REHOUSE public report: Social Life Cycle Assessment Plan (S-LCA) for the 4 local contexts
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Summary: The present document is the REHOUSE public report D1.5 “Social Life Cycle Assessment Plan (S-LCA) for the 4 local contexts”, developed within work package (WP) 1 in the framework of the Horizon Europe project REHOUSE. WP1 deals with the “Social innovation for people-centric renovation processes” and contains five deliverables. D1.5 displays the methodology of the s-LCA that will be followed in order to investigate the social perspective of the innovative RPs (Renovation Packages) and conventional interventions implemented to the project’s four demo sites. More specifically, the social aspect assessment of the renovation action will look into the potential positive or negative social impacts of the implemented solutions on different stakeholder groups during the pilots’ entire life cycle. The main goal of the deliverable is to present the method developed in WP1 (Task 1.4) to assess and evaluate the social and socio-economic impacts associated with the renovation process and the continued use of the building.This deliverable has been developed by CERTH (Task 1.4 leader) in collaboration with the partners that are involved in this task and includes all the activities concerning the preparation of all the necessary actions with the aim of examining the social impact of the proposed innovative renovation packages and conventional activities considering the construction and operational stages of the life cycle. In order for the foreseen work to be implemented, a 4-stage methodology is followed. The activities performed within this report consist of the implementation of the proposed 4-stage methodology, which includes setting the goal and scope of the s-LCA, building a social life cycle inventory through a two -step accroach encompasses literature review and UNEP Guidelines for s-LCA with focus on the identification of the stakeholder categories, relevant social topics and indicators, preparing for the life cycle impact assessment with a specific framework implemented, and guidelines for the analysis and interpretation of the LCA outcomes for the retrofitting processes and renovation packages, as well as the development of dedicated questionnaires to collect the necessary data in order to support the implementation of the s-LCA. The implementation of a s-LCA for retrofitting processes is important as it takes into account existing, and often overlooked, social needs, and can highlight problematic areas allowing for their examination and potential optimization in future renovation scenarios.This document is structured into 4 main chapters, Chapter 1 provides the Introduction, and Chapter 2 presents through a literature review the current situation of the global and European social aspects of house renovation. Chapter 3 focuses on the definition of the s-LCA methodology with a detailed description of each of the different stages in order to assess the social aspects of the four REHOUSE renovated demo sites. Also, the development of the specific questionnaires and the way that will be distributed by the demo leaders are included. In Chapter 4 the conclusion and a recapitulation of the work that took place in the deliverable are presented. Further public reports of the REHOUSE project: Publications – REHOUSE
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle