JCLP2601 2012 A1

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro Life cycle assessment in Brazilian agriculture facing worldwide trends Clandio F. Ruviaro a, *, Miguelangelo Gianezini a, Fernanda S. Brandão a, César A. Winck a, b, Homero Dewes a a b Center for Research in Agribusiness, CEPAN, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, Brazil University of West of Santa Catarina, UNOESC, Joaçaba, Brazil a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Received 15 April 2011 Received in revised form 25 September 2011 Accepted 11 October 2011 Available online 20 October 2011 Worldwide demand to set reliable environmental criteria for food and feed products has brought Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies to agribusiness. This paper describes the results of a search for scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide, as a way to capture state-of-the-art technology in the field and to identify the trends and drivers for labeling and certification requirements in international markets. Considering the status of Brazilian agriculture, it would be necessary to adapt the LCA tools to the peculiarities of this country’s environmental and technological context, regarding the ability to follow current trends in the application of LCA as a tool for analysis of the environmental impact. In Brazil, any effort to develop specific methodologies for both Life Cycle Inventory and Life Cycle Impact Assessment is urgently needed for the country to remain among the leaders of food and feed exporters and would be appreciated by consumers worldwide. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Sustainability Agribusiness Decision-making Environment Supply chain Certification 1. Introduction In recent years, the debate about environmental sustainability has broadened to include the impact of agricultural production. The increasing worldwide demand for food, feed and renewable energy sources requires new knowledge about production systems to make them acceptable under the sustainability criteria. Faced with such complex needs, researchers around the world have developed different research tools for the analysis of the life cycle of products to measure the impacts caused by their respective production processes, and have proposed improvements in all stages of production to boost environmental performance as a whole (Guinée et al., 2001; Cederberg and Mattson, 2000). Among the assessment tools currently available, the LCA is a method for integral assessment of the environmental impact of products, processes and services (Thomassen et al., 2008). The LCA includes analysis of the extraction and processing of raw materials as well as, product manufacture, transport, distribution, use, reuse, maintenance, recycling and disposal of discards. LCA allows a comprehensive view of the various impacts on the * Corresponding author. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Agronegócios (Cepan) Av. Bento Gonçalves, 7712 - Prédio da Agronomia e 1 andar, Porto Alegre e RS e Brazil e Cep.: 91.540-000. Tel./fax: þ55 51 3308 6586. E-mail address: clandioruviaro@hotmail.com (C.F. Ruviaro). 0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.015 environment, enabling the identification of suitable measures from a sustainable development prospective (Chehebe, 1997; Jensen, 1997; Graedel, 1998). The soaring worldwide demand to set reliable environmental criteria for food and feed products has brought LCA methodologies to agribusiness as a way to support the decision-making processes regarding agriculture and food production technologies. In this sense, the Kyoto Protocol (2005), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC (2007), and the United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP (2009), have played a major influence. As a major exporter of food and feed products, Brazil is a country highly concerned with environmental and food safety issues of international relevance associated with agricultural production and the food processing industry. Brazil is the largest South American country with an area of 8,514,876 km2 and with a population of more than 190 million (IBGE, 2010). The country leads the world in the production of oranges, sugarcane, and coffee, and it is also one of the major producers of soybeans, corn and beef (FAO, 2009). This paper presents the results of a search for scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide, as a way to capture state-of-theart technology in this field and to identify the trends and drivers for labeling and certification requirements in international markets. We contrasted the data on LCA for agricultural products from worldwide sources with the published documents from Author's personal copy 10 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Brazilian sources. We found that the world literature on the subject is still relatively scarce and refers to a limited list of products, namely dairy products, tomatoes, apples, nectarines, citrus products, potatoes, olives, wheat, rice, soybeans, maize, sugarcane, biomass, biodiesel, biomethanol, forage, beef, fish, pigs, poultry, sheep, wool, eggs, forests and wood. The Brazilian sources refer to ethanol, sugarcane, biofuels, agricultural machinery manufacture, coffee, soybeans, orange juice, poultry, aquiculture, and oysters. 1.1. Approaches to the assessment of the life cycle of agricultural and livestock products LCA is an important tool for environmental evaluation of production chains. This methodology is widely used and recognized worldwide by researchers and technicians and allows many applications in productive systems. A comprehensive systematization of the requirements and steps of the LCA is contained in the standards ISO 14040:2006 ISO, 2006a) and ISO 14044:2006 (ISO, 2006b). In agricultural production, the application of LCA is of marked relevance in all the production chains, and its importance can be seen in the following market externalities: a) consumers demand environmentally friendly products and are willing to pay more for them, b) the producers who are not able to demonstrate that their produce is grown in a sustainable way, have difficulties in accessing important markets, and c) environmental criteria are being gradually added by countries to their import requirements for agricultural products. Therefore, only agricultural products that have their production chain properly managed are fully accepted in local or global markets, and for management to move toward environmental control, agriculture requires objective measurements of reliable indicators similar to other production systems. Another aspect that can be controlled by LCA methodology is the efficiency of a production chain, which partially depends upon the production scale, the technologies used, and the organization of producers facing the industry. Because agricultural production is highly diversified worldwide, both in cultural and biophysical terms, application of a standard and widely accepted methodology for analysis of environmental impacts of local agricultural production is very difficult and highly controversial, although urgently needed. The application of LCA in agriculture progresses worldwide, although it still has to evolve to incorporate some additional sustainability dimensions, such as offensive odors, animal welfare and aesthetic aspects, among others. Considering this scenario, some limitations of the LCA methodology can be mentioned: a) the failure to consider and/or include all the relevant impacts on the production (use of soil and water, indirect changes in the use of the soil and the ecological competition among products); b) the difficulty to consider the reduction of soil use when production is classified as ecological (organic, natural, biodynamic, among others); c) the lack of a broader approach (such as the Integrated Environmental Assessment, IEA); and d) the current inability to consider the large number of existing categories of environmental impacts that make the decisionmaking process more difficult. 1.2. LCA in Brazil According to MAPA (Ministry of Agriculture, Brazil), agribusiness accounts for 33% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 42% of total Brazilian exports (MAPA, 2010a). Recent studies show that the total area of crops in the country should increase from 60 million hectares in 2010 to 70 million in 2020. Brazil will have a 37% increase in grain production (soybeans, corn, wheat, rice and beans), equivalent to 48 million tons by 2020. Growth is also expected in the same period for meat production (38% beef, pork and chicken), sugar (48%), and milk (24%) (MAPA, 2010b). What is remarkable is that conditions exist to permit even further growth. The well-known Brazilian potential to produce food due to potentially arable land and the availability of water and renewable energy (such as hydroelectric power), places the country in a prominent position in the global market as one of the major food suppliers for the world in coming years. However, to meet the new consumer demands for certification and labeling of agricultural products, it is critical that Brazilian institutions, both academic and governmental, watch for the trends of international markets in using the LCA methodologies and take the needed steps to qualify local institutions to perform those analytical procedures properly (Caldeira-Pires et al., 2002; Coltro et al., 2007; Barbosa et al., 2008). In other words, the LCA of agricultural products should consider the peculiarities of each country within its analysis context. Therefore, we must know how to apply this methodology properly according to the peculiarities of the different regions of Brazil, to provide both basic scientific knowledge and support for management and for environmental education (Souza et al., 2007; Mourad et al., 2007). Moreover, there is a need to establish institutional policies with local pertinence, in terms of environment and sustainable production. 2. Methods A preliminary document search showed that the analytical procedures and units used in LCA analysis differed according to the products and origins of the publications. Against this background, a literature review was performed on the LCA studies published in the last ten years. The data were obtained from scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide. Furthermore, we contrasted the LCA data on agricultural products from worldwide sources with the published documents from Brazilian sources (Fig. 1). 3. Results Apparently, the world is a long way from establishing general protocols that would take into account local conditions while providing valuable comparisons between countries and agricultural Scientific literature Governmental documents LCA: application to agricultural products (review 2001-2011) 42 • Livestock 28 • Grains, Vegetables and Others 4 12 • Animal Products • Brazilian Fig. 1. Flowchart of the search with the numbers of documents analyzed. Author's personal copy 11 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 International applications of LCA methodology on livestock production according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Ireland Milk Compare two standard methodologies, IPCC method and LCA, for quantifying GHG emissions from dairy farms kg CO2 eq., kg 1 milk; kg CO2 eq., kg 1 MS; t CO2 eq., ha Expressing emissions per ha does not appropriately reflect the effect different dairy systems can have on milk production. The LCA approach must be integrated into the existing IPCC framework to identify production systems with a net reduction in global GHG emissions Simplified LCA may not help provide efficient mitigation strategies for environmental problems There was a small difference in calculated average CF value at the farm gate for New Zealand and Swedish milk production Combined LCA and DEA provided valuable results to benchmark both operational and environmental parameters 2011 O’Brien et al. 2011 Yan et al. 2011 Flysjo et al. 2011 Iribarren et al. Cultivated hectare per year; currency unit; physical units (kg of dry matter and MJ net energy) There is considerable room for environmental optimization of Swiss farming systems 2011a Nemecek et al. Cultivated hectare per year; currency unit; physical units (Kg of dry matter and MJ net energy) CO2 eq./kg of wheat, sheep meat and wool produced from mixed pasture, wheat and sub-clover Detailed eco-efficiency analysis could help in reducing production systems’ environmental impacts 2011b Nemecek et al. Wool GHG emissions are higher than wheat and sheep meat. Enteric and manure decomposition CH4 emissions accounted for a significant portion of total emissions from sub-clover and mixed pasture production, while N20 is the major emission from wheat production Approach can be applied to other agricultural systems; results not suggested as industry averages 2010 Biswas et al. 2010 Peters et al. 1 Ireland Milk An evaluation of LCA of European milk production Undefined New Zealand/ Sweden Milk and co-products Investigate different methodologies of handling co-products in LCA or CF studies 1 kg energycorrected milk (ECM) Spain Milk Dairy farm Switzerland Integrated and organic farming systems Switzerland Extensive and intensive production systems LCA and DEA methodologies used to perform eco-efficiency assessment of a high number of dairy farms Assessment of integrated and organic farming systems for crops and forage production to compare environmental performance and potentials Reduction of environmental impacts of extensive farming systems Australia Wheat, sheep meat and wool Global warming contributions Australia Red meat beef Accounting for water use in red meat production Delivery of 1 kg of HSCW meat to the processing works product gate for wholesale distribution (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 12 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Austria Livestock Emissions accounting for production and consumption of livestock system Carbon emissions (CO2 and CH4) 2010 Gavrilova et al. Canada Beef Estimation of GHG emissions from beef production CO2 eq. Kg 2010 Bauchemin et al. Spain Fish Combination of LCA and data envelopment analysis (DEA) in fisheries kg CO2 eq. 2010 Vázquez-Rowe et al. United States Beef Comparison between models of different beef production strategies 2010 Pelletier et al. Brazil/USA/ Canada Soybeans and beef GHG emissions of soybeans and beef production in the Amazon basin of Brazil GJ, GHG (tonnes CO2 eq.); eutrophying emissions (tonnes of PO4 eq.); ecological footprint (ha) Carbon liability embodied in soybeans and beef (Tg CO2 eq.) FCA and LCA methods are effective to estimate direct carbon emissions from domestic livestock and combustion of fossil fuels in processes of product manufacturing and transportation Following mitigation of GHG emissions, beef production should focus on enteric CH4 production from mature beef cows. The cowecalf production system also has many ancillary environmental benefits, allowing use of grazing and forage lands, preserving soil carbon reserves and providing ecosystems services Approach facilitates interpretation of results of multiple LCAs for some fisheries and carries synergistic effects Beef production, feedlot or pasture-based, generates lower edible resource returns on the material/energy investment relative to other food production strategies 2009 Zaks et al. Brazil/Sweden Beef LCI of GHG emissions and use of land and energy in Brazilian beef production 2009 Cederberg et al. Canada Milk Environmental impacts of typical pasture and confinement operations 2009 Arsenault et al. France/ Greece Fish Environmental impacts of different production systems of carnivorous fish 1 tonne of live fish weight 2009 Aubin et al. New Zealand Milk Global warming and milk production GWP (/kg milk) 2009a Basset-Mens et al. 1 1 kg of Brazilian beef at the farm gate, as carcass eight equivalent; 1 kg of Brazilian beef exported as bone-free beef 1000 kg milk at farm gate Study requires calculating emissions from deforestation, life cycle analysis of agricultural systems and allocating emissions between producers and consumers The use of energy in Brazilian beef production is very low, a tenth of European production. Brazilian land use is higher than in the EU The transition to full confinement does not result in environmental benefits Global warming and the availability of fish resources, climate change and net primary production use impact freshwater raceways, sea cages and inland re-circulating systems A probabilistic framework provides information on the differences between technological options Author's personal copy 13 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) New Zealand Milk Eco-efficiency in intensification scenarios Comparison NZ  European needs validation 2009b Basset-Mens et al. Norway/UK/ Canada/Chile Fish Global-scale life cycle assessment of a major food commodity, farmed salmon kg CO2 eq.; kg PO4 eq.; kg SO2 eq.; MJ; m2.year; and kg/ha Emissions per unit production 2009 Pelletier et al. Czech Republic Livestock Environmental and health impact of dairy cattle