Beyond carbon footprints and environmental impacts lies a critical yet often overlooked dimension of sustainability: the social footprint of the products we use every day.
Imagine being able to trace the social journey of a product—from the mining of its raw materials to its final disposal—understanding not just its environmental impact, but its effects on human dignity, fair wages, and community well-being. This is the power of Social Life-Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), an emerging discipline that brings the human story behind products into sharp focus. While environmental LCA has been used for decades to calculate carbon footprints and ecological impacts, S-LCA represents the crucial third pillar of sustainability, addressing the social dimension that completes the picture of true sustainability 5 .
66% of all articles on S-LCA published between 2015-2018 alone 1 , signaling a paradigm shift in sustainability thinking.
Places human well-being at the center of product life cycles, examining social conditions and impacts.
Social Life-Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) is defined as "a technique for collecting, analyzing and communicating information about the social conditions and impacts associated with production and consumption" 1 . Unlike traditional environmental LCA that focuses on ecological impacts, S-LCA examines current and potential socio-economic impacts—both positive and negative—throughout a product's entire life cycle 1 .
The ultimate goal of conducting S-LCA is to provide decision-making support by evaluating changes in the lives of workers, consumers, society, and other key stakeholders connected to the product's life cycle 1 . This helps decision-makers choose alternatives with the most favorable social consequences, promoting improvements in social conditions and overall socio-economic performance 8 .
Establishing the study's purpose, system boundaries, and stakeholder focus 2
Collecting data on social indicators across the product life cycle 2
Evaluating social impacts based on the inventory data 2
Analyzing results and drawing conclusions for improvement 2
| Stakeholder Group | Sample Impact Concerns |
|---|---|
| Workers | Fair wages, health & safety, working hours, child labor, forced labor, discrimination |
| Local Community | Access to material resources, local employment, cultural heritage, community engagement |
| Society | Corruption, legal compliance, technology development, public commitments to sustainability |
| Consumers | Health & safety, privacy, transparency, end-of-life responsibility |
| Value Chain Actors | Fair competition, supplier relationships, promoting social responsibility |
Focus on workers' rights, safety conditions, and fair compensation during manufacturing.
Evaluate impacts across the entire value chain, from raw material extraction to distribution.
Consider social implications of disposal, recycling, and potential reuse of products.
To understand the evolution and current state of S-LCA, a groundbreaking bibliometric analysis published in 2020 examined the literature on social life-cycle assessment published over a 15-year period (2003-2018) 1 . This comprehensive review provides invaluable insights into the field's development, key contributors, and research trends.
The researchers employed scientific mapping techniques to extract qualitative information from specialized literature and represent it using quantitative measures 1 . Using SciMAT software, they analyzed publications from ISI Web of Science databases to identify main themes, publication patterns, and the most representative elements in the field 1 .
The bibliometric analysis revealed several crucial patterns and developments in S-LCA research 1 :
| Research Aspect | Key Finding | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Growth Pattern | Exponential growth, especially after 2009 guidelines | 66% of articles published in 2015-2018 period alone |
| Research Nature | Dominated by case studies | Strong emphasis on practical application over theoretical work |
| Geographical Spread | Primarily European authors, but applications mainly in non-European countries | Highlights global supply chain concerns and potential research bias |
| Methodological State | Highly fragmented research field | Lack of standardization and cohesive theoretical framework |
| Sector Application | Diverse sectors including agriculture, bioenergy, transport, water management, electronics | Demonstrates methodology's versatility across industries |
The analysis identified a clear upward trend in publications, particularly after the landmark 2009 UNEP/SETAC Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products 1 . This indicates that the establishment of methodological frameworks significantly accelerated research in this field.
The study also revealed S-LCA as a highly fragmented research field applied to diverse sectors, with critical questions concerning methods, framework, paradigms, and indicators remaining unresolved 1 . This fragmentation represents both a challenge and opportunity for future research.
A significant recent development in S-LCA methodology addresses the challenge of assessing positive social impacts. Traditional S-LCA approaches have primarily focused on reducing negative impacts—what researchers now call the "less-bad" approach 3 .
A groundbreaking 2025 study introduced a novel framework that distinguishes between "good" and "bad" social states, moving beyond the traditional "positive" and "negative" terminology that lacks consistent consensus in the literature 3 .
The methodology introduces two transformative concepts:
This approach uses compliance levels (e.g., industry standards) as baseline requirements to distinguish between good and bad social domains 3 . Social impacts are evaluated using a Social Performance Index (SPI) calculated by multiplying social performance levels with working hours at the factory or company level 3 .
This framework enables organizations to not just avoid harm but actively contribute to social well-being throughout their value chains.
Conducting robust Social Life-Cycle Assessment requires specialized tools and resources. Here are the essential components of the S-LCA research toolkit:
| Tool/Resource | Function | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Methodological Frameworks | Provide standardized approaches and guidelines | UNEP/SETAC Guidelines (2009, 2020), ISO 14075 |
| Impact Databases | Supply social impact data for various sectors and regions | PSILCA, Social Hotspots Database |
| Software Platforms | Facilitate data analysis and impact calculation | SimaPro (with social assessment features) |
| Stakeholder Engagement Tools | Collect primary data from affected stakeholders | Structured interviews, surveys, focus groups |
| Reference Scale Systems | Enable semi-quantitative assessment of social performance | 5-point performance scales for various indicators |
The field remains characterized by a lack of standardized indicators and assessment methods, making comparisons between studies difficult 9 . The recent publication of ISO 14075 represents a crucial step toward standardizing the methodology 3 .
Gathering high-quality, site-specific social data remains resource-intensive, particularly in informal sectors or regions with limited transparency 5 . Researchers are addressing this through the development of more efficient data collection protocols and collaborative databases 7 .
Unlike environmental impacts that may be similar across regions, social impacts are highly dependent on local context, making universal assessment criteria challenging to establish . The same type of mine may have similar environmental impacts regardless of location, but the social impacts may differ dramatically between operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Belgium .
The ultimate goal of many researchers is full Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) that integrates social, environmental, and economic dimensions 9 . Projects such as Orienting, funded by the EU's Horizon 2020 program, are making significant strides in this direction .
Social Life-Cycle Assessment represents a paradigm shift in how we conceptualize product sustainability—one that places human dignity and well-being at the center of our evaluation frameworks. As the bibliometric analysis reveals, this is a rapidly evolving field with tremendous potential to drive social improvements across global supply chains 1 .
The methodology has moved beyond academic curiosity to become an essential tool for businesses facing increasing regulatory pressure from directives such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) .
Beyond compliance, S-LCA offers companies the opportunity to genuinely understand and improve their social footprint, potentially unlocking investment opportunities through the 'do-no-significant-harm' clause of the EU Taxonomy .
As consumers increasingly demand transparency about product origins and impacts, S-LCA provides the framework to tell the complete human story behind products—from raw material to end of life. In doing so, it completes the sustainability triad, ensuring that our pursuit of environmental sustainability doesn't come at the cost of human dignity, but rather enhances it through responsible production and consumption practices that respect both planetary boundaries and social thresholds.
The journey of S-LCA from niche concept to established methodology mirrors a broader recognition that true sustainability must encompass not just what we take from our planet, but how we treat each other in the process of creating, using, and disposing of the products that shape our modern world.