Abstract
Researchers use life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impacts of foods, providing useful information to other researchers, policy-makers, consumers, and manufacturers. However, LCA is ill-equipped to account for desirable, often normatively valued, characteristics of food systems, such as redundancy, that could be considered more sustainable from a resilience perspective. LCA’s requirement of a functional unit also causes methodological bias favoring efficiency over resilience and other difficult-to-quantify properties. This efficiency bias results in favorable evaluations of conventional production techniques and plant-based foods since they typically have the lowest impacts per unit of output when compared to alternative agriculture systems and animal-based foods. Such research findings may drive policy-makers as well as consumers to prefer the more efficient options, with the possible outcome of diminishing resilience. This research and policy commentary explains why complementary assessment methodologies are necessary for comprehensive sustainability assessments that support researchers, policy-makers, and other relevant stakeholders in decision-making for food systems sustainability. In addition to LCA, researchers examining food systems sustainability issues should consider integrating other frameworks and methods such as life cycle sustainability assessments, sustainable materialism, backcasting and scenario building, and food systems assessments to help generate a holistic understanding of the systems being analyzed.
Highlights
Food systems are necessary for the survival and health of humanity, but they can pose risks
Researchers turn to life cycle assessment (LCA) to quantitatively assess the sustainability of a given product, production system, or consumer choice (Andersson, 2000; Jungbluth, Tietje, & Scholz, 2000; Roy et al, 2009)
Common metrics used in food LCA include global warming potential (GWP), eutrophication potential, land use, and water use, there are additional important environmental impacts of concern such as biodiversity loss and health impacts associated with dietary patterns, both of which are rarely if ever considered in food LCA
Summary
Submitted October 6, 2019 / Revised December 10, 2019, and January 16 and February 4, 2020 / Accepted February 6, 2020 / Published online June 30, 2020.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.