livestock and manure management Impacts per year, per hectare and per liter milk production 2008 Havlikova et al. European Union Livestock Life cycle assessment of feeding livestock with European grain legumes 1 kg of animal product 2008 Baumgartner et al. Finland Chicken meat 1,000 kg 2008 Katajajuuri et al. France Cow and goat Life cycle phases in broiler chain by Finnish ‘Eco-Benchmark’ Analyzes the environmental impacts of regional dairy chains to identify improvement options 2008 Kanyarushoki et al. Global Germany Beef One kilogram of ready-tocook beef 2008 Schlich et al. Netherland Milk Local and global meat production related to environmental and economic aspects Conventional and organic milk production Impacts were lowest for Norwegian production in most impact categories and highest for UK farmed salmon Selected characterization factors combined with information on study regions are useful in an assessment of the environmental and health impact of dairy Measures have to be taken to reduce the environmental burden of feedstuff production by choice of origin of feedstuffs and improvement in the productivity of the system Grain production has the higher impact on the food chain Farm operations have more impact than farm inputs. Transport of products to retailers has more impact than those of dairy plants Adoption of "Ecology of Scale" theory to support demand 2008 Thomassen et al. Netherland Organic eggs Integral environmental impact of the organic egg production chain One kg of organic egg 2008 Dekker et al. Sweden Beef Synthesizes and expands upon existing data on the contribution of farm animal production to climate change CO2 eq. GHG emissions per kilogram of beef 2008 Koneswaran, G. & Nierenberg, D. Japan Beef cattle Environmental impacts of beef cowecalf system One marketed beef calf 2007 Ogino et al. Canada Beef cattle Various 2006 Larney et al. France Pigs Influences of handling treatment on nutrient levels and mass balance estimates of feedlot manure Uncertainty and variability Relative performance varies within categories of environmental impact Concentrate production is the key cluster to climate change, eutrophication and energy use Immediate and farreaching changes in current animal agriculture practices and consumption patterns are both critical and timely if GHGs from the farm animal sector are to be mitigated Shortening calving intervals and increasing the number of calves per cow reduced environmental impacts in all of the categories Handling manure changes nutrient availability Farmer practices may affect the final result more than production modes 2006 Basset-Mens et al. Ireland Beef Comparing beef  dairy emissions revealed the potential for reduction by adopting alternative management 2006 Casey, J. W. & Holden, N. M. GHG emissions from sucker-beef production 1000 kg milk; Ha of land occupied kg of milk g PO4 eq./ kg pig; g CO2 eq./kg pig, g SO2 eq./kg pig kg CO2 kg LW yr 1 (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 14 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) European Union Livestock Compares tools for environmental assessment and recommends indicators for benchmarking Kg/product or kg/ha 2005 Halberg et al. France (Bretagne) Pig 1000 kg of feed; 1000 kg of ingredients 2005 van der Werf et al. Ireland Milk Environmental impacts on the production of concentrated feed associated with the production and onfarm delivery of concentrated feed for pigs GHG and the intensity of milk production 2005 Casey, J. W. & Holden, N. M. Japan Livestock Environmental impacts of concentrate feed supply systems on industry Organic vs. conventional milk production and three pig production systems give different results, depending on the basis of the indicators Decreased environmental burdens by optimizing the fertilization of cropebased ingredients, by reducing concentrations of Cu and Zn in the feed, and by using wheat-based rather than maize-based feeds Moving toward extensive production could reduce emissions Livestock industry could join in emissions trading by reducing CO2 producing equivalents 2005 Kaku et al. Japan Beef Environmental impacts of beef-fattening system and effects of feeding length 2004 Ogino et al. Sweden Dairy cattle Perform an LCI of milk production from conventional and organic dairy farms One kg of energycorrected milk at the farm gate 2004 Cederberg, C. & Flysjo, A. New Zealand Milk Dairy farm, grazing and forage land Volume of milk (m3) 2003 Ledgard et al. Spain Milk Total life cycle of production and processing of milk to quantify the environmental impact 2003 Hospido et al. Sweden Milk and beef Organic milk production with different methods of handling co-products Milk and beef production systems are closely connected 2003 Cederberg, C. & Stadig, M. United Kingdom Pig waste Environmental benefits of livestock manure management practices and technology 1 L of packaged liquid milk ready to be delivered One kg ECM; One kg bone-free meat 1000 kg pork weight 2003 Sandars et al. Germany Systems of grassland farms Environmental impacts of eighteen grassland farms in three different f arming intensities Using an anaerobic digester shows few overall benefits due to the fugitive losses of methane. However, if these can be eliminated, the global warming potential from waste management is reduced close to zero Organic production promotes biodiversity 2001 Haas et al. One kg of ECM; land area PA tons/year; Di tons/year; Fij MJ/tons of feed; GAj tons/ MJ; Li GWh/tons of feed; MA tons/GWh; feed i; and fuel j One beef animal Whole farm A shorter feeding length resulted in lower environmental impacts, such as global warming and acidification The organic farms had lower use of fossil energy, P and K, and pesticides, but larger land use. High production per cow and the use of input resources can reduce the environmental impact Nitrogen fertilizer increased production and economic efficiency but decreased environmental efficiency Applications of improvement actions in milk production can lead to a maximum reduction of the global normalized impact Author's personal copy 15 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 International applications of LCA methodology on grain production, vegetables, and others according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Italy Wine Evaluates the environmental performances of four high quality wines for carbon labeling 0.75 L bottle of wine 2011 Bosco et al. China Biodiesel Energy cost of rapeseed-based biodiesel alternative energy in China MJ/kg, MJ/unit 2011 Chen & Chen Sweden Biomass Environmental study of production of propionic acid in a biorefinery system based on agricultural byproducts One kg of propionic acid at the factory gate 2011 Ekman & Böejesson Sweden Biomass Scenarios for supply of the entire demand of power and heat of a rural village One year supply of heat and electricity to a modern village of 150 households 2011 Kimming et al. Spain Tomato One tonne of commercial tomatoes produced 2011 Martínez-Blanco et al. USA Woodchips for bioethanol Neupane et al. Citrus-based products Harvesting and woodchips processing stage and transportation to the facility stage emit large amount of environmental pollutants compared to other life cycle stages of ethanol production Sensible variations in energy and environmental performances of final products. Benefits that state the improvement of products’ eco-profile, by reusing purified water used for irrigation, using the railway mode for delivery of final products, and adopting efficient technologies in pasteurization and concentration of juice 2011 Italy Determine agricultural and environmental differences of four cultivation options characterized by greenhouse or open-field cultivation using compost plus mineral fertilizers or only mineral fertilizers Among the many lignocellulosic feedstocks, woodchips are viewed as one of the most promising feedstocks for producing liquid transportation fuels Environmental impacts of citrus production and transformation processes to identify the most significant issues and suggest options for improvement Vineyard-planting phase has a significant impact on the wine CF; thus, it has to be considered in the life cycle, while in literature, it is frequently omitted. On the contrary, the pre-production phase did not present a relevant impact There is potential to improve the apparently negative energy balance for biodiesel from rapeseed oil in China by increasing the average yield of rapeseed or decreasing the energy inputs of nitrogen fertilizers The use of industrial byproducts as raw materials in biorefinery systems appears to be an attractive option to produce bio-based chemicals, both from an environmental and an economical point-of-view The biomass-based scenarios reduce greenhouse gas emissions considerably compared to the scenario based on fossil fuel but have higher acidifying emissions. Replacement of a fraction of the mineral fertilizers dosage with compost appears to be a good agronomical solution for tomato crops for growth in both open-fields and greenhouses 2010 Beccali et al. Production of 4 m3 of hardwood chips 1 kg of each final citrus-based product (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 16 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Italy Nectarine orchard Application of Ecological Footprint Analysis gha t 1 nectarines produced 2010 Cerutti et al. Italy Biofuel Discuss limits and constraints of the LCA to perform quantitative assessments as requested by the current supporting policies in the biofuel area CO2 eq. (kg (MWhe) 2010 Chiaramonti, D. & Recchia, L. Chile Sunflower and rapeseed To quantify and compare the environmental impacts and energy and water demand for cultivation of sunflower and rapeseed One tonne of seeds per year 2010 Iriarte et al. Brazil, Denmark, China, and the USA Wheat Life cycle inventory modeling of land use induced by crop consumption using wheat as an example Kg eq./ha 2010 Kløverpris et al. China/ Denmark Organic soybeans The environmental impacts of organic and conventional production of soybeans 2010 Knudsen et al. Switzerland Forest The impact of climatic factors on land use as determined by the CO2 transfers between vegetation/soil and atmosphere One tonne of organic soybean produced in China and delivered in Denmark Carbon quantities per hectare for land transformation and land occupation and their time weighting Validation of the system is needed before the application at grower level. Ecological indicator based on EFA may provide the required introduction of an environmental verification system for food production LCA studies should always provide the bias of the calculations because this range of variation in the LCA results could be significantly greater than the initially set quantitative targets, and therefore, the whole investigation would be at risks for inconsistency Evaluation of environmental impacts indicated that in Chilean conditions, rapeseed has a better environmental profile than sunflowers. Sunflowers have a higher impact in 9 of the 11 impact categories evaluated, with values between 1.2 and 39 times higher Wheat consumption in different countries result in different land use consequences due to differences in trade patterns, which are governed by transport and trade costs, among other factors The organic soybean has a lower environmental impact compared to the conventional soybean 2010 Müller-Wenk, R. & Brandão, M. Australia Sugarcane production Quantify the environmental impacts of sugarcane products The quality of available data on carbon content in vegetation and soil, on carbon transfers to air due to particular land use types, and on the duration of stay of carbon in the air is still limited and needs improvement Potential uncertainty can be higher in Australian sugarcane products due to the nature of the cane processing system, the variability in sugarcane growing, and the approach taken for assigning impacts to multiple products from sugarcane processing 2010 Renouf et al. One tonne of raw sugar; one tonne molasses; one kWh electricity; and one MJ anhydrous fuel ethanol Author's personal copy 17 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Germany Wood One oven dry tonne of poplar chips; MJ power; MJ heat; and MJ FT diesel Utilization of the same amount of shortrotation poplar chips for heat and power production causes fewer environmental impacts than its use for FT diesel 2010 Roedl, A. European Union Rapeseed oil and palm oil Environmental burdens of cultivation of fast-growing tree species on agricultural land and subsequent energetic conversion in comparison to the fossil energy system Local and global alternative for meeting the increasing oil demand One tonne refined vegetable oil 2010 Schmidt, J. H. China Rice Examines the environmental impact of the rice production system One tonne of rice produced 2010 Wang et al. Canada Greenhouse tomatoes Explores one approach to assessing social issues in supply chain - LCA $100 of tomatoes from a large greenhouse 2009 Andrews et al. Italy Rice Analyzes improvement scenarios concerning alternative rice farming and food processing methods: organic and upland farming and parboiling One kg of refined rice packed and delivered to the supermarket 2009 Blengini, G.A. & Busto, M. Brazil/ Netherlands Sugarcane Power to wheels for 1 km driving of a midsize car 2009 Luo et al. Argentina Biodiesel Comparative LCA on gasoline and ethanol as fuels, and two types of blends of gasoline with bioethanol, all used in a midsize car. Environmental impact of soybeanbased biodiesel production for export Palm oil tends to be environmentally preferable to rapeseed oil within all impact categories except global warming, biodiversity and ecotoxicity, where the difference is less pronounced and where it is highly dependent on assumptions regarding system delimitation in the agricultural stage Reducing nitrogen fertilizer intensity and increasing efficiency are key points to control LCA environmental impacts of rice, decreasing resource consumption and emissions LCAA may serve as an aid for discussions of how current and popular CSR indicators may be integrated into a supply chain model Organic and upland farming have the potential to decrease impact per unit of cultivated area. Due to the lower grain yields, environmental benefits per kg of the final products are reduced in the case of upland rice production and almost cancelled for organic rice Driving with ethanol fuels is more economical than gasoline and economically more attractive. The outcomes depend on the assumed price for crude oil and technological development Environmental impact is influenced by land use change, the BNF and the use of fertilizers, as well as applied pesticides, the soybean production method, the use of methanol and the transport system 2009 Panichelli et al. 1 km driven with diesel by a 28 t truck (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 18 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) China Biomethanol 1000 kg of biomethanol Xiao et al. Soybean meal 2008 Dalgaard et al. Belgium LCA of biofuels The environmental benefits of using biofuels 100 km covered with a midsize and recent car 2008 Halleux et al. Spain/Global Apples How the international trade of fresh apples concerned environmental, economic and social impacts One ha of orchard; one kg of fresh apples; m3/ha; kg N; kg P2O5; and Kg K2O 2008 Soler-Rovira, J. & Soler-Rovira, P. Germany Biomass Ecological optimization of biomass cultivation Kg of harvested product 2007 Kagi et al. Italy Sunflower oil Evaluates the use of sunflower oil on farms to meet their internal energy requirements One ha 2006 Riello et al France Agriculture Compares and analyzes 12 indicatorbased approaches to assessing the environmental impact at the farm level to propose a set of guidelines for the evaluation or development of such methods Various Rice straw to produce methanol is beneficial for both utilization of agricultural waste and improvement in the environment Consequential LCAs are quite easy to handle, even though it has been necessary to include production of palm oil, rapeseed and spring barley because these production systems are affected by the soybean oil co-product Rapeseed methyl ester allows a considerable improvement in environmental performances compared to fossil diesel, while ethanol from sugar beets offers a more limited benefit compared to petrol Multivariate analysis can be used to select the most important indicators regarding economic, social and environmental aspects of apple production and trade There is no cultural method preferable for biodiesel. Organic agriculture was better for integrated production of energy using wheat, corn and soybeans Biofuel is not yet competitive because no free market exists for it, but it represents a practical way to avoid the shift of economic benefits from agriculture to industry, as occurs with biodiesel production The method should be validated with respect to (a) the appropriateness of its set of objectives relative to its purpose and (b) its indicators 2009 Denmark/ Argentina The biomethanol rice straw production