Purpose. Using apple consumption in Belgium as a case study, this study examines the environmental impacts associated with Belgian (BE) and New Zealand (NZ) apples, how impacts evolve throughout the year and how packaging affects this impact. Additionally, impacts associated with food losses and food waste along the chain are assessed. The study aims to delineate the most important factors determining environmental impacts associated with apple. Methods. The environmental impacts are calculated using the ILCD (International Reference Life Cycle Data System) approach. The functional unit is 1 kg of apples purchased by a consumer in the supermarket. Primary data was collected through players along the chain. Various scenarios are analysed for both the BE and NZ apple, based on the moment of purchase and packaging method. Food loss and waste impacts are assessed by splitting the impacts along the chain into three categories: apples lost along the supply chain, apples purchased and eaten by the consumer, and apples purchased and wasted by the consumer. Results and discussion. For all impact categories assessed, NZ apples come at a higher environmental cost than BE ones due to overseas transport. For both BE and NZ apples, minimum impacts are found for bulk apples at the beginning of the season, whereas maximum values are found for pre-packed apples at the end of the season. For BE apples, the choice of packaging method highly affects the impact, while it is negligible relative to shipping impacts for NZ apples. Altering secondary packaging materials of BE apples allows for impacts reductions up to 50%. In the case of climate change, food waste and losses contribute up to 25% or 15% for respectively BE or NZ apples , as all lost food travels in vain through the food chain and needs to be disposed of. Conclusions. The study shows the importance of origin and packaging, whereas the moment of purchase hardly affects the environmental impact of apples. From a supply chain perspective, there is room for improvement as altering use of secondary packaging greatly reduces impacts along the chain. The study further highlights how impacts are magnified by food waste and losses.

In the case of climate change, food waste and losses contribute up to 25% or 17% for BE or NZ apples, respectively, as all lost food travels in vain through the food chain and needs to be disposed of. Distribution:In scenario A, this sub-stage contributes between 41 and 85% to the overall impact along the chain. Due to its high contribution, it is the only hotspot in all but one impact category for the NZ apple chain. Looking for example at the CC impact of an average kilogram of NZ apples, the overseas refrigerated shipment is responsible for 0.65 kg CO 2 eq, which is 50% more than the total CC impact of the BE apple chain. Packaging:Secondary packaging is a hotspot for NZ apples in the MD impact category and is the second biggest contributor to the total chain impact of NZ apples in three other ICs assessed in scenario A (Table 5).3.3 Food waste along the chain: For climate change, for example, 0.09 kg CO 2 eq is associated with the share of NZ apples that enters the food chain but never makes it to the consumer. Another 0.08 kg CO 2 eq is associated with the share of NZ apples that does make it to the consumer but is in the end thrown away. In total, these impacts represent about 17% of the total chain impact of an average kilogram of NZ apples (Electronic Supplementary Material, Online Resource 2, sheet 10). […] Thus, only 75% or 83% of the CC impact associated with BE or NZ apples, respectively, corresponds to apples that are effectively consumed.4.1 Impact along the chain: Focusing on import produce, Mithraratne et al. (2008) concluded that total greenhouse gas emissions associated with NZ kiwifruit consumed in the UK are at 1.62 kg CO 2 eq per kg kiwi which is of the same magnitude as the NZ apples in this study (1.00 kg CO 2 eq per kg apples) despite the differing fruit and system boundaries (exclusion of repacking in Europe; higher food loss along the supply chain). […] In the present study, the overseas shipping stage contributed to 0.65 kg CO 2 eq per kg apple, which is The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.