries,referencealternatives/sce-narios,etc.Threepointsrequireparticu-larattention:

Thegeographicalsystemboundariesarenormallydefinedsoastoincludecountrieswithdifferentsocialcondi-tionsandcultures.

Productutility,andhencethefunc-tionalunit,mustbedescribedwithconsiderablymoreprecisionthanisusualintheLCA(cf.alsoBenefitAnalysis).Forexample,thereshouldbeadescriptionofwhatareknownas“symbolic”utilityaspects(prestige,etc).

Theselectionofindicatorsmakesspe-cialdemands(seebelow),butsurpris-inglytheretendstoberapidagree-mentontheselectionofthemost

importantindicators,evenwherestakeholderpositionsareotherwisehighlydivergent.

(2) Life Cycle Inventory (LCI)Duetothepooravailabilityofdatasofar,thisareaposesaparticularchal-lenge.Onlyasmallproportionofquanti-tativedataisavailablefromstatisticalorcomparablesources.Asyettherearenomoduledataforcentralprocessesorintermediateproducts(e.g.cottonman-ufacturing,plasticsmanufacturing,trans-port).Theupstreamchainsareoftencomplexandinvolvesuppliersfrommanycountries.WhilstsmallmaterialinputscanoftenbedisregardedforLCApurposes,whenitcomestotheanalysisofsocialconditions,smallcompaniesintheupstreamchaincanbehighlyrele-vant.

Thedepthofanalysiscanbevarieddependingonthequestionbeingaddressed(qualitativeassessment,expertjudgement,if-thenassumptions,semi-quantitativeorquantitativedatacollec-tion).(3) Impact AssessmentAsinLCA,thekeyelementsare:analysisofdataquality;classification;characteri-zation;and,optionally,normalization.Qualitativedatacanbe“translated”intoaquantitativeformbyapplyingspecifiedmethods.

Exampleofclassificationintheemploymentfield:categorizationintofull-timeandpart-timejobs,mini-jobs,state-subsidizedself-employment,pseudoself-employment,etc.

Exampleofcharacterizationintheemploymentfield:weightingofthespecifiedtypesofemploymentandcalculationoftotals(e.g.full-timejobat100%,part-timejobat50%,etc.)

Exampleofnormalization:relatingtheemploymentfiguretothenum-bersofpeopleinemploymentinthecountrystudied

(4) Interpretation of resultsAsinthecaseofLCA,thekeyelementsarecheckingforcompleteness,signifi-

23

canceandconsistencywiththegoalofthestudy,andcarryingoutsensitivityanalyses.

Ideallytheinterpretationshouldbecar-riedoutincollaborationwithstakehold-ersandwillnormallybequalitative-dis-cursive.Nevertheless,therearearangeofsituationswhichrequiretheuseof(semi-)quantitativeinterpretationframeworks,e.g.portfolioscreeningasaninternalcompanyexercise,producttestinginvolvingthecomparisonofmul-tipleproducts,ortheintegrationofmanyindividualresultsintoanoverallevaluationofsustainability.ThisisalsoemphasisedintheguidelinesoftheLifeCycleInitiative(Benoîtatal.“,p.83).Thisproposestwodifferentsystems:afive-partnumericalrating(-2,-1,0,+1,+2)oracolour-gradedrating,akindoftrafficlightsystem,butinfourgradations(very

highrisk,highrisk,mediumrisk,lowrisk).Furtherweightingsandanoverallaggregationarepossible.Ideallytheoverallinterpretationshouldbecarriedoutincollaborationwithstakeholders.Moreimportantthanthenumericalaggregationisthederivationofoptionsforactiontoavoidorreducenegativeimpacts.

24

7 Benefit Analysis

Thebenefitanalysisisusedtoanalyseandevaluatetheutilityofproductsandservices.Benefitanalysiscanbeusedinthecontextofproductandsustainabil-itypolicy(implementationofthe2030AgendaandtheSDGs),bycompanies,inpublicprocurement,bylargeorganisa-tionssuchaschurches,intheawardingoflabels,andbytestingandconsumerorganisations.

Whereasbenefitorutilityisrecordedanddefinedslightlyabovethefunc-tionalunitorthefunctionalequivalentinthecaseofaLife-CycleAssessment,inPROSAbenefit/utilityisanalysedmoreintensively.Beyondthecorebenefitofaproductorservicedefinedinthefunc-tionalunit,additionalbenefitaspectsareconsidered.Relevantmaterialandenergyflowsaswellaseconomicandsocialaspectsthatcanhaveapositiveornega-tiveimpactonsustainabilityaretakenintoaccount.Thisextensioncanproveusefulformanyobjectsofinvestigation,

sinceutilityaspectsultimatelydetermineconsumers’purchaseandusedecisions;furthermore,ifhighersocialorecologicalrisksareinvolved,theassessmenthastobereasonedandansweredforintermsofproductpolicyinviewofrelevantleg-islation–suchasintheSocio-EconomicBenefitAnalysis(SEA)inREACH,theEU’sChemicalsAct.

Thebenefitanalysisisusedtoanalyse–dependingontheissueandwiththehelpofconsumerresearch–practicalutility,symbolicutilityandsocietalutility.Theresultswillbequitedifferentandwillbeassesseddifferentlyindifferentcountriesandtargetgroups.Thisshouldbetakenintoaccountwhendefiningthescopeofthestudyintheanalysisandevaluation.

Utility type The users of the benefit analysis and their reasons

Practicalutility Portfoliostrategy,opportunitiesanalysis;optimizationofproduct developmentandmarketing

Testingandconsumerorganizations: basisforpurchaserecommendations

Users:basisforpurchaseandusebehaviour

Productpolicy:basisforrisk-benefitassessmentinrelation tolaws(e.g.EcodesignDirective)andsupportprogrammes

Symbolicutility Companies:optimizationofproductmarketing,firstandforemost forsustainableproducts

Societalutility Companies:productdevelopment,productimprovement,creating(“publicvalue“) transparencythroughoutthesupplychain,portfoliostrategy, opportunitiesanalysis;optimizationof(„publicvalue“)product marketing

Users:Ethicalbasisforpurchase,identificationofbenefit/utilityaspects beyondcorebenefit

Productpolicy:implementationofthe2030Agendaandthe use-relatedSDGs,basisforrisk-benefitassessmentinrelationtooptions foraction,lawsandsupportprogrammes,basisforpoliticalassessments withregardtocompliancewithplanetaryboundariesandpotential sufficiencymeasures

Figure8–Utilitytypesandusefullnessofresults

25

Therearevariousconceptsanddescrip-tionsofpractical utility:functionalutility,technicalutility,mainutility,(simply)util-ity,coreperformance,quality(cf.Fig.9).Oneexampleofpracticalutilityistheresultachievedafterwashinglaundryintermsofhygieneandvisualaesthetics.Theessentialelementsofpracticalutilityaremeasurable(performance,durability,etc.)andcanberecordedincomparativeproducttests,qualityassurancesystemsorISOstandards.Atthesametime,indi-vidualelementsofpracticalutilitymayturnoutdifferentlyforindividualusers(gainintime,forexample).

Veryoftentherearesub-criteriafortheutilityaspectsmentioned.Forexample,thepracticalutilityofamediacentreisdetermined,amongotherthings,bytheloadingspeed,thetimeittakestoestablishaconnectionandthesoundandpicturequality.Itisclearfromthisthatweightingsarenecessaryinthiscontextdependingontheproductorservice;usuallytheyareimplicit.

Thepracticalutilitychecklistcanserveasagridtoderiveutilityaspectsindifferentsectors,productgroupsandservices.

Forcars,forexample,severaldozenpracticalutilityaspectsarelistedintheADACcardatabase,andfurtheraspects(suchasreliabilityorsafety)areexam-

inedintests.Typicalcentralaspects,whichcanvarygreatlydependingonthemodelandwhichareparticularlyexaminedorpresentedinadvertisingortests,areperformance(inhorsepower),topspeed,acceleration(from0to100km/h),consumptionfiguresandCO

2val-ues,numberofseatsandbootvolume.Manyotheraspectsarecompliedwithbymostnewcars,suchasfoldingrearseats,electricwindows,automaticstart-stoporparkingaids.Withtheintroductionofelectriccars,newaspectsofusehavebeenadded,suchastherangewithonebatterycharge(inthecaseoftheVWID.3electriccarwithabatteryof58kWhitis426km,forexample)orthecharg-ingtime.Inthisrespect,atleastatthecurrentstateoftheart,therearecleardisadvantagescomparedtocombustionengines.Electriccarsgenerallyhavead-vantagesintermsofdrivingnoiseatlowspeedsandintermsofperformanceoracceleration.TheID.3,forexample,hasanoutputof204hp,whilecomparabledieselandpetrolGolfshave150hp.Con-versely,electriccarsaredesignedwithlowertopspeeds(becausehighspeedsconsiderablyshortentherange).Thus,whilethetopspeedoftheID.3isstillveryhighat160km/h,itismuchhigherforthedieselandpetrolGolfsat224or223km/hrespectively.Foreverydayusability,however,thehighaccelerationvaluesandtopspeedsarelikelytohavelittlerelevance.

Productpolicydecisionstypicallytakeintoaccountthepracticalutilityofprod-ucts.ExamplesarethederogationforasthmaspraysintheCFC-HalonProhibi-tionOrdinance,derogationsintheEUregulationsonchemicalsortheconsider-ationofhigherpracticalutility(e.g.cool-ingvolumeofrefrigeratorsordrumsizesofwashingmachinesandtumbledryersintheenergyefficiencylabellingofelec-tricalappliances).Theanalysisofutilitycanalsoshowthatsomeproductpolicydecisionsarequestionable:Inthecaseofthecarlabel,theefficiencyclassesarestructuredaccordingtoweight.Aheavycarwithhighconsumptioncantherefore

Suitabilityforuse(accordingtoexisting

testcriteria,e.g.fromStiftungWarentest)

User-friendliness(accordingtoDINENISO

13407)

Availability

Convenience/timesaving

Durability

Functionalreliability

Safety/securityinuse

Goodconsumperinformation

Goodconsumerservice

Reparability/availabilityofspareparts

(accordingtoEcodesignDirective)

Figure9PracticalUtilityChecklist

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

26

getabetterlabelthanasmallcarwithlowerconsumptionbuthigherconsump-tioninthesmallcarclass.Themajorityofconsumersthereforemisunderstandthelabel(Musteretal.2020,p.133).

