CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Environmental Impact and SustainabilityEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Addressing uncertain scoring and weighting factors in social life cycle assessment

do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles, Margni, Manuele, Baptiste, Pierre·2017·The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
DOI 10.1007/s11367-017-1275-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11367-017-1275-1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The uncertainty of scoring and weighting factors in S-LCA has been identified but no single solution has been agreed upon in the S-LCA community thus far.

    “The uncertainty of scoring and weighting factors in S-LCA has been identified (do Carmo et al. 2017a, b) but no single solution has been agreed upon in the S-LCA community thus far (UNEP 2020).”

    From S-LCA of lithium mining in Chile and its potential impacts on water and the local community (2025) · cites this paper as do Carmo et al. 2017a

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Bengtsson M (2001) Weighting in practice: implications for the use of life-cycle assessment in decision making. J Ind Ecol 4(4):47–60 · DOI
  2. Benoit-Norris C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Praksha S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social lifecycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:156–163 · DOI
  3. Carmo BBT, Margni M, Baptiste P (2017) Customized scoring and weighting approaches for quantifying and aggregating results in social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-017-1280-4 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Dong YH, Ng ST (2015) A social life cycle assessment model for building construction in Hong Kong. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1166–1180 · DOI
  5. Ekener-Petersen E, Finnveden G (2013) Potential hotspot identified by social LCA—part 1: a case study of a laptop computer. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:127–143 · DOI
  6. Ekener-Petersen E, Moberg Å (2013) Potential hotspot idenfied by social LCA–Part 2: Reflections on a study of a complex product. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:144–154 · DOI
  7. Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2:3309–3322 · DOI
  8. Hosseinijou SA, Mansour S, Shirazi MA (2014) Social life cycle assessment for material selection: a case study of building materials. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:620–645 · DOI
  9. Hyde K, Maier HR, Colby C (2003) Incorporating uncertainty in Promethee MCDA method. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 12:245–259 · DOI
  10. Jørgensen A (2013) Social LCA—a way ahead? Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:296–299 · DOI
  11. Macombe C, Leskinen P, Feschet P, Antikainen R (2013) Social life cycle assessment of biodiesel production at three levels: a literature review and development needs. J Clean Prod 52:205–216 · DOI
  12. Macombe C, Loeillet D, Gillet C (2016) Extended community of peers and robustness of social LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1226-2 · DOI
  13. Marinoni O (2005) A stochastic spatial decision support system based on PROMETHEE. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 19(1):51–68 · DOI
  14. Muller S, Lesage P, Ciroth A, Mutel C, Weidema BP, Samson S (2014) The application of the pedigree approach to the distributions foreseen in ecoinvent v3. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1327–1337 · DOI
  15. Revéret JP, Couture JM, Parent J (2015) Socioeconomic LCA of milk production in Canada. In: Muthu SS (ed) Social life cycle assessment. Springer, Singapore, pp 25–69 · DOI
  16. Russo Garrido S, Parent J, Beaulieu L, Revéret JP (2016) A literature review of type I SLCA—making the logic underlying methodological choices explicit. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1067-z · DOI
  17. Sanchez-Ramirez PK, Petti L, Brones F, Ugaya CML (2016) Subcategory assessment method for social life cycle assessment. Part 2: application in cocoa soap. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:106–117 · DOI
  18. Ugaya CML (2015) The social assessment of products. In: Murray J, Mcbain D, Wiedmann T (eds) The sustainability practitioner’s guide to social analysis and assessment. Commun Group, Chicago, pp 18–27
  19. Vinyes E, Oliver-Solà J, Ugaya C, Rieradevall J, Gasol CM (2013) Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:445–455 · DOI
  20. Zamagni A, Amerighi O, Buttol P (2011) Strengths or bias in social LCA? Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:596–598 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
do Carmo, B. B. T., Margni, M., & Baptiste, P.
Affiliations
  • CIRAIG (CA)
  • Polytechnique Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
do Carmo, Breno Barros Telles
ORCID
Venue
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-02-17
Volume
22
Issue
10
Pages
1609-1617
ISSN
  • 0948-3349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1614-7502
DOI
10.1007/s11367-017-1275-1
OpenAlex
W2588252550
Cited by
33
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)
Locations
  • The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords
social life cycle assessment, uncertainty analysis, weighting factors, value judgments, Monte Carlo simulation, ranking robustness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review