LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

PLENARY SESSION 2: METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES FOR ANIMAL PRODUCTION SYSTEMS 8 th Int. Conference on
LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
always consistent; for example, Foltz and Zueli (2005) determined that large operations do not, in general,
reduce reliance on local inputs in a study that included local supply considerations.
4. Discussion
The LCA identified detailed aspects of the fluid milk life cycle as contributors to specific environmental
impacts. The LCA also used normalisation analysis to prioritize environmental improvement efforts by identifying
impact categories where improvements would be most meaningful in a national context, in this case
highlighting the importance of nutrient management in the farm stages and understanding the potential emissions
from wastewater treatment at the processing stage. Together these tools provide organisations and policymakers
with detailed information that can be used to develop management strategies and environmental
policies.
The economic and social analyses presented here do not have the same level of process-related granularity as
LCA. These analyses indicate sector-level economic contributions and social areas of risk, respectively. The
sector-level focus of the IO analyses is a function of the data that populate the models. Note also that while
indirect economic contributions are included, they may overestimate the actual indirect contributions of the
dairy supply chain; because of allocation methods, the indirect economic contributions presented here may
only be in part attributable to dairy. For example, a worker in a feed mill that supplies feed to both dairy
farms and cattle farms will be counted in the indirect impacts of dairy and cattle. Thus caution must be taken
as indirect contributions may overstate contributions from the US dairy sector. Another important difference
between the economic and social IO analyses is that the economic IO model study region is the US only and
the social IO model is global.
Economic IO analysis is not meant to inform product comparisons or identify opportunities for more sustainable
practices; rather, it presents an indication of the economic contributions of the dairy industry to the
overall US economy. The SSA identifies country-specific sectors along the dairy supply chain with a predominance
of worker hours in order to identify areas of social risk. Not all social impacts, however, are tied
to workers hours. For example, the National Dairy Animal Well-Being Initiative (2008) acknowledged that
“ethical obligations associated with dairy production include a strong emphasis on animal well-being.” The
Initiative published management principles and guidelines in areas such as nutrition; herd health; housing
and facilities; and handling, movement and transportation. Finally, the social literature review identifies potential
social risks in the areas of on-farm US dairy production. Note that the studies cited are often limited to
case studies or surveys in individual communities, and while they raise flags, they are not necessarily generalizable.
While together these analyses provide valuable information on the individual areas of sustainability,
there is limited ability to draw conclusions about the relationship between the environmental and social risks
of US dairy and its economic contribution.
5. Conclusion
Overall, the LCA identified significant sources of environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of fluid
milk. Farming stages of the life cycle most significantly affected land occupation, terrestrial acidification/nitrification
and human health impacts. On-farm releases of ammonia drove terrestrial acidification/nitrification.
On-farm releases of volatile organic compounds, manure management and the use of fertilisers
and fuel drove human toxicity. Post-farm gate stages of the fluid milk life cycle also contributed to terrestrial
and aquatic ecotoxicity. The normalisation analysis showed that aquatic eutrophication is by far the
most significant environmental impact in terms of the fluid milk life cycle’s relative contributions to environmental
impacts in the US.
The economic analysis found that in addition to directly providing jobs, income and added value, the US
dairy industry contributes greatly to employment, labour income and value added in other agricultural and
nonagricultural nodes of the US dairy supply chain. The economic significance of these indirect impacts
highlights the importance of dairy to the strength of the greater economy. Describing relationships between
the economic contributions of specific supply chain activities alongside the environmental impacts of these
activities would enhance organisational and policy-based decision-making.
According to the SSA a significant share of worker hours for the total US dairy supply chain are found in
US dairy production and manufacturing. In the social domain, literature on dairy’s impacts is sparse and
limited in scope, and the literature review lacks the rigor of a LCA framework. Some evidence suggesting
that a consolidating dairy industry brings new challenges to social welfare is a call for more rigorous research.
The use of process-level, life cycle-based tools to identify impacts within each of the three pillars of sustainability
would improve the decision-making value of this three part assessment. To encourage life cycle-
237