Symbolic utilityisalsoknownaspsycho-logicalutilityoradditionalutility.Itisconveyedviatheproductanditsmarket-ingandtriggersfeelingsormoodssuchasprestige,anewsenseofidentityorthesenseofbelongingtoagroup.Oneexamplewouldbethemetallicpaintonacar.

Thedifferencesbetweenpracticalutilityandsymbolicutilityarenotallhardandfastandcanbevariouslyinterpretedandexperienceddependingonthepersonconcerned.Oneusedtobeabletoas-sumethatpracticalutilitywasthesameasthemainutilityfortheconsumerandthatsymbolicutilitywasmerelyaddi-tionalutility.Inprosperoussocietiesandmaturemarketswithhighproductqual-ity,theperceptionofutilitymayshiftinthecaseofsomeproductgroups,sothatpracticalutilityistakenforgrantedandisperceivedasbeingabasicquality,withsymbolicutilitydominatingpeople’sper-ceptions(inthecaseofcertaintextiles,forexample,moremoneyisspentforthe“brand”thanforactualproductquality).

7.1 Societal utility („Public Value“)

Withinasocialmarketeconomy,itisassumedthatconsumersmakedecisionsabouttheutilityofproductsandhencegeneratedemandforparticularproductsandservices.Andthatisagoodthing.Butthestateshouldintervenewhentheecologicalorsocietalburdensofproductsaretoohighforthecommongood.Itisalsoexpectedthatthestatewillpromotepromisingtechnologiesandproductsforthefuturetoensurethesustainabledevelopmentofsociety.Ap-propriatesupportprogrammes,taxreliefandlawsshouldonlycomeintobeing,however,onthebasisofclearanalysisandreasonedassessment.Inlinewitharisk-benefitassessmentboththerisksandthebenefitneedtobeclearlyanalysedandassessed.Indeed,thisisincreasinglybecomingstandardinEUlegislation.

Externalappearance/design/taste/

feel/soundetc

Prestige/status

Identitiy/autonomy/development

Expertise

Safety/precaution/careforothers

Privacy

Socialcontact/fosteringcommunity

Enjoyment/pleasure/joy/experience

Compensation/reward

Consonancewithsocietal,religiousor

ethicalmeta-preferences

Figure10–Symbolicutilitychecklist

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

27

PROSAisaimedaboveallatproductsthathaveahighsocietalbenefitandoffercompanies“sustainabilityoppor-tunities“.Theproductsshouldmakeanessentialcontributiontokeynationalandinternationalobjectives,suchasinternationalpovertyreduction(setoutintheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals),securingpeace,thebasicobjectiveoftheRioDeclaration(economicdevelopmentandsatisfactionofbasicneeds),climateprotection(FrameworkConventionOnClimateChange),thepreservationofbiodiversity(ConventiononBiologicalDiversity),aswellasjobsandsocietalstability.Aminimumpreconditioninthiscanbethattheproductshaveahighpracticalutilityandnocontraryimpactswithinsociety.

Theassessmentofsocietalbenefitdependscruciallyonthestatusofthesociety.Forexample,thesatisfactionofthebasicneedforfoodisassumedtobetakenforgrantedinarichcountry.

Onthebasisofdirectreferencetothe2030Agendawithits17SustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)whichcoverabroadspectrumofsocietalgoalswithregardtosocietalneeds,theanalysisofsocietalbenefitscanbeuniversallyjustifiedandconcretised.Benefitindica-torscanbederiveddirectlyfromthe169SDGsub-goalsofthe2030Agenda.SDGsub-goalsthatarerelevantforsocietalbenefitmustfulfilthefollowingcriteria:

TheSDGsub-goalmustbeinfluence-ableattheproductorservicelevel.

Theinfluenceoftheproduct/serviceontheSDGsub-goalmustbedirect(i.e.indirecteffectsmustnotbetakenintoaccount).

Thebenefiteffectunfoldsbeyondthecorebenefitoftheproductorservice;relevantmaterialandenergyflowsaswellaseconomicandsocialaspectsaretakenintoaccount.

Inthisway,atotalof30benefitindica-torscanbespecifiedonthebasisoftheSDGalignment,cf.Table5.ParticularlyrelevantSDGs,eachwithseveralbenefitindicators,areSDG2(ZeroHunger),

SDG3(GoodHealthandWell-Being),SDG6(CleanWaterandSanitation),SDG8(DecentWorkandEconomicGrowth)andSDG12(SustainableConsumptionandProduction).

Duetothebindingnatureofthe2030Agenda,itisobligatorytoconsiderallindicatorswhencarryingoutthebenefitanalysisforproductsorservices.Inordertobeabletoclaimabenefitaspect,cor-respondingevidencemustbeprovidedineachcase(e.g.scientificpeer-reviewedstudy).Asaminimumrequirement,itmustalsobeensuredthattheproductshaveahighutilityvalueandnocoun-teractingorharmfuleffectsondifferentusergroups(suchascigarettesorsmok-ing).

Thefollowingexampleshowswhichpos-sibilitiesthe2030Agendaoffersforthebenefitanalysis:

SDG3.4:„By2030,reducebyonethirdprematuremortalityfromnon-commu-nicablediseasesthroughpreventionandtreatment,andpromotementalhealthandwell-being“.

ThisSDGprovidesthestartingpointforthebenefitindicatorB4“Reducingmortality”,specificallythereductionofprematuremortalityfromcardiovascu-lardiseases,cancer,diabetesorchronicrespiratorydiseases,whichisconsideredrelevantespeciallyforthemedical,phar-maceuticalandfoodsectors.Inadditiontotheexistingsustainabilityindicators(cf.chapter8),thisindicatorcanbeused,forexample,tomapimportantaddi-tionalbenefitaspectsbeyondthecorebenefitinthecaseoffood,e.g.health-promotingeffectsofoliveoilswithaparticularlyhighcontentofpolyphenols(antioxidants)inaccordancewiththe„NutritionandHealthClaims“codifiedatEUlevel.TheevidenceforsuchabenefitaspectwouldhavetobeprovidedbyascientificstudyconductedaccordingtotheprinciplesofGoodClinicalPractice(GCP)andsubjectedtoacriticalreviewbyathirdindependentparty.

28

Table5–IndicatorsforSocietalBenefit

Adetaileddescriptionoftheindividualindicatorsintheformof„indicatorprofiles“canbefoundatwww.prosa.org.

# SDG Indicator

B1 2.1,2.2 Reductionofhungerandmalnutrition(byaccesstosafe,nutriousandsufficientfood;addressingnutritionneedsofadolescentgirls,pregnantandlactatingwomen,childrenandolderpersons)

B2 2.3 Increasingincomesofsmall-scalefoodproducers

B3 2.4,2.5 Strengtheningsustainablefoodproductionsystems(maintainingecosystems/geneticdiversity,fosteringresi-lienceagainstclimatechange,extremeweather,drought,floodingandotherdisasters)

B4 3.1,3.2, Reducingmortality(frommaternalmortality/neonatalmortality/epidemicsofseriousdiseases/ 3.3,3.4 cardiovasculardiseases/cancer/diabetes/chronicrespiratorydiseases)

B5 3.5 Strengtheningthepreventionandtreatmentofsubstanceabuse

B6 3.6 Reducingdeaths/injuriesfromroadtrafficaccidents

B7 3.9 Reducingdeaths/injuriesfromhazardouschemicalsandair,waterandsoilpollutionandcontamination

B8 4.4,4.7 Strengtheningknowledgeandskillsrelatedtosustainabilityissues(ICTskills/sustainabledevelopmentingeneral)

B9 6.1,6.2 Improvingtheaccesstosafedrinkingwater,sanitationandhygiene

B10 6.3 Improvingwaterqualitybyreducingthereleaseofhazardouschemicalsandmaterials

B11 6.4 Increasingwater-useefficiencyandstrengtheningsustainablesupplyoffreshwater

B12 7.2 Enabling/increasingtheproductionofrenewableenergy

B13 7.3 Enabling/increasingenergyefficiency

B14 8.5,8.6 Creationofwell-paidjobs/reducingyouthunemployment

B15 8.8 Strengtheningsecureworkingconditions

B16 8.9 Strengtheningsustainabletourism(localjobcreation,promotionoflocalcultureandproducts)

B17 8.10 Expandingtheaccesstobanking,insuranceandfinancialservices

B18 9.4 Fosteringdecarbonisationandresourceefficiencyofindustries

B19 11.5 Reducingdeaths/peopleaffectedbydisasters

B20 11.6 Improvingurbanairquality(withspecialattentiontoparticulatematter)

B21 12.2 Strengtheningsustainablemanagementandefficientuseofnaturalresources(byreducingthematerialfootprintofproductsandservices)

B22 12.3 Reducingfoodlossesandfoodwaste

B23 12.4 Reducingthereleaseofchemicals/hazardouswasteintoair,waterandsoil

B24 12.5 Reducingwastegenerationthroughwasteprevention,recyclabilityandreusability

B25 13.2 SignificantcontributiontoGHGemissionreductions

B26 14.1 Reducingmarinepollution/marinelittering

B27 14.7 Strengtheningthesustainableuseofmarineresources(fisheries,aquacultureandtourism)

B28 15.1 Fosteringtheconservationandsustainableuseofecosystems/biodiversity

B29 16.10 Strengthenpublicaccesstoinformation

B30 1.3,3.8, Strengtheningtheavailabilityofaffordableandsustainableproducts/services 4.3,6.1, (overarchingindicatorfortheaspect‚affordable‘) 7.1,9.1, 9.3,11.1, 11.2,

29

7.2 Consumer Research in PROSA

Therearetwodifferentresearchtradi-tionsandareasforpracticalapplicationinconsumerresearch:marketing-orient-edconsumerresearchandconsumer-ori-entedconsumerresearch.Theunderlyingmethodsarethesame,butthequestionsandanalyticalperspectivearedifferent.

Marketing-orientedconsumerresearchiscarriedoutpredominantlyonbehalfofcompanies;itsprimaryobjectiveistoen-surethatproductssellsuccessfully(“sales research“),althoughofcoursepotentialproblemsinthepost-salephasearealsotakenintoaccount(dissonancereductionmanagementandcustomersatisfactionresearch).Bycontrastconsumer-orientedconsumerresearch(“consumption re-search“)analysesfromthepointofviewofconsumersandsocietyandalsounder-takesin-depthanalysisofthepost-salephase–inparticulartheusephase,usepatternsandpossibilitiesforanenviron-mentallysound,cost-savingandsociallysustainableuseofproducts.Bothpointsofviewshouldbegivenattentioninasustainability-orientedstudy.

