Driving change in agriculture (2020–2025): A global review of LCA findings and adoption factors for agricultural electric vehicles

IF 16.3 1区工程技术 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews Pub Date : 2025-09-16 DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2025.116295

Sadia Asrofi Fairuz , Guangnan Chen , Tek Maraseni

{"title":"Driving change in agriculture (2020–2025): A global review of LCA findings and adoption factors for agricultural electric vehicles","authors":"Sadia Asrofi Fairuz , Guangnan Chen , Tek Maraseni","doi":"10.1016/j.rser.2025.116295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Agriculture significantly contributes to global greenhouse gas emissions. As the sector decarbonises, Agricultural Electric Vehicles (AEVs) gain increasing attention for their environmental benefits and adoption potential. Using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework and Double Diamond Approach (DDA), this study reviewed peer-reviewed articles from 2020 to 2025 on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and adoption behaviour, sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, addressing five key research questions. It was revealed that LCA research is mostly concentrated in Europe, with limited Global South representation. However, nearly half of the studies relied on simulations or retrofitted ICET (Internal Combustion Engine Tractor) data. Few applied cradle-to-cradle system boundaries or incorporated detailed battery lifecycle impacts such as aging, recycling, and toxicity. Endpoint indicators and end-of-life phases were often omitted. Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) demonstrated a 72 % lower overall environmental impact (single score) compared to ICE systems. Other AEV types also remain largely underexplored. Notably, no study used Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). Adoption studies identify high upfront costs, inadequate infrastructure, and performance limitations as major barriers. Accelerating AEV uptake requires multi-criteria interdisciplinary approaches, balancing environmental, economic, and social priorities, including targeted policies, financial incentives, rural infrastructure investment, farmer training, clear regulations, and public-private partnerships for locally adapted solutions. Future research should use mixed methods, cover more vehicle types, apply cradle-to-cradle modelling, and integrate real-world data. Embedding S-LCA and culturally responsive frameworks is essential for socially accepted, context-specific adoption.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":418,"journal":{"name":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews","volume":"226 ","pages":"Article 116295"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125009682","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agriculture significantly contributes to global greenhouse gas emissions. As the sector decarbonises, Agricultural Electric Vehicles (AEVs) gain increasing attention for their environmental benefits and adoption potential. Using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework and Double Diamond Approach (DDA), this study reviewed peer-reviewed articles from 2020 to 2025 on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and adoption behaviour, sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, addressing five key research questions. It was revealed that LCA research is mostly concentrated in Europe, with limited Global South representation. However, nearly half of the studies relied on simulations or retrofitted ICET (Internal Combustion Engine Tractor) data. Few applied cradle-to-cradle system boundaries or incorporated detailed battery lifecycle impacts such as aging, recycling, and toxicity. Endpoint indicators and end-of-life phases were often omitted. Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) demonstrated a 72 % lower overall environmental impact (single score) compared to ICE systems. Other AEV types also remain largely underexplored. Notably, no study used Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA). Adoption studies identify high upfront costs, inadequate infrastructure, and performance limitations as major barriers. Accelerating AEV uptake requires multi-criteria interdisciplinary approaches, balancing environmental, economic, and social priorities, including targeted policies, financial incentives, rural infrastructure investment, farmer training, clear regulations, and public-private partnerships for locally adapted solutions. Future research should use mixed methods, cover more vehicle types, apply cradle-to-cradle modelling, and integrate real-world data. Embedding S-LCA and culturally responsive frameworks is essential for socially accepted, context-specific adoption.

查看原文本刊更多论文

推动农业变革（2020-2025）：农业电动汽车LCA研究结果和采用因素的全球回顾

农业对全球温室气体排放的贡献很大。随着行业的脱碳，农业电动汽车（aev）因其环境效益和采用潜力而受到越来越多的关注。本研究使用PRISMA（系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目）框架和双钻石方法（DDA），回顾了来自Scopus、Web of Science和谷歌Scholar的2020年至2025年关于生命周期评估（LCA）和采用行为的同行评议文章，解决了五个关键研究问题。据透露，LCA研究主要集中在欧洲，在全球南方的代表性有限。然而，近一半的研究依赖于模拟或改装的ICET（内燃机拖拉机）数据。很少有应用摇篮到摇篮系统边界或纳入详细的电池生命周期影响，如老化、回收和毒性。终点指标和生命结束阶段经常被忽略。与内燃机系统相比，纯电动汽车（BEVs）的整体环境影响（单分）降低了72%。其他AEV类型也在很大程度上仍未得到充分开发。值得注意的是，没有研究使用社会生命周期评估（S-LCA）。采用研究确定了高昂的前期成本、基础设施不足和性能限制是主要障碍。加快自动电动汽车的普及需要多标准跨学科方法，平衡环境、经济和社会优先事项，包括有针对性的政策、财政激励、农村基础设施投资、农民培训、明确的法规以及为适应当地情况的解决方案建立公私伙伴关系。未来的研究应采用混合方法，覆盖更多的车型，采用摇篮到摇篮模型，并整合现实数据。嵌入S-LCA和文化响应框架对于社会接受和具体情况采用至关重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 工程技术-能源与燃料

CiteScore

31.20

自引率

5.70%

发文量

1055

审稿时长

62 days

期刊介绍： The mission of Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is to disseminate the most compelling and pertinent critical insights in renewable and sustainable energy, fostering collaboration among the research community, private sector, and policy and decision makers. The journal aims to exchange challenges, solutions, innovative concepts, and technologies, contributing to sustainable development, the transition to a low-carbon future, and the attainment of emissions targets outlined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews publishes a diverse range of content, including review papers, original research, case studies, and analyses of new technologies, all featuring a substantial review component such as critique, comparison, or analysis. Introducing a distinctive paper type, Expert Insights, the journal presents commissioned mini-reviews authored by field leaders, addressing topics of significant interest. Case studies undergo consideration only if they showcase the work's applicability to other regions or contribute valuable insights to the broader field of renewable and sustainable energy. Notably, a bibliographic or literature review lacking critical analysis is deemed unsuitable for publication.