Environmental impact of Norwegian food and beverages: compilation of a life cycle assessment food database

Monica Hauger Carlsen; Marie M. Bjøntegaard; Bob van Oort; Sepideh  Jafarzadeh; Shraddha  Mehta; Ellen C. Wright; Lene Frost Andersen

doi:10.29219/fnr.v69.10645

Monica Hauger Carlsen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Marie M. Bjøntegaard Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Bob van Oort CICERO, Center for International Climate Research, Oslo, Norway
Sepideh Jafarzadeh Department of Climate and Environment, SINTEF Ocean AS, Trondheim, Norway
Shraddha Mehta Department of Climate and Environment, SINTEF Ocean AS, Trondheim, Norway
Ellen C. Wright Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Lene Frost Andersen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29219/fnr.v69.10645

Keywords: environmental food database, life cycle assessment, food LCA, climate food impact, environmental food impact, food systems

Abstract

Background: Food production contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and pollution. Climate and environmental impacts from food production vary across geographical areas. To estimate these impacts of food and diets, country-specific data are needed.

Objective: This project aimed to compile an environmental impact food database, including the impact categories (ICs) global warming potential, soil acidification, freshwater and saltwater eutrophication, water use and land use, representative of the Norwegian diet.

Design: The compilation was based on literature searches for original life cycle assessment (LCA) studies on foods, including domestic and imported foods, which constitute the habitual diet in Norway. Food items of importance in the average Norwegian diet were identified based on the national dietary survey Norkost 3. The study’s generic system boundaries included impacts from farm to fork: production, processing, packaging, transportation, storage and food preparation at home. Conversion factors for edible portions were applied when relevant. When LCA data of a certain food were missing, data from foods with similar cultivation conditions and nutritional composition were used as proxies. Data from other LCA food databases were also used if original LCA studies were not identified, or the LCA studies found were evaluated as being of poor quality.

Results: The compiled database is tailored specifically for and covers main animal- and plant-based foods in the Norwegian diet.

Discussion: Limitations of the compilation project include the fact that most LCA studies identified in the present project covered ICs up to the farm gate and used varying methodology. Also, proxy values were used when data for specific food items were missing. These methodological issues introduce variability and complicate direct comparisons. The strength of the present study is the thorough work in compiling and filling data gaps for the IC values of foods in the Norwegian diet.

Conclusions: The Norwegian LCA food database enables simultaneous estimation of food and nutrient intakes and estimation of climate and environmental impacts of Norwegian diets.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1.
Crippa M, Solazzo E, Guizzardi D, Monforti-Ferrario F, Tubiello FN, Leip A. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat Food 2021; 2(3): 198–209. doi: 10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9

2.
Ivanovich CC, Sun TY, Gordon DR, Ocko IB. Future warming from global food consumption. Nat Clim Change 2023; 13(3): 297. doi: 10.1038/s41558-023-01605-8

3.
Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 2018; 360(6392): 987. doi: 10.1126/science.aaq0216

4.
Food and Agricultural Oragnization. The state of the world’s land and water resources for food and agriculture – systems at breaking point. Rome: FAO; 2022.

5.
Benton TGB, Harwatt H, Pudasaini R, Wellesley L. Food system impacts on biodiversity loss. Three levers for food system transformations in support of nature. London: Chatham House; 2021.

6.
Webb J, Williams AG, Hope E, Evans D, Moorhouse E. Do foods imported into the UK have a greater environmental impact than the same foods produced within the UK? Int J Life Cycle Ass 2013; 18(7): 1325–43. doi: 10.1007/s11367-013-0576-2

7.
Totland TH, Melnæs BK, Lundberg-Hallen N, Helland-Kigen KM, Lund-Blix NA, Myhre JB, et al. Norkost 3 En landsomfattende kostholdsundersøkelse blant menn og kvinner i Norge i alderen 18–70 år, 2010–11. Oslo: Norwegian Health Directorate; 2012.

8.
Rimestad AH, Løken EB, Nordbotten A. The Norwegian food composition table and the database for nutrient calculations at the Institute of Nutrition Reserach. Nor J Epidemiol 2000; 10(1): 7–16.

9.
Willett W, Rockstrom J, Loken B. Food in the anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 2020; 395(10221): 338.

10.
Cucurachi S, Scherer L, Guinée J, Tukker A. Life cycle assessment of food systems. One Earth 2019; 1(3): 292–7. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2019.10.014

11.
Huijbregts MAJ, Steinmann ZJN, Elshout PMF, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, et al. ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2017; 22(2): 138–47. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1246-y

12.
Huijbregts MAJ, Steinmann ZJN, Elshout PMF, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, et al. ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2020; 25(8): 1635. doi: 10.1007/s11367-020-01761-5

13.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Kanagawa: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES); 2006.

14.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories: wetlands. Geneva: IPCC; 2013.

15.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC 2019, 2019 refinement to the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Geneva: IPCC; 2019.

16.
Goedkoop MJ, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, Schryver AD, Struijs J, Van Zelm R. ReCiPe 2008: a life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. 1st ed. (version 1.08). Report I: Characterisation. Bilthoven: PRé Consultants, Amersfoort, CML, University of Leiden, RUN, Radboud University Nijmegen RIVM; 2013.

17.
CML-IA. Characterisation factos. University of Leiden; 2016. Available from: https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/research/research-output/science/cml-ia-characterisation-factors [cited 15 June 2019].

18.
Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, Koning AD, et al. Handbook on life cycle assessment. Operational guide to the ISO standards. I: LCA in perspective. IIa: guide. IIb: operational annex. III: scientific background. Dordrecht: Springer Nature; 2002.

19.
ILCD Handbook. Analysis of existing environmental impact assessment methodologies for use in life cycle assessment. European Union, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra: Institute for Environment and Sustainability; 2010.

20.
Greenfield H, Southgate DAT. Food composition data. Production, managment and use. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations; 2003.

21.
Weidema BP, Wesnæs MS. Data quality management for life cycle inventories – an example of using data quality indicators. J Cleaner Prod 1996; 4(3–4): 167–74. doi: 10.1016/S0959-6526(96)00043-1

22.
van Paassen M, Braconi N, Kuling L, Durlinger B, Gual P. Agri-footprint 5.0. Part 1: methodology and basic principles. Gouda: Blonk Consultants; 2019.

23.
Weidema BP, Bauer C, Hischier R, Mutel C, Nemecek T, Reinhard J, et al. Overview and methodology. Data quality guideline for the EcoInvent database version 3. St.Gallen: Swiss Center for Life Cycle Inventories; 2013.

24.
Mila i Canals L, Azapagic A, Doka G, Jefferies D, King H, Mutel C, et al. Approaches for addressing life cycle assessment data gaps for bio-based products. J Ind Ecol 2011; 15(5): 707–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00369.x

25.
The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. LCA food database. 2021. Available from: https://www.rivm.nl/voedsel-en-voeding/duurzaam-voedsel/database-milieubelasting-voedingsmiddelen [cited 20 June 2019].

26.
Moreno Ruiz E, Valsasina L, FitzGerald D, Brunner F, Symenoidis A, Bourgault G, et al. Documentation of changes implemented in the EcoInvent Database v3.6. Zürich: EcoInvent Association; 2019.

27.
Dalane JOB, Bergvatn TAM, Kielland E, Carlsen MH. Weights, measures and portion sizes for foods. Norwegian Food Safety Authority, Oslo: University of Oslo, Norwegian Directorate of Health; 2015.

28.
Winther U, Skontorp Hognes E, Jafarzadeh S, Ziegler F. Greenhouse gas emissions of Norwegian seafood products in 2017. Report No.: 2019:01505. Trondheim: SINTEF Ocean AS; 2020.

29.
Cai H, Biesbroek S, Wen X, Fan S, van’t Veer P, Talsma EF. Environmental footprints of Chinese foods and beverages: literature-based construction of a LCA database. Data Brief 2022; 42: 108244. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2022.108244

30.
Mertens E, Kaptijn G, Kuijsten A, van Zanten H, Geleijnse JM, van’t Veer P. SHARP-indicators database towards a public database for environmental sustainability. Data Brief 2019; 27: 104617. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.104617

31.
Zargar S, Yao Y, Tu QS. A review of inventory modeling methods for missing data in life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 2022; 26(5): 1676–89. doi: 10.1111/jiec.13305

32.
Kytta V, Roitto M, Astaptsev A, Saarinen M, Tuomisto HL. Review and expert survey of allocation methods used in life cycle assessment of milk and beef. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2022; 27(2): 191–204. doi: 10.1007/s11367-021-02019-4

33.
Svanes E, Vold M, Hanssen OJ. Effect of different allocation methods on LCA results of products from wild-caught fish and on the use of such results. Int J Life Cycle Ass 2011; 16(6): 512–21. doi: 10.1007/s11367-011-0288-4

34.
Stensgård AE, Prestrud K, Callewaert P. Matsvinn i Norge – Rapportering av Nøkkeltall 2015–2019. Fredrikstad: NORSUS; 2020.