CONTEXT
Scoping or initial life cycle assessments (LCAs) occur in the absence of conformity to existing standards and often contend with limited data. This is particularly the case for agricultural food value chains. Nonetheless, such studies can play a valuable role in delivering policy-relevant insights and serving as a precursor for a more complete analysis. However, in practice, such studies may be conducted within the framing of larger projects and be undertaken by subject specialists rather than LCA practitioners.
OBJECTIVE
This study seeks to bridge a gap in the literature to provide practical guidance on methodological pitfalls that may complicate the development of initial LCAs to the point of a minimal viable product (i.e., usable insights or a functioning platform for a more targeted analysis). In this case, our ideal target audience is subject specialists in the agri-food sector, but not necessarily LCA practitioners.
METHODS
This study undertook a structured review of some of the requirements of LCA through the lens of the stages of an LCA and framed by considerations of what a minimum viable product needs. This was supported by the generation of illustrative (plant and animal-based) LCA results produced as part of a commodity ‘food basket’. While these terminate at the farm gate based on UK conditions, another illustrative comparison (UK and Spanish tomatoes) is compared up to a substitutable point along the value chain, i.e., a UK distribution centre.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Within this work, proposed minimum data requirements are presented along with results for several case studies demonstrating important environmental hotspots. The results demonstrate the importance of interpreting impact hotspots, showing how most commodities will demonstrate life cycle stages that are significant for most environmental impact categories, but not all. For example, in the case of glasshouse-produced tomatoes and broiler chickens, the production of heat and feed is seen as crucial for many impact categories such as Global Warming Potential (GWP), whereas field/farm-based leachate and litter management dominate eutrophication and acidification impacts. Taking a reflective approach, the potential sources of error in developing the exemplar case studies are discussed along with strategies for addressing these.
SIGNIFICANCE
There remains a clear need to formulate practical guidance and recommendations for conducting an initial LCA, highlighting crucial data needs and potential strategies to overcome identified barriers. This paper has shared perspectives on conducting a transparent and reliable scoping study, identifying potential data gaps, limitations, and the complex nature of agricultural value chains, using representative case studies which can be used to further develop more insightful LCAs.
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号