A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability

Gava, Oriana; Bartolini, Fabio; Venturi, Francesca; Brunori, Gianluca; Zinnai, Angela; Pardossi, Alberto

doi:10.3390/su11010071

Cited by 38 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, several methodological challenges exist in LCA on food including e.g. how to handle uncertainty and variability in the inventory modelling, how to account for the function of different foods within the functional unit and how LCA results are best translated to policy or consumer guidance (Gava et al., 2018; Notarnicola et al., 2017). With the rising urgency of climate change, an increased focus has been put on the climate impact of food specifically.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The carbon footprint of breastmilk substitutes in comparison with breastfeeding

Karlsson

Garnett

Rollins³

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breastfeeding is one of the foundations of child health, development and survival. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) are associated with negative influences on breastfeeding practices and subsequent health concerns and, as with all foods, production and consumption of BMS comes with an environmental cost. The carbon footprint (CFP) of production and consumption of BMS was estimated in this study. To illustrate regional differences among the largest producers and consumers, the CFP of BMS production in New Zealand, United States (USA), Brazil and France and the CFP of BMS consumption in United Kingdom (UK), China, Brazil and Vietnam were assessed. The CFP values were then compared with the CFP of breastfeeding arising from production of the additional food needed for breastfeeding mothers to maintain energy balance (approximately 500 kcal per day). The CFP of production was estimated to be 9.2 ± 1.4, 7.0 ± 1.0, 11 ± 2 and 8.4 ± 1.3 kg CO 2 e per kg BMS in New Zealand, USA, Brazil and France, respectively, with the largest contribution (68–82% of the total) coming from production of raw milk. The CFP of consumption, which included BMS production, emissions from transport, production and in-home sterilisation of bottles, and preparation of BMS, was estimated to be 11 ± 1, 14 ± 2, 14 ± 2 and 11 ± 1 kg CO 2 e per kg BMS in UK, China, Brazil and Vietnam, respectively. Comparison of breastfeeding with feeding BMS showed a lower CFP from breastfeeding in all countries studied. However, the results were sensitive to the method used to allocate emissions from raw milk production on different dairy processing co-products (i.e. BMS, cream, cheese and lactose). Using alternative allocation methods still resulted in lower CFP from breastfeeding, but only slightly for UK, Brazil and Vietnam. Care is also needed when interpreting findings about products that are functionally different as regards child health and development.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The carbon footprint of breastmilk substitutes in comparison with breastfeeding

Karlsson

Garnett

Rollins³

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…LCA's of foods and diets are intended to inform consumers, producers, policy-makers, and other stakeholders and enable them to make better choices by comparing the environmental impacts of products. Applied to food systems, LCA can provide evidence to help guide policy-making in some specific circumstances, such as evaluating the impacts of agricultural commodities or establishing carbon tax for individual foods (Gava et al, 2019). Although common metrics used in food LCA include global warming potential (GWP), eutrophication potential, land use, and water use, there are additional important environmental impacts of concern such as biodiversity loss and health impacts associated with dietary patterns, both of which are rarely if ever considered in food LCA (de Vries & de Boer, 2010;Roy et al, 2009).…”

Section: Lca and Food Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considering the Role of Life Cycle Analysis in Holistic Food Systems Research Policy and Practice

Berardy

Seager

Costello

et al. 2020

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers use life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impacts of foods, providing useful information to other researchers, policy-makers, consumers, and manufacturers. However, LCA is ill-equipped to account for desirable, often normatively valued, characteristics of food systems, such as redundancy, that could be considered more sustainable from a resilience perspective. LCA's requirement of a functional unit also causes methodological bias favoring efficiency over resilience and other difficult-to-quantify properties. This efficiency bias results in favorable evaluations of conventional production techniques and plant-based foods since they typically have the lowest impacts per unit of output when compared to alternative agriculture systems and animal-based foods. Such research findings may drive policymakers as well as consumers to prefer the more efficient options, with the possible outcome of diminishing resilience. This research and policy commentary explains why complementary assessment methodologies are necessary for comprehensive sustainability assessments that support a *

show abstract

“…Information from stand-alone or comparative LCAs is key for identifying interventions to reduce the environmental impact of agricultural and food systems [19,20]. There are three approaches to the conceptualization of impact-mitigating interventions [21]: (i) supply-side, for improving the environmental performance of agriculture; (ii) demand-side, for reducing the consumption of the most impacting foods; (iii) system-level, combining supply and demand-side approaches to propose sustainable synergetic solutions based on redesigned agricultural and food system models [22,23].…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This article proposes a content-analysis-based literature review [18] of LCA research by agricultural and food economists, structured towards the following six themes, identified by authors in related study [19]: (i) approaches to intervention conceptualization, including stakeholders involved in strategy formulation and implementation; (ii) usefulness of information originating from research studies that apply the LCA tool in policy making, (iii) types of LCA; (iv) delivery of multidimensional assessments; (v) recommendations about rebound effect modelling. Theme combinations are also analyzed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life cycle assessment is a widespread method for measuring and monitoring the environmental impacts of production processes, thereby allowing the comparison of business-as-usual with more ecological scenarios. Life cycle assessment research can support evidence-based policy making by comparing and communicating the environmental impacts of agricultural and food systems, informing about the impact of mitigating interventions and monitoring sectoral progress towards sustainable development goals. This article aims at improving the contribution of science to evidence-based policies for agricultural sustainability and food security, while facilitating further research, by delivering a content-analysis based literature review of life cycle assessment research in agricultural and food economics. Results highlight that demand-side and system-level approaches need further development, as policies need to support redesigned agricultural systems and newly conceived dietary guidelines, which combine environmental protection and health benefits, without reducing productivity. Similarly, more research effort towards consequential life cycle assessment and multidimensional assessment may benefit policy makers by considering the rebound effects associated with the large-scale implementation of impact-mitigating interventions. Promising interventions involve the promotion of waste circularization strategies, which could also improve the profitability of agriculture. For effective policy making towards agricultural sustainability and food security worldwide, countries with the greatest expected population growth and raise of urbanization rates need more attention by researchers.

show abstract

A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability

Cited by 38 publications

References 102 publications

The carbon footprint of breastmilk substitutes in comparison with breastfeeding

The carbon footprint of breastmilk substitutes in comparison with breastfeeding

Considering the Role of Life Cycle Analysis in Holistic Food Systems Research Policy and Practice

Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About