Search

Since the 1st of April 2015, European dairy quotas, one of the iconic instruments of the Common Agricultural Policy, have been removed. With this removal, the European Commission expects to develop a more competitive and market-oriented dairy sector in light of increasing world food demand. In countries such as France, where quotas were administratively managed and strongly linked to land, this system maintained dairy production in all regions but also sustained inefficient dairy production systems. With quota removal, changes such as concentration of production in the most favourable areas, enlargement of dairy farms and restructuring of the dairy sector to increase the efficiency of production systems are likely. The impacts of quota removal on markets, as well as the localisation of dairy production, have been widely studied. The impacts on the distribution of dairy production across various production systems have been less studied. We use MATSIM-LUCA, a partial equilibrium economic model, to assess the impacts of dairy quota removal on i) markets and prices and ii) redistribution of production among dairy production systems in France. We consider several world demand scenarios for dairy and meat products to test the sensitivity of our results to future world demand for these products. Our results confirm the findings of previous studies, i.e., quota removal causes an increase in milk production and a decrease in raw milk prices in the European Union. Market effects are similar regardless of the world demand scenario, but they are markedly higher in the high world demand scenario. Our results regarding the impacts of quota removal on the shares of different dairy production systems in France are new and original. We find that quota removal alone has limited impacts on the redistribution of production across dairy systems. Quota removal associated with increased world demand has stronger impacts, but the expected redistribution effects towards more efficient systems remain rather limited even then. Our results show that the very intensive maize system is the most responsive to changes in the production context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this paper is to contribute to the debate on environmental labelling by exploring the potential of economic value as a functional unit (FU) for the environmental labelling of food and other consumer products. We used life cycle inventory (LCI) data for organic and conventional pigs and broiler chickens from the public French AGRIBALYSE LCI database and the CML 2001 method to calculate impacts per ton of animal live weight at the farm gate, per hectare (ha) of land occupied and per 1000 Euro of animal live weight. We also examined the relationship between carbon footprint (CF) and price for 24 food product groups representative of French food consumption. When using the FU live weight, organic animals had larger impacts than conventional animals. Per ha of land occupied, organic animals had smaller impacts than conventional animals, but production was lower. Per 1000 Euro of value, organic animals had similar or lower values for eutrophication, lower values for climate change and higher or similar values for land occupation. These results illustrate that the choice of FU is crucial when comparing products from highly efficient conventional systems to products from less intensive organic systems. For the 24 food product groups CF per product mass was positively correlated with product price; CF per product economic value was not correlated with product price. This suggests that a rebound effect may occur: consumers that choose foods with lower CFs per mass will tend to spend less money on food, leaving them with more money to buy other products which may compensate the reduced food CF. This type of correlation has not been observed for non-food sectors of the economy. Nevertheless, the FU economic value is attractive, as it considers product quality through the product's price. An economic-value-based FU will be more favourable to systems producing products of superior quality. More generally, an economic-value-based FU is well suited for environmental labelling of consumer products. A consumer has a certain budget to spend; an economic-value-based FU may guide the consumer towards reduced impacts per Euro spent. We recommend the use of an FU based on economic value for the environmental labelling of food and other consumer products. This FU will be a complement to currently used FUs. It will guide consumers towards lower impacts for a given expenditure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Cereal-legume intercrops (ICs) are a promising way to combine high productivity and ecological benefits in temperate agroecosystems. This study aims to apply a life cycle assessment (LCA) to ICs by testing several methods of co-product handling to ascertain the environmental impacts of the co-products. Several classic methods of allocation and system expansion were compared, and additional methods were proposed to better analyse the impacts of ICs and sole crops (SCs), taking into account complementarities between species that may provide benefits for each species as well as global benefits compared to the SCs of an equivalent area or production. Unfertilised ICs produce wheat and pea crops that have a lower impact with regards to climate change (CC), acidification (AC), terrestrial ecotoxicity (TE) or cumulative energy demand (CED) than N-fertilised SC wheat (W100 N) and unfertilised SC pea (P100 N0), regardless of the allocation method or functional unit (kg of grains of wheat, of pea, or 1 ha). Unfertilised ICs exhibited a higher and lower eutrophication (EU) impact when compared to W100 N and P100 N0, respectively. Concerning land occupation (LO), the results were highly variable depending on the allocation method and either increased or decreased the impact of ICs relative to the impact of SCs. Classic allocation methods strongly affected the results, and system expansion yielded surprising results, emphasising the benefits of interspecific complementarity. We then redefined our functional unit to assess the impact of ICs apart from those of SCs (equivalence of area or production). These comparisons demonstrated that ICs always allowed for a significant decrease in environmental impacts when compared to SCs based on the equivalence of production. Based on the equivalence of crop area, similar trends were observed, except for EU and LO, where there was little difference in impact between ICs and SCs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper introduces the Special Volume (SV) dedicated to the 2012 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Food Conference. During recent years, these conferences have seen a rapid increase in the number of participants, reflecting the development of an interdisciplinary research and development community at the intersection between the agronomic, food/nutrition science and environmental system analysis disciplines. This introductory paper summarises the key issues addressed in the individual papers of this SV, which present a balance between methodological and applied studies. The application of LCA to agro-food systems exemplifies a dynamic and productive interaction between scientific disciplines that previously led separate lives. As a result, LCA in the agro-food sector leads LCA methodological developments on topics such as the attributional versus consequential debate, land use changes, impacts on biodiversity, biotic resource depletion, water use, soil quality, and modelling of direct emissions of crop and animal production systems. Future challenges for the LCA Food research and development domain concern the following issues: functional unit and multi-functionality, emission models, land occupation and transformation, LCA for low-income countries, resilience of agro-food systems and presentation and transparency of results. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This study compared the environmental burdens of two broiler chicken production systems in Brazil and two in France. One Brazilian system represents large-scale production in the Center-West region of the country; the other is a small-scale production in the South. One of the French systems represents an extensive broiler chicken production system, known as “Label Rouge”; the other is a standard system. Life-cycle impact assessments were performed using the CML-IA characterization method. The main functional unit adopted was 1 tonne of cooled and packaged chicken, ready for distribution. For the systems and impacts studied, production scale did not affect the environmental impact, but production intensity did. The extensive Label Rouge system had the largest impact among the impact categories studied. This resulted principally from the high feed-conversion ratio of this production system (3.1 kg of feed per kg of live weight) in conjunction with the fact that the feed-production stage contributed most to the overall impact. The contribution of deforestation to the crop-production stage was significant, particularly for climate change, equaling 19% of total emissions of CO2eq per tonne of cooled and packaged chicken, in the system of the Center-West of Brazil. The French systems were also affected, since they import crops from Brazil. The system of southern Brazil had less climate change impact because there is no longer deforestation in southern Brazil for crop production. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Soybean production and its supply chain are highly dependent on inputs such as land, fertilizer, fuel, machines, pesticides and electricity. The expansion of this crop in Brazil in recent decades has generated concerns about its environmental impacts. To assess these impacts, two representative chains supplying soybeans to Europe were identified: Center West (CW) and Southern (SO) Brazil. Each supply chain was analyzed using Life Cycle Assessment methodology. We considered different levels of use of chemical and organic fertilizers, pesticides and machinery, different distances for transportation of inputs and different yield levels. Because transportation contributed strongly to environmental impacts, a detailed study was performed to identify the routes used to transport soybeans to seaports. Additionally, we considered different levels of land occupation and land transformation to represent the impact of deforestation in the CW region. Environmental impacts were calculated for 1000 kg of soybean up to and including the delivery to Europe at the seaport in Rotterdam, at 13% humidity. Overall results showed that the impacts are greater for CW than for SO for all impact categories studied, including acidification (7.7 and 5.3 kg SO2 eq., respectively), climate change (959 and 510 kg CO2 eq.), cumulative energy demand (12,634 and 6,999 MJ) and terrestrial ecotoxicity (4.9 and 3.1 kg 1,4-DCB eq.), except eutrophication and land occupation. The same trend was observed for the crop-production stage. Efforts to reduce chemical fertilizers and diesel consumption can reduce CO2 emissions. Although deforestation for crop production has decreased in recent years, the contribution of deforestation to climate change and cumulative energy demand remains significant. In the CW scenario deforestation contributed 29% to climate change and 20% to cumulative energy demand. Results also showed that although there are different transportation options in Brazil, the current predominance of road transport causes severe environmental impacts. In CW, road transport contributed 19% to climate change and 24% to cumulative energy demand, while in SO it contributed 12% and 15% to these impacts, respectively. Improvements in the logistics of transportation, giving priority to rail and river transports over road transport, can contribute significantly to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and decreasing energy use. Future studies involving Brazilian soybeans should take into account the region of origin as different levels of environmental impact are predicted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper describes and applies EDEN-E, an operational method for the environmental evaluation of dairy farms based on the life cycle assessment (LCA) conceptual framework. EDEN-E requires a modest amount of data readily available on-farm, and thus can be used to assess a large number of farms at a reasonable cost. EDEN-E estimates farm resource use and pollutant emissions mostly at the farm scale, based on-farm-gate balances, amongst others. Resource use and emissions are interpreted in terms of potential impacts: eutrophication, acidification, climate change, terrestrial toxicity, non-renewable energy use and land occupation. The method distinguishes for each total impact a direct component (impacts on the farm site) and an indirect component (impacts associated with production and supply of inputs used). A group of 47 dairy farms (41 conventional and six organic) was evaluated. Expressed per 1000kg of fat-and-protein-corrected milk, total land occupation was significantly larger for organic than for conventional farms, while total impacts for eutrophication, acidification, climate change, terrestrial toxicity, and non-renewable energy use were not significantly different for the two production modes. When expressed per ha of land occupied all total impacts were significantly larger for conventional than organic farms. This study largely confirms previously published findings concerning the effect of production mode on impacts of dairy farms. However, it strikingly reveals that, for the set of farms examined, the contribution of production mode to overall inter-farm variability of impacts was minor relative to inter-farm variability within each of the two production modes examined. The mapping of impact variability through EDEN-E opens promising perspectives to move towards sustainable farming systems by identifying the structural and management characteristics of the farms presenting the lowest impacts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This study aimed to quantify major environmental impacts associated with the production of hemp yarn using Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). A reference scenario of traditional hemp warm water retting was compared to: (1) bio-retting, i.e. hemp green scutching followed by water retting, (2) babyhemp, based on stand retting of pre-mature hemp, (3) dew retting of flax. Overall, neither of the alternative scenarios was unambiguously better than the reference. The impacts of the hemp reference scenario and the flax scenario were similar, except for pesticide use (higher for flax) and water use during processing (higher for hemp). Bio-retting had higher impacts than the reference scenario for climate change and energy use, due to higher energy input in fibre processing. Babyhemp had higher impacts than the reference scenario for eutrophication, land occupation and pesticide use. A reduction of the environmental impacts of hemp yarn should give priority to reduction of energy use in the fibre processing and yarn production stages and to reduction of eutrophication in the crop production phase. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This work describes the analysis of the uncertainty linked to the annual direct and indirect losses of different nitrogenous compounds at the scale of a group of farms. The nitrogen (N) forms taken into account are: ammonia (NH3), nitric oxide (NO), nitrous oxide (N2O), dinitrogen (N2) and nitrate (NO3). The gaseous N emissions for the different components of the farms are estimated with a selection of adapted emission factors. The NO3 losses at the farm scale are calculated as the difference between the surplus of the farm-gate N balance and the gaseous N emissions. The feasibility of this method and the validity of the estimated NO3 losses have been demonstrated for a group of farms situated in the Naizin catchment area (Brittany, France) [Payraudeau, S., van der Werf, H.M.G., Vertès. F., 2006. Evaluation of an operational method for the estimation of emissions of nitrogen compounds for a group of farms. IJARGE 5 (2–3), 224–246]. Two sources of uncertainty were studied: (i) that associated with the terms of the farm-gate N balance and (ii) that associated with the different N emission factors. A Monte Carlo (MC) approach was used to assess the uncertainty associated with the calculated losses according to the uncertainty in the terms of the farm-gate N balance and in the emission factors used. The nitrogen losses are assessed, amongst others, to contribute to the establishment of an emissions inventory to be used in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of farming systems. Therefore, an analysis of the main problems limiting the implementation of the MC approach in LCA studies of agricultural production is proposed. The different stages in the implementation of the MC approach are described. The results reveal a greater sensitivity of emissions of NH3, N2O and N2 to the uncertainty associated with the emission factors than to that associated with the terms of the farm-gate N balance. The two sources of uncertainty contribute similarly to the uncertainty of NO3 losses. In spite of the occasionally large confidence intervals in the factors, the confidence intervals for the different direct losses are reasonably small. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: It is not known to what extent the outcome of studies assessing the environmental impacts of agricultural systems depends on the characteristics of the evaluation method used. The study reported here investigated five well-documented evaluation methods (DIALECTE, Ecological Footprint, Environmental Management for Agriculture, FarmSmart, Life Cycle Assessment) by applying them to a case study of three pig farm scenarios. These methods differ with respect to their global objective (evaluation of impact versus evaluation of adherence to good practice), the number and type of environmental issues they consider, the way they define the system to be analysed, the mode of expression of results (for the farm as a whole, per unit area or per unit product) and the type of indicators used (pressure, state or impact indicators). The pig farm scenarios compared were conventional good agricultural practice (GAP), a quality label scenario called red label (RL) and organic agriculture (OA). We used the methods to rank the three scenarios according to their environmental impacts. The relative ranking of the three scenarios varied considerably depending on characteristics of the evaluation method used and on the mode of expression of results. We recommend the use of evaluation methods that express results both per unit area and per unit product. Environmental evaluation methods should be used with great caution, users should carefully consider which method is most appropriate given their particular needs, taking into consideration the method''s characteristics. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Different types of assessment tools have been developed in Europe with the purpose of determining the environmental impact of various livestock production systems at farm level. The assessment tools differ in terms of which environmental objectives are included and how indicators are constructed and interpreted. The paper compares typical tools for environmental assessment of livestock production systems, and recommends selected indicators suitable for benchmarking. The assessment tools used very different types of indicators ranging from descriptions of farm management and quantification of input to estimates of emissions of, e.g., nitrate and ammonia. The indicators should be useful in a benchmarking process where farmers may improve their practices through learning from farms with better agri-environmental performance. An example of this is given using data on P-surplus on pig farms. Some indicators used the area of the farm as the basis of the indicator—e.g. nitrogen surplus per hectare—while others were expressed per unit produced, e.g. emission of greenhouse gasses per kilogram milk. The paper demonstrates that a comparison of organic vs. conventional milk production and comparison of three pig production systems give different results, depending on the basis of the indicators (i.e. per hectare or per kilogram product). Indicators linked to environmental objectives with a local or regional geographical target should be area-based—while indicators with a global focus should be product-based. It is argued that the choice of indicators should be linked with the definition of the system boundaries, in the sense that area-based indicators should include emissions on the farm only, whereas product-based indicators should preferably include emissions from production of farm inputs, as well as the inputs on the actual farm. The paper ends with recommendations for choice of agri-environmental indicators taking into account the geographical scale, system boundary and method of interpretation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The methods currently used for assessing the environmental impact of agriculture on the scale of a farming region cover a wide range of objectives, users and concepts. To illustrate this variety, this article provides an analysis of six main types of method: environmental risk mapping, life cycle analysis, environmental impact assessment, multi-agent system, linear programming and agro-environmental indicators. Eleven case studies, in which one of the six methods was applied, are used as data in this review. All methods are based on a set of environmental objectives. Some methods also take account of economic and social objectives to produce a more wide-ranging assessment of the sustainability of the agricultural system studied. Each method relies on indicators serving as criteria to evaluate whether the objectives have been attained. These indicators take account of local impacts such as noise, regional impacts such as eutrophication, or global impacts like the greenhouse effect. The characteristics required to develop a method for the environmental impact assessment of a farming region are discussed. The analysis of the interactions between farms is indispensable at this scale of analysis. Indicators based on the environmental effects of farming practices should take precedence over those based on the practices themselves, which do not provide a direct evaluation of environmental impact. Indicators which express an impact both per kg of product and per unit of land area used bring together the essential functions of agriculture, namely production and the occupation of the countryside. The assessment methods should include an analysis of the uncertainty associated with the results. Lastly, the method should be validated with respect to (i) the conception of the method and its indicators, (ii) the consistency of the values of the indicators in relation to observed values, and finally (iii) the suitability of the indicators and more generally of the assessment method for the end users. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Pig production systems often depend to a large extent on concentrated feed imported from outside the farm. This study used the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method to assess major environmental impacts associated with the production and on-farm delivery of concentrated feed for pigs. Feed composition was based on average data for Bretagne (France) in 1998 and on published data for wheat-based, maize-based and co-product based feeds. As crop and feed production practices in Bretagne are similar to those in most of western Europe, we conclude that the results of this study apply more largely for western Europe. Depending on feed composition and fertilisation practise for crop-based feed ingredients, the production and delivery of one kg of feed for finishing pigs will produce a eutrophication potential between 3.8 and 9.3 g PO4-equivalents, a global warming potential between 472 and 792 g CO2-equivalents, an acidification potential between 3.0 and 6.3 g SO2-equivalents, a terrestrial ecotoxicity potential between 0.4 and 8.7 g 1,4-dichlorobenzene-equivalents, an energy use between 3.3 and 6.1 MJ, and land use between 1.44 and 2.07 m2 year. These impacts are mainly due to the production of crop-based ingredients. The contribution of transport processes was substantial for climate change, acidification and energy use. A feed containing mainly co-products had higher energy use and lower terrestrial ecotoxicity than feeds consisting mainly of non-processed crop-based ingredients. Hypotheses with respect to the fertilisation practices for the feed''s main ingredients have a major effect on its impact values. The effect of uncertainty concerning the emissions of N2O, NH3, and NO3 was very large for climate change, and large for acidification and eutrophication. The environmental burdens associated with the production and delivery of pig feed can be decreased by: optimising the fertilisation of its crop based ingredients, using more locally produced feed ingredients, reducing concentrations of Cu and Zn in the feed, and using wheat-based rather than maize-based feeds. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Current intensive pig production is often associated with environmental burdens. However, very few studies deal with the environmental performance of both current and alternative systems of pig production. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the environmental impacts of three contrasting pig production systems using the life cycle assessment method and to identify hot spots for each system. The scenarios compared were conventional good agricultural practice (GAP) according to French production rules, a French quality label scenario called red label (RL) and a French organic scenario called organic agriculture (OA). For each of the three scenarios a “favourable” and an “unfavourable” variant was defined; these variants were used as indicators of uncertainty with respect to key parameters for technical performance and emissions of pollutants. The environmental categories assessed were: eutrophication, climate change, acidification, terrestrial toxicity, energy use, land use and pesticide use. Two functional units (FU) were used to express impacts: 1 kg of pig produced and 1 ha of land surface used. The scenarios were examined with particular emphasis on their contribution to eutrophication and acidification. Given this perspective, the RL scenario can be an interesting alternative to GAP on the condition that its emission of greenhouse gases can be reduced. The results for OA were very dependent on the choice of the FU. Per kg of pig, eutrophication and acidification were similar for OA and GAP, while OA had less eutrophication and acidification than GAP when expressed per ha. For the three scenarios, environmental hot spots and important margins of improvement were identified. Finally, the uncertainty analysis indicated that efforts should be made to produce more reliable estimations of emission factors for NO3, NH3 and N2O in the field. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The current industrial pig production model is in crisis, due to its association with environmental pollution, doubtful product quality and lack of animal well-being. In Bretagne (France), a region of intensive pig production, a survey of seven stakeholder groups concerned with pig production was conducted, as part of a research programme dedicated to the assessment of the environmental impact of different modes of pig production. A very large majority of pig producers (93%) and their suppliers (100%) considers pig farms as an asset for the region, whereas a majority of scientists (58%), activists (78%) and consumers (54%) sees it as a handicap. Differences among stakeholder groups are minor with respect to the perceived importance of environmental and social issues. Stakeholders agree on the relative level of responsibility of pig farms with respect to specific problems. For all groups unpleasant odours and water quality come first with respect to responsibility, for most groups soil quality comes second, followed by product safety and air quality. For a future improved mode of pig production, 76% of pig producers and their suppliers prefer to adapt the current model, for all other groups the majority prefers an alternative model. While pig producers and their suppliers prefer a slurry-based housing system, all other groups prefer a straw-based system. Pig producers see the slurry-based system as technically superior and associate the straw-based system with poor working conditions, whereas consumers associate the slurry-based system in the first place with poor water quality and associate the straw-based system with less pollution. These results will be of use in the research programme on the environmental impact of modes of pig production, as they indicate the environmental impacts to be considered and their relative importance. The results will also help in deciding which options should be assessed. It is concluded that the poor image of the current pig production model and its production practices with consumers does not seem compatible with a sustainable demand for pork products. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

An increasing variety of evaluation methods is being proposed to address the question of the environmental impacts of agriculture. This paper compares and analyses 12 indicator-based approaches to assessing environmental impact at the farm level, in order to propose a set of guidelines for the evaluation or development of such methods. These methods take into account a number of environmental objectives (e.g. soil erosion, water quality). A set of indicators is used to quantify the degree to which these objectives are attained. A total of 26 objectives were taken into account by one or several of the methods. A great diversity in breadth of analysis exists: the number of objectives considered per method varies from 2 to 13. Indicator-based methods for environmental evaluation at the farm level should take into account a range of objectives covering both local and global effects. Indicators based on the environmental effects of farmer practices are preferable to indicators based on farmer practices as the link with the objective is direct and the choice of means is left to the farmer. Indicators based on farmer practices cost less in data collection but do not allow an actual evaluation of environmental impact. Indicators allowing expression of impacts both per unit surface and per unit product are preferable. Indicators producing output in the form of values are preferred to indicators producing scores. If possible, science-based threshold values should be defined for indicators. The method should be validated with respect to (a) the appropriateness of its set of objectives relative to its purpose and (b) its indicators. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The complexity of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method requires many subjective choices throughout the procedure, which make decision making difficult and LCA results insecure. Our approach consists in combining life cycle thinking and sensitivity analysis to provide information to the actor of a foreground system within a product's life cycle. For any parameter of a foreground system, the trends and quantified influence on impact categories are systematically compared to determine the most effective action levers for actors controlling the process. This approach has been previously applied to a single actor, the farmer, in a case study of hemp crop production. In this study, we introduce a second life cycle actor: the industrial producer for transformation of hemp straw into insulation products for buildings. The relationships between farming and industrial actors are examined and demonstrate that industrial actors have action levers limited to climate change and energy consumption. Only a joint action of both actors can allow further reduction of climate change and energy consumption impacts. Nevertheless, the farmer action alone can allow reduction of other environmental impacts such as human toxicity or ecotoxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current context of the end of dairy quotas, the increasing size of dairy farms and the expected growth in food demand, European dairy production systems are facing major challenges. The aim of this study was to assess environmental impacts of dairy system intensification to identify production