Loading…
Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study
Purpose Agricultural land use and land-use change, especially from forests to agricultural land, to satisfy growing demand for food and feed, is a major cause of global biodiversity loss. International trade connects food consumption to land use across the world, leading consumption in one area to a...
Saved in:
Published in: | The international journal of life cycle assessment 2023-09, Vol.28 (9), p.1104-1116 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3 |
container_end_page | 1116 |
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 1104 |
container_title | The international journal of life cycle assessment |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Kyttä, Venla Hyvönen, Terho Saarinen, Merja |
description | Purpose
Agricultural land use and land-use change, especially from forests to agricultural land, to satisfy growing demand for food and feed, is a major cause of global biodiversity loss. International trade connects food consumption to land use across the world, leading consumption in one area to affect ecosystems elsewhere. However, methods for evaluating the effects of food consumption on biodiversity are still under development. Here, we evaluate two recent land-use-based biodiversity life cycle impact assessment methods, using the Finnish diet as a case study.
Methods
Two different land-use-based biodiversity impact assessment methods (Chaudhary and Books
2018
; Kuipers et al.
2021
) were used to evaluate the biodiversity impacts of five dietary scenarios: the current Finnish diet and four alternative scenarios that involve a gradual reduction in the intake of foods of animal origin. The assessment was conducted using the previously developed FoodMin model. The model assesses the climate impact and nutritional quality of diets based on 90 food product groups. The countries of origin for each product group, as well as the land occupation and land-use change associated with the products, were determined using five-year averages from national import and international yield and land-use change statistics.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the biodiversity impacts vary depending on the assessment method used, with the difference in the dietary impacts being 60-fold in magnitude depending on the method. Most of the impacts were related to land-use change, which was linked especially to production of feeds, leading to the dietary impacts being reduced with intake of foods of animal origin. The occupation impacts were associated with different food groups than those of land-use change and were higher than the land-use change impacts for beverages, and sugars and sweets. Trade played a significant role in biodiversity impacts of diets, with over 85% of impacts being linked to imported foods and feeds.
Conclusions and recommendations
A comparison of the two assessment methods for the biodiversity impact of diet scenarios showed that results obtained with these methods should not be compared in absolute terms. Also, on a product-level basis, the methods lead to different relative results, and the choice of method can affect which products appear the most burdensome. The assessment also showed that land-use change had a greater impact than land occup |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11367-023-02201-w |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2859756902</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2859756902</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1KBDEQhYMoOI5ewFXAdTQ_ne70UsQ_GHCj65BJVzTiJGMq4zA7D-EJPYmtI7hzUVTxeO8VfIQcC34qOO_OUAjVdoxLNY7kgq13yES0omGd5nKXTHjfGKZU0--TA8RnzqXgvZ6QNHNpYCsENpT4BonOYx7Go2CsGxoXS-cr0hzoEKHi5_uHoz6PaomY07de15k6REBcQKp0AfUpD0hjoo5exZQiPlHvECjW1bA5JHvBvSAc_e4pebi6vL-4YbO769uL8xnzqlWVhTBXUoCDoI1QGpyE0BoteiO9MkqqoALwTjtjQDbQeSPVvPO6bYPhofFqSk62vcuSX1eA1T7nVUnjSyuN7jvd9iOrKZFbly8ZsUCwyxIXrmys4Pabq91ytaPX_nC16zGktiEczekRyl_1P6kvlTN-EQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2859756902</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Kyttä, Venla ; Hyvönen, Terho ; Saarinen, Merja</creator><creatorcontrib>Kyttä, Venla ; Hyvönen, Terho ; Saarinen, Merja</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
Agricultural land use and land-use change, especially from forests to agricultural land, to satisfy growing demand for food and feed, is a major cause of global biodiversity loss. International trade connects food consumption to land use across the world, leading consumption in one area to affect ecosystems elsewhere. However, methods for evaluating the effects of food consumption on biodiversity are still under development. Here, we evaluate two recent land-use-based biodiversity life cycle impact assessment methods, using the Finnish diet as a case study.
Methods
Two different land-use-based biodiversity impact assessment methods (Chaudhary and Books
2018
; Kuipers et al.
2021
) were used to evaluate the biodiversity impacts of five dietary scenarios: the current Finnish diet and four alternative scenarios that involve a gradual reduction in the intake of foods of animal origin. The assessment was conducted using the previously developed FoodMin model. The model assesses the climate impact and nutritional quality of diets based on 90 food product groups. The countries of origin for each product group, as well as the land occupation and land-use change associated with the products, were determined using five-year averages from national import and international yield and land-use change statistics.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the biodiversity impacts vary depending on the assessment method used, with the difference in the dietary impacts being 60-fold in magnitude depending on the method. Most of the impacts were related to land-use change, which was linked especially to production of feeds, leading to the dietary impacts being reduced with intake of foods of animal origin. The occupation impacts were associated with different food groups than those of land-use change and were higher than the land-use change impacts for beverages, and sugars and sweets. Trade played a significant role in biodiversity impacts of diets, with over 85% of impacts being linked to imported foods and feeds.
