Skip to main content

Table 8 Data quality values and corresponding literature sources for each indicator

From: Social life-cycle assessment (S-LCA) of residential rooftop solar panels using challenge-derived framework

#

Indicator name

Data quality criteria

Literature sources

Accuracy, integrity, and validity

Timeliness

Geographical correlation

Technological correlation

Score

1

Child labor involvement in any life-cycle activity

3

5

1

2

2.8

[66, 67]

2

Community trust/approval in technology risk information

2

5

1

1

2.3

[68, 69]

3

Contribution of the technology to economic progress

1

3

2

1

1.8

[70,71,72,73]

4

Energy security

1

1

1

1

1.0

[74]

5

Existence of government regulation on public sustainability reporting for technology

1

3

2

1

1.8

[75, 76]

6

Health hazard from emissions during any life-cycle activity

3

3

2

1

2.3

[77,78,79]

7

Income inequalities

1

2

1

1

1.3

[80]

8

Level of material resource use due to product design decisions

2

4

3

1

2.5

[81, 82]

9

Number of individuals involuntarily relocating due to technology implementation

1

1

1

1

1.0

[83]

10

Occupational health and safety

1

5

3

1

2.5

[84, 85]

11

Possibility of technology components to be reused for other purposes

1

3

2

1

1.8

[86,87,88,89]

12

Potential of technology to affect health and safety of workers during the end-of-life phase

2

2

2

1

1.8

[90,91,92]

13

Presence and quality of infrastructure to dispose responsibly of product components

3

2

2

1

2.0

[86, 93]

14

Presence and quality of programs to assist citizens with high energy burdens if technology is implemented

1

4

1

1

1.8

[94,95,96,97]

15

Presence of public agreement to sustainability using the selected technology

2

5

1

1

2.3

[98,99,100,101,102]

16

Product design or technology design makes use of local resources and expertise

2

3

1

1

1.8

[103, 104]

17

Protests to the proposed technology

2

2

2

1

1.8

[105, 106]

18

The extent to which the technology negatively affects the local community’s sense of place and cultural heritage

1

5

5

1

3.0

[107, 108]

19

Spatial equity of technology: a fair distribution of risks and costs throughout the territory

3

2

2

1

2.0

[109,110,111]

20

Technology is not expected to increase the energy burden

1

2

2

1

1.5

[96, 112,113,114,115]

21

There is evidence that the product is safer than other products used for the same purpose

3

2

2

1

2.0

[116,117,118,119]

22

Electricity consumers have a choice in the utility company that will provide the technology

2

2

1

1

1.5

[120, 121]

23

The likeliness of community members to be displaced by a different population group

3

2

3

1

2.3

[122,123,124]

24

The technology is accessible and affordable to developing countries

2

4

3

1

2.5

[125, 126]