ThefamiliarquantitativeandqualitativeconsumerresearchtoolscanbeusedforthebenefitanalysisinPROSA(question-naires,interviews,empiricalcontentanalysis,observations,experimentsandtestsituations);qualitativesocialresearchmethodssuchasgroupresearcharegen-erallygivengreateremphasis,however.Focusgroupsareespeciallywellsuitedforthisbecausecomplexaspectsofsustainabilityanddifficultsocial-psycho-logicalissuescanbeanalysedherewithlimitedeffort.Beingtogetherinagrouphastheadvantagethatthegenerationofprocessesofopinionformationcanbespeededupinthegroup,observedandanalysedlateraccordingtospecifictar-getgroups.Inadditiontothetraditionalquestions(practicalutility,symbolicutil-ity,targetgroups)patternsofuse,habitsofuseandaspectsofsustainabilityarealsosubjectedtoparticularstudy.

InfocusgroupswithPROSA,anexpertisincludedineachgroupinordertoan-swertrickyquestionsinanadhocman-nerintheoverlappingareasoftechnol-ogy,ecologyanduse(cf.Grießhammeretal.2007,p.37ff).Inadditiontothefocusgroupsitcanalsobeusefultoconsultstakeholdersandexpertsinmini-groups.

Theresultsofconsumerresearchorben-efitanalysisarecloselycoordinatedwiththosefromtheLife-CycleAssessment(LCA),theSocialLCAandtheLife-CycleCosting.

Theaimofthebenefitanalysisisnottoproduceanabsoluteassessmentofprod-uctsbutrathertoascertainopportunitiesandproductssuitedforthefutureandtoderivepotentialwaysofoptimizingproductssothattheybecomemoresus-tainable.Forexample,carsharingcanbemademoreattractivewhenthesymbolicutilityaspectsofindividualcarsaremadeclearerandthissymbolicutilitycanbesatisfiedbycarsharingaswell.

30

8 Sustainability criteria on the basis of the 2030 Agenda

Whenanalysingandevaluatingtheimpactofproductsalongtheirlifecycle,theselectionoftheimpactcategoriesandindicatorstobeconsideredplaysacentralrolefortheresult.WhileLCAsincorporateavarietyofimpactcatego-riesthataretakenintoaccountaccord-ingly(seepage8),analysesareoftenrestrictedtogreenhousegasassessmentsinpractice.AccordingtotheEUPEFStrategy,therelevantimpactcategoriesforindividualproductgroupsshouldbedeterminedinadvance(seep.12).

Standardsthatcanbeusedforanalysingtheeconomicdimensionofsustainabil-ityare,forexample,DINENISO14045oneco-efficiency,orthedraftstandardDINEN60300-3-3:2005-03onLife Cycle Costing.Here,costs(expressedineurosorothercurrencies)arethecentralandusuallytheonlyindicator.However,theyshouldroutinelybesupplementedbytheanalysisofexternalcosts(seep.14ff).

OthereconomicaspectsarereportedinpracticeusingtheSocialLCA.Accord-ingtotheSLCAguidelines,40impactcategoriesshouldbetakenintoaccount,andthenumberofpotentialindividualindicatorsisfargreater.Againstthisbackground,itisobviousthatanarrow-ingdowntoaspectstobeanalysedwithprioritymusttakeplace(seep.19ff).

Thisappliesinparticulartointegrated product sustainability analyses.Theprioritisation–asinthecaseofSLCAs–hassofaroftenbeencarriedoutbyastakeholderpanel,asinthecaseoftheproductassessmenttoolforITandtelecommunicationproductsoftheGeSi–Globale-SustainabilityInitiative.Thecomparativelyopenorspecificselec-tionofindicatorshaslongbeenjustifiedbythefactthatthereisnogenerallyacceptednormativeorlegallydefinedbackgroundforthis.

WiththeadoptionoftheUnited Na-tions’ Agenda 2030inSeptember2015,thishasfundamentallychanged(UnitedNations2015).The2030Agendacontains17overarchingSustainableDevelopment

Goals(SDGs)and169sub-goals.Therati-fyingcountrieshavethusalsocommittedthem-selvestoimplementingtheSDGsintheirnationalstrategies.However,municipalities,companiesandconsum-ersshouldalsoimplementthegoalsofthe2030Agendaasfarasthisispossiblewithintheirsphereofinfluence.

The2030Agendathusprovidesaglo-ballyacceptedsystemofindicatorsformeasuringtheSDGs.However,onlyafewdozenofthe169sub-goalsexplicitlyrefertoproductsandcompanies;oth-ers,suchastheindicator“Ensureaccessforalltoadequate,safeandaffordablehousing”(SDG11.1),cannotberealiseddirectlybyindividualcompanies.

Product- and company-relevant indicators of the 2030 Agenda

Inthe“SDGAssessment”researchproject(Eberleetal.2021)fundedbytheGermanFederalMinistryonEducationandResearch(BMBF),amethodcalled“SDGEvaluationofProducts”(SEP)wasdeveloped(www.sdg-evaluation.com)whichprovidedforareasonedrestric-tiontothoseindicatorstotheachieve-mentofwhichproducts,servicesandcompaniescanactuallycontribute(EberleandWenzig2020).

IndicatorsformeasuringtheSDGshavealreadybeendevelopedintheGeneralIndicatorFramework(GIF)oftheUnitedNationsforthe2030Agenda.Thesearetheauthoritativesourceoftheselectedindicators.Incaseswheretheindicatorscouldnotbeapplied,theywereamend-edorsupplementedbymoresuitableindicators.Thesupplementedindicatorsusuallyoriginatefromotheracceptedindicatorframeworks,suchasthosepro-posedintheEuropeanprocesstoestab-lishaProductEnvironmentalFootprint(EuropeanCommission2012)orpro-posedbytheGlobalReportingInitiative(GRI)(GRI2016a;GRI2016b).Thisapproachwaschosentoensurethattheselectedsustainabilityindicatorshavethegreatestpossibleconnectivityand

31

compatibilitywithotherinitiatives,suchastheEuropeanProductEnvironmentalFootprintprocess(EuropeanCommission2012).

Forthenarrowingdown,twotestques-tionswereasked:

DoestheproductorservicealongthelifecyclehaveadirectimpactontheachievementoftheSDGs?Theresult-ing25indicatorsarereferredtoasCase1(C1)indicators.

Dothecompaniesthatproduceoroffertheproductorservicealongthelifecyclehaveadirectinfluenceontheachievementofthegoalthroughtheiractivities,forexamplethroughthelevelofwagespaidorthroughmeasurestopreventcorruption?Theresulting20indicatorsarereferredtoasCase2(C2)indicators.

Inasecondstep,theindicatorsweresubdividedintomandatory core indica-torsandcomprehensive indicators.Thefollowingtwo“filters”wereusedtodeterminethecoreindicators:

ThePlanetaryBoundaries(Steffenetal.2015)toselectthemostrelevantecologicalindicators,

theDeclarationofUniversalHumanRightsoftheUnitedNations(UnitedNations1949)forselectingthemostrelevantsocio-economicindicators.

Thus,21mandatorycoreindicatorscouldbeidentified.Forindividualsectors,indi-catorsgoingbeyondtheseweredefinedasmandatory.TheC1indicatorsareshowninTable6,theC2indicatorsinTab.7.Adetaileddescriptionoftheindi-vidualindicatorscanbefoundintheformofindicatorprofilesat:www.sdg-evaluation.com.

32

Table6–C1indicatorsfortheanalysisofproducts(EberleandWenzig2020,p.28)

Impact Indicators # SDG Indicator Core

C1.1 2.4 Soilqualityindex

C1.2 2.4,15.9 Terrestrialbiodiversitypotential X

C1.3 2.4 AccumulatedExceedance(terrestrialeutrophication,acidification) X

C1.4 3.9 ComparativeToxicUnitforhumansC1.4a:cancerC1.4b:non-cancer

C1.5 3.9 Photochemicalozonecreationpotential

C1.6 3.9 Diseaseincidences(Particulatematter)

C1.7 3.9,6.3, ComparativeToxicUnitforecosystems X 12.4

C1.8 6.3 P-equivalents(freshwatereutrophication) X

C1.9 6.4 Scarcity-adjustedwateruse

C1.10 8.4,9.4 AbioticresourcedepletionC1.10a:minerals&metalsC1.10b:fossilfuels

C1.11 9.4,13.2 GlobalWarmingPotential X

C1.12 12.4 Ionisingradiationpotential

C1.13 14.1 N-equivalents(marineeutrophication) X

C1.14 14.2 Marinebiodiversitypotential X

C1.15 14.3 Marineacidificationpotential

Inventory Indicatores # SDG Indicator Core

C1.16 2.3 Income/ha-onlySmallScaleProducers

C1.17 2.3 Yield/ha-onlySmallScaleProducers

C1.18 3.6 Deathrateduetoroadtrafficinjuries

C1.19 6.4 Wateruse

C1.20 7.2,7.3 Energyuse XC1.20a:renewableC1.20b:non-renewable

C1.21 12.3 Foodlosses

C1.22 12.4 Wastegeneration(perfraction)

C1.23 12.5 Useofrecycledmaterial

C1.24 14.1 Marinedebris(incl.(micro)plastic) X

C1.25 14.4 Shareofby-catchincatches X

33

Table7–C2indicatorsfortheanalysisofcompanies

Inventor-Indicators # SDG Indicator Core

C2.1 1.1 Workersearningbelowpovertylineof1.90$/day X

C2.2 1.3 Coverageofsocialsecuritysupport X

C2.3 2.4,3.6, Coverageofproduct-relatedsustainability(risk)management: X 5.1,6.5, C2.3a:sustainableagriculture(SDG2.4) C2.3c 6.6,7.3, C2.3b:driver/passengersafety/reductionofaccidents(SDG3.6) C2.3i 8.7,8.8 C2.3c:equalopportunities(SDG5.1) C2.3j 9.3,12.2, C2.3d:wateruse&scarcity(SDG6.5,6.6) C2.3k 12.3,12.4, C2.3e:naturalresources(SDG12.2) C2.3o 13.2,14.2, C2.3f:foodlosses(SDG12.3) C2.3p 15.1-15.6, C2.3g:chemicals(SDG12.4) C2.3s 15.8,15.9, C2.3h:waste(SDG12.5) 15.a,15.b, C2.3i:climatechange(SDG13.2) 16.5,16.a, C2.3j:marinebiodiversity(SDG14.2) 17.7,17.11, C2.3k:terrestrial&freshwaterbiodiversity(SDG15.1-15.5,15.8) 17.16,17.17 C2.3l:patentsonnaturalresources(SDG15.6) C2.3m:corruptionprevention(SDG16.5) C2.3n:humanrights(SDG16.a) C2.3o:promotionofenvironmentalsoundtechnologiesindevelopingcountries(SDG17.7)