process involves thermodynamic, economic, and environmental performance The purpose of the study was to estimate the environmental consequences of soybean meal consumption using a consequential LCA approach 2002 van der Werf, H.M.G. & Petit, J. One kg of soybean meal produced in Argentina and delivered to Rotterdam Harbor Author's personal copy 19 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 products and production systems, useful in supporting official international trade, uni- or multi-lateral requirements, and consumer decision making. Considering the status of Brazilian agriculture, it would be necessary to adapt the LCA tools to the country’s environmental peculiarities and technological context, to keep up with current trends in the application of LCA methodology for analysis of the environmental impact of food and feed products. So far, there are only a few studies on adaptation of the descriptive factors related to various critical categories, such as biodiversity, land use, and water use. Regarding the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI), no national database is yet open to access, either related to agriculture or to other sectors of industrial activity, in spite of current efforts in this direction. Tables 1, 2 and 3 list the LCA reports according to the respective country of application, agriculture products, theme, functional units, selected conclusion, year of publication, and authors. In Table 4, the variables include theme, goal, functional unit, selected results, year of publication, and authors. Fig. 2 shows that the number of publications on LCA applied to agriculture rose markedly from the year 2007 and onwards, when governments and public opinion started to ask for more transparency of the environmental impacts of industrial activities as a result of international agreements, such as Kyoto Protocol, COP and IPCC. 4. Discussion As in LCA studies of other industrial products and sectors, the reports on LCA of agricultural products put emphasis on comparison of different production systems, e.g., organic versus conventional, extensive versus intensive, small versus large scale, and traditional versus advanced systems. Both the environmental burden and productivity are referred to by LCA methodology that uses multiple functional units to express them, such as the mass of the final products (kg), the energy content of food products (kJ), the cultivation area (ha), and the unit of livestock, among others. In several studies, the LCA methodology is complemented by other approaches that together are more effective in evaluating the environmental impact of the system or the product analyzed. The studies and their conclusions are quite heterogeneous, as one would expect considering the extreme diversity in technological and biophysical terms of the agricultural systems analyzed. Any extension of the conclusions of one study to another region of the world or to another production system would be inappropriate. This is particularly relevant for Brazil compared to other countries and considering the huge regional differences inside its borders. With the current inexistence of any Brazilian LCA inventory, interregional or international comparisons are very difficult. Table 3 International applications of LCA methodology on animal products according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected Conclusion Year Author(s) USA Organic dairy LCA of a large-scale, vertically integrated organic dairy in the USA One L of packaged fluid milk 2011 Heller et al. Germany Organic milk Environmental impacts of different types of organic dairy farms Whole farm 2010 Müller-Lindenlauf et al. New Zealand/UK Dairy CO2 emissions; energy emissions 2007 Saunders, C. & Barber, A. New Zealand Dairy - lamb - apple Comparative energy and greenhouse gas emissions of New Zealand’s and the UK’s dairy industry Food Miles e Comparative Energy/ Emissions Performance of New Zealand’s Agriculture Industry Improvements in data quality with respect to feed production and methane emissions are required before more definitive comparisons can be made between agricultural production methods Environmental impact assessment analyzing only global impact categories of climate impact and energy consumption leads to different conclusions than an overall analysis that also takes categories with regional and local impact into account NZ is still more efficient at dairy production than the UK even when other emissions are accounted for NZ products compare favorably with lower energy and emissions per tonne of product delivered to the UK compared to other UK sources. In the case of dairy, NZ is at least twice as efficient and for sheep meat, four times as efficient. The CO2 emissions per tonne of apples produced are also higher in the UK than in NZ 2006 Saunders et al. Energy use and CO2 emissions associated with production and transport Author's personal copy 20 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 4 Applications of LCA methodology in Brazilian agriculture according to the year of publication. Theme Goal Functional units Results Year Author(s) Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuel sustainability assessments Contributes to the development of a framework for sustainability indicators as a tool for performance assessment Assess the life cycle energy use and GHG related to cane sugar and ethanol, considering bagasse and electricity surpluses as coproducts Compares the different interpretations that can be obtained from CML 2001 and Ecological Footprint, using a case study of four scenarios of broiler feed production in Brazil Suggests an arrangement of existing models to determine material flow in agricultural production systems Various Brazilian biofuel programs demonstrate the feasibility of a sustainable method for renewable fuels utilization 2011 Lora et al. KJ/kg and CO2 eq./kg Advantages of sugarcane products compared to beet sugar produced in Europe 2011 Seabra et al. Supply ration to feed broilers on farm Ecological Footprint is not suitable for the agricultural sector because misleading decisions can be taken as a result of neglecting some important environmental impacts for this economic sector 2011 Alvarenga et al. Volume and mass units 2010 Romanelli, T. L. & Milan, M. Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybeans according to crop production and transport scenarios Evaluates the environmental impacts of supply chains from Brazil’s two major soybean production regions 1,000 kg of soybeans at 13% humidity 2010 Prudêncio da Silva et al. Greenhouse gas emissions in the life cycle of ethanol: estimation in agriculture and industrialization stages in Minas Gerais, Brazil The life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol as 100% of the vehicle fuel from sugarcane in Brazil Estimates of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4 e N2O) in the stages of agriculture and sugarcane industrialization for the production of ethanol in mills One ha of cultivated land per year Existing models to determine material flow are applicable for general as well as for local or specific scenarios because they are based on the physical demand of agricultural mechanized operations The mode of transport chosen and the distance to be traveled strongly influence environmental impacts. Assessments involving soybeans from Brazil should take into account the region of origin, as different regions have different levels of environmental impacts GHG emissions in the phases of agriculture and industrialization of sugarcane for ethanol production are mainly due to the burning of plants, fuel consumption, the release of N2O in the soil and the consumption of lime and fertilizer 2010 Garcia, J. C. C. & Sperling, E. von LCA of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil, assessing the environmental impact potentials 10,000 km run in a urban area by a car with a 1600 cm3; 1000 kg of ethanol 2009 Ometto et al. Life cycle assessment of Brazilian sugarcane products: GHG emissions and energy use Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production Material flow determination through agricultural machinery management Fuel ethanol life cycle contributes to all the impacts analyzed. The main causes are nutrient application, burning in harvesting, and the use of diesel Author's personal copy 21 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 4 (continued ) Theme Goal Functional units Results Year Author(s) Energy use in the life cycle of frozen concentrated orange juice Brazilian poultry: a study of production and supply chains for the accomplishment of a LCA study Presents the aspects of energy use for FCOJ produced in two orange-growing regions 1,000 kg of FCOJ 2009 Coltro et al. Describes two current supply chains of poultry production emphasizing the distance of transportation as a predominant factor One tonne live weight chicken and one tonne frozen chicken 2008 Prudêncio da Silva et al. Life Cycle inventory for a Brazilian oyster production system Raises data of entries and exits at all stages of the life cycle of the oysters to provide grounds for a future LCA analysis A dozen oysters consumed 2008 Alvarenga et al. Sustainable development in aquiculture: methodology and strategies Introduces a reflection about the strategies of interconnection of the aquaculture in the humanenvironmental context Presents the LCI of green coffee production to obtain detailed production inventory data Undefined The Global Warming Potential of FCOJ is related to 70% of the total energy (nonrenewable energy) The potential impacts of frozen chicken delivered to the port could be quite different between two chains given the distance between each and the main port used as a route for export There is a high consumption of water (both fresh and salt), and also high emission of CO2, high total solids (in wastewater) and solid waste as oyster’s shells LCA can be used in environmental licensing 2007 Eler, M.N. & Millani, T.J. Supplies results for a better correlation of agricultural practices and potential environmental impacts 2006 Coltro et al. Environmental profile of Brazilian Green Coffee 1000 kg of green coffee destined for export Fig. 3 shows that so far, most of the studies have focused on European agriculture. Since 2006, reports on Brazilian agriculture have also achieved noticeable numbers with frank expansion. The soaring number of publications on Brazilian agriculture mirrors the economic relevance of this sector for the country and the widespread concerns regarding how the environmental impact of this sector affects the access of Brazilian agricultural products in international markets. As one can follow in several recent governmental, agribusiness and academic forums and meetings (e.g., http:// www.ciclodevida.ufsc.br/ www.congressodacarne2011.com.br/; congresso, http://www.feicorte.com.br/index.php?p¼noticias_view &id¼1, http://www.biodieselbr.com/eventos/biodiesel.htm, http:// www.abag.com.br/index.php?apg¼cong_visor&ncong¼2011), LCA has been considered one of the preferential approaches to support the decision-making process for establishing appropriate governmental policies and technological choices. In world reports, but not in Brazilian reports, livestock outnumbers grains, vegetables and diversified agricultural products (Fig. 4). This is probably a result of European concerns regarding animal greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), food safety, traceability, and production costs. In Brazil, production and export of grains play a central role in the formation of the national GDP, which may explain why grain LCA studies predominate. In addition, grains cover large areas of land and form a base for the poultry and swine agro-industrial food chains. Studies on sugarcane and biomass production, both related to expansion of land use and to the growing biofuel industry, tend to gain relevance in the group. Livestock production will certainly demand more research to create an inventory on animal GHG emissions applicable to tropical and subtropical regions. Fig. 2. Evolution of publications on LCA in agricultural products for the period of 2001e2011. (until August 2011) Fig. 3. Geographic distribution of LCA agricultural studies in the world (including livestock, grains, vegetables, animal products) 2001e2011. (until August 2011) Author's personal copy 22 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Brazil World 6% 8% Grains, Vegetables and Others 25% Livestock Agricultural Products 36% 58% 67% Fig. 4. Distribution of different studies on LCA according to the type of agricultural product (world and Brazil). 5. Conclusions The literature search on LCA provides a comprehensive overview of the various environmental impacts caused by agricultural production in different countries and offers the potential to help in directing the sustainable production of food and other agricultural products. In Brazil, the application of LCA methodology in the field of agribusiness is still in its infancy. It would be in the interest to the economy of the country to promote the use of such techniques for the assessment of potential environmental impacts to meet the growing demand for answers to questions regarding the sustainability of agricultural production in food-exporting countries. Brazil can implement solutions for environmental issues related to agriculture with the help of institutional arrangements among universities, industries and government agencies to promote science and innovation for a sustainable agricultural production. International research shows how much can be done. For Brazil to remain an important food and feed exporter, efforts are needed both to adapt the methodologies of LCA and of Life Cycle Impact Assessment, LCIA, to the peculiarities of the country and to develop an LCI applicable to Brazil’s agricultural systems. There are certainly many opportunities for local efforts to promote related advanced education, human resources training, infra-structure, and institutional growth. Acknowledgments CAPES and CNPq, Brazil References Alvarenga R.A.F., Soares S.R., 2008. Prudêncio da Silva V. Life cycle inventory for a Brazilian oyster production system. 6th international Conference on LCA in the agri-food sector November. Zurich. Alvarenga, RAFd, da Silva Jr., V.P., Soares, S.R., 2011. Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production. Journal of Cleaner Production. Andrews, E., Lesage, P., Benoit, C., Parent, J., Norris, G., Reveret, J.P., 2009. Life cycle Attribute assessment case study of Quebec greenhouse tomatoes. Journal of Industrial Ecology 13 (4), 565e578. Arsenault, N., Tyedmers, P., Fredeen, A., 2009. Comparing the environmental impacts of pasture-based and confinement-based dairy systems in Nova Scotia (Canada) using life cycle assessment. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7 (1), 19e41. Aubin, J., Papatryphon, E., van der Werf, H.M.G., Chatzifotis, S., 2009. Assessment of the environmental impact of carnivorous finfish production systems using life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 17 (3), 354e361. Barbosa Jr., A.F., Morais, R.M., Emerenciano, S.V., Pimenta, H.C.D., Couvinhas, R.P., 2008. Conceitos e aplicações de Análise do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) no Brasil. Revista Gerenciais 7 (1). Basset-Mens, C., van der Werf, H.M.G., Durand, P., Leterme, P., 2006. Implications of uncertainty and variability in the life cycle assessment of pig production systems. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (5), 298e304. Basset-Mens, C., Kelliher, F.M., Ledgard, S., Cox, N., 2009a. Uncertainty of global warming potential for milk production on a New Zealand farm and implications for decision making. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (7), 630e638. Basset-Mens, C., Ledgard, S., Boyes, M., 2009b. Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand. Ecological Economics 68 (6), 1615e1625. Baumgartner D.U., Baan L., Nemecek T., 2008. Life cycle assessment of feeding livestock with European grain legumes. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agrifood Sector. Zurich. Beccali, M., Cellura, M., Iudicello, M., Mistretta, M., 2010. Life cycle assessment of Italian citrus-based products. Sensitivity analysis and improvement scenarios. Journal of Environmental Management 91 (7), 1415e1428. Biswas, W.K., Graham, J., Kelly, K., John, M.B., 2010. Global warming contributions from wheat, sheep meat and wool production in Victoria, Australia e a life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (14), 1386e1392. Blengini, G.A., Busto, M., 2009. The life cycle of rice: LCA of alternative agri-food chain management systems in Vercelli (Italy). Journal of Environmental Management 90 (3), 1512e1522. Bosco, S., Bene, C., Galli, M., Remorini, D., Massai, R., Bonari, E., 2011. Greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural phase of wine production in the Maremma rural district in Tuscany, Italy. Italian Journal of Agronomy 6 (15). Caldeira-Pires, A., Rabelo, R.R., Xavier, J.H.V., 2002. Uso potencial da análise do ciclo de vida (ACV) associada aos conceitos da produção orgânica aplicados à agricultura familiar. Cadernos de Ciência & Tecnologia 19 (2). Casey, J.W., Holden, N.M., 2005. The relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the intensity of milk production in Ireland. Journal of Environmental Quality 34 (2), 429e436. Casey, J.W., Holden, N.M., 2006. Quantification of GHG emissions from sucker-beef production in Ireland. Agricultural Systems 90 (1e3), 79e98. Cederberg, C., Flysjo, A., 2004. In: SIK (Ed.), Life Cycle Inventory of 23 Dairy Farms in South-Western Sweden. The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Swedish. Cederberg, C., Mattsson, B., 2000. Life cycle assessment of milk production e a comparison of conventional and organic farming. Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (1), 49e60. Cederberg, C., Stadig, M., 2003. System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8 (6), 350e356. Cederberg, C., Meyer, D., Flysjo, A., 2009. In: SIK (Ed.), Life Cycle Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Use of Land and Energy in Brazulian Beef Production. The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Swedish. Cerutti, A.K., Bagliani, M., Beccaro, G.L., Bounous, G., 2010. Application of Ecological Footprint Analysis on nectarine production: methodological issues and results from a case study in Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (8), 771e776. Chehebe, J.R., 1997. Análise do ciclo de vida de produtos: ferramenta gerencial da ISO 14000. Qualitymark, Rio de Janeiro. Chen, H., Chen, G.Q., 2011. Energy cost of rapeseed-based biodiesel as alternative energy in China. Renewable Energy 36 (5), 1374e1378. Chiaramonti, D., Recchia, L., 2010. Is life cycle assessment (LCA) a suitable method for quantitative CO2 saving estimations? the impact of field input on the LCA results for a pure vegetable oil chain. Biomass & Bioenergy 34 (5), 787e797. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Oliveira, P., Baddini, J., Kletecke, R.M., 2006. Environmental profile of Brazilian green coffee. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (1), 16e21. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Garcia, E.E.C., Queiroz, G.C., Gatti, J.B., Jaime, S.B.M., 2007. Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida como Instrumento de Gestão. In: Campinas-Coltro, L. (Ed.), CETEA/ITAL, p. 75. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Kletecke, R.M., Mendonca, T.A., Germer, S.P.M., 2009. Assessing the environmental profile of orange production in Brazil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (7), 656e664. COP, 2009. United Nations Climate Change Conference. Dalgaard, R., Schmidt, J., Halberg, N., Christensen, P., Thrane, M., Pengue, W.A., 2008. LCA of soybean meal. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13 (3), 240e254. Author's personal copy C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Dekker S.E.M., De Boer I.J.M., Aarnink A.J.A., Groot Koerkamp P.W.G., 2008. Environmental hotspot identification of organic egg production. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich, pp. 381e389. Ekman, A., Börjesson, P., 2011. Environmental assessment of propionic acid produced in an agricultural biomass-based biorefinery system. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (11), 1257e1265. Eler, M.N., Millani, T.J., 2007. Métodos de estudos de sustentabilidade aplicados a aquicultura. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 36 (Especial), 33e44. FAO, 2009. Food and Agriculture commodities production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Flysjö, A., Henriksson, M., Cederberg, C., Ledgard, S., Englund J-, E., 2011. The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden. Agricultural Systems 104 (6), 459e469. Garcia, J.C.C., Sperling, E., 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions in the life cycle of ethanol: estimation in agriculture and industrialization stages in Minas Gerais. Engenharia Sanitária Ambiental 15 (3), 5. Gavrilova, O., Jonas, M., Erb, K., Haberl, H., 2010. International trade and Austria’s livestock system: direct and hidden carbon emission flows associated with production and consumption of products. Ecological Economics 69 (4), 920e929. Graedel, T.E., 1998. Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment. Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey. Guinee, J., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., Koning, A., et al., 2001. In: Guinee, J. (Ed.), Life Cycle Assessment: An Operational Guide to the ISO Standards Netherlands. Haas, G., Wetterich, F., Köpke, U., 2001. Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 83 (1e2), 43e53. Halberg, N., van der Werf, H.M.G., Basset-Mens, C., Dalgaard, R., de Boer, I.J.M., 2005. Environmental assessment tools for the evaluation and improvement of European livestock production systems 33e50. Halleux, H., Lassaux, S., Renzoni, R., Germain, A., 2008. Comparative life cycle assessment of two biofuels ethanol from sugar beet and rapeseed methyl ester. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13 (3), 184e190. Havlikova, M., Kroeze, C., Huijbrets, M.A.J., 2008. Environmental and health impact by dairy cattle livestock and manure management in the Czech Republic. Science of the Total Environment 396 (2e3), 121e131. Heller, M.C., Keoleian, G.A., 2011. Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas analysis of a large-scale Vertically Integrated organic dairy in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology 45 (5), 1903e1910. Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2003. Simplified life cycle assessment of galician milk production. International Dairy Journal 13 (10), 783e796. IIBGE, 2010. Contagem da população. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistic. IPCC, 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Iriarte, A., Rieradevall, J., Gabarrell, X., 2010. Life cycle assessment of sunflower and rapeseed as energy crops under Chilean conditions. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (4), 336e345. Iribarren, D., Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2011. Benchmarking environmental and operational parameters through eco-efficiency criteria for dairy farms. Science of the Total Environment 409 (10), 1786e1798. ISO, 2006a. ISO 14040: Environmental Management e Life Cycle Assessment Requirements and Guidelines. ISO copyright office, Geneva. ISO, 2006b. ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment e Principles and Framework. ISO copyright office, Geneva. Jensen, A., 1997. Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA): A Guide to Approaches, Experiences and Information Sources. European Environmental Agency, Copenhague. Kagi, T., Nemecek, T., Gaillard, G., 2007. Life cycle assessment of energy crops. Agrarforschung 14 (10), 460e465. Kaku K., Ogino A., Osada T., Shimada K., 2005. Life Cycle Assessment of Concentrate Feed Supply System for Japanese Domestic Livestock Industry. 4th Australian LCA Conference. Sydney. Kanyarushoki C., Fuchs F., van der Werf H.M.G., 2008. Environmental evaluation of cow and goat milk chains in France. 6th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Katajajuuri J.M., Grönroos J., Usva K., 2008. Environmental impacts and related options for improving the chicken meat supply chain. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Kimming, M., Sundberg, C., Nordberg, A., Baky, A., Bernesson, S., Noren, O., et al., 2011. Biomass from agriculture in small-scale combined heat and power plants e A comparative life cycle assessment. Biomass & Bioenergy 35 (4), 1572e1581. Kloverpris, J.H., Baltzer, K., Nielsen, P.H., 2010. Life cycle inventory modelling of land use induced by crop consumption. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (1), 90e103. Knudsen, M.T., Qiao, Y.H., Luo, Y., Halberg, N., 2010. Environmental assessment of organic soybean (Glycine max.) imported from China to Denmark: a case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (14), 1431e1439. Koneswaran, G., Nierenberg Global Farm Animal Production, D., Warming, Global, 2008. Impacting and Mitigating Climate Change. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116. Kyoto, 2005. Kyoto Protocol. Larney, F.J., Buckley, K.E., Hao, X.Y., McCaughey, W.P., 2006. Fresh, stockpiled, and composted beef cattle feedlot manure: nutrient levels and mass balance estimates in Alberta and Manitoba. Journal of Environmental Quality 35 (5), 1844e1854. 23 Ledgard S.F., Finlayson J.D., Patterson M.G., Carran R.A., Wedderburn M.E., 2003. Effects of Intensification of Dairy Farming in New Zealand on Wholesystem Resource Use Efficiency and Environmental Emissions. 4th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Bygholm, Denmark. Lora, E.E.S., Palacio, J.C.E., Rocha, M.H., Reno, M.L.G., Venturini, O.J., del Olmo, O.A., 2011. Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuels sustainability assessments. Energy 36 (4), 2097e2110. Luo, L., van der Voet, E., Huppes, G., 2009. Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of bioethanol from sugarcane in Brazil. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (6e7), 1613e1619. MAPA, 2010a. Projeções do Agronegócio. Brasil 2009/10 a 2019/20. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Brasília. MAPA, 2010b. Agronegócio Brasileiro: uma oportunidade de investimentos. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Brasília. Martinez-Blanco, J., Munoz, P., Anton, A., Rieradevall, J., 2011. Assessment of tomato Mediterranean production in open-field and standard multi-tunnel greenhouse, with compost or mineral fertilizers, from an agricultural and environmental standpoint. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (9e10), 985e997. Mourad, A.L., Coltro, L., Oliveira, P., Kletecke, R.M., Baddini, J., 2007. A simple methodology for elaborating the life cycle inventory of agricultural products. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12 (6), 408e413. Muller-Lindenlauf, M., Deittert, C., Kopke, U., 2010. Assessment of environmental effects, animal welfare and milk quality among organic dairy farms. Livestock Science 128 (1e3), 140e148. Muller-Wenk, R., Brandao, M., 2010. Climatic impact of land use in LCA-carbon transfers between vegetation/soil and air. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (2), 172e182. Nemecek, T., Huguenin-Elie, O., Dubois, D., Gaillard, G., Schaller, B., Chervet, A., 2011a. Life cycle assessment of Swiss farming systems: II. Extensive and intensive production. Agricultural Systems 104 (3), 233e245. Nemecek, T., Dubois, D., Huguenin-Elie, O., Gaillard, G., 2011b. Life cycle assessment of Swiss farming systems: I. Integrated and organic farming. Agricultural Systems 104 (3), 217e232. Neupane, B., Halog, A., Dhungel, S., 2011. Attributional life cycle assessment of woodchips for bioethanol production. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (6e7), 733e741. O’Brien, D., Shalloo, L., Buckley, F., Horan, B., Grainger, C., Wallace, M., 2011. The effect of methodology on estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from grassbased dairy systems. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 141 (1e2), 39e48. Ogino, A., Kaku, K., Osada, T., Shimada, K., 2004. Environmental impacts of the Japanese beef-fattening system with different feeding lengths as evaluated by a life-cycle assessment method. Journal of Animal Science 82 (7), 2115e2122. Ogino, A., Orito, H., Shimada, K., Hirooka, H., 2007. Evaluating environmental impacts of the Japanese beef cow-calf system by the life cycle assessment method. Animal Science Journal 78 (4), 424e432. Ometto, A.R., Hauschild, M.Z., Roma, W.N.L., 2009. Lifecycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (3), 236e247. Panichelli, L., Dauriat, A., Gnansounou, E., 2009. Life cycle assessment of soybeanbased biodiesel in Argentina for export. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (2), 144e159. Pelletier, N., Tyedmers, P., Sonesson, U., Scholz, A., Ziegler, F., Flysjo, A., et al., 2009. Not all Salmon are created equal: life cycle assessment (LCA) of global Salmon farming systems. Environmental Science & Technology 43 (23), 8730e8736. Pelletier, N., Pirog, R., Rasmussen, R., 2010. Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States. Agricultural Systems 103 (6), 380e389. Peters, G.M., Wiedemann, S.G., Rowley, H.V., Tucker, R.W., 2010. Accounting for water use in Australian red meat production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (3), 311e320. Prudêncio da Silva, V., van der Werf, H.M.G., Spies, A., Soares, S.R., 2010. Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybean according to crop production and transport scenarios. Journal of Environmental Management 91 (9), 1831e1839. Prudêncio da Silva V., Soares S.R., Alvarenga R.A.F., 2008. Cradle to gate study of two differing Brazilian poultry production systems. 6th international Conference on LCA in the agri-food sector. Zurich, pp. 234e241. Renouf, M., Wegener, M., Pagan, R., 2010. Life cycle assessment of Australian sugarcane production with a focus on sugarcane growing. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (9), 927e937. Riello, L., 2006. Life cycle assessment for evaluating on-farm energy production: the case of sunflower oil. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 705e714. Roedl, A., 2010. Production and energetic utilization of wood from short rotation coppice-a life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (6), 567e578. Romanelli, T.L., Milan, M., 2010. Material flow determination through agricultural machinery management. Scientia Agricola 67 (4), 8. Sandars, D.L., Audsley, E., Canete, C., Cumby, T.R., Scotford, I.M., Williams, A.G., 2003. Environmental benefits of livestock manure management practices and technology by life cycle assessment. Biosystems Engineering 84 (3), 267e281. Saunders, C., Barber, A., 2007. Comparative energy and greenhouse gas emissions of New Zealand’s and the UK’s dairy industry. AERU. Saunders, C., Barber, A., Taylor, G., 2006. Food miles: comparative energy/emissions performance of New Zealand0 s agriculture industry. AERU. Author's personal copy 24 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Schlich E., Krause F., Hardtert B., 2008. Beef of Local and global provenience: a comparison in terms of energy, CO2, scale, and farm management. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich, pp. 325e331. Schmidt, J.H., 2010. Comparative life cycle assessment of rapeseed oil and palm oil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (2), 183e197. Seabra, J.E.A., Macedo, I.C., Chum, H.L., Faroni, C.E., Sarto, C.A., 2011. Modeling and analysis: life cycle assessment of Brazilian sugarcane products: GHG emissions and energy use. Biofuels, Bioproduction Biorefinary. Soler-Rovira J., Soler-Rovira P., 2008. Assessment of Aggregated Indicators of Sustainability Using PCA: The Case of Apple Trade in Spain. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Souza D.M., Soares S.R., Sousa S.R., Dias A.M.P., 2007. Development of a life cycle impact assessment method for Brazil. 3rd international Conference on life cycle management. Zurich. Thomassen, M.A., van Calker, K.J., Smits, M.C.J., Iepema, G.L., de Boer, I.J.M., 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural Systems 96 (1e3), 95e107. van der Werf, H.M.G., Petit, J., 2002. Evaluation of the environmental impact of agriculture at the farm level: a comparison and analysis of 12 indicator-based methods. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 93 (1e3), 131e145. van der Werf, H.M.G., Petit, J., Sanders, J., 2005. The environmental impacts of the production of concentrated feed: the case of pig feed in Bretagne. Agricultural Systems 83 (2), 153e177. Vazquez-Rowe, I., Iribarren, D., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2010. Combined application of life cycle assessment and data envelopment analysis as a methodological approach for the assessment of fisheries. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (3), 272e283. Wang, M.X., Xia, X.F., Zhang, Q.J., Liu, J.G., 2010. Life cycle assessment of a rice production system in Taihu region, China. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 17 (2), 157e161. Xiao, J., Shen, L.H., Zhang, Y.A., Gu, J.Q., 2009. Integrated analysis of energy, economic, and environmental performance of biomethanol from rice straw in China. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 48 (22), 9999e10007. Yan, M.J., Humphreys, J., Holden, N.M., 2011. An evaluation of life cycle assessment of European milk production. Journal of Environmental Management 92 (3), 372e379. Zaks, D.P.M., Barford, C.C., Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A., 2009. Producer and consumer responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural production-a perspective from the Brazilian Amazon. Environmental Research Letters 4 (4). 

