Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 5/2014

01-05-2014 | WOOD AND OTHER RENEWABLE RESOURCES

Accounting for overfishing in life cycle assessment: new impact categories for biotic resource use

Authors: Andreas Emanuelsson, Friederike Ziegler, Leif Pihl, Mattias Sköld, Ulf Sonesson

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 5/2014

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

Overfishing is a relevant issue to include in all life cycle assessments (LCAs) involving wild caught fish, as overfishing of fish stocks clearly targets the LCA safeguard objects of natural resources and natural ecosystems. Yet no robust method for assessing overfishing has been available. We propose lost potential yield (LPY) as a midpoint impact category to quantify overfishing, comparing the outcome of current with target fisheries management. This category primarily reflects the impact on biotic resource availability, but also serves as a proxy for ecosystem impacts within each stock.

Methods

LPY represents average lost catches owing to ongoing overfishing, assessed by simplified biomass projections covering different fishing mortality scenarios. It is based on the maximum sustainable yield concept and complemented by two alternative methods, overfishing though fishing mortality (OF) and overfishedness of biomass (OB), that are less data-demanding.

Results and discussion

Characterization factors are provided for 31 European commercial fish stocks in 2010, representing 74 % of European and 7 % of global landings. However, large spatial and temporal variations were observed, requiring novel approaches for the LCA practitioner. The methodology is considered compliant with the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) standard in most relevant aspects, although harmonization through normalization and endpoint characterization is only briefly discussed.

Conclusions

Seafood LCAs including any of the three approaches can be a powerful communicative tool for the food industry, seafood certification programmes, and for fisheries management.
previous article A methodology for separating uncertainty and variability in the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of coal-fueled power generation in the USA
next article Life-time achievement award in life cycle assessment for Mark Goedkoop

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Readers with non-LCA background are encouraged to view key concept glossary in supplementary information S1a
 
2
Readers with non-fisheries biologist background are encouraged to view key concept glossary in supplementary information S1b
 
3
Instantaneous fishing mortality (Finst) is the F used and communicated most frequently in fisheries management, e.g., the one given in ICES advice, although it is less intuitive (measured on a log scale) than the annual fishing mortality (Fannual, the proportion harvested each year), which was our input data into the projection function. For example, an instantaneous fishing mortality of 0.5, 1, and 1.5 corresponds to an annual fishing mortality of 39, 63, and 78 %, respectively, of the spawning stock biomass of that stock harvested each year by the fishery.
 
4
The cautious LCA practitioner will notice that both parameters B (SSB) and F do vary (slightly) retrospectively for each new stock assessment, since more data are fitted to the assessment time series, increasing the model's accuracy. For example, B regarding 2010 assessed in 2011 can be slightly changed in the 2012 assessment.
 
