Comparing environmental impacts of beef production systems: A review of life cycle assessments

Vries, M. de; Middelaar, C.E. van; Boer, I.J.M. de

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2015.06.020

Cited by 218 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

132

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Conversely, the values for AP, EP and CED found in this study were greater than those reported by others (Nguyen et al 2012;de Vries et al 2015). This was probably due to greater N and P fertilisation rates for maize and wheat with respect to the values reported in Nguyen et al (2012) and different N volatilisation rates (for AP and EP), and to the great importance of the transport of the off-farm feedstuffs (CED).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

“…Although the results found in this study cannot be precisely compared with those found in other studies because of differences in the LCA modelling and impact computation, the results found for GWP and LO were within the range found in the literature (Pelletier et al 2010;Nguyen et al 2012;de Vries et al 2015). Conversely, the values for AP, EP and CED found in this study were greater than those reported by others (Nguyen et al 2012;de Vries et al 2015).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sources of variation of the environmental impact of cereal-based intensive beef finishing herds

Berton

Cesaro

Gallo

et al. 2018

Italian Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate the effect of beef category, feedstuffs self-sufficiency (SELF), crude protein (CPI) and phosphorus (PI) daily intake on the environmental impact of the beef fattening system typical of north-eastern Italy according to a partial Life Cycle Assessment. The reference unit was the batch (group of animals homogeneous for genotype, sex, fattening farm, finishing period). The study involved 245 batches (64 ± 34 heads) herded in 17 fattening farms. The system boundaries were set from animals arrival at the fattening farm to the sale to the slaughterhouse. The functional unit was 1 kg BW gain (BWG). Data on animal performance and farm input were collected for each batch and farm, respectively. Data on feed intake, ingredient formulation and chemical composition of diets were monthly collected for each batch. Impact categories assessed were (mean ± SD per kg BWG in brackets): global warming (8.8 ± 1.6 kg CO 2 -eq), acidification (142 ± 22 g SO 2 -eq) and eutrophication (55 ± 8 g PO 4 -eq) potentials, cumulative energy demand (53 ± 18 MJ), land occupation (7.9 ± 1.2 m 2 /year). Beef category and SELF, CPI and PI classes significantly affected all the impact categories, with lower values observed with decreasing values of CPI and PI and increasing values of SELF as well as more productive beef categories. This study evidences that beef category and diet-related factors affect the environmental impact of cereal-based intensive beef finishing herds. In conclusion, there is space to develop mitigation strategies based on enhancing the self-sufficiency rate of the diet and lowering the daily intake of crude protein and phosphorus.ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Sources of variation of the environmental impact of cereal-based intensive beef finishing herds

Berton

Cesaro

Gallo

et al. 2018

Italian Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results of the comparison on beef production are in line with results reported by De Vries et al (2015), who compared environmental impacts of contrasting beef systems based on a literature review.…”

Section: Beef Cattlesupporting

confidence: 82%

Sustainability of livestock production systems : a comparing conventional and organic livestock husbandry

Wagenberg¹,

Haas²,

Hogeveen³

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analysed peer-reviewed literature comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on sustainability indicators within the topics of economy, productivity, environment, animal welfare and public health. For many indicators, insufficient data were found to draw any conclusions on a difference. The strong points of both conventional and organic livestock production systems were used to formulate lessons learned for sustainable livestock production systems. As sustainability indicators often interact with other sustainability indicators in opposing directions, sustainable livestock production should be approached as a multi-criteria problem optimising a balanced combination of sustainability indicators in all topics.Deze studie heeft wetenschappelijke literatuur geanalyseerd, die conventionele en biologische dierlijke productiesystemen kwantitatief vergelijkt op duurzaamheidsindicatoren binnen de onderwerpen economie, productiviteit, milieu, dierenwelzijn en volksgezondheid. Voor veel indicatoren zijn onvoldoende gegevens gevonden om conclusies te trekken over een verschil. Gevonden sterke punten van zowel conventionele als biologische systemen zijn gebruikt om lessen te trekken voor duurzame veehouderij. Aangezien duurzaamheidsindicatoren vaak onderling samenhangen in tegenstrijdige richting moet een duurzame veehouderij gezien worden als een multicriteria beslissingsprobleem, waarin een gebalanceerde combinatie van indicatoren uit alle duurzaamheidsonderwerpen moet worden geoptimaliseerd.

show abstract

“…Studies employing agri‐food LCA typically estimate pollution–production ratios as their primary outputs, for example kg CO 2 ‐eq per unit of food produced, whereby systems represented by lower scores are judged to be socially more desirable. In the context of livestock production systems, the denominator depicting the quantity of production, or the functional unit, generally takes the form of output mass, such as 1 kg of liveweight, cold carcass weight, or deboned meat (McAuliffe, Chapman, & Sage, 2016; McAuliffe, Takahashi, Mogensen et al., 2017; de Vries, van Middelaar, & de Boer, 2015). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for life cycle assessment of livestock production systems to account for the nutritional quality of final products

McAuliffe

Takahashi

Lee

2018

Food and Energy Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is widely regarded as a useful tool for comparing the environmental impacts of multiple livestock production systems. While LCA results are typically communicated in the form of environmental burdens per mass unit of the end product, it is increasingly becoming recognized that the product quality also needs to be accounted for to truly understand the value of a farming system to society. To date, a number of studies have examined environmental consequences of different food consumption patterns at the diet level; however, few have addressed nutritional variations of a single commodity attributable to production systems, leaving limited insight into how on‐farm practices can be improved to better balance environment and human nutrition. Using data from seven livestock production systems encompassing cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry, this paper proposes a novel framework to incorporate nutritional value of meat products into livestock LCA. The results of quantitative case studies demonstrate that relative emissions intensities associated with different systems can be dramatically altered when the nutrient content of meat replaces the mass of meat as the functional unit, with cattle systems outperforming pig and poultry systems in some cases. This finding suggests that the performance of livestock systems should be evaluated under a whole supply chain approach, whereby end products originating from different farm management strategies are treated as competing but separate commodities.

show abstract

Comparing environmental impacts of beef production systems: A review of life cycle assessments

Cited by 218 publications

References 56 publications

Sources of variation of the environmental impact of cereal-based intensive beef finishing herds

Sources of variation of the environmental impact of cereal-based intensive beef finishing herds

Sustainability of livestock production systems : a comparing conventional and organic livestock husbandry

Framework for life cycle assessment of livestock production systems to account for the nutritional quality of final products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About