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro Life cycle assessment in Brazilian agriculture facing worldwide trends Clandio F. Ruviaro a, *, Miguelangelo Gianezini a, Fernanda S. Brandão a, César A. Winck a, b, Homero Dewes a a b Center for Research in Agribusiness, CEPAN, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, Brazil University of West of Santa Catarina, UNOESC, Joaçaba, Brazil a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Received 15 April 2011 Received in revised form 25 September 2011 Accepted 11 October 2011 Available online 20 October 2011 Worldwide demand to set reliable environmental criteria for food and feed products has brought Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies to agribusiness. This paper describes the results of a search for scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide, as a way to capture state-of-the-art technology in the field and to identify the trends and drivers for labeling and certification requirements in international markets. Considering the status of Brazilian agriculture, it would be necessary to adapt the LCA tools to the peculiarities of this country’s environmental and technological context, regarding the ability to follow current trends in the application of LCA as a tool for analysis of the environmental impact. In Brazil, any effort to develop specific methodologies for both Life Cycle Inventory and Life Cycle Impact Assessment is urgently needed for the country to remain among the leaders of food and feed exporters and would be appreciated by consumers worldwide. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Sustainability Agribusiness Decision-making Environment Supply chain Certification 1. Introduction In recent years, the debate about environmental sustainability has broadened to include the impact of agricultural production. The increasing worldwide demand for food, feed and renewable energy sources requires new knowledge about production systems to make them acceptable under the sustainability criteria. Faced with such complex needs, researchers around the world have developed different research tools for the analysis of the life cycle of products to measure the impacts caused by their respective production processes, and have proposed improvements in all stages of production to boost environmental performance as a whole (Guinée et al., 2001; Cederberg and Mattson, 2000). Among the assessment tools currently available, the LCA is a method for integral assessment of the environmental impact of products, processes and services (Thomassen et al., 2008). The LCA includes analysis of the extraction and processing of raw materials as well as, product manufacture, transport, distribution, use, reuse, maintenance, recycling and disposal of discards. LCA allows a comprehensive view of the various impacts on the * Corresponding author. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Agronegócios (Cepan) Av. Bento Gonçalves, 7712 - Prédio da Agronomia e 1 andar, Porto Alegre e RS e Brazil e Cep.: 91.540-000. Tel./fax: þ55 51 3308 6586. E-mail address: clandioruviaro@hotmail.com (C.F. Ruviaro). 0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.015 environment, enabling the identification of suitable measures from a sustainable development prospective (Chehebe, 1997; Jensen, 1997; Graedel, 1998). The soaring worldwide demand to set reliable environmental criteria for food and feed products has brought LCA methodologies to agribusiness as a way to support the decision-making processes regarding agriculture and food production technologies. In this sense, the Kyoto Protocol (2005), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC (2007), and the United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP (2009), have played a major influence. As a major exporter of food and feed products, Brazil is a country highly concerned with environmental and food safety issues of international relevance associated with agricultural production and the food processing industry. Brazil is the largest South American country with an area of 8,514,876 km2 and with a population of more than 190 million (IBGE, 2010). The country leads the world in the production of oranges, sugarcane, and coffee, and it is also one of the major producers of soybeans, corn and beef (FAO, 2009). This paper presents the results of a search for scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide, as a way to capture state-of-theart technology in this field and to identify the trends and drivers for labeling and certification requirements in international markets. We contrasted the data on LCA for agricultural products from worldwide sources with the published documents from Author's personal copy 10 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Brazilian sources. We found that the world literature on the subject is still relatively scarce and refers to a limited list of products, namely dairy products, tomatoes, apples, nectarines, citrus products, potatoes, olives, wheat, rice, soybeans, maize, sugarcane, biomass, biodiesel, biomethanol, forage, beef, fish, pigs, poultry, sheep, wool, eggs, forests and wood. The Brazilian sources refer to ethanol, sugarcane, biofuels, agricultural machinery manufacture, coffee, soybeans, orange juice, poultry, aquiculture, and oysters. 1.1. Approaches to the assessment of the life cycle of agricultural and livestock products LCA is an important tool for environmental evaluation of production chains. This methodology is widely used and recognized worldwide by researchers and technicians and allows many applications in productive systems. A comprehensive systematization of the requirements and steps of the LCA is contained in the standards ISO 14040:2006 ISO, 2006a) and ISO 14044:2006 (ISO, 2006b). In agricultural production, the application of LCA is of marked relevance in all the production chains, and its importance can be seen in the following market externalities: a) consumers demand environmentally friendly products and are willing to pay more for them, b) the producers who are not able to demonstrate that their produce is grown in a sustainable way, have difficulties in accessing important markets, and c) environmental criteria are being gradually added by countries to their import requirements for agricultural products. Therefore, only agricultural products that have their production chain properly managed are fully accepted in local or global markets, and for management to move toward environmental control, agriculture requires objective measurements of reliable indicators similar to other production systems. Another aspect that can be controlled by LCA methodology is the efficiency of a production chain, which partially depends upon the production scale, the technologies used, and the organization of producers facing the industry. Because agricultural production is highly diversified worldwide, both in cultural and biophysical terms, application of a standard and widely accepted methodology for analysis of environmental impacts of local agricultural production is very difficult and highly controversial, although urgently needed. The application of LCA in agriculture progresses worldwide, although it still has to evolve to incorporate some additional sustainability dimensions, such as offensive odors, animal welfare and aesthetic aspects, among others. Considering this scenario, some limitations of the LCA methodology can be mentioned: a) the failure to consider and/or include all the relevant impacts on the production (use of soil and water, indirect changes in the use of the soil and the ecological competition among products); b) the difficulty to consider the reduction of soil use when production is classified as ecological (organic, natural, biodynamic, among others); c) the lack of a broader approach (such as the Integrated Environmental Assessment, IEA); and d) the current inability to consider the large number of existing categories of environmental impacts that make the decisionmaking process more difficult. 1.2. LCA in Brazil According to MAPA (Ministry of Agriculture, Brazil), agribusiness accounts for 33% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 42% of total Brazilian exports (MAPA, 2010a). Recent studies show that the total area of crops in the country should increase from 60 million hectares in 2010 to 70 million in 2020. Brazil will have a 37% increase in grain production (soybeans, corn, wheat, rice and beans), equivalent to 48 million tons by 2020. Growth is also expected in the same period for meat production (38% beef, pork and chicken), sugar (48%), and milk (24%) (MAPA, 2010b). What is remarkable is that conditions exist to permit even further growth. The well-known Brazilian potential to produce food due to potentially arable land and the availability of water and renewable energy (such as hydroelectric power), places the country in a prominent position in the global market as one of the major food suppliers for the world in coming years. However, to meet the new consumer demands for certification and labeling of agricultural products, it is critical that Brazilian institutions, both academic and governmental, watch for the trends of international markets in using the LCA methodologies and take the needed steps to qualify local institutions to perform those analytical procedures properly (Caldeira-Pires et al., 2002; Coltro et al., 2007; Barbosa et al., 2008). In other words, the LCA of agricultural products should consider the peculiarities of each country within its analysis context. Therefore, we must know how to apply this methodology properly according to the peculiarities of the different regions of Brazil, to provide both basic scientific knowledge and support for management and for environmental education (Souza et al., 2007; Mourad et al., 2007). Moreover, there is a need to establish institutional policies with local pertinence, in terms of environment and sustainable production. 2. Methods A preliminary document search showed that the analytical procedures and units used in LCA analysis differed according to the products and origins of the publications. Against this background, a literature review was performed on the LCA studies published in the last ten years. The data were obtained from scientific literature and government documents regarding the application of LCA to agricultural products worldwide. Furthermore, we contrasted the LCA data on agricultural products from worldwide sources with the published documents from Brazilian sources (Fig. 1). 3. Results Apparently, the world is a long way from establishing general protocols that would take into account local conditions while providing valuable comparisons between countries and agricultural Scientific literature Governmental documents LCA: application to agricultural products (review 2001-2011) 42 • Livestock 28 • Grains, Vegetables and Others 4 12 • Animal Products • Brazilian Fig. 1. Flowchart of the search with the numbers of documents analyzed. Author's personal copy 11 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 International applications of LCA methodology on livestock production according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Ireland Milk Compare two standard methodologies, IPCC method and LCA, for quantifying GHG emissions from dairy farms kg CO2 eq., kg 1 milk; kg CO2 eq., kg 1 MS; t CO2 eq., ha Expressing emissions per ha does not appropriately reflect the effect different dairy systems can have on milk production. The LCA approach must be integrated into the existing IPCC framework to identify production systems with a net reduction in global GHG emissions Simplified LCA may not help provide efficient mitigation strategies for environmental problems There was a small difference in calculated average CF value at the farm gate for New Zealand and Swedish milk production Combined LCA and DEA provided valuable results to benchmark both operational and environmental parameters 2011 O’Brien et al. 2011 Yan et al. 2011 Flysjo et al. 2011 Iribarren et al. Cultivated hectare per year; currency unit; physical units (kg of dry matter and MJ net energy) There is considerable room for environmental optimization of Swiss farming systems 2011a Nemecek et al. Cultivated hectare per year; currency unit; physical units (Kg of dry matter and MJ net energy) CO2 eq./kg of wheat, sheep meat and wool produced from mixed pasture, wheat and sub-clover Detailed eco-efficiency analysis could help in reducing production systems’ environmental impacts 2011b Nemecek et al. Wool GHG emissions are higher than wheat and sheep meat. Enteric and manure decomposition CH4 emissions accounted for a significant portion of total emissions from sub-clover and mixed pasture production, while N20 is the major emission from wheat production Approach can be applied to other agricultural systems; results not suggested as industry averages 2010 Biswas et al. 2010 Peters et al. 1 Ireland Milk An evaluation of LCA of European milk production Undefined New Zealand/ Sweden Milk and co-products Investigate different methodologies of handling co-products in LCA or CF studies 1 kg energycorrected milk (ECM) Spain Milk Dairy farm Switzerland Integrated and organic farming systems Switzerland Extensive and intensive production systems LCA and DEA methodologies used to perform eco-efficiency assessment of a high number of dairy farms Assessment of integrated and organic farming systems for crops and forage production to compare environmental performance and potentials Reduction of environmental impacts of extensive farming systems Australia Wheat, sheep meat and wool Global warming contributions Australia Red meat beef Accounting for water use in red meat production Delivery of 1 kg of HSCW meat to the processing works product gate for wholesale distribution (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 12 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Austria Livestock Emissions accounting for production and consumption of livestock system Carbon emissions (CO2 and CH4) 2010 Gavrilova et al. Canada Beef Estimation of GHG emissions from beef production CO2 eq. Kg 2010 Bauchemin et al. Spain Fish Combination of LCA and data envelopment analysis (DEA) in fisheries kg CO2 eq. 2010 Vázquez-Rowe et al. United States Beef Comparison between models of different beef production strategies 2010 Pelletier et al. Brazil/USA/ Canada Soybeans and beef GHG emissions of soybeans and beef production in the Amazon basin of Brazil GJ, GHG (tonnes CO2 eq.); eutrophying emissions (tonnes of PO4 eq.); ecological footprint (ha) Carbon liability embodied in soybeans and beef (Tg CO2 eq.) FCA and LCA methods are effective to estimate direct carbon emissions from domestic livestock and combustion of fossil fuels in processes of product manufacturing and transportation Following mitigation of GHG emissions, beef production should focus on enteric CH4 production from mature beef cows. The cowecalf production system also has many ancillary environmental benefits, allowing use of grazing and forage lands, preserving soil carbon reserves and providing ecosystems services Approach facilitates interpretation of results of multiple LCAs for some fisheries and carries synergistic effects Beef production, feedlot or pasture-based, generates lower edible resource returns on the material/energy investment relative to other food production strategies 2009 Zaks et al. Brazil/Sweden Beef LCI of GHG emissions and use of land and energy in Brazilian beef production 2009 Cederberg et al. Canada Milk Environmental impacts of typical pasture and confinement operations 2009 Arsenault et al. France/ Greece Fish Environmental impacts of different production systems of carnivorous fish 1 tonne of live fish weight 2009 Aubin et al. New Zealand Milk Global warming and milk production GWP (/kg milk) 2009a Basset-Mens et al. 1 1 kg of Brazilian beef at the farm gate, as carcass eight equivalent; 1 kg of Brazilian beef exported as bone-free beef 1000 kg milk at farm gate Study requires calculating emissions from deforestation, life cycle analysis of agricultural systems and allocating emissions between producers and consumers The use of energy in Brazilian beef production is very low, a tenth of European production. Brazilian land use is higher than in the EU The transition to full confinement does not result in environmental benefits Global warming and the availability of fish resources, climate change and net primary production use impact freshwater raceways, sea cages and inland re-circulating systems A probabilistic framework provides information on the differences between technological options Author's personal copy 13 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) New Zealand Milk Eco-efficiency in intensification scenarios Comparison NZ  European needs validation 2009b Basset-Mens et al. Norway/UK/ Canada/Chile Fish Global-scale life cycle assessment of a major food commodity, farmed salmon kg CO2 eq.; kg PO4 eq.; kg SO2 eq.; MJ; m2.year; and kg/ha Emissions per unit production 2009 Pelletier et al. Czech Republic Livestock Environmental and health impact of dairy cattle livestock and manure management Impacts per year, per hectare and per liter milk production 2008 Havlikova et al. European