The choice of materials used for a vehicle can contribute to reduce negative environmental and social impacts. Bio-based materials are considered a promising solution; however, the sustainability effects still need to be assessed. Depending on the material assessed, it is questionable which environmental and social impact categories or subcategories should be included since recommendations in guidelines are vague and case studies in this regard are limited. Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the choice of impact categories, methods, and indicators for E-LCA and S-LCA when assessing wood as substitute for conventional materials in automotive applications. The research is based on a literature review covering 115 case studies of S-LCAs and E-LCAs focusing either on wood-based products or on components in automotive applications. The selected case studies were analyzed according to the following criteria: considered stakeholder groups and chosen subcategories (S-LCA sample), sector or product system (S-LCA sample), year of publication and geographical scope (S-LCA and E-LCA sample), chosen LCIA method(s) and impact categories, objective(s) of the studies, analyzed materials and used software support (E-LCA samples). For S-LCA some relevant social topics for bio-based product systems, like food security or land- and worker-related concerns, could be identified. The E-LCA literature suggests that the objective and material type determine calculation approaches and impact category choices. Some material-related environmental issues like biodiversity loss in the case of bio-based product systems or ecotoxicity for steel and toxicity in the case of aluminum could be identified. For S-LCA the geographical and sectorial context and the affected stakeholders are the determining factors for methodical choices, however, the results show almost no difference in subcategory choice and geographical context. Influencing factors for methodical choices in E-LCA might be the objective of the study, data availability, the up-to-dateness of the LCIA approach, the geographical scope of the study, the materials analyzed, and the availability of software support. Some relevant environmental and social impact categories as well as influencing factors on methodical choices could be identified from existing literature. However, a clear picture on these issues could not be drawn. Further research is needed on the motivation of researches on certain methodical choices as well as on environmental issues connected with materials or geographical-related social topics.

中文翻译：

---

比较无敌？车辆木材可持续性评估的方法论方面的审查

车辆材料的选择有助于减少对环境和社会的负面影响。生物基材料被认为是一种很有前景的解决方案；然而，可持续性影响仍需评估。根据评估的材料，应该包括哪些环境和社会影响类别或子类别是有问题的，因为指南中的建议含糊不清，并且这方面的案例研究有限。因此，本研究旨在阐明在评估木材作为汽车应用中传统材料的替代品时，E-LCA 和 S-LCA 的影响类别、方法和指标的选择。该研究基于涵盖 115 个 S-LCA 和 E-LCA 案例研究的文献综述，重点是木质产品或汽车应用中的组件。根据以下标准对选定的案例研究进行了分析：考虑的利益相关者群体和选定的子类别（S-LCA 样本）、部门或产品系统（S-LCA 样本）、出版年份和地理范围（S-LCA 和 E-LCA样本）、选择的 LCIA 方法和影响类别、研究目标、分析的材料和使用的软件支持（E-LCA 样本）。对于 S-LCA，可以确定生物基产品系统的一些相关社会主题，例如粮食安全或与土地和工人相关的问题。E-LCA 文献表明，目标和材料类型决定了计算方法和影响类别选择。可以确定一些与材料相关的环境问题，例如生物基产品系统中的生物多样性丧失或钢的生态毒性和铝的毒性。对于 S-LCA，地理和部门背景以及受影响的利益相关者是有条不紊选择的决定因素，然而，结果显示子类别选择和地理背景几乎没有差异。影响 E-LCA 方法选择的因素可能是研究的目标、数据的可用性、LCIA 方法的最新性、研究的地理范围、分析的材料和软件支持的可用性。可以从现有文献中确定一些相关的环境和社会影响类别以及方法选择的影响因素。但是，无法就这些问题描绘出清晰的图景。