V. Bellassen, M. Drut, F. Antonioli, R. Brečić, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, V. Hoang, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, G. Vittersø, A. Diallo
{"title":"认证食品的碳足迹和土地足迹","authors":"V. Bellassen, M. Drut, F. Antonioli, R. Brečić, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, V. Hoang, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, G. Vittersø, A. Diallo","doi":"10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":"19 1","pages":"113 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products\",\"authors\":\"V. Bellassen, M. Drut, F. Antonioli, R. Brečić, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, V. Hoang, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, G. Vittersø, A. Diallo\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"113 - 126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products
Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization (JAFIO) is a unique forum for empirical and theoretical research in industrial organization with a special focus on agricultural and food industries worldwide. As concentration, industrialization, and globalization continue to reshape horizontal and vertical relationships within the food supply chain, agricultural economists are revising both their views of traditional markets as well as their tools of analysis. At the core of this revision are strategic interactions between principals and agents, strategic interdependence between rival firms, and strategic trade policy between competing nations, all in a setting plagued by incomplete and/or imperfect information structures. Add to that biotechnology, electronic commerce, as well as the shift in focus from raw agricultural commodities to branded products, and the conclusion is that a "new" agricultural economics is needed for an increasingly complex "new" agriculture.