systems that combine high productivity and low environmental impacts. We used the concept of the Technological Management Route, i.e. a logical set of technical options designed by farmers, to describe the diversity of milk production systems in France. Life Cycle Assessment was used to estimate impacts of these systems according to two functional units: t milk and hectare of total (on- and off-farm) land occupied. Dairy system intensification has three major effects: i) an increase in all impacts when expressed per hectare, ii) a decrease in eutrophication and land occupation per t milk, and iii) no clear effects on other impacts when expressed per t milk. The two first effects are due mostly to the switch from grass-based feed to maize silage and concentrate feed when intensifying production systems. Furthermore, the choice of functional unit leads to radically different conclusions. Using only a mass-based functional unit, which is predominant in current life cycle assessment practice, does not provide a balanced view of the impacts of intensification and could mislead decision makers in identifying promising dairy systems. More generally, current LCA practice seems largely blind to the negative environmental consequences of agricultural system intensification, as revealed by the area-based functional unit. Therefore, we recommend the use of both mass-based and area-based functional units in life cycle assessments of agricultural goods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The number of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies on foods and diets steadily increases. However, due to lack of data on food products as well as time and resource constraints, many of these studies ignore part of the system (e.g. cooking and waste in the household), which may lead to underestimating impacts greatly. This LCA study compared diets using six methods with different system boundaries; three of these are simplified methods we developed. The aim was to identify which method best optimizes data collection for life cycle inventories from cradle to human mouth of food products and diets. The principle behind the three simplified methods was that, for many foods and impact categories, the farm (or fishery) is the life cycle stage that contributes most to impacts. One average, one healthy and one vegetarian diet, each composed of up to 105 foods, were assessed. Climate change, cumulative energy demand, eutrophication, acidification and land occupation impacts were estimated. Recommendations are given on which methods, depending on study goals, offer the best trade-off among available resources (time, money, and knowledge), while providing the required robustness of results. Compared to a full LCA, simplified LCA methods can yield more accurate results at a lower cost of data collection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The objective of this study was to model land use configuration for a sustainable dairy sector in Brittany, France, using results from Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Multiple-Goal Linear Programming (MGLP). To generate future land-use configurations that met environmental targets, the approach required (1) defining a set of current and alternative land-use types, (2) defining a set of characteristics of these land-use types, (3) quantifying these characteristics for all land-use types, (4) calculating the regional sum of each indicator for current land-use types to establish the baseline scenario, and (5) defining scenarios consisting of a set of goals to meet (maximize milk production or farm profit) and environmental constraints not to violate (per-ha limits on nitrate leaching, non-renewable energy use, and greenhouse gas emissions). Existing dairy farms were classified into 5 groups (from organic to intensive) according to their mode of production, quantity of milk production, and fodder-crop and grass area. Alternative land uses, namely 100%-grass-based dairy systems or forest, were characterized to explore the potential effects of replacing current dairy farmland with them. The MGLP model was unable to find a combination of current land-use types that could meet the three environmental constraints while using all of the land available. With alternative land-use types allowed, however, the model maximized milk production while meeting environmental constraints by allocating 55–60, 21–44, and 1–19% of the area to grass-based dairy systems, intensive farms, and forest, respectively, which decreased regional milk production by 8–30%. The trade-offs shown in MGLP results predict consequences of applying environmental constraints on agricultural production, revealing challenges that agricultural policies may face. The major benefits of coupling MGLP and LCA results include (1) taking into account social and economic indicators while considering environmental concerns, (2) quantification of potential environmental impacts to optimize agricultural production from an LCA perspective, (3) consideration of a variety of complementary production modes in a region, and (4) generation of scenarios that can be discussed with stakeholders as support information for environmentally-conscious decision making regarding land use. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

According to the bifurcation hypothesis, a gap may be growing between "agroecological" organic farms, which rely mostly on ecosystem services, and "conventionalised" ones, which rely more on external inputs, related to contrasting evolutions in farm structure (e.g. size, specialisation) and supply chains. The objectives of this study were to 1) analyse the diversity of organic vegetable farming systems in France, 2) investigate the extent to which bifurcation can be observed among organic vegetable farms in France and 3) investigate the extent to which structural factors that can reflect bifurcation (e.g. profiles of "new organic farmers", marketing channels, farm size) are related to conventionalised or agroecological OF. We developed a farm typology based on Factor Analysis of Mixed Data (FAMD) and agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC) using information obtained from an online survey with 165 complete answers. We used composite indexes that aggregated primary indicators to compare the biotechnical and socio-economic dimensions of farms among clusters. The diversity that exists in organic vegetable farms, with large differences among farm clusters, can be interpreted as a snapshot sign of bifurcation, which is a temporal process, and support hypotheses that relate farming structure to farming practices in this perspective. Our study suggests that 1) the dichotomy that contrasts "agroecological" to "conventionalised" organic farms should be considered as a conceptual perspective with two poles and a gradient of farms between them; 2) farms that were created as organic tended to be more agroecological than farms that were converted from conventional farming; 3) new entrants to organic farming had the best agroecological performances; 4) the best agroecological performances were associated with short supply chains, although good agroecological performances did occur with some long supply chains; and 5) the smallest farms were more likely to implement agroecological practices, but farm size did not have the same influence on all agroecological practices. These findings confirm the influence of structural factors that reflect bifurcation of the degree of conventionalisation or agroecology of organic vegetable farming. For a given set of structural factors (i.e. farmer profile, farm size and supply chain), however, agroecological performances varied greatly. This suggests levels of freedom to develop more agroecological organic practices for a given farm size or supply chain that should be further investigated. [Display omitted] • Organic vegetable farms showed a range of farm structure, related to practices with different levels of agroecology. • The smallest farms were the most agroecological, while the most conventionalised practices were associated with a large percentage of sheltered area. • Large farms were less agroecological on average, but some