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

PLENARY SESSION 2: METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES FOR ANIMAL PRODUCTION SYSTEMS8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
based assessments of environmental, economic and social impacts, a Task Force of the UNEP-SETAC Life
Cycle Initiative has published a framework for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (UNEP-SETAC, 2011).
This is a future area of research with potential to produce consistent and more comprehensive sustainability
assessments. One critical need, noted by the UNEP-SETAC framework yet lacking in this assessment, is to
define a common product system for the environmental, economic and social analysis. Use of a common
product system would be more feasible if there were tools to support process-level life cycle assessment in
the areas of social and environmental sustainability. As noted above, IO analysis operates on a sector-level,
and in this case, the IO analyses could not be linked to the fluid milk life cycle (as a subset of the dairy sector)
examined in the environmental analysis. Socio-economic databases that provide process-level background
data for an agreed-upon set of socio-economic indicators is a critical research need. Compiling databases
of process-level economic and social background data would be a feasible, practical step in this direction.
6. References
Benoît-Norris, C., Aulisio, D., Norris, G. (2012) Identifying social impacts in product supply chains: overview and application of the
social hotspot database. Sustainability 4, 1946-1965.
Benoît-Norris, C., Aulisio, D., Hallisey-Kepka, C., Norris, G.A., 2011. TSC – Prototype social scoping report: Product category 7:
Strawberry yogurt. New Earth &The Sustainability Consortium (www.socialhotspot.org).
Broom, D., Dantzer, R., Willeberg, P., Mepham, B., Noordhuizen-Stassen, E., 1999. Report on animal welfare aspects of the use of
bovine somatotrophin. The Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare, European Union.
Capper, J.L., Castañeda-Gutiérrez, E., Cady, R.A., Bauman, D.E., 2008. The environmental impact of recombinant bovine somatotropin
(rbST) use in dairy production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 105(28), 9668 -9673.
Capper, J. L., & Cady, R. A. (2012). A comparison of the environmental impact of Jersey compared with Holstein milk for cheese
production. J. Dairy Sci., 95(1), 165-76. Elsevier. doi:10.3168/jds.2011-4360
Dohoo, I.C., DesCôteaux, L., Leslie, K., Fredeen, A., Shewfelt, W., Preston, A., Dowling, P., 2003. A meta-analysis review of the
effects of recombinant bovine somatotropin: 2. Effects on animal health, reproductive performance, and culling. The Can. J. Vet.
Res. 67, 252-264.
Foltz, J., Jackson-Smith, D., Chen, L., 2002. Do purchasing patterns differ between large and small dairy farms? Economic evidence
from three Wisconsin communities. Agric. and Resour. Econ. 31(1), 28-32.
Foltz, J., Zueli, K., 2005. The role of community and farm characteristics in farm input purchasing patterns. Rev. Agric. Econ. 27(4),
508-525.
Frischknecht, R., Rebitzer, G., 2005. The ecoinvent database system: A comprehensive web-based LCA database. J. Clean. Prod.
13(13-14), 1337 – 1343.
Harrison, J., Lloyd, S., O’Kane, T., 2009. Dairy workers in Wisconsin: Tasks, shifts, wages, and benefits (Briefing No. 3). Changing
hands: Hired labour on Wisconsin dairy farms. Madison, WI, Program on Agricultural Studies, University of Wisconsin-
Madison.
Heijungs, R., Goedkoop, M.J., Strujis, J., Effting, S., Sevenster, M. Huppes, G. (2010). Towards a life cycle impact assessment
method which comprises category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level, Report of the first project phase: Design of
the new method. Retrieved from www.lcia-recipe.net.
Jackson-Smith, D., Gillespie Jr., G.W., 2005. Impacts of farm structural change on farmers’ social ties. Soc. Nat. Resour., 18(3), 215-
240.
Jesse, E. (2002) Rethinking dairyland: Background for decisions about Wisconsin’s dairy industry. Marketing and Policy Briefing
Paper No. 78A, May 2002, University of Wisconsin.
Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., Rosenbaum, R., 2003. IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle
impact assessment methodology. Int. J. LCA, 8(6), 324-330.
Lautier, A., Rosenbaum, R. K., Margni, M., Bare, J. C., Roy, P.-O., & Deschênes, L. (2010). Development of normalization factors
for Canada and the United States and comparison with European factors. Sci. Tot. Env., 409(1), 33-42. Elsevier B.V.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.09.016
Lobao, L., Stofferahn, C., 2008. The community effects of industrialized farming: Social science research and challenges to corporate
farming laws. Agric. Hum. Val. 25, 219-240.
National Dairy Animal Well-Being Initiative, 2008. Principles & Guidelines for Dairy Animal Well-Being. Retrieved from
www.dairywellbeing.org/guidelines.php.
Popp, J., Kemper, N., Miller, W., McGraw, K., Karr, K., 2010. The Economic Contribution of the Agricultural Sector to the Arkansas
Economy in 2008, Research Report No. 989. Little Rock, AR.
Salant, P.,Wulfhorst, J.D., Kane, S., Dearien, C., 2009. Community level impacts of Idaho’s changing dairy industry. Moscow, ID:
University of Idaho, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences.
Thoma, G., Popp, J., Shonnard, D., Nutter, D., Ulrich, R., Matlock, M., Kim, D., Neiderman, Z., East, C., Adom, F., Kemper, N.,
Mayes, A., (2012). Greenhouse gas emissions from milk production and consumption in the United States: A cradle to grave life
cycle assessment circa 2008. Int. Dairy J, submitted.
UN GA (2005) 2005 World Summit Outcome. Resolution A/60/1, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 15 September
2005
UNEP/SETAC, 2011. Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment: Making informed choices on products. Paris, France:
UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative.
USDA NASS, 2010. Overview of the United States dairy industry. Retrieved from
http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/USDairyIndus/USDairyIndus-09-22-2010.pdf
238