Analyzing the suitability of LCIA methods to foster the most beneficial food loss and waste prevention action in terms of environmental sustainability

Datos Bibliográficos

ID11368254
AutoresElena Domingo-Morcillo (Universitat Jaume I, autor de correspondencia), Elena Escrig-Olmedo, Elena Escrig‐Olmedo (0000-0001-9135-1276, Universitat Jaume I), Juana María Rivera-Lirio, Juana María Rivera‐Lirio (0000-0002-8434-6222, Universitat Jaume I), María Jesús Muñoz Torres (0000-0002-7500-0617, Universitat Jaume I), María Jesús Muñoz-Torres
Año2024
Volumen107
Páginas107575
Fecha de publicación2024-07-01
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0195-9255 • E-ISSN: 1873-6432
EditorialElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.eiar.2024.107575
OpenAlexW4399459124
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas37

The food value chain is responsible for significant environmental and resource pressures. 14% of the total food produced in the EU is lost or wasted along the supply chain (FAO, 2019) and 19% is disposed of when reaching the consumption stage (UNEP, 2024). Therefore, to tackle the problem of food loss and waste (FLW), it is crucial to make the agri-food system sustainable. Adopting a life cycle approach to measure and assess the impacts created by FLW prevention actions is key to achieving this transition. This paper provides a detailed mapping study of EU projects that previously dealt with the issue of FLW prevention and compiles the LCIA methods that were used to conduct their environmental assessments. Two essential requirements are set to evaluate the suitability of the identified LCIA methods to detect the most beneficial FLW prevention and reduction (FLWPR) action in terms of environmental sustainability. Results show that the Environmental Footprint v3.0 method (EF v3.0) is the LCIA method that better meets these requirements. To shed light on its suitability, this paper uses the EF v3.0 method to make a comparative LCA of two specific hypothetical FLWPR actions concerning the fresh tomato value chain. Moreover, this study highlights the strengths of this LCIA method and explores pathways to overcome possible shortcomings. The outputs of this study represent an academic breakthrough in the field of FLWPR by addressing the requirements for guiding the selection of a method that enhances comparability between FLWPR actions and provides science-based tools that can help decision-makers follow a path to a more sustainable agri-food system. • Tackling food loss and waste problem is crucial for a sustainable agri-food system. • Life cycle approach is key to assessing the impacts of food loss and waste prevention. • At midpoint, weighting and single score help to compare environmental performance. • Having a whole picture of environmental performance enables hotspots identification. • Environmental Footprint 3.0 allows to compare food waste prevention actions impacts

Action (physics · Business · Economics · Environmental economics · Environmental planning · Food waste · Natural resource economics · Risk analysis (engineering · Sustainability · Waste management · Engineering · Environmental Science · Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability · Recycling and Waste Management Techniques · Sustainable Supply Chain Management · Ecology

Herramientas

Abrir DOIOpen Access