C2.3p:energyefficiencyz(SDG7.3)C2.3q:smallscalesuppliers/industryborrowersinsupplychain(particularfromLDC)(SDG9.3)C2.3r:shareofproducts/materialsfromDC(SDG17.11)C2.3s:Investmentsinconservationandsustainableuseofbiodiversity/ecosystems(SDG15.a,15.b)C2.3t:Engagementinmulti-stakeholderpartnershipsforsustainabledevelopment(SDG17.16,17.17)

C2.4 2.5 Numberofusedbreeds/varieties X

C2.5 3.8 Shareofemployeescoveredbyhealthinsuranceorapublichealthsystem X

C2.6 3.9,8.8 Numberof,timelossorfrequencyratesoffatalandnon-fataloccupationalinjuries

C2.7 3.9,8.8 Accessofworkerstoprotectiveclothing

C2.8 4.4,4.7, Shareofemployeestrainedinsustainabilityissues 13.3,16.5 C2.8a:ICTskills(SDG4.4)

C2.8b:sustainabilityingeneral(SDG4.7)C2.8c:climatechange(SDG13.3)C2.8d:corruptionprevention(SDG16.5)“

C2.9 4.5 Averagehoursoftrainingperemployeebyshareofmen/woman

C2.10 5.1,8.5 Ratioofaveragehourlywageofmentowomen X

C2.11 5.5 Shareofwomeninmanagerialpositionsatallhierachylevels X

C2.12 6.1 Availabilityofsafelymanageddrinkingwateratwork X

C2.13 6.2 Availabilityoflockablesanitationatwork,includingahand-washingfacilitywithsoapandwater X

C2.14 6.3 Percentageofsafelytreatedwastewaterflows

C2.15 8.6 Shareofemployees(incl.apprenticeships)under24

C2.16 8.7,8.8 FulfillmentofILOconventionsbysex XC2.16a:freedomofassemblyC2.16b:childworkC2.16c:forcedlabourC2.16d:discriminationC2.16e:collectivebargaining

C2.17 9.5 InvestmentsinR&D

C2.18 10.2 Relativepovertyrate(50%ofmediandisposableincome) X

C2.19 10.3 PalmaRatio

C2.20 12.6,12.8, Sustainabilityinformationabouttheproduct(incl.valuechain)publiclyavailable 14.4

34

Theanalysisofthesustainabilityofproductsorcompaniesisalreadycom-plex.Thesubsequentevaluationoftheresultsofdozensofindicatorsrepresentsafurtherchallenge.

Beforegoingintodetail,threeimportantpointsshouldbenotedinadvance:

Incontrasttothesustainabilityanaly-sisforproducts,theevaluationisonlypoorlydevelopedintermsofmethod-ology.

Thedefinitionofgoalandscopewiththeselectedindicatorsdeterminestheresulttoalargeextent.IfananalysisislimitedtoaLifeCycleAssessment,forexample,socialaspectsarebasical-lynotevaluated.Likewise,ifrelevantindicatorsfrommanypossiblesocialindicatorsarenotanalysedinasocialLCA,noresultsareavailablefortheevaluation.

Assessmentsshouldalwaysbeaction-oriented.ItisdebatablewhetherindicatorAorindicatorBismoreimportant.ItwouldbepreferabletofindandimplementmeasuresthatreducethenegativeimpactsofAandB.

TheLCAaccordingto ISO 14040providesforimpactassessmentandinterpreta-tion,butnotforevaluationandaggrega-tion.Inpractice,however,aggregationcanbeobserved,especiallywhenseveralproductsoralternativesaretobecom-pared.SuchaggregationisalsousedintheEU’sPEF process(seep.12f).

InthecaseoftheSocial Life Cycle As-sessment (SLCA),asemi-quantitativeevaluationoftheindividualLifeCycleIn-ventoryresultsisrecommended,namelyafive-partnumericalrating(-2,-1,0,+1,+2)orakindoftrafficlightsystem,aswellasaclassificationofthepositiveimpacts.Furtherweightingsandanover-allaggregationarepossible.However,theoverallassessmentshouldideallybedeterminedtogetherwithstakeholders(seep.19ff).

Life Cycle Costingprovidesasingularindicatorresultintheformofcosts,so

thatitiseasytodistinguishbetweentwoalternatives(seep.14ff).Ifnecessary,itcanbesupplementedbyanEco-Efficien-cy Analysis(seep.17f).

InSustainability Analyses,weightingandevaluationwithastakeholderpanelhasprovensuccessfulsofar.Inthesoftware-supportedproductevaluationsystemofGeSi–theGlobale-SustainabilityInitiativeforITandtelecommunicationproductsandservices,numericalevalu-ationsofindividualindicatorsaswellastheweightingsbetweentheindicatorstowardsanoverallaggregationweredeterminedinthisway.

AthreefoldrequirementismadefortheLifeCycleInventorydatarelatedtosustainabilityindicators:

Firstly,theresultsmustbestandard-ised,i.e.relatedtoanoverarchingcomparativevalue,suchaswagespaidtotheminimumstandardofliv-ingintherespectivecountry.

Secondly,ausefulfunctionmustbedevelopedfortheevaluationbe-tweentheLifeCycleInventoryresultandthecomparativevalue.UnlikewithLCAresults,therelationshipisnotalwayslinear.Forexample,thetargetforincreasingtheproportionofwomeninmanagementpositionsisnot100%,but50%.Thistargetvaluecanbeconsideredwellmetevenwithasmalldeviation,e.g.iftheshareofwomenisbetween45%and55%.

Thirdly,thecorrespondingresultsalongtheproductlinemustbesum-marisedandweightedfordifferentcompaniesindifferentcountries.

9 Sustainability Assessment and Aggregation

35

Assessment of individual sustainability indicators

IntheSDG assessmentresearchproject(Eberleetal.2021),thesethreerequire-mentswereimplementedforsomecom-pany-relatedindicators,usingthemeth-odofSDG-EvaluationofProducts(SEP)(cf.EberleandWenzig2020).Furthermore,ratingcurveswerederivedthatshowarelationshipbetweentheperformanceoftheindicatorandthecontributiontotherespectiveSDG.Inordertoassessthepotentialcontribu-tionsoftheC2indicatorstotheachieve-mentoftheSDGs,ascaleof„-1“to„+1“waschosen(“+1”meansthattheprod-uctcontributesfullytoachievingthesus-tainabilitygoal;“-1”meansthattheproducthasanegativeimpactonachiev-ingthesustainabilitygoal).

Forexample,indicatorC2.1“EmployeesearningbelowtheUNpovertyline”measureshowmanyworkersalongthevaluechainearnbelowtheextremepov-ertylinesetbytheUNofcurrently$1.90perday.Accordingly,afullcontri-butiontotheSDGrated“+1”meansthatallemployeesalongtheentirevaluechainearnabovethepovertyline.Thepercentageofpeopleearningaccordingtothepovertylineonaverageinaspe-cificcountrywassetas0.Assessmentsbasedontheindividualenterprisesinvolvedarethensummarisedaccordingtotheirshareofthehoursworkedtoproducetheproductunderinvestigation.

Table8:SummaryofindicatorsthatconcretisetargetSD6(Cleanwaterandadequatesanitation)(EberleandWenzig2020,p.18)

Forfurtherassessment,individualindica-torsareassignedtotheindividualSDGs(cf.exampleinTab.8).Theycanalsobeaggregated.Evenifthisiswiththesameweighting(1:1:1)asintheexample,thisisstillanormativeassessment.Thegen-eralpublicmightgiveahigherweight-ingto“waterscarcity”,whereasworkersmightgiveahigherweightingto“ad-equatesanitationattheworkplace”.Forthisreason,sustainabilityanalysesshouldbeaccompaniedbystakeholderpanels–

startingwiththedefinitionofthetarget,frameworkconditionsandindicatorsuptothefinalevaluationand,ifnecessary,aggregation.

Tofacilitatetheevaluation,the“ProFitS”softwarewasdeveloped(seep.36ff).

Agriculture Processing Overall assessment

C2.3d Wateruse&scarcity

C2.12 Drinkingwaterattheworkplace

C2.13 Adequatesanitationatwork

C2.14 Wastewatertreatment

SDG6(balancedaggregation)

Location100%

0,00

1,00

1,00

1,00

0,75

Location100%

0,33

1,00

1,00

1,00

0,83

0,02

1,00

1,00

1,00

0,76

Product(Shareofworkinghours,93%)

0,00

0,93

0,93

0,93

0,70

Product(Shareofworkinghours,93%)

0,02

0,07

0,07

0,07

0,06

36

Forseveraldecadesnowtherehasbeendebateonsustainabledevelopment–sustainabilitystrategiesandsustainabilitygoalshavebeendefined,sustainabilityreportswereproduced,andproductsratedassustainableornon-sustainable,asthecasemaybe.Surprisingly,thereislittledebateandlittletransparencyastohow in fact sustainability is evaluated and which concrete improvements are proposed and implemented.

PROSA,incontrast,placesastrongfocusonaverifiableevaluationprocessandaclearevaluationframework.PROSAprovidesforthispurposethesoftwareProFitS(Products-fit-to-Sustainability)integratedevaluationframeworkandsoftware.ProFitSisaction-orientedanditsoutcomecanbepresentedinaquali-tative-argumentativemannerorinquan-titativeterms.Whererequired,itcanbecomplementedorsubstitutedbyothertransparentevaluationframeworks.

Thepurposeoftheevaluationisgener-allytopreparestrategicdecisionsandtoidentifysustainabilityopportunitiesandoptimizationavenues,andNOTtoper-formanyabsolutenumericalevaluation.

Nonetheless,ProFitSdoesprovideoppor-tunitiesforquantitativeassessment,

becausethismakesitpossibletotreatandpresentthegreatarrayoffind-ingsondifferentvariantsinamoresystematicfashion,

because,curiously,itisoftenthequantitativeassessmentproposedinastrategyteamoratastakeholderworkshopthattriggersmorein-depthdiscussionofqualitativeevaluations,

becausecompanieswithlargeprod-uctportfoliosuseindexes.

TheoutcomeofProFitSthereforecanbeaggregatedasoneindexwhererequired.Alloriginaldataandalltheindividualevaluationssteps,however,canbetracedback.Inadditiontoquantitativeassess-ment,theProFitSevaluationframeworkroutinelyaskswhichmeasurescanbetakentoimproveanindicatororstatethathasbeenratedpoorly.

10.1 The ProFitS software

TheProFitSsoftwarecombinesinasin-gletooltheevaluationmethodswhichhavebeendeveloped,thusenablingtherecordingofproduct-andcompany-relateddata,thebreakingdownofthemanufacturingprocessintoindividualsub-stepsandthegraphicaldisplayoftherespectivesustainabilitycontribution.Thesoftwareisfreelyavailableonwww.prosa.organdcanbeoperatedviaanin-ternetbrowser.Alldataenteredremainslocallyontheuser’scomputerandcanbesavedthereorexportedforprocessinginaspreadsheetprogramme.TheuserinterfaceofthesoftwareisdrawnupinEnglishtofacilitateinternationalappli-cability.

10.2 Data entry

PreferencesTheimplementationofasustainabilityanalysiswithProFitSisstartedwiththespecificationoftheobjectofinvestiga-tion(“assessmenttitle”and“product/servicename”),theselectionofthebranch(“branch”)andthe“assessmentfocus”(“core”or“comprehensive”)(seeFigure11).The“functionalunit(fu)”describestheobjectofinvestigationwithanexplanatorytext,inthesenseofalifecycleassessmentwiththespecificationofthesystemboundariesandtheunitandtimereference.Byselectingthescale,youcanchoosewhethertheresultsaredisplayedfrom-1to+1oraspointsfrom0to100.Thesettingscanbechangedsubsequently

10 ProFitS

37

Torecordthesustainabilityimpactsofaproductorservice,theentryofsustain-abilityindicatorsisdividedintothreesub-steps:

Productorservice-relatedSDGindica-tors(SDGimpacts:C1indicators,seealsop.32)

Company-relatedSDGindicators(SDGimpacts:C2indicators,seealsop.33)

Benefit-relatedindicators(benefitanalysis:Bindicators,seealsop.28)

C1 indicatorsTheproduct-relatedC1indicators(“prod-uct-orservice-relatedSDGimpacts”)aretheresultsoflifecycleassessmentsthatcanbeenteredinthefirstsub-stepoftheassessment(seeFigure12).TheProFitSsoftwareitselfdoesnotofferanysup-portinthepreparationofLCAs,butonlydocumentstherespectiveenvironmen-talimpactcategoriesandspecifiestheassociatedcalculationmethodsaswellasthesustainabilitygoalsaddressed.De-pendingonwhichfilters(“branch”and“assessmentfocus”)wereselectedinthedefaultsettings,themaximumnumberof25indicatorsisreducedtothenumberapplicabletotherespectiveproduct.

Figure11–Defaultsettingonassessment(“preferences”)

Figure12–Entryoftheproduct-relatedC1indicators

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

38

C2 indicatorsWithregardtothecompany-relatedC2indicators(SDGimpacts),informationonsustainablecorporategovernanceisrequested(seeFigure13).Thisisthesecondstepintheprocessofenteringdata.Onthebasisoftheevaluationofeachindicatorthesoftwarecalculates

therespectivenumericalcontributiontotheachievementoftheSDGsfromthein-dicatorsenteredinthe“result”column.Thegraphicalrepresentation(“resultgraph”)immediatelyprovidesfeedbackonwhetherthiscontributionisnegative(redbar),neutral(orangebar)orpositive(greenbar).

Figure13–Entryofthecompany-relatedC2indicators

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

Process editor for C2 indicatorsProductsareusuallynotmanufacturedbyasinglecompany,buttheyaremadeupofpartialproductsandservicesfromseveralcompanies(e.g.rawmaterialex-traction,transport,manufactureofsemi-finishedgoods,processing,assembly).Thesustainabilityimpactsofaproductatthecompanylevelarethereforemadeupoftherespectivepartialcontributionsofthecompaniesinvolved.Tomapthisinthesoftware,aso-calledprocesseditorisintegratedintheC2indicators.Dur-ingtherecordingprocessitispossibletospecifythenumberofsub-stepsforthemanufactureoftherespectiveproduct.Theprocesseditorisstartedfromtheen-trymaskforeachindicatorviathe“editprocesses”button(seeFigure14).By

entering“process”and“provider”,theprocessesareclearlyspecified,theselec-tionofthecountrydocumentstherefer-encecountryforeachnationalaveragevalue.Theso-called“quantifier”indi-catestheallocationfactorwithwhichtherespectiveprocessstepisweighted.Thiscanbedone,forexample,onthebasisofmassorworkinghours.TheoverallresultdisplayedfortheC2indicatoriscalcu-latedasthesumoftheweightedpartialresults.Afterconfirmingtheentriesforanindicator(“OK”),theprocessesforallotherC2indicatorsareavailable.

39

Figure14–Processeditorfortherepresentationofthecompany-relatedsub-steps

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

B indicatorsThethirdsub-stepforenteringthesustainabilityindicatorsforproductsandservicesistorecordtheproductbenefitsinrelationtotheachievementofthesustainabilitygoals(BenefitAnalysis,see

page24ff).Thefulfilmentofthebenefitisevidencedineachcasebyreferencetoacorrespondingdocument.IntheProF-itSsoftware,theexistenceofpositiveevidenceisdocumentedanddisplayedgraphically(greenbar).

Figure15–Enteringtheproduct-relatedbenefits,Bindicators

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

40

Integrated information

Inadditiontorecordingsustainabilityinformation,theProFitSsoftwarealsoservestodocumentthe“SDGEvaluationofProducts(SEP)”calculationmethod.Forthispurpose,informationexplainingthemethodanditsapplicationisalreadydisplayedwhenthesustainabilityindica-torsareentered.

Information on how to fi ll in the formWhenindividualindicatorsareselected,aninformationfieldopenswithinstruc-tionsonhowtofillthemin(seeFigure16).There,theindividualidentifiersarespecifiedandexplanationsaregivenonhowtoenterthem.Theinformationalsoappearswhennavigatingwiththemouseovertheinputfields(tooltip).

Figure16–Instructionsforcompletingforindividualindicators

Source:ProFitSsoftware,examplevalues

Indicator profi leAllindicatorspecificationsinthesoft-warearefollowedbyaninformationbuttonthatopensanindicatorfactsheetasapop-upwindow.Thefactsheetscontaininformationexplainingtheindi-

cator,provideliteraturereferencesand,inthecaseofC2indicators,documentthecalculationformulaandtheassoci-ateddiagramshowingtherelationshipbetweenenteredindicatorsandsustain-abilityimpact(seeFigure17).

Figure17–Indicatorprofiles

Source:ProFitSsoftware

41

Reference to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)Bydefinition,thesustainabilityindicatorsmakeapositiveornegativecontributiontotheachievementoftheSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs).ThenameofthisSDGisindicatedbyafurtherinfor-mationbutton,whichislocatednext

tothesustainabilityindicatorsinthe“referringSDG“column.Clickingonthisbuttonopensapop-upwindowinwhichtheSDGsarelistedinplaintextandthecorrespondingSDGlogoisshown(seeFigure18).

Figure18:–Informationonthereferredsustainabilitygoals(SDGs)

Source:ProFitSsoftware

42

Figure19–MenubuttonsoftheProFitSsoftware

Function

Show home page

Start or continue data collection

Delete or restart data collection

View Example

Import local assessment fi le (*.profi ts)

Export recorded data for local storage (*.profi ts)

Export recorded data as spreadsheet (*.xls)

Restore previous session

Aggregate data to individual SDGs (experimental)

Menu button

Source:ProFitSsoftware

Other functions of the softwareThesoftwareisequippedwithamenuwithwhichotherfunctionsofthesoft-warecanbecalledup.AnoverviewofthemenubuttonsisshowninFigure19.Thenamesareself-explanatory.The“ex-port”buttontransferstheuserentriestoatextfilethatcanbesavedlocally.Thefilenameismarked“*.profits”andcanberenamedbytheuser.Itisajsonfile(JavaScriptObjectNotation)inwhichthedataisstoredasstructuredreadabletext.ThefilecanbereloadedfromthelocalharddiskintotheProFitSsoftwareatalatertimeviathe“import”button.

Asecondexportoptionisthe“export XLS”button.Thiscreatesafilethatcanbeopeneddirectlywithaspreadsheetprogramme(e.g.OpenCalcorExcel).Theresultsaredocumentedinthexlsfile,butnotthecalculationformulae.Thexlsfileissuitableforfurtherprocessingofthedata,forexampleforcreatinggraphics,butnotforre-importingthedataintothesoftwarelater.

43

Anotherpossiblefunctionisthe“aggre-gate”button.Thisoffersthepossibilityforatwo-stagesummary(aggregation)ofthescoresoftheindicatorstotherespectiveSDGs(1ststage)andfinallytoanoverallassessmentoftheproductorservice(2ndstage).However,theweight-ingofthedifferentindicatorsamongeachothercanonlybedoneonthebasisofanintensiveweighingprocess,atbestasasocialconsensus.Theaggrega-tionisthereforecarriedoutinasimpli-fied,equallyweightedmanner,i.e.each

indicatormakesthesamecontributiontotheoverallresult.Figure20showstheexperimentalaggregation.TheindividualC2indicators(C2.1toC2.20)ontheouterringareassignedtothecolour-codedSDGs(SDG1toSDG17)inthemiddlering.Thenumericalvalueinthemiddleofthegraph(hereasanexample:50points)indicatestheaggregatedtotalvalueoftheproductandthustheoverallcontributiontotheachievementoftheSustainableDevelopmentGoals.

Figure20–AggregationofC2sustainabilityindicators(fictitiousexample)

Source:ProFitSsoftware,Examplevalues50or25pointseach(Pt.)