Union Livestock Life cycle assessment of feeding livestock with European grain legumes 1 kg of animal product 2008 Baumgartner et al. Finland Chicken meat 1,000 kg 2008 Katajajuuri et al. France Cow and goat Life cycle phases in broiler chain by Finnish ‘Eco-Benchmark’ Analyzes the environmental impacts of regional dairy chains to identify improvement options 2008 Kanyarushoki et al. Global Germany Beef One kilogram of ready-tocook beef 2008 Schlich et al. Netherland Milk Local and global meat production related to environmental and economic aspects Conventional and organic milk production Impacts were lowest for Norwegian production in most impact categories and highest for UK farmed salmon Selected characterization factors combined with information on study regions are useful in an assessment of the environmental and health impact of dairy Measures have to be taken to reduce the environmental burden of feedstuff production by choice of origin of feedstuffs and improvement in the productivity of the system Grain production has the higher impact on the food chain Farm operations have more impact than farm inputs. Transport of products to retailers has more impact than those of dairy plants Adoption of "Ecology of Scale" theory to support demand 2008 Thomassen et al. Netherland Organic eggs Integral environmental impact of the organic egg production chain One kg of organic egg 2008 Dekker et al. Sweden Beef Synthesizes and expands upon existing data on the contribution of farm animal production to climate change CO2 eq. GHG emissions per kilogram of beef 2008 Koneswaran, G. & Nierenberg, D. Japan Beef cattle Environmental impacts of beef cowecalf system One marketed beef calf 2007 Ogino et al. Canada Beef cattle Various 2006 Larney et al. France Pigs Influences of handling treatment on nutrient levels and mass balance estimates of feedlot manure Uncertainty and variability Relative performance varies within categories of environmental impact Concentrate production is the key cluster to climate change, eutrophication and energy use Immediate and farreaching changes in current animal agriculture practices and consumption patterns are both critical and timely if GHGs from the farm animal sector are to be mitigated Shortening calving intervals and increasing the number of calves per cow reduced environmental impacts in all of the categories Handling manure changes nutrient availability Farmer practices may affect the final result more than production modes 2006 Basset-Mens et al. Ireland Beef Comparing beef  dairy emissions revealed the potential for reduction by adopting alternative management 2006 Casey, J. W. & Holden, N. M. GHG emissions from sucker-beef production 1000 kg milk; Ha of land occupied kg of milk g PO4 eq./ kg pig; g CO2 eq./kg pig, g SO2 eq./kg pig kg CO2 kg LW yr 1 (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 14 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 1 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) European Union Livestock Compares tools for environmental assessment and recommends indicators for benchmarking Kg/product or kg/ha 2005 Halberg et al. France (Bretagne) Pig 1000 kg of feed; 1000 kg of ingredients 2005 van der Werf et al. Ireland Milk Environmental impacts on the production of concentrated feed associated with the production and onfarm delivery of concentrated feed for pigs GHG and the intensity of milk production 2005 Casey, J. W. & Holden, N. M. Japan Livestock Environmental impacts of concentrate feed supply systems on industry Organic vs. conventional milk production and three pig production systems give different results, depending on the basis of the indicators Decreased environmental burdens by optimizing the fertilization of cropebased ingredients, by reducing concentrations of Cu and Zn in the feed, and by using wheat-based rather than maize-based feeds Moving toward extensive production could reduce emissions Livestock industry could join in emissions trading by reducing CO2 producing equivalents 2005 Kaku et al. Japan Beef Environmental impacts of beef-fattening system and effects of feeding length 2004 Ogino et al. Sweden Dairy cattle Perform an LCI of milk production from conventional and organic dairy farms One kg of energycorrected milk at the farm gate 2004 Cederberg, C. & Flysjo, A. New Zealand Milk Dairy farm, grazing and forage land Volume of milk (m3) 2003 Ledgard et al. Spain Milk Total life cycle of production and processing of milk to quantify the environmental impact 2003 Hospido et al. Sweden Milk and beef Organic milk production with different methods of handling co-products Milk and beef production systems are closely connected 2003 Cederberg, C. & Stadig, M. United Kingdom Pig waste Environmental benefits of livestock manure management practices and technology 1 L of packaged liquid milk ready to be delivered One kg ECM; One kg bone-free meat 1000 kg pork weight 2003 Sandars et al. Germany Systems of grassland farms Environmental impacts of eighteen grassland farms in three different f arming intensities Using an anaerobic digester shows few overall benefits due to the fugitive losses of methane. However, if these can be eliminated, the global warming potential from waste management is reduced close to zero Organic production promotes biodiversity 2001 Haas et al. One kg of ECM; land area PA tons/year; Di tons/year; Fij MJ/tons of feed; GAj tons/ MJ; Li GWh/tons of feed; MA tons/GWh; feed i; and fuel j One beef animal Whole farm A shorter feeding length resulted in lower environmental impacts, such as global warming and acidification The organic farms had lower use of fossil energy, P and K, and pesticides, but larger land use. High production per cow and the use of input resources can reduce the environmental impact Nitrogen fertilizer increased production and economic efficiency but decreased environmental efficiency Applications of improvement actions in milk production can lead to a maximum reduction of the global normalized impact Author's personal copy 15 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 International applications of LCA methodology on grain production, vegetables, and others according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Italy Wine Evaluates the environmental performances of four high quality wines for carbon labeling 0.75 L bottle of wine 2011 Bosco et al. China Biodiesel Energy cost of rapeseed-based biodiesel alternative energy in China MJ/kg, MJ/unit 2011 Chen & Chen Sweden Biomass Environmental study of production of propionic acid in a biorefinery system based on agricultural byproducts One kg of propionic acid at the factory gate 2011 Ekman & Böejesson Sweden Biomass Scenarios for supply of the entire demand of power and heat of a rural village One year supply of heat and electricity to a modern village of 150 households 2011 Kimming et al. Spain Tomato One tonne of commercial tomatoes produced 2011 Martínez-Blanco et al. USA Woodchips for bioethanol Neupane et al. Citrus-based products Harvesting and woodchips processing stage and transportation to the facility stage emit large amount of environmental pollutants compared to other life cycle stages of ethanol production Sensible variations in energy and environmental performances of final products. Benefits that state the improvement of products’ eco-profile, by reusing purified water used for irrigation, using the railway mode for delivery of final products, and adopting efficient technologies in pasteurization and concentration of juice 2011 Italy Determine agricultural and environmental differences of four cultivation options characterized by greenhouse or open-field cultivation using compost plus mineral fertilizers or only mineral fertilizers Among the many lignocellulosic feedstocks, woodchips are viewed as one of the most promising feedstocks for producing liquid transportation fuels Environmental impacts of citrus production and transformation processes to identify the most significant issues and suggest options for improvement Vineyard-planting phase has a significant impact on the wine CF; thus, it has to be considered in the life cycle, while in literature, it is frequently omitted. On the contrary, the pre-production phase did not present a relevant impact There is potential to improve the apparently negative energy balance for biodiesel from rapeseed oil in China by increasing the average yield of rapeseed or decreasing the energy inputs of nitrogen fertilizers The use of industrial byproducts as raw materials in biorefinery systems appears to be an attractive option to produce bio-based chemicals, both from an environmental and an economical point-of-view The biomass-based scenarios reduce greenhouse gas emissions considerably compared to the scenario based on fossil fuel but have higher acidifying emissions. Replacement of a fraction of the mineral fertilizers dosage with compost appears to be a good agronomical solution for tomato crops for growth in both open-fields and greenhouses 2010 Beccali et al. Production of 4 m3 of hardwood chips 1 kg of each final citrus-based product (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 16 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Italy Nectarine orchard Application of Ecological Footprint Analysis gha t 1 nectarines produced 2010 Cerutti et al. Italy Biofuel Discuss limits and constraints of the LCA to perform quantitative assessments as requested by the current supporting policies in the biofuel area CO2 eq. (kg (MWhe) 2010 Chiaramonti, D. & Recchia, L. Chile Sunflower and rapeseed To quantify and compare the environmental impacts and energy and water demand for cultivation of sunflower and rapeseed One tonne of seeds per year 2010 Iriarte et al. Brazil, Denmark, China, and the USA Wheat Life cycle inventory modeling of land use induced by crop consumption using wheat as an example Kg eq./ha 2010 Kløverpris et al. China/ Denmark Organic soybeans The environmental impacts of organic and conventional production of soybeans 2010 Knudsen et al. Switzerland Forest The impact of climatic factors on land use as determined by the CO2 transfers between vegetation/soil and atmosphere One tonne of organic soybean produced in China and delivered in Denmark Carbon quantities per hectare for land transformation and land occupation and their time weighting Validation of the system is needed before the application at grower level. Ecological indicator based on EFA may provide the required introduction of an environmental verification system for food production LCA studies should always provide the bias of the calculations because this range of variation in the LCA results could be significantly greater than the initially set quantitative targets, and therefore, the whole investigation would be at risks for inconsistency Evaluation of environmental impacts indicated that in Chilean conditions, rapeseed has a better environmental profile than sunflowers. Sunflowers have a higher impact in 9 of the 11 impact categories evaluated, with values between 1.2 and 39 times higher Wheat consumption in different countries result in different land use consequences due to differences in trade patterns, which are governed by transport and trade costs, among other factors The organic soybean has a lower environmental impact compared to the conventional soybean 2010 Müller-Wenk, R. & Brandão, M. Australia Sugarcane production Quantify the environmental impacts of sugarcane products The quality of available data on carbon content in vegetation and soil, on carbon transfers to air due to particular land use types, and on the duration of stay of carbon in the air is still limited and needs improvement Potential uncertainty can be higher in Australian sugarcane products due to the nature of the cane processing system, the variability in sugarcane growing, and the approach taken for assigning impacts to multiple products from sugarcane processing 2010 Renouf et al. One tonne of raw sugar; one tonne molasses; one kWh electricity; and one MJ anhydrous fuel ethanol Author's personal copy 17 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) Germany Wood One oven dry tonne of poplar chips; MJ power; MJ heat; and MJ FT diesel Utilization of the same amount of shortrotation poplar chips for heat and power production causes fewer environmental impacts than its use for FT diesel 2010 Roedl, A. European Union Rapeseed oil and palm oil Environmental burdens of cultivation of fast-growing tree species on agricultural land and subsequent energetic conversion in comparison to the fossil energy system Local and global alternative for meeting the increasing oil demand One tonne refined vegetable oil 2010 Schmidt, J. H. China Rice Examines the environmental impact of the rice production system One tonne of rice produced 2010 Wang et al. Canada Greenhouse tomatoes Explores one approach to assessing social issues in supply chain - LCA $100 of tomatoes from a large greenhouse 2009 Andrews et al. Italy Rice Analyzes improvement scenarios concerning alternative rice farming and food processing methods: organic and upland farming and parboiling One kg of refined rice packed and delivered to the supermarket 2009 Blengini, G.A. & Busto, M. Brazil/ Netherlands Sugarcane Power to wheels for 1 km driving of a midsize car 2009 Luo et al. Argentina Biodiesel Comparative LCA on gasoline and ethanol as fuels, and two types of blends of gasoline with bioethanol, all used in a midsize car. Environmental impact of soybeanbased biodiesel production for export Palm oil tends to be environmentally preferable to rapeseed oil within all impact categories except global warming, biodiversity and ecotoxicity, where the difference is less pronounced and where it is highly dependent on assumptions regarding system delimitation in the agricultural stage Reducing nitrogen fertilizer intensity and increasing efficiency are key points to control LCA environmental impacts of rice, decreasing resource consumption and emissions LCAA may serve as an aid for discussions of how current and popular CSR indicators may be integrated into a supply chain model Organic and upland farming have the potential to decrease impact per unit of cultivated area. Due to the lower grain yields, environmental benefits per kg of the final products are reduced in the case of upland rice production and almost cancelled for organic rice Driving with ethanol fuels is more economical than gasoline and economically more attractive. The outcomes depend on the assumed price for crude oil and technological development Environmental impact is influenced by land use change, the BNF and the use of fertilizers, as well as applied pesticides, the soybean production method, the use of methanol and the transport system 2009 Panichelli et al. 1 km driven with diesel by a 28 t truck (continued on next page) Author's personal copy 18 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 2 (continued ) Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected conclusion Year Author(s) China Biomethanol 1000 kg of biomethanol Xiao et al. Soybean meal 2008 Dalgaard et al. Belgium LCA of biofuels The environmental benefits of using biofuels 100 km covered with a midsize and recent car 2008 Halleux et al. Spain/Global Apples How the international trade of fresh apples concerned environmental, economic and social impacts One ha of orchard; one kg of fresh apples; m3/ha; kg N; kg P2O5; and Kg K2O 2008 Soler-Rovira, J. & Soler-Rovira, P. Germany Biomass Ecological optimization of biomass cultivation Kg of harvested product 2007 Kagi et al. Italy Sunflower oil Evaluates the use of sunflower oil on farms to meet their internal energy requirements One ha 2006 Riello et al France Agriculture Compares and analyzes 12 indicatorbased approaches to assessing the environmental impact at the farm level to propose a set of guidelines for the evaluation or development of such methods Various Rice straw to produce methanol is beneficial for both utilization of agricultural waste and improvement in the environment Consequential LCAs are quite easy to handle, even though it has been necessary to include production of palm oil, rapeseed and spring barley because these production systems are affected by the soybean oil co-product Rapeseed methyl ester allows a considerable improvement in environmental performances compared to fossil diesel, while ethanol from sugar beets offers a more limited benefit compared to petrol Multivariate analysis can be used to select the most important indicators regarding economic, social and environmental aspects of apple production and trade There is no cultural method preferable for biodiesel. Organic agriculture was better for integrated production of energy using wheat, corn and soybeans Biofuel is not yet competitive because no free market exists for it, but it represents a practical way to avoid the shift of economic benefits from agriculture to industry, as occurs with biodiesel production The method should be validated with respect to (a) the appropriateness of its set of objectives relative to its purpose and (b) its indicators 2009 Denmark/ Argentina The biomethanol