Sustainability, Vol. 18, Pages 950: A Supply Chain Analysis on Natural Rubber in Industrial Solid Tire Manufacturing Based on a Social Life Cycle Assessment Method: A Case Study Under Sri Lankan Scenario


Sustainability, Vol. 18, Pages 950: A Supply Chain Analysis on Natural Rubber in Industrial Solid Tire Manufacturing Based on a Social Life Cycle Assessment Method: A Case Study Under Sri Lankan Scenario

Sustainability doi: 10.3390/su18020950

Authors:
D. J. T. S. Liyanage
Pasan Dunuwila
V. H. L. Rodrigo
Enoka Munasinghe
Wenjing Gong
Koichi Shobatake
Kiyotaka Tahara
Takeo Hoshino
Ichiro Daigo

As the largest exporter in the global solid tire market, Sri Lanka’s natural rubber supply chain plays a critical role in global production, yet its social dimension remains largely unaddressed. Our study aims to assess the social performance of a Sri Lankan natural rubber supply chain in solid tire manufacturing using social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) in a cradle-to-gate approach. Study adapts “More Good and Less Bad” method which captures both positive and negative social impacts, addressing traditional S-LCAs’ focus on negative impacts solely. It applies to updated methodological sheets to distinguish “good” and “bad” social conditions across subcategories based on baseline compliance. Social impacts were quantified using a Social Performance Index (SPI), calculated by multiplying social performance levels by working hours at the organizational level, comprising SPIgood for good social impacts and SPIbad for bad social impacts. Data was collected through stakeholder interviews, with working hours calculated using a “working hour model”. Results showed mixed social performance across 39 subcategories, identifying six social hotspots: promoting social responsibility (27.67% less bad, 72.32% more good), wealth distribution (26.87% less bad, 73.13% more good), commitment to sustainability issues (100% less bad), social benefits (100% less bad), safe and healthy living conditions (100% less bad), and hours of work (88.74% less bad, 11.26% more good).



Source link

D. J. T. S. Liyanage www.mdpi.com