A comparative Life Cycle Assessment between organic and conventional barley cultivation for sustainable agriculture pathways

被引:74
|
作者
Tricase, Caterina [1 ]
Lamonaca, Emilia [1 ]
Ingrao, Carlo [1 ]
Bacenetti, Jacopo [2 ]
Lo Giudice, Agata [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Foggia, Dept Econ, Largo Papa Giovanni Paolo 2,1, I-71121 Foggia, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dept Agr & Environm Sci Prod Landscape & Agroener, Via Giovanni Celoria 2, I-20133 Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Johannesburg, Fac Engn & Built Environm, Dept Qual & Operat Management, APB Campus,POB 524,Auckland Pk, ZA-2006 Johannesburg, South Africa
关键词
Cereals; Life cycle analysis; Comparative assessment; Organic farming; Conventional farming; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY; GRAIN PRODUCTION; CROP PRODUCTION; EMISSIONS; SYSTEMS; LCA; CLIMATE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.008
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This paper is based upon a comparative environmental evaluation between organic and conventional cultivation of barley, under favorable pedo-climatic conditions. A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was performed alternatively using, as Functional Units (FUs), 1 ha of land involved in cultivation of barley to seek environmental sustainability and 1 kg of dry matter grains of produced barley to check productive efficiency. The study aims at highlighting the best solution for cultivation of barley. The topic was addressed because of the lack of comprehensive comparisons between organic and conventional management of barley production systems, which involve specific methodological assumptions (i.e. different FUs, economic allocation procedure between product and co-product). Findings from comparative LCA show that organic barley cultivation is the most environmentally sustainable solution (but not efficient in production), vice versa conventional barley cultivation is the solution most efficient in production (but not environmentally sustainable). Using 1 ha as FU, the cultivation of organic barley produces environmental impacts for 2.33 pt vs. the 2.55 pt of the cultivation of conventional barley. Vice-versa using 1 kg as FU, organic barley accounts for 3.103E-04 pt vs. the 2.396E-04 pt of conventional barley. Efficiency in production and environmental sustainability may also depend on qualitative elements (crop quality and adaptiveness to specific pedo-climatic conditions). (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:3747 / 3759
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Life cycle assessment of organic and conventional egg production: A case study in northern Italy
    Pelaracci, Simone
    Paolotti, Luisa
    Rocchi, Lucia
    Boggia, Antonio
    Castellini, Cesare
    CLEANER ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, 2024, 15
  • [42] Comparison of organic and conventional cropping systems: A systematic review of life cycle assessment studies
    Boschiero, Martina
    De Laurentiis, Valeria
    Caldeira, Carla
    Sala, Serenella
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2023, 102
  • [43] Environmental sustainability of conventional and organic farming: Accounting for ecosystem services in life cycle assessment
    Boone, Lieselot
    Roldan-Ruiz, Isabel
    Van Linden, Veerle
    Muylle, Hilde
    Dewulf, Jo
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 695
  • [44] Comparative life cycle assessment in the wine sector: biodynamic vs. conventional viticulture activities in NW Spain
    Villanueva-Rey, Pedro
    Vazquez-Rowe, Ian
    Teresa Moreira, Maria O.
    Feijoo, Gumersindo
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2014, 65 : 330 - 341
  • [45] Carbon footprints of crops from organic and conventional arable crop rotations - using a life cycle assessment approach
    Knudsen, Marie Trydeman
    Meyer-Aurich, Andreas
    Olesen, Jorgen E.
    Chirinda, Ngonidzashe
    Hermansen, John E.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2014, 64 : 609 - 618
  • [46] Environmental Life Cycle Assessment in Organic and Conventional Rice Farming Systems: Using a Cradle to Farm Gate Approach
    Amirahmadi, Elnaz
    Moudry, Jan
    Konvalina, Petr
    Hortenhuber, Stefan Josef
    Ghorbani, Mohammad
    Neugschwandtner, Reinhard W.
    Jiang, Zhixiang
    Krexner, Theresa
    Kopecky, Marek
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2022, 14 (23)
  • [47] Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Silage Maize in Relation to Regenerative Agriculture
    Dedina, Martin
    Jevic, Petr
    Cermak, Pavel
    Moudry, Jan
    Mukosha, Chisenga Emmanuel
    Losak, Tomas
    Hrusovsky, Tadeas
    Watzlova, Elizaveta
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2024, 16 (02)
  • [48] Critical Review of Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production Pathways
    Maniscalco, Manfredi Picciotto
    Longo, Sonia
    Cellura, Maurizio
    Micciche, Gabriele
    Ferraro, Marco
    ENVIRONMENTS, 2024, 11 (06)
  • [49] A comparative life cycle assessment of dental restorative materials
    Smith, Lucy
    Ali, Mustafa
    Agrissais, Manon
    Mulligan, Steven
    Koh, Lenny
    Martin, Nicolas
    DENTAL MATERIALS, 2023, 39 (01) : 13 - 24
  • [50] Environmental life cycle assessment of Ethiopian rose cultivation
    Sahle, Abiy
    Potting, Jose
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2013, 443 : 163 - 172