and cooperation with value chain partners. This also permits to reduce the negative
and strengthen existing positive externalities.
Since 2013, BASF calculates it ‘real’ contribution to a sustainable future. With
the Value-to-Society approach, BASF assesses its positive and negative economic,
social and environmental impacts on society along the value chain in €. The results
are used in positioning and communication as well as progress monitoring.
Application in decision making and goal setting is piloted. However, due to data
accuracy, maturity level of methods as well as conceptual challenges, for a systematic embedment further research and standardization is required. These are
under construction. Mr. van Gelder stated for BASF “With Value-to-Society we
have a new macro perspective on benefits and costs of our economic, environmental
and social impacts along the value chain”.
Mr. Wathelet (SOLVAY) introduced the Sustainable Portfolio Management
(SPM) map [7, 8]. There, the products are presented on a map according to two
criteria: Operations Vulnerability (monetized environmental impact of production/
sales price) and Market Alignment (analyse of a product in an application through
the lens of sustainability—benefits or roadblocks). This allows to categorized the
products under three categories: Solutions (outstanding sustainability contribution
for the society), neutral, and challenges (Strong negative signals in sustainability, to
be improved or abandoned).
Those three companies are using monetarisation of LCA results to express the
environmental impacts in terms of costs. Methods to evaluate social benefits remain
very diverse. They all three agree that monetarisation of social and environmental
aspects is very intuitive, allowing to gather positive and negative aspects of a
system on a unique scheme, and can be useful to engage with top management.
They also acknowledge the needs for further research.
4 Discussion and Conclusion
External cost calculation constitutes a bridge between economic decisions and
environmental and social assessment while it can provide both types of results in a
common unit, and is relevant to support three levels of decision: technical solution,
product portfolio and the company strategy.
It can also be a support to engage with top management, allowing to align with
materiality assessment and stakeholder’s expectations.
Nevertheless, many challenges remain to improve the applicability of monetisation methodologies, and company acceptance. To be implemented, it is required
to collect raw information from the supply chain and consumers. This starts with the
life cycle inventory collection from the direct supplier to the very first one. Then the
definition of monetization factor for each impact is necessary and crucial, for this
last task a customer´ survey can held in order to define the wiliness to pay. In
alternative, monetization factors presented in literature can be used for the first
implementations.
394
S. Morel et al.
and strengthen existing positive externalities.
Since 2013, BASF calculates it ‘real’ contribution to a sustainable future. With
the Value-to-Society approach, BASF assesses its positive and negative economic,
social and environmental impacts on society along the value chain in €. The results
are used in positioning and communication as well as progress monitoring.
Application in decision making and goal setting is piloted. However, due to data
accuracy, maturity level of methods as well as conceptual challenges, for a systematic embedment further research and standardization is required. These are
under construction. Mr. van Gelder stated for BASF “With Value-to-Society we
have a new macro perspective on benefits and costs of our economic, environmental
and social impacts along the value chain”.
Mr. Wathelet (SOLVAY) introduced the Sustainable Portfolio Management
(SPM) map [7, 8]. There, the products are presented on a map according to two
criteria: Operations Vulnerability (monetized environmental impact of production/
sales price) and Market Alignment (analyse of a product in an application through
the lens of sustainability—benefits or roadblocks). This allows to categorized the
products under three categories: Solutions (outstanding sustainability contribution
for the society), neutral, and challenges (Strong negative signals in sustainability, to
be improved or abandoned).
Those three companies are using monetarisation of LCA results to express the
environmental impacts in terms of costs. Methods to evaluate social benefits remain
very diverse. They all three agree that monetarisation of social and environmental
aspects is very intuitive, allowing to gather positive and negative aspects of a
system on a unique scheme, and can be useful to engage with top management.
They also acknowledge the needs for further research.
4 Discussion and Conclusion
External cost calculation constitutes a bridge between economic decisions and
environmental and social assessment while it can provide both types of results in a
common unit, and is relevant to support three levels of decision: technical solution,
product portfolio and the company strategy.
It can also be a support to engage with top management, allowing to align with
materiality assessment and stakeholder’s expectations.
Nevertheless, many challenges remain to improve the applicability of monetisation methodologies, and company acceptance. To be implemented, it is required
to collect raw information from the supply chain and consumers. This starts with the
life cycle inventory collection from the direct supplier to the very first one. Then the
definition of monetization factor for each impact is necessary and crucial, for this
last task a customer´ survey can held in order to define the wiliness to pay. In
alternative, monetization factors presented in literature can be used for the first
implementations.
394
S. Morel et al.