Literature
Agnew DJ, Gutiérrez NL, Stern-Pirlot A, Smith ADM, Zimmermann C, Sainsbury K (2013) Rebuttal to Froese and Proelß “evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood”. Mar Policy 38:551–553CrossRef
Anticamara JA, Watson R, Gelchu A, Pauly D (2011) Global fishing effort (1950–2010): trends, gaps, and implications. Fish Res 107(1–3):131–136CrossRef
Avadí A, Fréon P (2013) Life cycle assessment of fisheries: a review for fisheries scientists and managers. Fish Res 143:21–38CrossRef
BSI (2012) PAS2050-2:2012—assessment of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions—supplementary requirements for the application of PAS 2050:2011 to seafood and other aquatic food products. The British Standards Institution, London
EC (2003) COM 302 Integrated product policy—building on environmental life-cycle thinking. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels
EC (2008a) Council regulation No 99/2008 concerning the establishment of a community framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy. Council Regulation (EC), Brussels
EC (2008b) Directive 2008/56/EC—establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine strategy framework directive). Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels
EC (2011) COM 425 Proposal of the European Commission for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Brussels
Emanuelsson A (2008) Bycatch and discard in Senegalese artisanal and industrial fisheries for southern pink shrimp (Penaeus notialis), vol 774. SIK, Gothenburg
FAO (2008) The sunken billions—the economic justification for fisheries reform. World Bank and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Washington DC
FAO (2012) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome
Ford JS, Pelletier NL, Ziegler F, Scholz AJ, Tyedmers PH, Sonesson U, Kruse SA, Silverman H (2012) Proposed local ecological impact categories and indicators for life cycle assessment of aquaculture: a salmon aquaculture case study. J Ind Ecol 16(2):254–265CrossRef
Froese R, Proelß A (2010) Rebuilding fish stocks no later than 2015: will Europe meet the deadline? Fish Fish 11(2):194–202CrossRef
Gutiérrez NL, Valencia SR, Branch TA, Agnew DJ, Baum JK, Bianchi PL, Cornejo-Donoso J, Costello C, Defeo O, Essington TE, Hilborn R, Hoggarth DD, Larsen AE, Ninnes C, Sainsbury K, Selden RL, Sistla S, Smith ADM, Stern-Pirlot A, Teck SJ, Thorson JT, Williams NE (2012) Eco-label conveys reliable information on fish stock health to seafood consumers. Plos One 7(8):e43765CrossRef
Haes HAU, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klöpffer W, Krewit W, Lindeijer E, Muller-Wenk R, Olsen SI, Pennington DW, Potting J, Steen B (2002) Life cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Brussels
Hilborn R, Branch TA (2013) Fisheries: does catch reflect abundance? No, it is misleading. Nature 494(7437):303–306CrossRef
Hornborg S, Nilsson P, Valentinsson D, Ziegler F (2012) Integrated environmental assessment of fisheries management: Swedish nephrops trawl fisheries evaluated using a life cycle approach. Mar Policy 36(6):1193–1201CrossRef
Hornborg S, Belgrano A, Bartolino V, Valentinsson D, Ziegler F (2013a) Trophic indicators in fisheries: a call for re-evaluation. Biol Lett 9(1):20121050
Hornborg S, Svensson M, Nilsson P, Ziegler F (2013b) The IUCN Red List as a framework for communication regarding discard impacts in fisheries. Env Mgmt 52(5):1239-1248
ICES (2011) Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS) : ANNEX: WGBFAS Cod in 22–24, Copenhagen
ICES (2012a) ICES Advice 2012 Book 1–Introduction, overviews, and special requests. The International Council for Exploration of the Seas, Copenhagen
ICES (2012b) Stock summary database, at ICES website. The International Council for Exploration of the Seas. Accessed 1 December 2012
ILCD (2010) ILCD handbook—general guide to life cycle assessments—detailed guidance, 1st edn. Joint Research Center of the European Commission, Luxenburg
ISO (2006a) ISO14040 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principals and framework. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland
ISO (2006b) ISO14044 Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland
Kraak SBM, Bailey N, Cardinale M, Darby C, De Oliveira JAA, Eero M, Graham N, Holmes S, Jakobsen T, Kempf A, Kirkegaard E, Powell J, Scott RD, Simmonds EJ, Ulrich C, Vanhee W, Vinther M (2013) Lessons for fisheries management from the EU cod recovery plan. Mar Policy 37:200–213CrossRef
Langlois J, Hélias A, Delgenes J-P, Steyer J-P (2011) Review on land use considerations in life cycle assessment: methodological perspectives for marine ecosystems. In: Finkbeiner M (ed) Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Management, Chapter 9. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 85–96CrossRef
Langlois J, Fréon P, Delgenes J-P, Steyer J-P, Hélias A (2012) Biotic resources extraction impact assessment in LCA of fisheries. In: Corson MS, van der Werf HMG (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international conference on life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector (LCA food 2012), 1–4 October 2012, Saint Malo, France. INRA, Rennes, France, pp 517–523
