% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence % of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older. % Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or % “biber”. @ARTICLE{Werker:864593, author = {Werker, Jasmin and Wulf, Christina and Zapp, Petra and Schreiber, Andrea and Marx, Josefine}, title = {{S}ocial {LCA} for rare earth {N}d{F}e{B} permanent magnets}, journal = {Sustainable production and consumption}, volume = {19}, issn = {2352-5509}, address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]}, publisher = {Elsevier}, reportid = {FZJ-2019-04304}, pages = {257 - 269}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Rare earth permanent magnets are important components for modern (energy) technologies and are employed to reduce GHG emissions and combat climate change. The process of extracting these minerals from the ore has contentious economic, environmental and social implications. While the environmental impacts of their production have already been analyzed in several studies, the economic and the social perspective is still under-researched. The Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) approach employed in the present research explores whether there is a difference in social risks for rare earth permanent magnet production from three different rare earth ore production locations and the associated value chains. While one is located completely in China, another is composed of processes in Australia and Malaysia. The third process chain combines processes in the United States and Japan. The Product Social Impact Life Cycle Assessment (PSILCA) 2.0 database is used to assess the social implications. The analysis focuses on value chain actors, a stakeholder group of great interest to businesses but often underrepresented in S-LCA research. The impact categories describing this stakeholder group pertain to issues of social responsibility along the value chain, fair competition and corruption. Overall, the US value chain indicates the lowest level of social risk along the supply chain. However, in order to gain a deeper understanding of the social risks a sectoral and geographical analysis is conducted. Across all three cases, the mineral, fossil fuel and chemical sectors are shown to be problematic.}, cin = {IEK-STE}, ddc = {333.7}, cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013}, pnm = {153 - Assessment of Energy Systems – Addressing Issues of Energy Efficiency and Energy Security (POF3-153)}, pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-153}, typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16}, UT = {WOS:000483411500022}, doi = {10.1016/j.spc.2019.07.006}, url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/864593}, }