Sourcing from supply-chains where social impacts are unacceptable is a risk. However understanding these beyond tier 1 is a challenge which we have addressed extensively.


In the Implementation guide (page 31), BASF had submitted the following quote:

At BASF more and more, strategic decision-making processes require holistic sustainability assessments including social impacts. We developed our Social Analysis within the SEEbalance® method, see figure 5.6, based on the guidelines of the Handbook. A harmonized method that delivers meaningful results help decision-makers in their work to consider sustainability aspects based on a sound methodology. As it is common today to consider environmental impacts, it will be standard to consider social impacts as well. Furthermore, Social Analysis identifies improvement opportunities and can support the definition of priorities of activities.

The Social Analysis that BASF applies, delivers completely new findings because the approach is significantly different to the classical LCA approach and not just a repetition of an LCA with different figures. We extended that approach to agro business as well with the AgBalance method. Both methods are implemented by the sustainability strategy department and is run all over the world with the same approaches. That ensures the same mode of work and allows the comparison of findings as well as the collaboration with different sustainability centers in the world. Sustainability Strategy has the worldwide responsibility for the assessment methods and will implement applicable, accepted and harmonized methods based on different standards. ISO standards can play here an important role in the future. Furthermore, the workload must be acceptable, to generate a relatively high output of studies per year at reasonable costs. The results must be transferred to easy understandable final results to give guidance for non-experts as well


The implementation guide also contains reference to the work done by ArcelorMittal

Over the years ArcelorMittal has developed expertise and knowledge on environmental life cycle assessments. As part of the sustainability journey, ArcelorMittal has explored social value of steel and is developing experience in the field of social life cycle assessments. During phase 6 of the Roundtable, ArcelorMittal performed a case study intended to evaluate the two social life cycle assessment databases currently available on the market: Social Hotspot Database (SHDB) and Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSIA) data-base. The main goal of the case study was to gain experience and develop working knowledge of the two databases. The intent was to develop an illustrative example that could be used to transfer the lessons learned to wider audience within ArcelorMittal, thus raising awareness within the company and initiating discussions.

The report and overall learnings show a number of weaknesses in these databases. The overall conclusion is formulated in this way: All in all, this study suggests the results from the databases can provide a good starting point for evaluating social risks associated with production of steel, different product systems, etc. Social life cycle database can complement the existing knowledge of social risks or highlight the areas that require further investigation. However, the raw results the social life cycle databases should be used with caution due to uncertainty de-rived from the input-output models, the social data used and use of worker-hours as an activity variable.