Elsevier

Food Policy

Volume 37, Issue 6, December 2012, Pages 760-770
Food Policy

The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.08.002Get rights and content

Abstract

Animal husbandry, aquaculture and fishery have major impacts on the environment. In order to identify the range of impacts and the most important factors thereof, as well as to identify what are the main causes of the differences between products, we analysed 52 life cycle assessment studies (LCAs) of animal and vegetal sources of protein. Our analysis was focused only on land requirement and carbon footprints.

In a general conclusion it can be said that the carbon footprint of the most climate-friendly protein sources is up to 100 times smaller than those of the most climate-unfriendly. The differences between footprints of the various products were found mainly to be due to differences in production systems. The outcomes for pork and poultry show much more homogeneity than for beef and seafood. This is largely because both beef and seafood production show a wide variety of production systems.

Land use (occupation), comprising both arable land and grasslands, also varies strongly, ranging from negligible for seafood to up to 2100 m2 y kg−1 of protein from extensive cattle farming. From farm to fork the feed production and animal husbandry are by far the most important contributors to the environmental impacts.

Highlights

► 104 Carbon footprints and 43 land footprints of protein sources are examined. ► Very large differences in impact between protein sources were found. ► In the life cycles, in general, the farm phase is the most important. ► Vegetal sources, poultry products and certain seafood have low carbon footprints. ► Ruminant meat and some types of seafood have high carbon footprints.

Introduction

The role of animal husbandry in climate change and loss of biodiversity has been highlighted in several studies in the past decade (e.g. Kramer, 2000, Steinfeld et al., 2006, Garnett, 2008, FAO, 2009). These publications provide the larger picture of the impacts of livestock production on a global scale. More focus and detail can be found in environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of animal food products, many of which were also published the past few years.

In an LCA the environmental impacts of a product is quantified as much as possible in a consistent and standardized way. De Vries and De Boer (2010) have reviewed a selection of LCA studies on animal products. Other meta-publications on LCAs of food products include Yan et al. (2011), Roy et al., 2009, Flachowsky and Hachenberg, 2009 and González et al. (2011). These publications mainly focus on greenhouse gases and carbon labelling, or include a limited group of products or a limited number of studies. The present review presents a broader view, based on the analysis of 52 LCA studies on meat, milk, seafood and other sources of protein. The goals were to:

  • Identify the ranges in land requirements and carbon footprints of different sources of protein.

  • Identify the most important inputs and processes in the life cycles.

  • Identify what are the main causes of differences.

We focused on land use (occupation) and greenhouse gas emissions because these aspects are very relevant to damage to ecosystems and consequential global loss of biodiversity (Alkemade et al., 2009, Rockstrom et al., 2009).

Section snippets

Methods

A method commonly used to analyse the environmental impacts of products is the environmental life cycle assessment (LCA). It is an internationally recognized method, and the ISO standards (ISO 14040 and 14044) provide guidelines for conducting LCAs. They can be used to identify the most important contributors in a production chain (gravity analysis or contribution analysis), or to make a systematic comparison of different products or production methods. Many different environmental impact

Results

The next two sections present the land use and carbon footprints of the various food products, according to the LCA studies. Tables and graphs only present results for conventional production, with the exception of the results for eggs from free range production from Mollenhorst et al. (2006), as this represents a large part of the consumer market in Europe.

Trade-offs and rebounds

This review covers the carbon footprints and land use of the major protein-rich products in the western diet. Cereals are also a significant supplier of protein, but are not included. On the basis of differences in environmental impact of the various products, we conclude that there is a large potential for reductions in the environmental impact of food consumption by choosing low-impact sources of protein. However, large scale shifts may have rebounds or trade-offs. The impact of such shifts

Conclusions

In general, from an analysis of life cycle assessment studies, it can be concluded that food products of animal origin have higher climate- and land use related impacts than vegetable products. Meat substitutes containing egg protein, poultry, eggs and some seafood products also show small carbon footprints. The largest impacts per kilogram of product was found for ruminant meat, both in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and in terms of land use (occupation). Pork has intermediate impacts.

References (101)

  • G. Haas et al.

    Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment

    Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

    (2001)
  • D. Iribarren et al.

    Carbon footprint of canned mussels from a business-to-consumer approach: a starting point for mussel processors and policy makers

    Environmental Science & Policy

    (2010)
  • D. Iribarren et al.

    Estimation of the carbon footprint of the Galician fishing activity (NW Spain)

    Science of the Total Environment

    (2010)
  • J.P. Lesschen et al.

    Greenhouse gas emission profiles of European livestock sectors

    Animal Feed Science and Technology

    (2011)
  • L. Milà i Canals et al.