had agroecological performances similar to those of smaller farms. • The coexistence of agroecological and conventionalised farms may result from bifurcation, where the role of new entrants needs further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing demand for moving towards sustainable agri-food systems which per nature covers a complex network of activities and domains; such systems will benefit from multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods. Although some reviews on MCDA in agri-food research have been published, none of them covered the whole value chain. In this article, a corpus of 954 articles published by INRA scientists from 2007 to 2017 was used to study the diversity and potentiality of MCDA techniques. For the first time, experts from more than 10 agri-food domains worked altogether to annotate the articles, carry out a multivariate analysis, and finally interpret the statistical results to identify the specificities of certain domains and the complementarities between domains and to suggest avenues for future agri-food research. One-third of the studies were based only on a list of indicators, even when their purpose was to choose, sort, or rank options. Regardless of the scientific discipline in the agri-food sector, MCDA studies rarely considered temporal dynamics, spatial scale changes, or stakeholder contributions. As the agri-food system becomes increasingly sustainable in the near future, the use of MCDA methods will accelerate. To become more effective, they will have to include ecosystem services, even outside the scope of ecological studies. Similarly, MCDA studies will need to include participatory science to involve stakeholders (i.e., public authorities, governmental agencies) and end-users (i.e., farmers, producers, industrials, consumers) in the construction of the multi-criteria evaluation but also in the resulting decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biodiversity loss caused by livestock production is a key environmental issue. Biodiversity-friendly livestock systems aim to favour biodiversity mainly for its own sake. Environmental impacts of biodiversity-friendly livestock systems have not been studied, nor have trade-offs between higher productivity and lower environmental impacts of these systems. This study aimed to (i) assess the productivity and environmental impacts of a sample of cattle-oriented production systems representing a wide range of external inputs, productivity and consideration of biodiversity; (ii) identify trade-offs among the objectives of lower input use, higher productivity, lower environmental impacts and higher energy return on investment (EROI); (iii) relate the systems' production strategies to the trade-offs identified and (iv) identify perspectives for biodiversity-friendly livestock systems. This study assessed the productivity and environmental impacts of a sample of seven cattle-oriented production systems: an agricultural rewilding system (biodiversity-friendly, in England), three suckler beef systems (two of them considered biodiversity-friendly, in France) and three dairy systems (one biodiversity-friendly and one conventional, in France). Life cycle assessment (LCA) was applied to assess six environmental impacts (i.e. terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication, marine eutrophication, land occupation, and in particular, climate change and energy demand) and was combined with calculation of EROI. Per hectare of land occupied to produce livestock and their feed, production of human-edible animal protein and environmental impacts of these systems increased as energy demand (i.e. input use) increased. Per hectare, human-edible animal protein production, energy demand and climate change impact (considering carbon dynamics) ranged from 5 kg, 90 MJ and −5.5 t CO 2 -eq., respectively, for the agricultural rewilding system to 239 kg, 20,496 MJ and 8.3 t CO 2 -eq., respectively, for the conventional French dairy farm. Patterns of trade-offs varied among the production strategies of the farms. The four biodiversity-friendly farms in the sample had low productivity but also low environmental impacts per ha, especially for climate change and energy demand, due to being extensive systems with relatively high self-sufficiency. Biodiversity-friendly farms also had higher EROI than other farms that produced the same products. Using LCA to assess biodiversity-friendly systems, in particular agricultural rewilding, challenges its ability to consider natural baseline emissions and non-provisioning ecosystem services. These results emphasise the need to consider the multiple functions of these systems and their overall environmental performances and sustainability. Current economic and social trends may provide opportunities for biodiversity-friendly livestock systems as a possible future for livestock systems. [Display omitted] • Biodiversity loss is a key environmental issue of livestock production. • Livestock systems with a wide range of biodiversity friendliness were assessed. • Productivity and environmental impacts per ha of land were lower for biodiversity-friendly systems than for other systems. • Land abandonment and new compensation payments may provide opportunities for biodiversity-friendly livestock systems. • Agricultural rewilding's potential forms and value for farmers remain to be explored further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Livestock production is a major driver of biodiversity loss. • Cattle-oriented farms may favor biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. • We adapted and applied the rewilding score to assess biodiversity on seven farms. • Adapted rewilding score was moderately correlated with observed avian biodiversity. • Adapted rewilding score may allow assessment of the biodiversity potential of farms. The loss of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes is caused mainly by intensive agricultural production, especially livestock farms. However, certain farms that favor biodiversity attempt to decrease this loss, and the biodiversity hosted by these farms needs to be assessed. To this end, certain methods assess integrated variables of the overall state of an ecosystem. Among them, the "rewilding score" is based on assessing human forcing (i.e. inputs used in the ecosystem and products exported from the ecosystem) and ecological integrity to consider short-term and long-term effects of human activities on ecosystems. This study aimed to adapt the rewilding score for cattle-oriented farms, apply the method, and compare its results to observed biodiversity in order to discuss the relevance of the adapted rewilding score for assessing the biodiversity potential of livestock farms. Two adapted rewilding scores were tested with seven farms by combining one assessment of human forcing with two approaches for estimating ecological integrity. Biodiversity indices based on bird species inventories were calculated and compared to the adapted rewilding scores. Their moderate correlations with the adapted rewilding scores (r = 0.54–0.69) supported using this score to assess one type of biodiversity potential of agroecosystems. Nonetheless, the correlation between the adapted rewilding score and biodiversity remains to be confirmed by using biodiversity indices for other taxonomic groups and for a larger set of farms. This method could be used as a decision aid by farmers or as a tool to help governments calculate subsidies by considering short-term and long-term effects of livestock farms on biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• SALCA BD was adapted to assess the impact on biodiversity in vegetables production. • Vegetables with similar characteristics are grouped into a single habitat. • We highlighted the role of semi-natural habitats for enhancing biodiversity. Biodiversity loss in agricultural landscapes due to intensification of agriculture and degradation and loss of semi-natural habitats is a major issue that life cycle assessment (LCA) methods intend to address. No current LCA method is able to assess and compare impacts on the biodiversity of vegetable production systems as a function of