44

PROSAProductPortfolioAnalysisisusedtoselecttheproductareas,businessunitsorkeyproductstobeanalysedingreaterdepth.Ifworkconductedpreviouslyhasalreadyledtothisselection,ProductPortfolioAnalysiscanbedispensedwith.

PROSAPortfolioAnalysisinvolvesbothaclassic,economicallyfocussedPortfolioAnalysisandaSustainabilityPortfolioAnalysis.ThePROSAProductPortfolioAnalysisconfrontstheeconomicallydeterminedself-perceptionofacom-panywithanexternalperceptionfromthesustainabilityperspectiveandfromastakeholderperspective.

Classic product portfolio analysisInafirststep,aclassicProductPortfolioAnalysisfocussingonmarketandcompe-titionaspectsisconducted,andalignedwiththeproductportfoliomatrix.Dependinguponthecompanyinques-tion,differenttypesofProductPortfolioAnalysescanbecarriedout.Thetwobestknownare:

theBostonPortfoliodevelopedbytheBostonConsultingGroup.HereStrategicBusinessUnits(SBUs)ofthecompanyareanalysed,andamatrixchartisproducedplacingtheirrela-tivemarketshareinrelationtotheirmarketgrowthrate.Dependinguponthepositioninthechart,thisleadstofourtypesofSBU:cashcows,risingstars,poordogs,questionmarks.

thecompetitiveadvantage/marketattractivenessportfoliodevelopedbyMcKinsey.Heretherelativecompeti-tiveadvantageandmarketattrac-tivenessarecharacterizedinamoredifferentiatedfashionusingseveralindexes,andtheninetypesofstand-ardstrategiesaremoredifferentiatedaswell.

PROSA Product Portfolio AnalysisInasecondstep,thePROSAProductPortfolioAnalysisiscarriedout,whichsupplementstheeconomicaspectsoftheStrategicBusinessUnits(SBUs)tocapturesocialandenvironmentalaspects:

Socialandenvironmentalrisksinproduction,inbusinessprocessesand

inthemarket;capturedashotspotsinthePROSAProductPortfolio–Sus-tainabilityRisks(cf.Figure21;pre-sentedwithoutcasestudy).

Socialandenvironmentalopportuni-tiesarisingfromproductinnovations,improvedmarketpositionandadher-encetokeyobjectivesofsociety,capturedasbenefitsandeco-poten-tialinthePROSAProductPortfolio–SustainabilityOpportunities(cf.Figure22;shownfortheexampleofaprefabricatedhousemanufacturer).

Specialattentionisgiventopotentialnewproductsorservices.Product-relatedsustainabilityinnovationscanholdoutthefollowingopportunities:

Identificationofnewbusinessop-portunities(markets)thatwerenotpreviouslyrecognized

Migrationintobusinessfieldsthatwillbytheirverynatureprovidelong-termopportunities

Greaterorientationtogrowinglong-termcustomerwishes

Generationofwin-winsituationsforthecompanyandsociety,andthusimprovedreputationofthecompany

AfinalSWOT analysisprovidesanintegratedperspectiveontheinternallyperceived(economic)strengthsandweaknessesandtheexternallyperceived(socialandenvironmental)opportunitiesandrisks.

Work best conducted by means of a multi-stakeholder workshopThekeyenvironmentalandsocialsus-tainabilitylinkagesarebestidentifiedandassessedwithinamulti-stakeholderworkshop.Thisapproachdeliversdirectandup-to-dateinformationandaccurateappraisalsoffutureoptionsandposi-tions.Itwouldalsobeconceivabletocon-ductascreeningofproduct-specificsustainabilitylinkagesbymeansofanexpertappraisalorthroughastrategyteamwithinthecompany,butthiswouldpresupposegreateravailabilityofquan-titativedatawhichhithertohavebeendifficulttoobtaininordertodeliveracomparablestabilityofresults.

11 Product Portfolio Analysis

45

Involvingstakeholdersinthestrategicphasenaturallypresentsrisks,suchasconfidentialityproblems.Figure22intheannexshowsthreeoptionsbywhichtoinvolvestakeholders,andtheadvantagesanddrawbacksoftheseoptions.

Case study: Prefabricated house manufacturer

Amajorprefabricatedhousemanufac-tureraimstoexpanditsbusinessareasinGermany.Followingexhaustivemarketsurveysandconsumerresearch,fourpos-siblenewStrategicBusinessUnits(SBUs)areidentifiedandarediscussedwithstakeholders.ThePROSAportfolioanaly-sisofsustainabilityopportunitiesresultsinthefollowingassessments(cf.alsoFigure22).

Standardized thermal insulation of exist-ing buildings(SBU1)Higheco-potential(verylargestockofexistingbuildings,energyreductionpotentialisveryhighperbuildingandoverall;majorcontributiontoclimatechangemitigation);thekeysocialobjec-tiveof“creatingemployment/reducingyouthunemployment”ispromoted(ben-efitindicatorB14),becauseinsulatingexistingbuildingscreatesmanyjobsincraftscompaniesandtheconstructionsector;thekeysocialobjectiveof“ena-bling/increasingenergyefficiency”(benefitindicatorB13)ispromotedbecausethespecificenergyconsumptionforheatingisreducedsignificantly.Whenselectingthermalinsulationmate-rials,itisessentialtoensurethattheydonotcontainflameretardantsofconcerninordertosupportthekeysocietalobjectiveof“reducingthereleaseofchemicals/hazardouswasteintoair,waterandsoil”(benefitindicatorB23)andtoenablepositivecontributionsto“reducingwastegenerationthroughwasteprevention,recyclabilityandreus-ability“(benefitindicatorB24)attheendofthebenefitphase.

New construction of plus-energy houses (SBU2)Eco-potentialisgiven,butissmallerfortheforeseeablefuturethaninthecaseofthethermalinsulationofexistingbuildings,becauseonlyafewhundredthousandhousesarenewlybuiltperyear.Thekeysocialobjectiveof“ena-bling/increasingenergyefficiency(ben-efitindicatorB13)ispromotednonethe-less.

Wood pellet heating systems(SBU3)Eco-potentialisgiven(woodisareplen-ishableresource,butlimitedinGermany).Thekeysocialobjectiveof“creatingemployment/reducingyouthunemployment”ispromoted(benefitindicatorB14)becausetheforestryandwoodprocessingsectorsarelabour-intensive.Thekeysocialobjective“ena-bling/increasingtheproductionofrenewableenergies”(benefitindicatorB12)ispromotedbecausewoodisarenewableenergycarrier.

Gas-fired condensing boilers(SBU4)Eco-potentialissmallandisnotverypromisingagainstthebackgroundoflong-termCO

2reductiontargets.Nevertheless,duetothehigherutilisa-tionoftheenergystoredinthefuel,acontributionismadetothekeysocialobjectiveof“enabling/increasingener-gyefficiency”(benefitindicatorB13).Alternativesareelectricheatpumps,possiblyincombinationwithaPVsys-tem,orevenelectricheatinginthecaseofhighlyinsulatedhouseswithverylowheatingenergyrequirements.Untilthisbusinessfieldisestablished,gasheatingwithfossilgaswillbephasedoutforcli-mateprotectionreasons.

46

Figure21–PROSA“Strategicriskminimization”productportfolio

Severalsocialhotspots

butnoenviron-mentalhotspot

Severalsocialhotspots

andoneenviron-mentalhotspot

Severalenviron-mentalhotspots

andseveralso-cialhotspots

Onesocialhot-spot

butnoenviron-mentalhotspot

Nosocialhot-spot

andnoenviron-mentalhotspot

Onesocialhot-spot

andoneenviron-mentalhotspot

Nosocialhot-spotbutseveralenvironmentalhotspots

Severalenviron-mentalhotspots

andonesocialhotspot

Nosocialhotspot

butoneenviron-mentalhotspot

Social risks

Environmental risks

47PlusEnergyhousesinFreiburg(Source:RolfDischarchitects)

Figure22–PROSA“Strategicopportunities”productportfolio

Severalbenefits

butnoeco-potential

Severalbenefits

andeco-potential

Severalbenefits

andhigheco-potential

Onebenefit

butnoeco-potential

Nobenefit

andnoeco-potential

Onebenefit

andeco-potential

Nobenefit

buthigheco-potential

Onebenefit

andhigheco-potential

Nobenefit

buteco-potential

Benefit

Eco-potential

o1 SBU:Standardizedthermalinsulationof existingbuildingso2SBU:Newconstructionofplus-energyhouses

o3 SBU:Woodpelletheatingsystemso4 SBU:Gas-firedcondensingboilers

3

1

2

4

48

Annex

Actor Checklist BeforeimplementingPROSAthereshouldbeclarityaboutwhichinternalandexternalactorsplayaroleandinwhatformtheyareincludedoraddressed.Particularlyinlargeandinter-

nationalcompaniesthereisadangerthatrelevantinternalactorsarenotincludedappropriately.ThegeneralActorChecklistcanhelptoestablishtherelevantexternalactors.

Actor groups in general

Productioncompaniesinthechain(pri-maryandsecondarysuppliers,buyers)

Tradingcompanies(incl.Internettra-ding)

Customers(B2C,B2B,procurers,...)

State/administrativeactors

Financialinstitutions:shareholders,banks,insurancecompanies,ratingorganizations

Mediaandproducttestingmagazines

Localresidentsandlocalactors

Industrialassociationsandstandardsorganizations

Consumerorganizations,environmentalcoalitions,developmentorganizations,tradeunions,product-specificassocia-tionsorinitiatives(suchasautomobileclubs,mobilephoneinitiatives)

Actor groups relevant to the product(portfolio) under study

Thissectioncontainschecklistsandover-viewsintendedasaidsforimplementingPROSA.Inlargecompaniestherewillgenerallybecompany-specificchecklistsforthis,whichcanequallybeused.

Figure23–ActorChecklist

49

Stakeholder Involvement Checklist

Stakeholdersshouldbeincludedespe-ciallyinsustainability-orientedstrategicprocesses.Thedifferentpossibilitiesaredescribedinthefollowingoverview.

Therearealsotransitionsbetweentheprototypicaloptionslistedhere.Options1und2shouldbeusedaspreparationpriortoincludingstakeholdersdirectly(Option3).

