This study presents the application of a Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) methodology to two Italian case studies, allowing to estimate the possible impacts of the production of two garments “A” and “B”. The hours of exposure to health risks have been accounted for the workers since they are the stakeholder group most immediately impacted. They have been analysed through the Psychosocial Risk Factors (PRF) impact pathway, a type II Social Life Cycle Assessment that allows the quantification of hours of exposure per each phase of the product or service life cycle. Using questionnaire, technical data have been gathered and all productive phases quantified and qualified in terms of duration (hours) and working conditions (ergonomics, exposures, postures, etc.). A literature review has been conducted to find relationships between these working conditions with health problems through odds ratios, a statistical measure of association between variables commonly used in retrospective studies. The functional unit chosen is one garment, and the system boundary is from cradle to firm gate; however, due to the lack of specific information concerning the upstream processes, impacts about inputs supplied from external providers were only qualified, but not quantified (background data). In both case studies, the highest psychosocial risk is linked to musculoskeletal disorders (Low back pain and neck and shoulder pain) and visual fatigue and discomfort. These results are due principally to the postures needed during work, the concentration required, repetitive movements, static and dynamic loads, as well as the use of video monitors during some tasks (especially planning and CAD modelling). Apparently, the process of product “B” is more socially impacting than “A”. Actually, this is due because of the internalization of some operations such as (part of) the fabric production and the dyeing processes, which can expose workers to hazardous chemicals and dusts, and the use of trichloroethylene for stain removal. These working conditions, indeed, expose workers to a higher risk of cancers, according to scientific literature. To reduce risks, it is suggested to avoid the use of bleach and trichloroethylene for cleaning, to reduce the exposure to textile dusts (for example with the use of vacuums or masks), to avoid skin contact with the azo dyes and azo pigments, by using protective individual dispositive such as gloves, long-sleeved shirts, and aprons. To improve the ergonomics workplace, it is recommended to take more breaks during the timework, ensure the firmness of chairs and add lumbar support, as well as control the height of chairs and worktops. Promoting employees’ physical activity would be useful to prevent musculoskeletal disorders.

中文翻译：

---

使用社会心理风险因素影响路径对服装生产进行社会生命周期评估

本研究介绍了社会生命周期评估 (SLCA) 方法在两个意大利案例研究中的应用，从而可以估计两件服装“A”和“B”的生产可能产生的影响。暴露于健康风险的时间已计入工人，因为他们是最直接受到影响的利益相关者群体。它们通过社会心理风险因素 (PRF) 影响途径进行了分析，这是一种 II 类社会生命周期评估，可以量化产品或服务生命周期每个阶段的暴露时间。通过问卷调查，收集了技术数据，并根据持续时间（小时）和工作条件（人体工程学、暴露、姿势等）对所有生产阶段进行了量化和限定。我们进行了文献综述，通过优势比（回顾性研究中常用的变量之间关联的统计测量方法）来发现这些工作条件与健康问题之间的关系。选择的功能单元是一件衣服，系统边界是从摇篮到企业大门；然而，由于缺乏有关上游流程的具体信息，外部供应商提供的投入的影响仅是限定的，而没有量化（背景数据）。在这两个案例研究中，最高的心理社会风险与肌肉骨骼疾病（腰痛和颈肩痛）以及视觉疲劳和不适有关。这些结果主要是由于工作期间所需的姿势、所需的注意力、重复性运动、静态和动态负载以及某些任务（尤其是规划和 CAD 建模）期间视频监视器的使用造成的。显然，产品“B”的过程比“A”更具社会影响力。实际上，这是因为一些操作的内部化，例如（部分）织物生产和染色过程，可能使工人接触危险化学品和灰尘，以及使用三氯乙烯去除污渍。根据科学文献，这些工作条件确实使工人患癌症的风险更高。为了降低风险，建议避免使用漂白剂和三氯乙烯进行清洁，减少与纺织灰尘的接触（例如使用吸尘器或口罩），避免皮肤接触偶氮染料和偶氮颜料，方法是：使用个人防护用品，例如手套、长袖衬衫和围裙。为了改善工作场所的人体工程学，建议工作时多休息，保证椅子的坚固性并增加腰部支撑，控制椅子和工作台面的高度。促进员工的身体活动有助于预防肌肉骨骼疾病。