rice straw production process involves thermodynamic, economic, and environmental performance The purpose of the study was to estimate the environmental consequences of soybean meal consumption using a consequential LCA approach 2002 van der Werf, H.M.G. & Petit, J. One kg of soybean meal produced in Argentina and delivered to Rotterdam Harbor Author's personal copy 19 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 products and production systems, useful in supporting official international trade, uni- or multi-lateral requirements, and consumer decision making. Considering the status of Brazilian agriculture, it would be necessary to adapt the LCA tools to the country’s environmental peculiarities and technological context, to keep up with current trends in the application of LCA methodology for analysis of the environmental impact of food and feed products. So far, there are only a few studies on adaptation of the descriptive factors related to various critical categories, such as biodiversity, land use, and water use. Regarding the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI), no national database is yet open to access, either related to agriculture or to other sectors of industrial activity, in spite of current efforts in this direction. Tables 1, 2 and 3 list the LCA reports according to the respective country of application, agriculture products, theme, functional units, selected conclusion, year of publication, and authors. In Table 4, the variables include theme, goal, functional unit, selected results, year of publication, and authors. Fig. 2 shows that the number of publications on LCA applied to agriculture rose markedly from the year 2007 and onwards, when governments and public opinion started to ask for more transparency of the environmental impacts of industrial activities as a result of international agreements, such as Kyoto Protocol, COP and IPCC. 4. Discussion As in LCA studies of other industrial products and sectors, the reports on LCA of agricultural products put emphasis on comparison of different production systems, e.g., organic versus conventional, extensive versus intensive, small versus large scale, and traditional versus advanced systems. Both the environmental burden and productivity are referred to by LCA methodology that uses multiple functional units to express them, such as the mass of the final products (kg), the energy content of food products (kJ), the cultivation area (ha), and the unit of livestock, among others. In several studies, the LCA methodology is complemented by other approaches that together are more effective in evaluating the environmental impact of the system or the product analyzed. The studies and their conclusions are quite heterogeneous, as one would expect considering the extreme diversity in technological and biophysical terms of the agricultural systems analyzed. Any extension of the conclusions of one study to another region of the world or to another production system would be inappropriate. This is particularly relevant for Brazil compared to other countries and considering the huge regional differences inside its borders. With the current inexistence of any Brazilian LCA inventory, interregional or international comparisons are very difficult. Table 3 International applications of LCA methodology on animal products according to the year of publication. Country Agriculture products Theme Functional units Selected Conclusion Year Author(s) USA Organic dairy LCA of a large-scale, vertically integrated organic dairy in the USA One L of packaged fluid milk 2011 Heller et al. Germany Organic milk Environmental impacts of different types of organic dairy farms Whole farm 2010 Müller-Lindenlauf et al. New Zealand/UK Dairy CO2 emissions; energy emissions 2007 Saunders, C. & Barber, A. New Zealand Dairy - lamb - apple Comparative energy and greenhouse gas emissions of New Zealand’s and the UK’s dairy industry Food Miles e Comparative Energy/ Emissions Performance of New Zealand’s Agriculture Industry Improvements in data quality with respect to feed production and methane emissions are required before more definitive comparisons can be made between agricultural production methods Environmental impact assessment analyzing only global impact categories of climate impact and energy consumption leads to different conclusions than an overall analysis that also takes categories with regional and local impact into account NZ is still more efficient at dairy production than the UK even when other emissions are accounted for NZ products compare favorably with lower energy and emissions per tonne of product delivered to the UK compared to other UK sources. In the case of dairy, NZ is at least twice as efficient and for sheep meat, four times as efficient. The CO2 emissions per tonne of apples produced are also higher in the UK than in NZ 2006 Saunders et al. Energy use and CO2 emissions associated with production and transport Author's personal copy 20 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 4 Applications of LCA methodology in Brazilian agriculture according to the year of publication. Theme Goal Functional units Results Year Author(s) Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuel sustainability assessments Contributes to the development of a framework for sustainability indicators as a tool for performance assessment Assess the life cycle energy use and GHG related to cane sugar and ethanol, considering bagasse and electricity surpluses as coproducts Compares the different interpretations that can be obtained from CML 2001 and Ecological Footprint, using a case study of four scenarios of broiler feed production in Brazil Suggests an arrangement of existing models to determine material flow in agricultural production systems Various Brazilian biofuel programs demonstrate the feasibility of a sustainable method for renewable fuels utilization 2011 Lora et al. KJ/kg and CO2 eq./kg Advantages of sugarcane products compared to beet sugar produced in Europe 2011 Seabra et al. Supply ration to feed broilers on farm Ecological Footprint is not suitable for the agricultural sector because misleading decisions can be taken as a result of neglecting some important environmental impacts for this economic sector 2011 Alvarenga et al. Volume and mass units 2010 Romanelli, T. L. & Milan, M. Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybeans according to crop production and transport scenarios Evaluates the environmental impacts of supply chains from Brazil’s two major soybean production regions 1,000 kg of soybeans at 13% humidity 2010 Prudêncio da Silva et al. Greenhouse gas emissions in the life cycle of ethanol: estimation in agriculture and industrialization stages in Minas Gerais, Brazil The life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol as 100% of the vehicle fuel from sugarcane in Brazil Estimates of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4 e N2O) in the stages of agriculture and sugarcane industrialization for the production of ethanol in mills One ha of cultivated land per year Existing models to determine material flow are applicable for general as well as for local or specific scenarios because they are based on the physical demand of agricultural mechanized operations The mode of transport chosen and the distance to be traveled strongly influence environmental impacts. Assessments involving soybeans from Brazil should take into account the region of origin, as different regions have different levels of environmental impacts GHG emissions in the phases of agriculture and industrialization of sugarcane for ethanol production are mainly due to the burning of plants, fuel consumption, the release of N2O in the soil and the consumption of lime and fertilizer 2010 Garcia, J. C. C. & Sperling, E. von LCA of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil, assessing the environmental impact potentials 10,000 km run in a urban area by a car with a 1600 cm3; 1000 kg of ethanol 2009 Ometto et al. Life cycle assessment of Brazilian sugarcane products: GHG emissions and energy use Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production Material flow determination through agricultural machinery management Fuel ethanol life cycle contributes to all the impacts analyzed. The main causes are nutrient application, burning in harvesting, and the use of diesel Author's personal copy 21 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Table 4 (continued ) Theme Goal Functional units Results Year Author(s) Energy use in the life cycle of frozen concentrated orange juice Brazilian poultry: a study of production and supply chains for the accomplishment of a LCA study Presents the aspects of energy use for FCOJ produced in two orange-growing regions 1,000 kg of FCOJ 2009 Coltro et al. Describes two current supply chains of poultry production emphasizing the distance of transportation as a predominant factor One tonne live weight chicken and one tonne frozen chicken 2008 Prudêncio da Silva et al. Life Cycle inventory for a Brazilian oyster production system Raises data of entries and exits at all stages of the life cycle of the oysters to provide grounds for a future LCA analysis A dozen oysters consumed 2008 Alvarenga et al. Sustainable development in aquiculture: methodology and strategies Introduces a reflection about the strategies of interconnection of the aquaculture in the humanenvironmental context Presents the LCI of green coffee production to obtain detailed production inventory data Undefined The Global Warming Potential of FCOJ is related to 70% of the total energy (nonrenewable energy) The potential impacts of frozen chicken delivered to the port could be quite different between two chains given the distance between each and the main port used as a route for export There is a high consumption of water (both fresh and salt), and also high emission of CO2, high total solids (in wastewater) and solid waste as oyster’s shells LCA can be used in environmental licensing 2007 Eler, M.N. & Millani, T.J. Supplies results for a better correlation of agricultural practices and potential environmental impacts 2006 Coltro et al. Environmental profile of Brazilian Green Coffee 1000 kg of green coffee destined for export Fig. 3 shows that so far, most of the studies have focused on European agriculture. Since 2006, reports on Brazilian agriculture have also achieved noticeable numbers with frank expansion. The soaring number of publications on Brazilian agriculture mirrors the economic relevance of this sector for the country and the widespread concerns regarding how the environmental impact of this sector affects the access of Brazilian agricultural products in international markets. As one can follow in several recent governmental, agribusiness and academic forums and meetings (e.g., http:// www.ciclodevida.ufsc.br/ www.congressodacarne2011.com.br/; congresso, http://www.feicorte.com.br/index.php?p¼noticias_view &id¼1, http://www.biodieselbr.com/eventos/biodiesel.htm, http:// www.abag.com.br/index.php?apg¼cong_visor&ncong¼2011), LCA has been considered one of the preferential approaches to support the decision-making process for establishing appropriate governmental policies and technological choices. In world reports, but not in Brazilian reports, livestock outnumbers grains, vegetables and diversified agricultural products (Fig. 4). This is probably a result of European concerns regarding animal greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), food safety, traceability, and production costs. In Brazil, production and export of grains play a central role in the formation of the national GDP, which may explain why grain LCA studies predominate. In addition, grains cover large areas of land and form a base for the poultry and swine agro-industrial food chains. Studies on sugarcane and biomass production, both related to expansion of land use and to the growing biofuel industry, tend to gain relevance in the group. Livestock production will certainly demand more research to create an inventory on animal GHG emissions applicable to tropical and subtropical regions. Fig. 2. Evolution of publications on LCA in agricultural products for the period of 2001e2011. (until August 2011) Fig. 3. Geographic distribution of LCA agricultural studies in the world (including livestock, grains, vegetables, animal products) 2001e2011. (until August 2011) Author's personal copy 22 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Brazil World 6% 8% Grains, Vegetables and Others 25% Livestock Agricultural Products 36% 58% 67% Fig. 4. Distribution of different studies on LCA according to the type of agricultural product (world and Brazil). 5. Conclusions The literature search on LCA provides a comprehensive overview of the various environmental impacts caused by agricultural production in different countries and offers the potential to help in directing the sustainable production of food and other agricultural products. In Brazil, the application of LCA methodology in the field of agribusiness is still in its infancy. It would be in the interest to the economy of the country to promote the use of such techniques for the assessment of potential environmental impacts to meet the growing demand for answers to questions regarding the sustainability of agricultural production in food-exporting countries. Brazil can implement solutions for environmental issues related to agriculture with the help of institutional arrangements among universities, industries and government agencies to promote science and innovation for a sustainable agricultural production. International research shows how much can be done. For Brazil to remain an important food and feed exporter, efforts are needed both to adapt the methodologies of LCA and of Life Cycle Impact Assessment, LCIA, to the peculiarities of the country and to develop an LCI applicable to Brazil’s agricultural systems. There are certainly many opportunities for local efforts to promote related advanced education, human resources training, infra-structure, and institutional growth. Acknowledgments CAPES and CNPq, Brazil References Alvarenga R.A.F., Soares S.R., 2008. Prudêncio da Silva V. Life cycle inventory for a Brazilian oyster production system. 6th international Conference on LCA in the agri-food sector November. Zurich. Alvarenga, RAFd, da Silva Jr., V.P., Soares, S.R., 2011. Comparison of the ecological footprint and a life cycle impact assessment method for a case study on Brazilian broiler feed production. Journal of Cleaner Production. Andrews, E., Lesage, P., Benoit, C., Parent, J., Norris, G., Reveret, J.P., 2009. Life cycle Attribute assessment case study of Quebec greenhouse tomatoes. Journal of Industrial Ecology 13 (4), 565e578. Arsenault, N., Tyedmers, P., Fredeen, A., 2009. Comparing the environmental impacts of pasture-based and confinement-based dairy systems in Nova Scotia (Canada) using life cycle assessment. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7 (1), 19e41. Aubin, J., Papatryphon, E., van der Werf, H.M.G., Chatzifotis, S., 2009. Assessment of the environmental impact of carnivorous finfish production systems using life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 17 (3), 354e361. Barbosa Jr., A.F., Morais, R.M., Emerenciano, S.V., Pimenta, H.C.D., Couvinhas, R.P., 2008. Conceitos e aplicações de Análise do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) no Brasil. Revista Gerenciais 7 (1). Basset-Mens, C., van der Werf, H.M.G., Durand, P., Leterme, P., 2006. Implications of uncertainty and variability in the life cycle assessment of pig production systems. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (5), 298e304. Basset-Mens, C., Kelliher, F.M., Ledgard, S., Cox, N., 2009a. Uncertainty of global warming potential for milk production on a New Zealand farm and implications for decision making. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (7), 630e638. Basset-Mens, C., Ledgard, S., Boyes, M., 2009b. Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand. Ecological Economics 68 (6), 1615e1625. Baumgartner D.U., Baan L., Nemecek T., 2008. Life cycle assessment of feeding livestock with European grain legumes. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agrifood Sector. Zurich. Beccali, M., Cellura, M., Iudicello, M., Mistretta, M., 2010. Life cycle assessment of Italian citrus-based products. Sensitivity analysis and improvement scenarios. Journal of Environmental Management 91 (7), 1415e1428. Biswas, W.K., Graham, J., Kelly, K., John, M.B., 2010. Global warming contributions from wheat, sheep meat and wool production in Victoria, Australia e a life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (14), 1386e1392. Blengini, G.A., Busto, M., 2009. The life cycle of rice: LCA of alternative agri-food chain management systems in Vercelli (Italy). Journal of Environmental Management 90 (3), 1512e1522. Bosco, S., Bene, C., Galli, M., Remorini, D., Massai, R., Bonari, E., 2011. Greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural phase of wine production in the Maremma rural district in Tuscany, Italy. Italian Journal of Agronomy 6 (15). Caldeira-Pires, A., Rabelo, R.R., Xavier, J.H.V., 2002. Uso potencial da análise do ciclo de vida (ACV) associada aos conceitos da produção orgânica aplicados à agricultura familiar. Cadernos de Ciência & Tecnologia 19 (2). Casey, J.W., Holden, N.M., 2005. The relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the intensity of milk production in Ireland. Journal of Environmental Quality 34 (2), 429e436. Casey, J.W., Holden, N.M., 2006. Quantification of GHG emissions from sucker-beef production in Ireland. Agricultural Systems 90 (1e3), 79e98. Cederberg, C., Flysjo, A., 2004. In: SIK (Ed.), Life Cycle Inventory of 23 Dairy Farms in South-Western Sweden. The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Swedish. Cederberg, C., Mattsson, B., 2000. Life cycle assessment of milk production e a comparison of conventional and organic farming. Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (1), 49e60. Cederberg, C., Stadig, M., 2003. System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8 (6), 350e356. Cederberg, C., Meyer, D., Flysjo, A., 2009. In: SIK (Ed.), Life Cycle Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Use of Land and Energy in Brazulian Beef Production. The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Swedish. Cerutti, A.K., Bagliani, M., Beccaro, G.L., Bounous, G., 2010. Application of Ecological Footprint Analysis on nectarine production: methodological issues and results from a case study in Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (8), 771e776. Chehebe, J.R., 1997. Análise do ciclo de vida de produtos: ferramenta gerencial da ISO 14000. Qualitymark, Rio de Janeiro. Chen, H., Chen, G.Q., 2011. Energy cost of rapeseed-based biodiesel as alternative energy in China. Renewable Energy 36 (5), 1374e1378. Chiaramonti, D., Recchia, L., 2010. Is life cycle assessment (LCA) a suitable method for quantitative CO2 saving estimations? the impact of field input on the LCA results for a pure vegetable oil chain. Biomass & Bioenergy 34 (5), 787e797. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Oliveira, P., Baddini, J., Kletecke, R.M., 2006. Environmental profile of Brazilian green coffee. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11 (1), 16e21. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Garcia, E.E.C., Queiroz, G.C., Gatti, J.B., Jaime, S.B.M., 2007. Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida como Instrumento de Gestão. In: Campinas-Coltro, L. (Ed.), CETEA/ITAL, p. 75. Coltro, L., Mourad, A.L., Kletecke, R.M., Mendonca, T.A., Germer, S.P.M., 2009. Assessing the environmental profile of orange production in Brazil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (7), 656e664. COP, 2009. United Nations Climate Change Conference. Dalgaard, R., Schmidt, J., Halberg, N., Christensen, P., Thrane, M., Pengue, W.A., 2008. LCA of soybean meal. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13 (3), 240e254. Author's personal copy C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Dekker S.E.M., De Boer I.J.M., Aarnink A.J.A., Groot Koerkamp P.W.G., 2008. Environmental hotspot identification of organic egg production. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich, pp. 381e389. Ekman, A., Börjesson, P., 2011. Environmental assessment of propionic acid produced in an agricultural biomass-based biorefinery system. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (11), 1257e1265. Eler, M.N., Millani, T.J., 2007. Métodos de estudos de sustentabilidade aplicados a aquicultura. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 36 (Especial), 33e44. FAO, 2009. Food and Agriculture commodities production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Flysjö, A., Henriksson, M., Cederberg, C., Ledgard, S., Englund J-, E., 2011. The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden. Agricultural Systems 104 (6), 459e469. Garcia, J.C.C., Sperling, E., 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions in the life cycle of ethanol: estimation in agriculture and industrialization stages in Minas Gerais. Engenharia Sanitária Ambiental 15 (3), 5. Gavrilova, O., Jonas, M., Erb, K., Haberl, H., 2010. International trade and Austria’s livestock system: direct and hidden carbon emission flows associated with production and consumption of products. Ecological Economics 69 (4), 920e929. Graedel, T.E., 1998. Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment. Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey. Guinee, J., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., Koning, A., et al., 2001. In: Guinee, J. (Ed.), Life Cycle Assessment: An Operational Guide to the ISO Standards Netherlands. Haas, G., Wetterich, F., Köpke, U., 2001. Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 83 (1e2), 43e53. Halberg, N., van der Werf, H.M.G., Basset-Mens, C., Dalgaard, R., de Boer, I.J.M., 2005. Environmental assessment tools for the evaluation and improvement of European livestock production systems 33e50. Halleux, H., Lassaux, S., Renzoni, R., Germain, A., 2008. Comparative life cycle assessment of two biofuels ethanol from sugar beet and rapeseed methyl ester. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13 (3), 184e190. Havlikova, M., Kroeze, C., Huijbrets, M.A.J., 2008. Environmental and health impact by dairy cattle livestock and manure management in the Czech Republic. Science of the Total Environment 396 (2e3), 121e131. Heller, M.C., Keoleian, G.A., 2011. Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas analysis of a large-scale Vertically Integrated organic dairy in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology 45 (5), 1903e1910. Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2003. Simplified life cycle assessment of galician milk production. International Dairy Journal 13 (10), 783e796. IIBGE, 2010. Contagem da população. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistic. IPCC, 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Iriarte, A., Rieradevall, J., Gabarrell, X., 2010. Life cycle assessment of sunflower and rapeseed as energy crops under Chilean conditions. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (4), 336e345. Iribarren, D., Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2011. Benchmarking environmental and operational parameters through eco-efficiency criteria for dairy farms. Science of the Total Environment 409 (10), 1786e1798. ISO, 2006a. ISO 14040: Environmental Management e Life Cycle Assessment Requirements and Guidelines. ISO copyright office, Geneva. ISO, 2006b. ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment e Principles and Framework. ISO copyright office, Geneva. Jensen, A., 1997. Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA): A Guide to Approaches, Experiences and Information Sources. European Environmental Agency, Copenhague. Kagi, T., Nemecek, T., Gaillard, G., 2007. Life cycle assessment of energy crops. Agrarforschung 14 (10), 460e465. Kaku K., Ogino A., Osada T., Shimada K., 2005. Life Cycle Assessment of Concentrate Feed Supply System for Japanese Domestic Livestock Industry. 4th Australian LCA Conference. Sydney. Kanyarushoki C., Fuchs F., van der Werf H.M.G., 2008. Environmental evaluation of cow and goat milk chains in France. 6th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Katajajuuri J.M., Grönroos J., Usva K., 2008. Environmental impacts and related options for improving the chicken meat supply chain. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Kimming, M., Sundberg, C., Nordberg, A., Baky, A., Bernesson, S., Noren, O., et al., 2011. Biomass from agriculture in small-scale combined heat and power plants e A comparative life cycle assessment. Biomass & Bioenergy 35 (4), 1572e1581. Kloverpris, J.H., Baltzer, K., Nielsen, P.H., 2010. Life cycle inventory modelling of land use induced by crop consumption. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (1), 90e103. Knudsen, M.T., Qiao, Y.H., Luo, Y., Halberg, N., 2010. Environmental assessment of organic soybean (Glycine max.) imported from China to Denmark: a case study. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (14), 1431e1439. Koneswaran, G., Nierenberg Global Farm Animal Production, D., Warming, Global, 2008. Impacting and Mitigating Climate Change. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116. Kyoto, 2005. Kyoto Protocol. Larney, F.J., Buckley, K.E., Hao, X.Y., McCaughey, W.P., 2006. Fresh, stockpiled, and composted beef cattle feedlot manure: nutrient levels and mass balance estimates in Alberta and Manitoba. Journal of Environmental Quality 35 (5), 1844e1854. 23 Ledgard S.F., Finlayson J.D., Patterson M.G., Carran R.A., Wedderburn M.E., 2003. Effects of Intensification of Dairy Farming in New Zealand on Wholesystem Resource Use Efficiency and Environmental Emissions. 4th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Bygholm, Denmark. Lora, E.E.S., Palacio, J.C.E., Rocha, M.H., Reno, M.L.G., Venturini, O.J., del Olmo, O.A., 2011. Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuels sustainability assessments. Energy 36 (4), 2097e2110. Luo, L., van der Voet, E., Huppes, G., 2009. Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of bioethanol from sugarcane in Brazil. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (6e7), 1613e1619. MAPA, 2010a. Projeções do Agronegócio. Brasil 2009/10 a 2019/20. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Brasília. MAPA, 2010b. Agronegócio Brasileiro: uma oportunidade de investimentos. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, Brasília. Martinez-Blanco, J., Munoz, P., Anton, A., Rieradevall, J., 2011. Assessment of tomato Mediterranean production in open-field and standard multi-tunnel greenhouse, with compost or mineral fertilizers, from an agricultural and environmental standpoint. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (9e10), 985e997. Mourad, A.L., Coltro, L., Oliveira, P., Kletecke, R.M., Baddini, J., 2007. A simple methodology for elaborating the life cycle inventory of agricultural products. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12 (6), 408e413. Muller-Lindenlauf, M., Deittert, C., Kopke, U., 2010. Assessment of environmental effects, animal welfare and milk quality among organic dairy farms. Livestock Science 128 (1e3), 140e148. Muller-Wenk, R., Brandao, M., 2010. Climatic impact of land use in LCA-carbon transfers between vegetation/soil and air. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (2), 172e182. Nemecek, T., Huguenin-Elie, O., Dubois, D., Gaillard, G., Schaller, B., Chervet, A., 2011a. Life cycle assessment of Swiss farming systems: II. Extensive and intensive production. Agricultural Systems 104 (3), 233e245. Nemecek, T., Dubois, D., Huguenin-Elie, O., Gaillard, G., 2011b. Life cycle assessment of Swiss farming systems: I. Integrated and organic farming. Agricultural Systems 104 (3), 217e232. Neupane, B., Halog, A., Dhungel, S., 2011. Attributional life cycle assessment of woodchips for bioethanol production. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (6e7), 733e741. O’Brien, D., Shalloo, L., Buckley, F., Horan, B., Grainger, C., Wallace, M., 2011. The effect of methodology on estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from grassbased dairy systems. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 141 (1e2), 39e48. Ogino, A., Kaku, K., Osada, T., Shimada, K., 2004. Environmental impacts of the Japanese beef-fattening system with different feeding lengths as evaluated by a life-cycle assessment method. Journal of Animal Science 82 (7), 2115e2122. Ogino, A., Orito, H., Shimada, K., Hirooka, H., 2007. Evaluating environmental impacts of the Japanese beef cow-calf system by the life cycle assessment method. Animal Science Journal 78 (4), 424e432. Ometto, A.R., Hauschild, M.Z., Roma, W.N.L., 2009. Lifecycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (3), 236e247. Panichelli, L., Dauriat, A., Gnansounou, E., 2009. Life cycle assessment of soybeanbased biodiesel in Argentina for export. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 (2), 144e159. Pelletier, N., Tyedmers, P., Sonesson, U., Scholz, A., Ziegler, F., Flysjo, A., et al., 2009. Not all Salmon are created equal: life cycle assessment (LCA) of global Salmon farming systems. Environmental Science & Technology 43 (23), 8730e8736. Pelletier, N., Pirog, R., Rasmussen, R., 2010. Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States. Agricultural Systems 103 (6), 380e389. Peters, G.M., Wiedemann, S.G., Rowley, H.V., Tucker, R.W., 2010. Accounting for water use in Australian red meat production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (3), 311e320. Prudêncio da Silva, V., van der Werf, H.M.G., Spies, A., Soares, S.R., 2010. Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybean according to crop production and transport scenarios. Journal of Environmental Management 91 (9), 1831e1839. Prudêncio da Silva V., Soares S.R., Alvarenga R.A.F., 2008. Cradle to gate study of two differing Brazilian poultry production systems. 6th international Conference on LCA in the agri-food sector. Zurich, pp. 234e241. Renouf, M., Wegener, M., Pagan, R., 2010. Life cycle assessment of Australian sugarcane production with a focus on sugarcane growing. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (9), 927e937. Riello, L., 2006. Life cycle assessment for evaluating on-farm energy production: the case of sunflower oil. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 705e714. Roedl, A., 2010. Production and energetic utilization of wood from short rotation coppice-a life cycle assessment. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (6), 567e578. Romanelli, T.L., Milan, M., 2010. Material flow determination through agricultural machinery management. Scientia Agricola 67 (4), 8. Sandars, D.L., Audsley, E., Canete, C., Cumby, T.R., Scotford, I.M., Williams, A.G., 2003. Environmental benefits of livestock manure management practices and technology by life cycle assessment. Biosystems Engineering 84 (3), 267e281. Saunders, C., Barber, A., 2007. Comparative energy and greenhouse gas emissions of New Zealand’s and the UK’s dairy industry. AERU. Saunders, C., Barber, A., Taylor, G., 2006. Food miles: comparative energy/emissions performance of New Zealand0 s agriculture industry. AERU. Author's personal copy 24 C.F. Ruviaro et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 28 (2012) 9e24 Schlich E., Krause F., Hardtert B., 2008. Beef of Local and global provenience: a comparison in terms of energy, CO2, scale, and farm management. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich, pp. 325e331. Schmidt, J.H., 2010. Comparative life cycle assessment of rapeseed oil and palm oil. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (2), 183e197. Seabra, J.E.A., Macedo, I.C., Chum, H.L., Faroni, C.E., Sarto, C.A., 2011. Modeling and analysis: life cycle assessment of Brazilian sugarcane products: GHG emissions and energy use. Biofuels, Bioproduction Biorefinary. Soler-Rovira J., Soler-Rovira P., 2008. Assessment of Aggregated Indicators of Sustainability Using PCA: The Case of Apple Trade in Spain. 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food Sector. Zurich. Souza D.M., Soares S.R., Sousa S.R., Dias A.M.P., 2007. Development of a life cycle impact assessment method for Brazil. 3rd international Conference on life cycle management. Zurich. Thomassen, M.A., van Calker, K.J., Smits, M.C.J., Iepema, G.L., de Boer, I.J.M., 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural Systems 96 (1e3), 95e107. van der Werf, H.M.G., Petit, J., 2002. Evaluation of the environmental impact of agriculture at the farm level: a comparison and analysis of 12 indicator-based methods. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 93 (1e3), 131e145. van der Werf, H.M.G., Petit, J., Sanders, J., 2005. The environmental impacts of the production of concentrated feed: the case of pig feed in Bretagne. Agricultural Systems 83 (2), 153e177. Vazquez-Rowe, I., Iribarren, D., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2010. Combined application of life cycle assessment and data envelopment analysis as a methodological approach for the assessment of fisheries. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (3), 272e283. Wang, M.X., Xia, X.F., Zhang, Q.J., Liu, J.G., 2010. Life cycle assessment of a rice production system in Taihu region, China. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 17 (2), 157e161. Xiao, J., Shen, L.H., Zhang, Y.A., Gu, J.Q., 2009. Integrated analysis of energy, economic, and environmental performance of biomethanol from rice straw in China. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 48 (22), 9999e10007. Yan, M.J., Humphreys, J., Holden, N.M., 2011. An evaluation of life cycle assessment of European milk production. Journal of Environmental Management 92 (3), 372e379. Zaks, D.P.M., Barford, C.C., Ramankutty, N., Foley, J.A., 2009. Producer and consumer responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural production-a perspective from the Brazilian Amazon. Environmental Research Letters 4 (4).