Options for stakeholder involvement

(1)Researchonstake-holderpositions(Internet;publications)

(2)Conversationswithindividualstakeholdersonthesubject

(3)Directinclusioninstrategyorproductpanels

Advantages

quicknoproblemswithconfi-

dentialitynoobligations

moredirectandup-to- dateinformation

initialassessmentoffu- turedevelopmentsand changesinpositionpos- sible(dependingonex- tentofinformationpro- videdtostakeholders)

Directandup-to-date information

goodassessmentof futuredevelopments andchangesinposition possible

largegainincreativitypotentialforcoopera-

tiveactivitiesthatsup- portthemarket

Disadvantages or risks

oftenout-of-datepubli- cations

littlechancetoassess futuredevelopmentsand changesinposition

notpossibletoaskques- tionsaboutcontentor prioritizations

dependingonextentof informationprovidedto stakeholderspotential problemswithconfidenti- ality

moreanexchangeof positionsthanjointlydevi- singsustainablestrategies

timeconsumingproblemswith

confidentialitychoiceofthe“right“

stakeholdersdifficultand hardtocorrect

expensespayments required,butdepending ontheagreementand disclosurethiscanalso compromisethestake- holderposition

Figure24–StakeholderInvolvementChecklist

50

Figure25–Opportunitiesandrisksofcooperation

Gaininknow-how(know-howtransfer,attainmentofsystemexpertise,commonexperientialknowledge,etc.)

Sharingofstaffandinvestmentcosts(sharingqualifications,apparatus,testfacilities,dataprocessingfacilities,etc.)

Gainintime

Jointsettingofqualitylevelsandstandards

Improvingcompetitiveposition(accesstonewcustomersandmarkets,moredirectandgoal-specificmarketaccess,goodforimageduetoattractivepartners,mutualsupportofcomplementaryproducts,etc.)

Coordination problems(additionalcomplexity,dangerofsub-optimization,costsofcompromise,frictionlosses,etc.)

Threat to one’s own competitive situation(know-howdrain,newcompetitors,cooperationtakesonitsowndynamic,etc.)

Latent conflict situations(conflictsofdistribution,companyculture,conflictsovertrust,conflictsovermotivation,resistancetochange,etc.)

Actor Cooperation ChecklistWhenaproductportfolioisbeingreor-ganized,productsdevelopedandnewmarketingconceptsdevised,itusuallyrequiresenteringintocooperativeactivi-tiesthatmayentaildisadvantagesas

wellasadvantages.Theseshouldbeascertainedandassessedatthestart–butalsoduringtheprocessitself–andminimized,cf.thegeneralActorCooper-ationOpportunitiesandRisksChecklist.

Op

po

rtu

nit

ies

Ris

ks

Integration Checklist

InterfacesanddependenciesexistbetweentheindividualPROSAtools–Life-CycleAssessment,Life-CycleCosting(LCA),SocialLCA(SLCA)andBenefitAnalysis–whichneedtobetakenintoconsiderationwhenimplementingPROSAandinterpretingtheresults.Thisisnecessarynotonlyformethodologicalreasons,butaboveallintermsofdraw-ingconclusionsinpractice.

Example 1:Intheanalysisofanewlaun-drydryer(especiallygoodonsavingenergy,butmoreexpensive),theLife-CycleCostingshowsthatitissuitableonlyforlargefamilieswhowilluseitrel-

ativelyfrequently.Theintentionhadbeen,however,tocalculatetheLCAusinganaveragehousehold(statisticallyspeaking2.1individuals),whilethemar-ketingintentionhadbeentofocusonadifferenttargetgroup.

Example 2:Intheenvironmentalpolicyappraisalofawastetreatmentoptionforcars,thereductionofenvironmentalimpactisrelatedtoasinglecarpartandextrapolatedviathenumberofcarsdis-posedofasatotalpositiveimpact;thecosts,however,arecalculatedandextrapolatedper(whole)car–thismeansthatthecostsareoverestimatedincomparisontothereductionofenvi-ronmentalimpact.

51

Figure26–IntegrationChecklist

Feedbackoftheinitialresultsfromonetooltotheinputdataandassess-mentsfortheothertools.Changesrequired?

Functionalunitdefinedequivalently?Differentdependingontargetgroup?

OutcomeofBenefitAnalysistakenintoaccountwhendefiningfunctionalunit?

Systemboundaryandgeographicalscopedefineduniformlyorequivalently?

Patternsofusedefineduniformly?

Dealingwithdifferent“costbearers”inLife-CycleCosting,butuniform“impactbearer“inLife-CycleAssessment(namely,theenvironment)?

DealingwithespeciallyrelevantqualitativeresultsinSocialLCAandlessrelevantbuthardfiguresinLife-CycleCosting?

AretheLCA,Life-CycleCostingandSocialLCAbasedonsignificantlydiffe-rentdata?

Normalizationtothesamereference(e.g.numberofproducts,branchofindustry,wholenationaleconomy)?

Fairandsymmetricaloverallevaluation?

Fairandsymmetricalcommunicationoffindings?

52

Employment security

Social security

Professional develop-ment

Job satisfaction

Safe & healthy living conditions

Respect of human rights

Respect of indigenous rights

Durationofweeklyrestperiod(atleast24hoursinonestretch)DurationofannualpaidholidaysPossibilityforindividuallyarrangedworkinghoursFundamentaldecisionstoincrease/maintain/reduceworkinghours

NationalframeworkPortionsofpermanent,non-permanent,freelanceemployees,andworkersprovidedbytemporaryworkagenciesandsub-contractorsLabourturnoverrateRegulationsondismissalprotection(cancellationperiodetc.)Fundamentaldecisionsonhiringordismissingemployees

NationalframeworkEvidenceofbreachesofobligatorysocialcontri-butionsDurationandlevelofwagecontinuationinthecaseofillnessOccupationalpensionschemesMaternityprotectionandchildcareAdditionaloccupationalsocialcontributions

NationalframeworkEnhancementofprofessionalqualificationsonthejobProportionofemployeescoveredbytrainingpro-grammesAveragenumberoftrainingdaysperemployeeQualityoftraining(participants‘feedback)Languagecoursesandintegrationmeasuresforforeignemployees

NationalframeworkCompanyfestivitiesandsocialeventsWorkplacereachability(location,publictransportetc.)AestheticdesignofworkplacesIfnecessary:Provisionofhousingfacilitiesfittolivedecently

NationalframeworkFatalaccidentsconnectedtothecompany‘sacti-vitiesAccidentsconnectedtothecompany‘sactivitiesNegativeandpositivehealthimpactsforthelocalpopulationNoise,fume,dust,heatandwastewateremissi-onsMeasuresandarrangementstomaintainandimprovesafeandhealthylivingconditions

NationalframeworkVoluntarycommitmentsbythecompanyinthefieldofhumanrightsReportsonhumanrightsviolationsrelatedtothecompany‘sactivitiesForcedevictions/resettlementsrelatedtothecompany‘sactivitiesHumanrightstrainingforemployees,particularlyforsecuritystaff

NationalframeworkReportsoninterferencewithsocial,economicorculturalactivitiesofindigenousgroupsEvidenceofexploitingindigenousknowledge

NationalframeworkNumberoffatalaccidentsatworkNumberofaccidentsatworkNumberofrecognizedoccupationaldiseasesandreportsonelevatedhealthrisksWorkplacesassociatedwithnoise,fumes,dust,heat,insufficientilluminationBasicmeasuresandarrangementstomaintainandincreasesafetyatworkMeasuresandarrangementstomaintainandincreasehealthatworkAccesstocleandrinkingwaterandsanitaryfaci-litiesatworkPoliciesandprogrammestocombatHIV/AIDSand/orotherlocallyimportanthealthissues(den-gue,malaria,alcoholismetc.)

NationalframeworkVoluntarycommitmentsbythecompanyinthefieldoffreedomofassociation&righttocollec-tivebargainingReportsonhinderingworkers’organizationsandtheiractivitiesRateofunionizationPossibilitiesforcollectivebargainingPossibilitiesforbottom-upcommunication

NationalframeworkVoluntarycommitmentsbythecompanyinthefieldofequalopportunitiesandtreatmentReportsondiscriminatorypracticesofthecom-panyProportionofwomeninmanagementpositionsProportionofdisabledemployeesReportsonharassmentandmobbingReportsonsexualharassmentMeasuresandprogrammestomaintainandincreaseequalopportunitiesandtreatment

NationalframeworkVoluntarycommitmentsbythecompanyonabo-litionofforcedlabourReportsoncasesofforcedlabourasdefinedbytheILOcorelabourstandardconventionsNo.29and105

NationalframeworkVoluntarycommitmentsbythecompanyonabo-litionofchildlabourReportsoncasesofchildlabourasdefinedbytheILOcorelabourstandardconventionsNo.138and182

NationalframeworkAverageremunerationlevelAveragelevelofperformance-relatedincentivesLevelofcorporateminimumwagesRatioofcorporateminimumwagestolocalcostsoflivingNumberofemployeesinthelowestremunerati-onsegmentAveragelevelofperformance-relatedincentivesinthelowestremunerationsegmentApplicationofatransparentremunerationsystemPaymentofwagesinduetime

NationalframeworkDurationofonestandardworkingweekMaximumweeklyworkinghours

Employees

Safe & healthy wor-king conditions

Freedom of associati-on, right to collective bargaining & workers‘ participation

Equality of opportunity and treatment & fair interaction

Abolition of forced labour

Abolition of child labour

Adequate remunerati-on

Adequate working time

Local and regional communities

Figure27–PROSAlistofsocialindicators

53

Community engage-ment

Maintaining & impro-ving social and econo-mic opportunities

Society

Public commitments to sustainability issues

Prevention of unjustifi-able risks

Employment creation

Vocational training

Anti-corruption efforts & non-interference in sensitive political issues

Social & environmental minimum standards for suppliers and coopera-tion partners

andculturalheritageReportsontheviolationoflocaltraditionsandvaluesRespectofindigenousdevelopmentgoalsMeasurestomaintainandimprovethesocioeco-nomicbasisofindigenousgroups

NationalframeworkInformationpossibilitiesforresidentsSystemtorespondtocommunitygrievancesBreachesofobligationsestablishedbylocalpoli-ticalandsocialdecision-makingauthorities

NationalframeworkInfluenceonlocalresourceconflictsProvision/overburdeningofinfrastructurefacili-tiesProvision/overburdeningofwelfareservicesAdditionaleducationfacilitiesforlocalresidentsImpactonlocaleconomicdevelopment

