斯里兰卡传统种植和有机种植菠萝的比较:应用生命周期评估和外部效应的综合方法

IF 6.1 Q2 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL Cleaner Environmental Systems Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1016/j.cesys.2024.100219
{"title":"斯里兰卡传统种植和有机种植菠萝的比较:应用生命周期评估和外部效应的综合方法","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.cesys.2024.100219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The pros and cons of the organic and conventional systems of pineapple cultivation have not been studied extensively. Non-consideration of full crop cycle and non-incorporation of environmental externalities are among the other gaps in research. The present study therefore compared Conventional Cultivation System (CCS) and Organic Cultivation System (OCS) of pineapple grown in Sri Lanka using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) under five impact categories considering system boundary from gate-to-gate and the full crop cycle. Economic analysis was conducted to determine the best system considering positive and negative externalities. Results showed 87% reduction of Global Warming Potential and 89% reduction of Eutrophication Potential under OCS. Higher toxicity potentials were reported under CCS while OCS resulted in zero toxicity. The net benefit for the farmer under OCS was higher. When the externalities were incorporated, the OCS showed a net gain of USD 8208 per ha while the CCS was no longer beneficial (USD -21,162 per ha). The study proposes economic instruments to incentivise farmers and emphasises the need to minimise adverse impacts of pesticides in sensitive locations. The study also highlights the potential of LCA studies when coupled with monetary values in guiding policy to incentivise farmers towards sustainable pineapple production.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34616,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner Environmental Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789424000576/pdfft?md5=1f8ce56a81a9190ab4fe6b815180c9a8&pid=1-s2.0-S2666789424000576-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of conventionally and organically grown pineapple in Sri Lanka: An integrative approach applying life cycle assessment and externalities\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cesys.2024.100219\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The pros and cons of the organic and conventional systems of pineapple cultivation have not been studied extensively. Non-consideration of full crop cycle and non-incorporation of environmental externalities are among the other gaps in research. The present study therefore compared Conventional Cultivation System (CCS) and Organic Cultivation System (OCS) of pineapple grown in Sri Lanka using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) under five impact categories considering system boundary from gate-to-gate and the full crop cycle. Economic analysis was conducted to determine the best system considering positive and negative externalities. Results showed 87% reduction of Global Warming Potential and 89% reduction of Eutrophication Potential under OCS. Higher toxicity potentials were reported under CCS while OCS resulted in zero toxicity. The net benefit for the farmer under OCS was higher. When the externalities were incorporated, the OCS showed a net gain of USD 8208 per ha while the CCS was no longer beneficial (USD -21,162 per ha). The study proposes economic instruments to incentivise farmers and emphasises the need to minimise adverse impacts of pesticides in sensitive locations. The study also highlights the potential of LCA studies when coupled with monetary values in guiding policy to incentivise farmers towards sustainable pineapple production.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cleaner Environmental Systems\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789424000576/pdfft?md5=1f8ce56a81a9190ab4fe6b815180c9a8&pid=1-s2.0-S2666789424000576-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cleaner Environmental Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789424000576\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner Environmental Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789424000576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对菠萝种植的有机系统和常规系统的利弊尚未进行广泛研究。未考虑整个作物周期和未纳入环境外部因素是研究中的其他空白。因此,本研究采用生命周期评估(LCA)方法,对斯里兰卡菠萝种植的常规栽培系统(CCS)和有机栽培系统(OCS)进行了比较,生命周期评估考虑了从入口到出口的系统边界和整个作物周期的五个影响类别。考虑到积极和消极的外部效应,进行了经济分析以确定最佳系统。结果表明,在 OCS 系统下,全球变暖潜能值降低了 87%,富营养化潜能值降低了 89%。综合碳捕获和储存系统的毒性潜能值较高,而其他碳捕获和储存系统的毒性为零。在 OCS 条件下,农民的净收益更高。当考虑到外部因素时,OCS 的净收益为每公顷 8208 美元,而 CCS 则不再有利(每公顷-21162 美元)。该研究提出了激励农民的经济手段,并强调需要尽量减少农药对敏感地区的不利影响。该研究还强调了生命周期评估研究与货币价值相结合在指导政策方面的潜力,以激励农民进行可持续的菠萝生产。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of conventionally and organically grown pineapple in Sri Lanka: An integrative approach applying life cycle assessment and externalities

The pros and cons of the organic and conventional systems of pineapple cultivation have not been studied extensively. Non-consideration of full crop cycle and non-incorporation of environmental externalities are among the other gaps in research. The present study therefore compared Conventional Cultivation System (CCS) and Organic Cultivation System (OCS) of pineapple grown in Sri Lanka using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) under five impact categories considering system boundary from gate-to-gate and the full crop cycle. Economic analysis was conducted to determine the best system considering positive and negative externalities. Results showed 87% reduction of Global Warming Potential and 89% reduction of Eutrophication Potential under OCS. Higher toxicity potentials were reported under CCS while OCS resulted in zero toxicity. The net benefit for the farmer under OCS was higher. When the externalities were incorporated, the OCS showed a net gain of USD 8208 per ha while the CCS was no longer beneficial (USD -21,162 per ha). The study proposes economic instruments to incentivise farmers and emphasises the need to minimise adverse impacts of pesticides in sensitive locations. The study also highlights the potential of LCA studies when coupled with monetary values in guiding policy to incentivise farmers towards sustainable pineapple production.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cleaner Environmental Systems
Cleaner Environmental Systems Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
A novel integrated material flow cost accounting (MFCA)- IoT-lean management system approach to improving water use efficiency and reducing costs in the beverage industry Eco-efficiency of coffee production and consumption in the UK at the product and sectoral levels Climate policy uncertainty and environmental degradation: Does democracy moderate this relationship? Integrated approach of waste analysis and life cycle assessment for the management of non-recyclable plastics in recycling shops Implementation and improvement of Integrated Management Systems: recommendations for their adaptation to the ISO High-Level structure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1