MEA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: Biodiversity synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), Washington DC
Papatryphon E, Petit J, Kaushik SJ, van der Werf HMG (2004) Environmental impact assessment of salmonid feeds using life cycle assessment (LCA). Ambio 33(6):316–323
Parker R (2012) Review of life cycle assessments research on products derived from fisheries and aquaculture: a review for seafish as part of the collective action to address greenhouse gas emissions in seafood. Sea Fish Industry Authority, Edinburgh, UK
Pauly D, Christensen V, Guenette S, Pitcher TJ, Sumaila UR, Walters CJ, Watson R, Zeller D (2002) Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418(6898):689–695CrossRef
Pelletier N, Ayer N, Tyedmers P, Kruse S, Flysjo A, Robillard G, Ziegler F, Scholz A, Sonesson U (2007) Impact categories for life cycle assessment research of seafood production systems: review and prospectus. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(6):414–421CrossRef
Punt A, Smith ADM (2001) The gospel of maximum sustainable yield in fisheries management: birth, crucifixion, and reincarnation. In: Reynolds JD, Mace GM, Redford KH, Robinsson HG (eds) Conservation of exploited species. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, pp 41–66
Ramos S, Vázquez-Rowe I, Artetxe I, Moreira M, Feijoo G, Zufía J (2011) Environmental assessment of the Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) season in the Basque country. Increasing the timeline delimitation in fishery LCA studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(7):599–610CrossRef
Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson A, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, van der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sorlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P, Foley JA (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461(7263):472–475CrossRef
Schaefer M (1954) Some aspects of the dynamics of populations important to the management of the commercial Marine fisheries. Bulletin of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission 1(2):27–56
Swartz W, Sala E, Tracey S, Watson R, Pauly D (2010) The spatial expansion and ecological footprint of fisheries (1950 to present). Plos One 5(12):e15143CrossRef
Thrane M, Ziegler F, Sonesson U (2009) Eco-labeling of wild-caught seafood products. J Clean Prod 17(3):416–423CrossRef
Vázquez-Rowe I, Hospido A, Moreira MT, Feijoo G (2012a) Best practices in life cycle assessment implementation in fisheries. Improving and broadening environmental assessment for seafood production systems. Trends Food Sci Tech 28(2):116–131CrossRef
Vázquez-Rowe I, Moreira M, Feijoo G (2012b) Inclusion of discard assessment indicators in fisheries life cycle assessment studies. Expanding the use of fishery-specific impact categories. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(5):535–549CrossRef
Worm B, Hilborn R, Baum JK, Branch TA, Collie JS, Costello C, Fogarty MJ, Fulton EA, Hutchings JA, Jennings S, Jensen OP, Lotze HK, Mace PM, McClanahan TR, Minto C, Palumbi SR, Parma AM, Ricard D, Rosenberg AA, Watson R, Zeller D (2009) Rebuilding global fisheries. Science 325(5940):578–585CrossRef
Ziegler F, Nilsson P, Mattsson B, Walther Y (2003) Life cycle assessment of frozen cod filets including fishery-specific environmental impacts. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(1):39–47
Ziegler F, Emanuelsson A, Eichelsheim JL, Flysjö A, Ndiaye V, Thrane M (2011) Extended life cycle assessment of southern pink shrimp products originating in Senegalese artisanal and industrial fisheries for export to Europe. J Ind Ecol 15(4):527–538CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Accounting for overfishing in life cycle assessment: new impact categories for biotic resource use
Authors
Andreas Emanuelsson
Friederike Ziegler
Leif Pihl
Mattias Sköld
Ulf Sonesson
Publication date
01-05-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0684-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 5/2014 Go to the issue

LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Tackling environmental impacts in simple trigeneration systems operating under variable conditions

LCI METHODOLOGY AND DATABASES

Application of robust optimization in matrix-based LCI for decision making under uncertainty

LAND USE IN LCA

Sea-use impact category in life cycle assessment: state of the art and perspectives

INPUT-OUTPUT AND HYBRID LCA

Simplifying a life cycle assessment of a mobile phone

CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT

EcoBalance 2014: creating benefit through life cycle thinking

LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT

Life cycle thinking in small and medium enterprises: the results of research on the implementation of life cycle tools in Polish SMEs—Part 3: LCC-related aspects