    Method for assessing impacts on life support functions (LSF) related to the use of ‘fertile land’ in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

    Journal of Cleaner Production

    (2007)
  • T.L.T. Nguyen et al.

    Environmental consequences of different beef production systems in the EU

    Journal of Cleaner Production

    (2010)
  • N. Pelletier et al.

    Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the Upper Midwestern United States

    Agricultural Systems

    (2010)
  • P. Roy et al.

    A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products

    Journal of Food Engineering

    (2009)
  • J.H. Schmidt

    Development of LCIA characterisation factors for land use impacts on biodiversity

    Journal of Cleaner Production

    (2008)
  • E.M.A. Smaling et al.

    From forest to waste: assessment of the Brazilian soybean chain, using nitrogen as a marker

    Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

    (2008)
  • M.A. Thomassen et al.

    Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands

    Agricultural Systems

    (2008)
  • I. Vazquez-Rowe et al.

    Life cycle assessment of horse mackerel fisheries in Galicia (NW Spain): comparative analysis of two major fishing methods

    Fisheries Research

    (2010)
  • I. Vázquez-Rowe et al.

    Life Cycle Assessment of fresh hake fillets captured by the Galician fleet in the Northern Stock

    Fisheries Research

    (2011)
  • I. Vázquez-Rowe et al.

    Environmental assessment of frozen common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) captured by Spanish fishing vessels in the Mauritanian EEZ

    Marine Policy

    (2012)
  • X.P.C. Vergé et al.

    Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian dairy industry in 2001

    Agricultural Systems

    (2007)
  • X.P.C. Vergé et al.

    Greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian beef industry

    Agricultural Systems

    (2008)
  • X.P.C. Vergé et al.

    Long-term trends in greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian poultry industry

    Journal of Applied Poultry Research

    (2009)
  • A. Weiske et al.

    Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in European conventional and organic dairy farming

    Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

    (2006)
  • M.J. Yan et al.

    An evaluation of life cycle assessment of European milk production

    Journal of Environmental Management

    (2011)
  • R. Alkemade et al.

    GLOBIO3: a framework to investigate options for reducing global terrestrial biodiversity loss

    Ecosystems

    (2009)
  • K. Andersson

    LCA of food products and production systems

    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2000)
  • N.W. Ayer et al.

    Co-product allocation in life cycle assessments of seafood production systems: review of problems and strategies

    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2007)
  • H. Blanco-Canqui et al.

    Principles of Soil Conservation and Management

    (2008)
  • H. Blonk et al.

    Milieueffecten van Nederlandse consumptie van eiwitrijke producten (in Dutch, Environmental effects of Dutch consumption of protein-rich products)

    (2008)
  • H. Blonk et al.

    Milieueffecten van enkele populaire vissoorten (in Dutch, Environmental effects of some popular fish species)

    (2009)
  • M. Brander et al.

    Consequential and Attributional Approaches to LCA: A Guide to Policy Makers with Specific Reference to GHG LCA of Biofuels

    (2009)
  • BSI

    Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services

    (2008)
  • A. Carlsson-Kanyama et al.

    Energy Use in the Food Sector

    (2000)
  • J.W. Casey et al.

    Greenhouse gas emissions from conventional, agri-environmental scheme, and organic Irish suckler-beef units

    Journal of Environmental Quality

    (2006)
  • Cederberg, C., Flysjö, A., 2004a. Environmental Assessment of Future Pig Farming Systems – Quantification of Three...
  • Cederberg, C., Flysjö, A., 2004b. Life Cycle Inventory of 23 Dairy Farms in South-Western Sweden. SIK Report No. 728....
  • C. Cederberg et al.

    System expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production

    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2003)
  • Cederberg, C., Meyer, D., Flysjö, A., 2009a. Life Cycle Inventory of Greenhouse Gasses and Use of Land and Energy in...
  • Cederberg, C., Flysjö, A., Sonesson, U., Sund, V., Davis, J., 2009b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Swedish Consumption...
  • Ecoinvent-centre, 2009. The Life Cycle Inventory Data v2.1. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, St....
  • G. Edwards-Jones et al.

    Carbon footprinting of lamb and beef production systems: insights from an empirical analysis of farms in Wales, UK

    Journal of Agricultural Science

    (2009)
  • T. Ekvall et al.

    System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis

    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2004)
  • H. Ellingsen et al.

    Environmental impacts of wild caught cod and farmed salmon – a comparison with chicken

    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2006)
  • I.S. Eriksson et al.

    Environmental systems analysis of pig production: the impact of feed choice

    International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

    (2005)
  • FAO, 2009. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2008. FAO,...
  • Cited by (468)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text