Assessing the validity of impact pathways for child labour and well-being in social life cycle assessment

Background, aim and scope: Assuming that the goal of social life cycle assessment (SLCA) is to assess damage and benefits on its ‘area of protection’ (AoP) as accurately as possible, it follows that the impact pathways, describing the cause effect relationship between indicator and the AoP, should have a consistent theoretical foundation so the inventory results can be associated with a predictable damage or benefit to the AoP. This article uses two concrete examples from the work on SLCA to analyse to what extent this is the case in current practice. One considers whether indicators included in SLCA approaches can validly assess impacts on the well-being of the stakeholder, whereas the other example addresses whether the ‘incidence of child labour’ is a valid measure for impacts on the AoPs.

Materials and methods: The theoretical basis for the impact pathway between the relevant indicators and the AoPs is analysed drawing on research from relevant scientific fields.

Results:   The examples show a lack of valid impact pathways in both examples. The first example shows that depending on the definition of ‘well-being’, the assessment of impacts on well-being of the stakeholder cannot be performed exclusively with the type of indicators which are presently used in SLCA approaches. The second example shows that the mere fact that a child is working tells little about how this may damage or benefit the AoPs, implying that the normally used indicator; ‘incidence of child labour’ lacks validity in relation to predicting damage or benefit on the AoPs of SLCA.

Discussion: New indicators are proposed to mitigate the problem of invalid impact pathways. However, several problems arise relating to difficulties in getting data, the usability of the new indicators in management situations, and, in relation to example one, boundary setting issues.

Conclusions: The article shows that it is possible to assess the validity of the impact pathways in SLCA. It thereby point to the possibility of utilising the same framework that underpins the environmental LCA in this regard. It also shows that in relation to both of the specific examples investigated, the validity of the impact pathways may be improved by adopting other indicators, which does, however, come with a considerable ‘price’.

Recommendations and perspectives: It is argued that there is a need for analysing impact pathways of other impact categories often included in SLCA in order to establish indicators that better reflect actual damage or benefit to the AoPs.

Tests examining skill outcomes in sport: A systematic review of measurement properties and feasibility

Background
A high level of participant skill is influential in determining the outcome of many sports. Thus, tests assessing skill outcomes in sport are commonly used by coaches and researchers to estimate an athlete’s ability level, to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions or for the purpose of talent identification.

Objective
The objective of this systematic review was to examine the methodological quality, measurement properties and feasibility characteristics of sporting skill outcome tests reported in the peer-reviewed literature.

Data Sources
A search of both SPORTDiscus and MEDLINE databases was undertaken.

Study Selection
Studies that examined tests of sporting skill outcomes were reviewed. Only studies that investigated measurement properties of the test (reliability or validity) were included. A total of 22 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods
A customised checklist of assessment criteria, based on previous research, was utilised for the purpose of this review.

Results
A range of sports were the subject of the 22 studies included in this review, with considerations relating to methodological quality being generally well addressed by authors. A range of methods and statistical procedures were used by researchers to determine the measurement properties of their skill outcome tests. The majority (95 %) of the reviewed studies investigated test–retest reliability, and where relevant, inter and intra-rater reliability was also determined. Content validity was examined in 68 % of the studies, with most tests investigating multiple skill domains relevant to the sport. Only 18 % of studies assessed all three reviewed forms of validity (content, construct and criterion), with just 14 % investigating the predictive validity of the test. Test responsiveness was reported in only 9 % of studies, whilst feasibility received varying levels of attention.

Limitations
In organised sport, further tests may exist which have not been investigated in this review. This could be due to such tests firstly not being published in the peer-review literature and secondly, not having their measurement properties (i.e., reliability or validity) examined formally.

Conclusions
Of the 22 studies included in this review, items relating to test methodological quality were, on the whole, well addressed. Test–retest reliability was determined in all but one of the reviewed studies, whilst most studies investigated at least two aspects of validity (i.e., content, construct or criterion-related validity). Few studies examined predictive validity or responsiveness. While feasibility was addressed in over half of the studies, practicality and test limitations were rarely addressed. Consideration of study quality, measurement properties and feasibility components assessed in this review can assist future researchers when developing or modifying tests of sporting skill outcomes.