Effectiveness criteria for customised agricultural life cycle assessment tools

被引:20
|
作者
Renouf, M. A. [1 ,2 ]
Renaud-Gentie, C. [1 ]
Perrin, A. [1 ]
van der Werf, H. M. G. [3 ]
Kanyarushoki, C. [1 ]
Jourjon, F. [1 ]
机构
[1] INRA, ESA, USC GRAPPE 1422, 55 Rue Rabelais, F-49007 Angers, France
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Chem Engn, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia
[3] INRA, AGROCAMPUS OUEST, UMR SAS, F-35000 Rennes, France
关键词
Sustainable agriculture; LCA; Eco-design; Eco-efficiency; Environmental impact; Simplified tools; Streamlined tools; GREENHOUSE-GAS CALCULATOR; CARBON ACCOUNTING TOOLS; FARM-LEVEL; INVENTORY; DESIGN; IMPROVEMENT; CHALLENGES; EXTENSION; EMISSIONS; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.170
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Greater use of life cycle assessment (LCA) by agents of change will be needed to inform environmental improvements in agriculture, but the complexity of LCA can be a barrier. More accessible LCA tools customised for agriculture are emerging, but their effectiveness has not been considered. The aim of the work was to understand how tool features influence effectiveness and to propose criteria for effectiveness, for informing the design and evaluation of tools. We define 'customised' tools as those that focus on the life cycle phases and aspects of most relevance for the particular sector (in this case agriculture), and that parameterise practice variables to enable evaluation of practice alternatives. A theoretical framework for the role of tools in agricultural practice change was first used to define the desired objectives of LCA tools: i) to engage agricultural agents of change by catering to their needs, being accessible and being easy to use, ii) to generate information that users can interpret for informing environmental improvements, and iii) to generate information that can align with the wider decision making context. A desktop review of 14 LCA customised agriculture tools identified the features that influence these objectives: tool purpose, mode of access, ease of use, results presentation, degree of practice parameterisation, capacity for regionalised analysis, system scope, impact categories assessed, and alignment with other assessment frameworks. From this, a set of effectiveness criteria for customised LCA tools was developed. A few criteria from amongst this set will be challenges for future tool development: the balance between analysis capacity and ease of use, enabling regionalised analysis, and the presentation of results in a way that aids interpretation for informing environmental improvements. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:246 / 254
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Customised life cycle assessment tool for sugarcane (CaneLCA)a development in the evaluation of alternative agricultural practices
    Renouf, Marguerite A.
    Poggio, Mark
    Collier, Alison
    Price, Nicole
    Schroeder, Bernard L.
    Allsopp, Peter G.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2018, 23 (11) : 2150 - 2164
  • [2] Customised life cycle assessment tool for sugarcane (CaneLCA)—a development in the evaluation of alternative agricultural practices
    Marguerite A. Renouf
    Mark Poggio
    Alison Collier
    Nicole Price
    Bernard L. Schroeder
    Peter G. Allsopp
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2018, 23 : 2150 - 2164
  • [3] Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)-based tools for the eco-design of wooden furniture
    Bianco, Isabella
    Thiebat, Francesca
    Carbonaro, Corrado
    Pagliolico, Simonetta
    Blengini, Gian Andrea
    Comino, Elena
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 324
  • [4] Life cycle assessment and software tools comparison
    Seckar, Michal
    Schwarz, Marian
    Golej, Juraj
    Veverkova, Darina
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2025, 24 (02) : 145 - 162
  • [5] Exergetic Life Cycle Assessment: A Review
    Nwodo, Martin N.
    Anumba, Chimay J.
    ENERGIES, 2020, 13 (11)
  • [6] Optimization of organic and conventional olive agricultural practices from a Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing perspectives
    Mohamad, Ramez Saeid
    Verrastro, Vincenzo
    Cardone, Gianluigi
    Bteich, Marie Reine
    Favia, Mariafara
    Moretti, Michele
    Roma, Rocco
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2014, 70 : 78 - 89
  • [7] Addressing bystander exposure to agricultural pesticides in life cycle impact assessment
    Ryberg, Morten Walbech
    Rosenbaum, Ralph K.
    Mosqueron, Luc
    Fantke, Peter
    CHEMOSPHERE, 2018, 197 : 541 - 549
  • [8] A scalable and spatiotemporally resolved agricultural life cycle assessment of California almonds
    Marvinney, Elias
    Kendall, Alissa
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2021, 26 (06) : 1123 - 1145
  • [9] Life Cycle Assessment Applied to Naphtha Catalytic Reforming
    Portha, J. -F.
    Jaubert, J. -N.
    Louret, S.
    Pons, M. -N.
    OIL & GAS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-REVUE D IFP ENERGIES NOUVELLES, 2010, 65 (05): : 793 - 805
  • [10] Quantification of Improvement in Environmental Quality for Old Residential Buildings Using Life Cycle Assessment
    Mitterpach, Jozef
    Hroncova, Emilia
    Ladomersky, Juraj
    Stefko, Jozef
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2016, 8 (12)