Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.author
Alejandrino, Clarisa  
dc.contributor.author
Mercante, Irma Teresa  
dc.contributor.author
Bovea, María D.  
dc.date.available
2022-09-28T12:14:38Z  
dc.date.issued
2021-03-17  
dc.identifier.citation
Alejandrino, Clarisa; Mercante, Irma Teresa; Bovea, María D.; Life cycle sustainability assessment: Lessons learned from case studies; Elsevier; Environmental Impact Assessment Review; 87; 17-3-2021; 1-13  
dc.identifier.issn
0195-9255  
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/170727  
dc.description.abstract
Although methodological development of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is still under discussion, an increasing number of case studies have been published in recent years. A necessity to strengthen methodological trade-offs and obtain a consistent basis for future LCSA case studies exists. The aim of this research is to identify how LCSA is being applied for each of the pillars of sustainability (environmental, economic and social) and how results are being integrated into the decision-making process. To achieve this aim, a systematic review of case studies was conducted. The methodology followed includes research questions to guide the process, search guidelines for selecting case studies to analyse and assessment rules to identify information to extract. The descriptive and content analyses of case studies provided key findings related to the main goals, divergences in the scope of the pillars of sustainability, data collection sources, the most readily applicable impact indicators for each of the three pillars of sustainability, operational research methods applied as drivers for communication and decision processes. In addition, the incipient interactions between LCSA and new sustainability approaches as circular economy and Sustainability Development Goals (SDG) is analysed. As a final conclusion, further research should be carried out to achieve consistency in the selection of the scope for each pillar of sustainability. This would make it possible to develop more accurate indicators for quantifying the social impact and to point out advantages and disadvantages of operation research methods for communication and support in decision-making.  
dc.format
application/pdf  
dc.language.iso
eng  
dc.publisher
Elsevier  
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess  
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/  
dc.subject
CIRCULAR ECONOMY  
dc.subject
LCA  
dc.subject
LCC  
dc.subject
LCSA  
dc.subject
REVIEW  
dc.subject
SDG  
dc.subject
SLCA  
dc.subject.classification
Otras Ingeniería del Medio Ambiente  
dc.subject.classification
Ingeniería del Medio Ambiente  
dc.subject.classification
INGENIERÍAS Y TECNOLOGÍAS  
dc.title
Life cycle sustainability assessment: Lessons learned from case studies  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article  
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion  
dc.date.updated
2022-09-13T17:20:41Z  
dc.journal.volume
87  
dc.journal.pagination
1-13  
dc.journal.pais
Países Bajos  
dc.journal.ciudad
Amsterdam  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Alejandrino, Clarisa. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Ingeniería; Argentina  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Mercante, Irma Teresa. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Ingeniería; Argentina  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Bovea, María D.. Universitat Jaume I; España  
dc.journal.title
Environmental Impact Assessment Review  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925520307952  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106517