farming practices and the local context. Based on a literature review and consultation with experts, the SALCA-BD expert system, originally designed to assess impacts on the biodiversity of cropland and grassland at field, rotation, and farm levels, was adapted to vegetable production systems. SALCA-BD is based on an inventory of the habitats found on a farm and a list of practices that can be implemented in these habitats. We distinguished an open field and a greenhouse as two distinct "level I" habitats, as a habitat's openness favours the exchange of species with surrounding habitats. These two habitats were subdivided into "level II" habitats that corresponded to vegetable crops. Given the many types of vegetables, we used a clustering method to create a few categories that grouped vegetables that had similar potential to host biodiversity. We created a category for intercropped vegetables for fields in which multiple vegetables are grown at the same time, which is common on microfarms. We tested the expert system at field and farm levels using scenarios and a farm case study. We quantified effects of changes to individual practices and practice intensities at the field level on biodiversity. The results highlighted the importance of semi-natural habitats for preserving biodiversity, in addition to low-intensity practices, which indicates that assessment at the farm level is more informative than that at the field level. Because it considers habitats and practices in detail, SALCA-BD is useful for assessing biodiversity at field and farm levels and for comparing farming systems with the same land use and type of management (organic or conventional), which other LCA methods for assessing biodiversity cannot do. Field size, which is a driver of biodiversity, is considered indirectly only when semi-natural habitats are included. As SALCA-BD does not consider impacts of the background system, combining SALCA-BD with comprehensive methods for assessing impacts on biodiversity is a promising perspective for more complete assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agricultural intensification is a major cause of biodiversity loss. Biodiversity conservation and restoration generally involve human intervention. In comparison, rewilding, a radically different approach to address the erosion of biodiversity, aims to increase the ability of ecological processes to act with little or no human intervention, and thus to enhance biodiversity and the supply of ecosystem services. Rewilding, including that of agricultural systems, has been examined from ecological and social perspectives but rarely from an agricultural perspective. In this review of the literature and case studies, we (i) analyse whether and how rewilding of agricultural systems, particularly livestock systems, can help conserve and restore biodiversity and offer new prospects, and (ii) identify research questions about rewilding of agricultural systems. We researched literature in the Web of Science Core Collection that focussed on rewilding, agriculture, and interactions between them. We also identified agricultural rewilding projects established for at least five years in the United Kingdom (UK) to analyse their approaches and characteristics. Agricultural rewilding is an emerging form of land use that we conceptually position on a gradient between agroecology and rewilding. It combines restoration of ecological processes with some degree of agricultural production, most often of herbivores. A selection of 11 agricultural rewilding projects in the UK had areas of 121–4402 ha. The projects targeted 48 key species/breeds, 24 of which were ecosystem engineers: 19 grazers, four pig breeds and Eurasian beavers. The main actions to enhance rewilding were extensive grazing and habitat restoration. The main economic activities were meat or animal sales, tourism and education programmes. Agricultural rewilding may provide a multifunctional model to which livestock systems with herbivores may transition to respond better to environmental concerns. However, because it may lack economic viability and conflict with local culture and traditions, government policies may be needed to encourage more farmers to adopt it. Agricultural rewilding offers new prospects for livestock systems with herbivores. We identified key research questions about its relation to agroecology and rewilding, conditions necessary to implement it, its potential for plant production and its value for farmers. In addition, the forms it can take remain to be explored, and the potential influence of these forms on biodiversity, ecosystem services and environmental impacts needs to be characterised. Exploring the forms that agricultural rewilding may take requires close collaboration among ecologists, animal scientists, agronomists, and social scientists. [Display omitted] • Rewilding has emerged as a radically different approach to address the erosion of biodiversity • The potential of rewilding of agricultural systems to conserve and restore biodiversity should be explored • Agricultural rewilding is an emerging form of land use that we conceptually position between agroecology and rewilding • Agricultural rewilding may provide a multifunctional model for livestock systems to better respond to societal demands • Agricultural rewilding's relation to agroecology and rewilding, its forms and its value for farmers remain to be explored [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was applied to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with two-net cage aquaculture systems of common carp (Cyprinus carpio carpio) and tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in the Cirata reservoir, Indonesia. The studied system included fingerling production in hatcheries, fish rearing in cages, and transport of fry and feed as well as that of harvested fish to markets. The environmental impact indicators were calculated based on the annual production in 2006–2007 using the CML2 Baseline 2000 method, and expressed per tonne of fresh fish delivered to the market. The rearing performances and the environmental efficiency of the system were highly dependent on the lake water quality. Therefore the location of the cages and associated practices influenced the environmental impacts. Feed was identified as the major contributor to land occupation, primary production use, acidification, climate change, energy use and water dependence. Those impacts were mainly linked to the production of fishmeal followed by the production of crop-based feed materials and the production of electricity for feed processing. Eutrophication was mainly the consequence of the fish growing stage and linked closely to nutrient loading from cages. Better feeding practices to reduce feed conversion ratio (FCR), as well as improvement of feed composition by using less fishmeal and more local plant-based materials along with improving energy efficiency of feed production processing should be implemented to improve the environmental profiles of carp and tilapia production. The reduction of FCR from 2.1 to 1.7 could decrease eutrophication by about 22%. However, it is of first priority to reduce the number of cages in order to improve the water quality of the reservoir. The comparison of Cirata reservoir fish culture to other sources of animal protein revealed that it generated average energy use but high eutrophication level. LCA was demonstrated to be a useful tool for decision-making when targeting improved environmental sustainability of cage aquaculture. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Soils are an essential resource in both managed and natural systems, and maintaining soil quality is critical to the development of sustainable development of human activities, in particular agriculture. The assessment of impacts of human activities on soil quality needs a universal practical approach that can be incorporated in global environmental assessments. But so far, no synthetic indicators have been proposed that would combine the main soil characteristics in a simple formula valid for all types of soils and climates. The existence of numerous interrelated soil characteristics and their complex interactions with agricultural practices has postponed development of a universal soil-quality impact indicator in environmental assessment, especially in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). LCA is an internationally normalized method widely used to evaluate potential impacts of products. The inability to represent impacts on soil quality remains one of the unresolved problems in LCA because of soil''s spatial and temporal variability and the complex interactions between soil properties. It is crucial to consider soil quality in the environmental assessment of products, especially those with a majority of their life cycle in biological processes (such as agriculture and forestry). After presenting a general overview of the soil quality concept, we review the existing LCA approaches that consider soil quality in their inventory and impact-assessment phases, and outline the challenges to refining soil quality impacts in LCA. These challenges include estimation of complex soil quality impacts that depend on fluctuating soil characteristics, consideration of both on-site and off-site agricultural soils, and aggregation of impacts both spatially and temporally. The inventory items describing soil quality can be soil properties, functions or processes (e.g., erosion, compaction). Their quantification implies that they be (1) relevant for calculating impacts on soil quality, (2) related to one or more functional units, (3) as accurate as possible and (4) calculated with available data at a global scale. Inventory items based on processes fulfill these four needs and can be considered as midpoint indicators in LCA. Furthermore, indicators based on processes allow an incremental improvement of the method through the inclusion of new impacts. Efforts first must focus on developing robust impact indicators for individual soil processes before attempting to aggregate them into a single indicator. Nonetheless, several aggregation approaches are presented. The appropriate level of complexity and comprehensiveness for assessing impacts on soil quality should result from a compromise between oversimplified and overcomplicated descriptions of the multiple functions and properties of soils. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: With the aim of reducing the environmental impacts of poultry feed, a database of the impacts of feed components destined for formulation was constructed using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method. We used linear programming to create least cost feed formulas for fast-growing broiler (FGB), slow-growing broiler (SGB, i.e. quality label), laying hen and for three contrasting feed-cost situations (January 2006, December 2007 and March 2009). We focused on Eutrophication Potential (EP, a regional impact) and Climate Change (CC, a global impact) which were constraints to formulate low-impact poultry feed. The effects of using these constraints on feed cost and the use of feed components were investigated for a feed production plant in Bretagne (western France). Environmental impacts of poultry feed increased with the energy and protein content of the formula and were affected by the relative costs of feed components. FGB formulas had the highest impacts, followed by formulas for SGB and laying hens. The search for a minimum level of EP and CC of the formula decreased its impacts by 1–8% and by 1–12% respectively, and increased its cost by 2–8%, depending on the type of feed and the feed-cost situation. Impact reduction was obtained by partial substitution of soybean meal and cereals by rapeseed meal, grain legumes and co-products (wheat bran, gluten). Furthermore, 70% of the potential reduction of the EP and CC impacts could be obtained at a modest (0.5–4%) increase in the cost of the formulas. Some other ways to reduce feed impacts were explored, such as taking into account the geographic origin of maize crops and adopting a modified regulatory constraint for SGB formulas. It is important to continue this study by taking into account the whole life cycle of poultry production. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The environmental consequences of replacing fish meal and fish oil with plant-based sources in salmonid feeds were investigated using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Two scenarios of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) farming were compared. The first scenario used a Standard Diet (STD) with high levels of fish meal and fish oil, and the second a Low Marine-Fishery-Capture Diet (LFD) in which fish meal and fish oil were replaced by plant protein and oil sources. Environmental impacts assessed were: acidification, eutrophication, climate change, terrestrial ecotoxicity, net primary production use (biotic resource use), water use, land occupation and total cumulative energy demand. The assessment confirmed the substantial contribution of feed to the environmental burdens of fish production and the LFD scenario led to a significant decrease in biotic resource use compared to the STD scenario with the same total energy demand. Environmental impacts of feeds depended highly on the geographic origins of feed ingredients from fishery (e.g., fish oil from Norway or Peru) and from terrestrial agricultural crop species (e.g., palm oil or rapeseed oil). This study demonstrated the importance of a multicriteria method to give stakeholders the most accurate information on the potential consequences of replacing fishery products with plant-based sources in aquafeeds. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The challenge for environmental assessment tools, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is to provide a holistic picture of the environmental impacts of a given system, while being relevant both at a global scale, i.e., for global impact categories such as climate change, and at a smaller scale, i.e., for regional impact categories such as aquatic eutrophication. To this end, the environmental mechanisms between emission and impact should be taken into account. For eutrophication in particular, which is one of the main impacts of farming systems, the fate factor of eutrophying pollutants in catchments, and particularly of nitrate, reflects one of these important and complex environmental mechanisms. We define this fate factor as: the ratio of the amount of nitrate at the outlet of the catchment over the nitrate emitted from the catchment''s soils. In LCA, this fate factor is most often assumed equal to 1, while the observed fate factor is generally less than 1. A generic approach for estimating the range of variation of nitrate fate factors in a region of intensive agriculture was proposed. This approach was based on the analysis of different catchment scenarios combining different catchment types and different effective rainfalls. The evolution over time of the nitrate fate factor as well as the steady state fate factor for each catchment scenario was obtained using the INCA simulation model. In line with the general LCA model, the implications of the steady state fate factors for nitrate were investigated for the eutrophication impact result in the framework of an LCA of pig production. A sensitivity analysis to the fraction of nitrate lost as N2O was presented for the climate change impact category. This study highlighted the difference between the observed fate factor at a given time, which aggregates both storage and transformation processes and a “steady state fate factor”, specific to the system considered. The range of steady state fate factors obtained for the study region was wide, from 0.44 to 0.86, depending primarily on the catchment type and secondarily on the effective rainfall. The sensitivity of the LCA of pig production to the fate factors was significant concerning eutrophication, but potentially much larger concerning climate change. The potential for producing improved eutrophication results by using spatially differentiated fate factors was demonstrated. Additionally, the urgent need for quantitative studies on the N2O/N2 ratio in riparian zones denitrification was highlighted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]