NationalframeworkAwardsforengagementinsocialand/orsustai-nabilityissuesMembershipinalliancesandprogrammestosup-portandpromotesustainablebusinesspracticesEvidenceoflobbyingagainstimplementingsustainabilitymeasuresPublicationofasustainabilityreportorsocialreport

NationalframeworkUseofgeneticallyengineeredproductsand/orpromotionofactivitiesinthefieldofgeneticengineeringoflivingorganisms,andinrelationtopatentinggenes,organismsandplantsHandlingofradioactivesubstancesand/orsup-portofactivitiesconnectedtonuclearpowerandwarfareEvidenceofothershort-,medium-orlong-termriskstohumansecurity

NationalframeworkLabourintensity(workinghoursperproductorfunctionalunit)/numberofemployeesDevelopmentofindicators1.and2.withinthelast3years

NationalframeworkNumberandproportionofapprentices(inrelati-ontothetotalnumberofemployees)Enhancementofprofessionalqualificationsonthejob

NationalframeworkEvidenceofcorruptand/orextortionatebusi-nesspracticesReportsonimproperinvolvementinpoliticalacti-vitiesCorporatemeasurestocombatcorruptbusinesspractices

NationalframeworkProveneffortstoimplementsocialandenviron-mentalminimumstandardsatsuppliers,sub-sup-pliers,intermediarydealersandcooperationpart-nersEvidenceofbreachesoffundamentalsocialandenvironmentalminimumstandardsatsuppliers,sub-suppliersandcooperationpartners

Contribution to the national economy and stable economic deve-lopment

Contribution to the national budget

Prevention & mitigati-on of armed conflicts

Transparent business information

Protection of intellec-tual property rights

Protection of the user’s / consumer’s health and safety

Quality of product or service

Fair competition & marketing practices

Complete & understan-dable product informa-tion

Protection of user’s / consumer’s privacy

Enhancing the user’s / consumer’s social and economic possibilities

NationalframeworkContributiontoGDPDirectinvestmentsContributiontotheforeigntradebalanceDevelopmentofinnovativeproductsandservicesThesector‘sstabilityduringmarketcrisisEvidenceofcompetitiondistortingbusinessprac-tices(monopolisationetc.)

NationalframeworkContributiontothenationalbudget(taxespaidminussubsidiesreceived)Evidenceoftaxevasion

NationalframeworkLinkbetweeneconomicactivitiesandarmedcon-flicts

NationalframeworkComprehensiveandtransparentbusinessrepor-tingandsustainabilityreportingHandlingofinquiriesonsustainabilityissues

NationalframeworkReports/courtsentencesonbreachesofintellec-tualpropertyrights

NationalframeworkHealthopportunities/risksrelatedtoproductuseAccidentsrelatedtoproductuseFatalitiesrelatedtoproductuseFindingsofproductsafetytests(incl.anyawards,labels)NationalframeworkQualityinrelationtocomparableproductsGoodservice,repairability,availabilityofsparepartsFunctioningproceduretosettleconsumercom-plaintsFindingsofproducttests(incl.anyawards,labels)

NationalframeworkEvidenceofagreementsandpracticesthatdistortcompetitionEvidenceoffraudulent,misleadingorunfairmar-ketingstrategiesPreventionofhighdownstreamcostsformainte-nanceanddisposalProportionofadvertisingcostsinproductpriceEvidenceofinfringementsofcommercialadverti-singlaw(reprimandsbyadvertisingmonitoringcounciletc.)Evidenceofdubiouspracticestobindconsumers(non-compatiblesoftware,inkcartridgesetc.)

NationalframeworkPreciseandreadilyunderstandableinformation(usermanual,constituentsubstances,safeuse,maintenance,storageanddisposal)asbasisforinformation-basedconsumerdecisions

NationalframeworkIndicationsofinfringementsofconsumers’priva-cyand/ordataprotectionrights

NationalframeworkReductionofconsumercostsSuitabilityofproducttomeetneedsofdisadvan-tagedgroups(disabled,aged,ethnicminoritiesetc.)Generalandwidespreadaccesstoproductsandservices

Users & Consumers

54

ADAC(Hrsg.)(2020):Autokostenberechnung–GrundlagenfürdiestandardisierteKos-tenberechnung,ADACe.V.,München.

AgoraVerkehrswende(2019):KlimabilanzvonElektroautos.EinflussfaktorenundVerbes-serungspotenzial,Berlin.

Benoît,N.C.;Traverso,M.;Neugebauer,S.;Ekener,E.;Schaubroeck,T.;RussoGarrido,S.;Berger,M.;Valdivia,S.;Lehmann,A.;Finkbeiner,M.;Arcese,G.(eds.)(2020):SocialLycleAssessmentofProductsandOrganizations.UnitedNationsEnvironmentalProgramme.

Eberle,U.;Möller,M.;Grießhammer,R.;Gröger,J.;Prieß,R.;Wenzig,J.(2021):SDG-Bewertung-WeiterentwicklungeinerNachhaltigkeitsbewertungsmethodeaufBasisderNachhaltigkeitszielederVereintenNationen.Abschlussbericht.Witten/Freiburg.

Eberle,U.andWenzig,J.(2020):SDG-EvaluationofProducts—SEP.Nachhaltigkeits-bewertungvonProduktenundDienstleistungenanhandderSustainableDevelopmentGoals.Broschüre.ZentrumfürNachhaltigeUnternehmensführungderUniversitätWitten/Herdecke.Download:www.sdg-evaluation.com.

Emilsson,E.andDahllöf,L.(2019):Lithium-IonVehicleBatteryProduction-Status2019onEnergyUse,CO2Emissions,UseofMetals,ProductsEnvironmentalFootprint,andRecycling.ilvC444.

EuropeanCommission(2012):ProductEnvironmentalFootprint(PEF)Guide.Download:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/footprint/PEF%20methodology%20final%20draft.pdf.

EuropeanCommission(2013):ThedevelopmentofPEF.Download:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/dev_methods.htm(lastcheckedon07.02.2021).

EuropeanCommission(2018):ProductEnvironmentalFootprintCategoryRulesGuidance-Version6.3.Download:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/PEFCR_guidance_v6.3.pdf(lastcheckedon07.02.2021).

Finkbeiner,M.;Bach,V.andLehmann,A.(2018):EnvironmentalFootprint–DerUmwelt-FußabdruckvonProduktenundDienstleistungen.UBA-TEXTE76/2018.

GlobalReportingInitiative(GRI)(2016a):ManagementApproach.Download:https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/media/1038/gri-103-management-approach-2016.pdf(lastcheckedon07.02.2021).

GlobalReportingInitiative(GRI)(2016b):Grundlagen2016.Download:https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/media/1671/german-gri-101-foundation-2016.pdf(lastcheckedon07.02.2021).

GRI,UNGlobalCompactandtheWBCSD(w/oyear):SDGCompass.TheGuideforbusi-nessactionontheSDGs;developedbyGRI,theUNGlobalCompactandtheWorldBusinessCouncilforSustainableDevelopment(WBCSD).Download:https://sdgcompass.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/019104_SDG_Compass_Guide_2015.pdf(lastcheckedon07.02.2021).

Grießhammer,R.;Buchert,M.;Gensch,C.;Hochfeld,C.;Manhart,A.andRüdenauer,I.(2007):PROSA–ProductSustainabilityAssessment.BeschreibungderMethode.Freiburg.

Grießhammer,R;Benoit,C;Dreyer,L.C;Flysjö,A;Manhart,A;Mazijin,B;Methot,A.L;Weidema,B.(2006);Öko-InstitutandTaskforceUNEP-SETAC;FeasibilityStudy:Integrati-onofsocialaspectsintoLCA.Freiburg.

References and website

55

HAHessen-Agentur(2018):Strombewegt–FragenzurElektromobilität.Wiesbaden.

ISO14040:Environmentalmanagement-Lifecycleassessment-Principlesandframework(ISO14040:2006);GermanandEnglishversionENISO14040:2006

ISO14044:Environmentalmanagement-Lifecycleassessment-Requirementsandguide-lines(ISO14044:2006);GermanandEnglishversionENISO14044:2006

ISO14045:Environmentalmanagement-Eco-efficiencyassessmentofproductsystems-Principles,requirementsandguidelines(ISO14045:2012);GermanandEnglishversionENISO14045:2012

Muster,M.;Wolff,F.;Kampffmeyer,N.;Grießhammer,R.;Fischer,C.;Thorun,C.;Schrader,U.andReisch,R.(2020):EvaluationdesNationalenProgrammsfürNachhaltigenKonsum:Ex-ante-BetrachtungundKurzbewertungausgewählterMaßnahmen.UBA-Texte210.Berlin.

Rüdenauer,I.andGrießhammer,R.(2004):Ökoeffizienz-Rankingvonprodukt-undver-haltensbezogenenOptionenfürVerbraucher.Freiburg.

SalaS.;CeruttiA.K.;PantR.(2018):DevelopmentofaweightingapproachfortheEn-vironmentalFootprint,PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion.Luxembourg.DOI:10.2760/945290.

Saling,P.(2016):TheBASFEco-EfficiencyAnalysis.A20-yearsuccessstory.Ludwigshafen.

Steffen,W.;Richardson,K.;Rockstrom,J.etal.(2015):Planetaryboundaries:guidinghumandevelopmentonachangingplanet.Science2015;347(6223).

Swarr,T.E.;Hunkeler,D.;Kloepffer,W.;Pesonen,H.L.;Ciroth,A.;Brent,A.C.andPagan,P.(2011):EnvironmentalLifeCycleCosting:ACodeofPractice.TheInternationalJournalofLifeCycleAssessment16(5):389-391.

UNEP-SETACLifeCycleInitiative(2009):GuidelinesforSocialLifeCycleAssessmentofProducts.

UnitedNations(1949):UniversalDeclarationofHumanRights.Download:https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html,(lastcheckedon07.02.2021)

UnitedNations(2015):Transformingourworld:the2030AgendaforSustainableDeve-lopment:A/RES/70/1.Download:https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf,(lastcheckedon07.02.2021)

Zampori,L.andPant,R.(2019):SuggestionsforupdatingtheProductEnvironmentalFootprint(PEF)method.EUR29682EN,PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion.Luxembourg.DOI:10.2760/424613,JRC115959.

www.prosa.org

56

Öko-Institute.V.InstitutforAppliedEcology

MerzhauserStr.173D-79100FreiburgPhone: +49-761-45295-0Fax: +49-761-45295-288Email: info@oeko.dewww.oeko.dewww.prosa.org