Muestra métricas de impacto externas asociadas a la publicación. Para mayor detalle:
| Indexado |
|
||||
| DOI | 10.1007/S11367-024-02333-7 | ||||
| Año | 2024 | ||||
| Tipo | artículo de investigación |
Citas Totales
Autores Afiliación Chile
Instituciones Chile
% Participación
Internacional
Autores
Afiliación Extranjera
Instituciones
Extranjeras
PurposeSocial dimensions have yet to be explored in the bioeconomy context. This topic is relevant in Latin America, where social conflicts have arisen, for example, in the forestry sector, because of the pressure on the local communities. This research aimed to compare the social impacts of pellet production systems in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. As a second goal, this research sought to contrast the results in each pellet production chain by comparing two social databases.MethodsSocial hotspots are determined based on the Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) methodology through cradle-to-gate pellet production, using 100 MJ of pellets as a functional unit. Forestry, electricity, and fuel processes are included in the LCA system boundary. Two S-LCA databases, SHDB and SOCA, are used, focusing on sectoral and product-specific social aspects, respectively. The results are presented through Sankey diagrams, and a Principal Components Analysis assesses the sensitivity of results between the SHDB and SOCA databases.Results and discussionBrazil exhibits the highest social impacts using SHDB or SOCA databases, contrasting with Chile's lower impacts along the pellet production chain. Legal gaps in Brazil and Mexico concerning solid biofuels necessitated governance strategies to minimize associated social problems. In the case of Brazil, the SHDB and SOCA databases contributed to potential impacts in different ways. While forestry is a hotspot using the SHDB, electricity was the main process for the SOCA database. In the case of Chile and Mexico, the main risks are displayed for the forestry activities using both databases. The above was valid through the indices calculated through the Principal Components Analysis (PCA). These indices showed that quantitatively, the Brazilian pellets were the ones that showed the most remarkable social impacts, increasing the social impacts to more than 40% according to the SHDB. Moreover, the social impacts were approximately four times more (SOCA-based) when contrasted with Chilean and Mexican pellets.ConclusionsThis study proposes that forestry is the primary driver of social hotspots for pellet production in Latin America (considering the three case studies analyzed here), primarily linked to identified governance risks. To enhance the social dimension of the bioeconomy in these nations, it is crucial to incorporate these social aspects and impacts into policies. The Chilean context serves as a valuable benchmark for countries aiming to improve the social performance of biomass pellet production, emphasizing the need for short to medium-term advancements in the bioeconomy's social agenda.
| Ord. | Autor | Género | Institución - País |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Silva, Diogo Aparecido Lopes | - |
Univ Fed Sao Carlos - Brasil
Universidade Federal de São Carlos - Brasil |
| 2 | Vasquez-Ibarra, Leonardo | - |
Universidad Católica del Maule - Chile
|
| 3 | Farrapo Junior, Antonio Carlos | Hombre |
Univ Fed Sao Carlos - Brasil
Universidade Federal de São Carlos - Brasil |
| 4 | Musule Lagunes, Ricardo | - |
Univ Veracruzana - México
Universidad Veracruzana - México |
| Fuente |
|---|
| National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) |
| Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico |
| Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo |
| Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior |
| Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) |
| So Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) |
| Agradecimiento |
|---|
| This work was supported by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES - grant number CAPES-PRINT 88887.717208/2022-00), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq - grant numbers 302722/2019-0 and 201121/2022-0), and the S & atilde;o Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP - grant number 2019/16996-4). |
| This work was supported by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES \u2014 grant number CAPES-PRINT 88887.717208/2022-00), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq \u2014 grant numbers 302722/2019-0 and 201121/2022-0), and the S\u00E3o Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP \u2014 grant number 2019/16996-4). |