Conclusions and recommendations
A comparison of the two assessment methods for the biodiversity impact of diet scenarios showed that results obtained with these methods should not be compared in absolute terms. Also, on a product-level basis, the methods lead to different relative results, and the choice of method can affect which products appear the most burdensome. The assessment also showed that land-use change had a greater impact than land occupation. Thus, ignoring the impacts of land-use change, particularly in feed production, might underestimate the contribution of animal-source foods. Hence, both factors should be considered in future LCAs. Further research is also needed to develop and unify the biodiversity impact assessment methods, including the clarification of units, improving the accuracy of land-use change methodology, and analyzing the impacts of various agricultural management practices.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0948-3349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7502</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11367-023-02201-w</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Agricultural land ; Agricultural management ; Animal-based foods ; Beverages ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity loss ; Case studies ; Diet ; Dietary intake ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Environment ; Environmental Chemistry ; Environmental Economics ; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology ; Food ; Food consumption ; Food groups ; Food intake ; Food sources ; International trade ; Land use ; Land Use in Lca ; Life cycle assessment ; Life cycles ; Nutritive value</subject><ispartof>The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2023-09, Vol.28 (9), p.1104-1116</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3700-5959</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kyttä, Venla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hyvönen, Terho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saarinen, Merja</creatorcontrib><title>Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study</title><title>The international journal of life cycle assessment</title><addtitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</addtitle><description>Purpose
Agricultural land use and land-use change, especially from forests to agricultural land, to satisfy growing demand for food and feed, is a major cause of global biodiversity loss. International trade connects food consumption to land use across the world, leading consumption in one area to affect ecosystems elsewhere. However, methods for evaluating the effects of food consumption on biodiversity are still under development. Here, we evaluate two recent land-use-based biodiversity life cycle impact assessment methods, using the Finnish diet as a case study.
Methods
Two different land-use-based biodiversity impact assessment methods (Chaudhary and Books
2018
; Kuipers et al.
2021
) were used to evaluate the biodiversity impacts of five dietary scenarios: the current Finnish diet and four alternative scenarios that involve a gradual reduction in the intake of foods of animal origin. The assessment was conducted using the previously developed FoodMin model. The model assesses the climate impact and nutritional quality of diets based on 90 food product groups. The countries of origin for each product group, as well as the land occupation and land-use change associated with the products, were determined using five-year averages from national import and international yield and land-use change statistics.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the biodiversity impacts vary depending on the assessment method used, with the difference in the dietary impacts being 60-fold in magnitude depending on the method. Most of the impacts were related to land-use change, which was linked especially to production of feeds, leading to the dietary impacts being reduced with intake of foods of animal origin. The occupation impacts were associated with different food groups than those of land-use change and were higher than the land-use change impacts for beverages, and sugars and sweets. Trade played a significant role in biodiversity impacts of diets, with over 85% of impacts being linked to imported foods and feeds.
Conclusions and recommendations
A comparison of the two assessment methods for the biodiversity impact of diet scenarios showed that results obtained with these methods should not be compared in absolute terms. Also, on a product-level basis, the methods lead to different relative results, and the choice of method can affect which products appear the most burdensome. The assessment also showed that land-use change had a greater impact than land occupation. Thus, ignoring the impacts of land-use change, particularly in feed production, might underestimate the contribution of animal-source foods. Hence, both factors should be considered in future LCAs. Further research is also needed to develop and unify the biodiversity impact assessment methods, including the clarification of units, improving the accuracy of land-use change methodology, and analyzing the impacts of various agricultural management practices.</description><subject>Agricultural land</subject><subject>Agricultural management</subject><subject>Animal-based foods</subject><subject>Beverages</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity loss</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Diet</subject><subject>Dietary intake</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Chemistry</subject><subject>Environmental Economics</subject><subject>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food consumption</subject><subject>Food groups</subject><subject>Food intake</subject><subject>Food sources</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Land Use in Lca</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Nutritive value</subject><issn>0948-3349</issn><issn>1614-7502</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1KBDEQhYMoOI5ewFXAdTQ_ne70UsQ_GHCj65BJVzTiJGMq4zA7D-EJPYmtI7hzUVTxeO8VfIQcC34qOO_OUAjVdoxLNY7kgq13yES0omGd5nKXTHjfGKZU0--TA8RnzqXgvZ6QNHNpYCsENpT4BonOYx7Go2CsGxoXS-cr0hzoEKHi5_uHoz6PaomY07de15k6REBcQKp0AfUpD0hjoo5exZQiPlHvECjW1bA5JHvBvSAc_e4pebi6vL-4YbO769uL8xnzqlWVhTBXUoCDoI1QGpyE0BoteiO9MkqqoALwTjtjQDbQeSPVvPO6bYPhofFqSk62vcuSX1eA1T7nVUnjSyuN7jvd9iOrKZFbly8ZsUCwyxIXrmys4Pabq91ytaPX_nC16zGktiEczekRyl_1P6kvlTN-EQ</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Kyttä, Venla</creator><creator>Hyvönen, Terho</creator><creator>Saarinen, Merja</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3700-5959</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study</title><author>Kyttä, Venla ; Hyvönen, Terho ; Saarinen, Merja</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Agricultural land</topic><topic>Agricultural management</topic><topic>Animal-based foods</topic><topic>Beverages</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity loss</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Diet</topic><topic>Dietary intake</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Chemistry</topic><topic>Environmental Economics</topic><topic>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food consumption</topic><topic>Food groups</topic><topic>Food intake</topic><topic>Food sources</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Land Use in Lca</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Nutritive value</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kyttä, Venla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hyvönen, Terho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saarinen, Merja</creatorcontrib><collection>SpringerOpen</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kyttä, Venla</au><au>Hyvönen, Terho</au><au>Saarinen, Merja</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle><stitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</stitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1104</spage><epage>1116</epage><pages>1104-1116</pages><issn>0948-3349</issn><eissn>1614-7502</eissn><abstract>Purpose
Agricultural land use and land-use change, especially from forests to agricultural land, to satisfy growing demand for food and feed, is a major cause of global biodiversity loss. International trade connects food consumption to land use across the world, leading consumption in one area to affect ecosystems elsewhere. However, methods for evaluating the effects of food consumption on biodiversity are still under development. Here, we evaluate two recent land-use-based biodiversity life cycle impact assessment methods, using the Finnish diet as a case study.
Methods
Two different land-use-based biodiversity impact assessment methods (Chaudhary and Books
2018
; Kuipers et al.
2021
) were used to evaluate the biodiversity impacts of five dietary scenarios: the current Finnish diet and four alternative scenarios that involve a gradual reduction in the intake of foods of animal origin. The assessment was conducted using the previously developed FoodMin model. The model assesses the climate impact and nutritional quality of diets based on 90 food product groups. The countries of origin for each product group, as well as the land occupation and land-use change associated with the products, were determined using five-year averages from national import and international yield and land-use change statistics.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the biodiversity impacts vary depending on the assessment method used, with the difference in the dietary impacts being 60-fold in magnitude depending on the method. Most of the impacts were related to land-use change, which was linked especially to production of feeds, leading to the dietary impacts being reduced with intake of foods of animal origin. The occupation impacts were associated with different food groups than those of land-use change and were higher than the land-use change impacts for beverages, and sugars and sweets. Trade played a significant role in biodiversity impacts of diets, with over 85% of impacts being linked to imported foods and feeds.
Conclusions and recommendations
A comparison of the two assessment methods for the biodiversity impact of diet scenarios showed that results obtained with these methods should not be compared in absolute terms. Also, on a product-level basis, the methods lead to different relative results, and the choice of method can affect which products appear the most burdensome. The assessment also showed that land-use change had a greater impact than land occupation. Thus, ignoring the impacts of land-use change, particularly in feed production, might underestimate the contribution of animal-source foods. Hence, both factors should be considered in future LCAs. Further research is also needed to develop and unify the biodiversity impact assessment methods, including the clarification of units, improving the accuracy of land-use change methodology, and analyzing the impacts of various agricultural management practices.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s11367-023-02201-w</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3700-5959</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0948-3349 |
ispartof | The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2023-09, Vol.28 (9), p.1104-1116 |
issn | 0948-3349 1614-7502 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2859756902 |
source | Springer Link |
subjects | Agricultural land Agricultural management Animal-based foods Beverages Biodiversity Biodiversity loss Case studies Diet Dietary intake Earth and Environmental Science Environment Environmental Chemistry Environmental Economics Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology Food Food consumption Food groups Food intake Food sources International trade Land use Land Use in Lca Life cycle assessment Life cycles Nutritive value |
title | Land-use-driven biodiversity impacts of diets—a comparison of two assessment methods in a Finnish case study |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T00%3A21%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Land-use-driven%20biodiversity%20impacts%20of%20diets%E2%80%94a%20comparison%20of%20two%20assessment%20methods%20in%20a%20Finnish%20case%20study&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20life%20cycle%20assessment&rft.au=Kytt%C3%A4,%20Venla&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1104&rft.epage=1116&rft.pages=1104-1116&rft.issn=0948-3349&rft.eissn=1614-7502&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11367-023-02201-w&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2859756902%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-ffb321eaef58135ea2ef6851982c38323f3fe075a88e24e7c823b7c566f80f4c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2859756902&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |