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

GROUP 3, SESSION A: LABELLING, CONSUMERS, DIET 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
73. Benchmarking Swedish cod and herring products by spatialtemporal
life cycle assessment
Andreas Emanuelsson 1,2,* , Friederike Ziegler 1 , Leif Pihl 2 , Mattias Sköld 3 , Sara Hornborg 1 , Ulf Sonesson 1
1 SIK – The Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Department of Sustainable Food Production, 402
29 Gothenburg, Sweden, 2 University of Gothenburg, Department of Biological and Environmental Science,
Kristineberg, 451 78 Fiskebäckskil, Sweden, 3 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of
Aquatic Resources, 453 30 Lysekil, Sweden, Corresponding author. E-mail: ae@sik.se
Fisheries today affect the environment and its ecosystems with a broad range of impacts. Methods to quantify
and compare these lay within the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) framework when traditional emission
based impact categories are complemented with biological indices covering internationally acknowledged
aspects of direct target stock damage (i.e. overfishing) and direct ecosystem damage. This study demonstrates
the application of seafood LCA’s by midpoint benchmarking the environmental performance of the
Swedish trawl fleet in the Baltic Sea. It was done by comparing fishing activities on two stocks of cod and
two stocks of herring in 2008 (spatial resolution) in terms of average products. In addition one stock of each
species was compared over time in terms of key drivers, i.e. between 2002 and 2008 (temporal resolution).
Newly developed/refined impacts categories of Overfishing, Overfishedness, Wasted Potential Yield, Primary
Production Required and Swept Area were applied together with a full set of ReCiPe midpoint impact
categories. The results showed major differences between stocks (Fig. 1), and positive or negative trends
were highlighted by defined impact groups of target stock, ecosystem and emission impact. Temporal variation
was found substantial in all categories in relation to key drivers. The case study also demonstrated the
weakness of generally using low fuel consumption as an indicator for good stock status due to technical differences
influencing the catchability. Data availability was discussed as a limiting factor for applicability and
a sensitivity analysis of the model assumptions performed. Trade-offs were discussed and final scores
evaluated in relation to decision support and the future role of seafood LCA’s. With the inclusion of biological
impact categories in the methodology, LCA´s are concluded to be a useful complementary tool for fisheries
managers, seafood industry or seafood labelling/consumer guides. But without directly addressing and
quantifying the biological effects on target stock and ecosystem any future seafood LCA could easily be
misinterpreted or even deliberately misused as a biased proxy for holistic “environmental” damage.
763