Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Generic strategy LCA and LCC: Guidance for LCA and LCC focused on prevention, valorisation and treatment of side flows from the food supply chain
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioscience and Materials, Agrifood and Bioscience.
University of Bologna, Italy.
University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Austria.
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioscience and Materials, Agrifood and Bioscience.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Urged by the importance of resource efficiency and circular economy agenda of EU and national policy makers, many stakeholders are seeking alternatives for current surplus food or side flows within the food supply chain. Any new valorisation route for side flows (i.e. not the main product) will be associated with impacts (monetary and environmental). To allow informed decision making at all levels, from individual stakeholder to policy level, robust, consistent and science based approaches are required. The EU H2020 funded project REFRESH (Resource Efficient Food and dRink for the Entire Supply cHain) aims to contribute to food waste reduction throughout the food supply chain, and evaluate the environmental impacts and life cycle costs.

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) are well documented and generic approaches for assessing the environmental and cost dimensions of a system. Both LCA and LCC are characterised by allowing for a large flexibility in system scoping. To allow for comparison between different options consistent approaches are required. Furthermore, there is a need to bridge the gap between assessors who might have a deep knowledge of the systems they are assessing, but are not in depth method experts on LCA or LCC. Highlighting challenging methodological aspects and encouraging the practitioner to ask the most relevant questions contributes to a better scoping practice of LCA and LCCs.

The objective of this study was to develop a consistent approach, combining LCA and LCA specifically to assess impacts of prevention of resource inefficiencies, valorisation routes and waste handling in the food supply chain. The recommendations build on existing standards and state-of-the-art LCA/LCC research, and provide guidance on how to overcome specific methodological challenges. They focus particularly on the goal and scope stage of an LCA and Environmental LCC and on side flows from the food supply chain.

To categorise systems in order to be assessed, the concept of “REFRESH situations” (RS) has been developed (De Mena et al., 2016; Unger et al., 2016). The four REFRESH situations (RS) are: Prevention of side flow (RS 1), side flow valorisation (RS 2), valorisation as part of waste management (RS 3), and end-of-life treatment (RS 4). The REFRESH situations can take place at any point/process in the life cycle, within the remit of any stakeholder (including consumers) and are independent of the perspective taken, i.e. of the producer of side stream or the receiver. For each REFRESH situation, specific recommendations on setting of system boundary, functional unit(s) and handling of multi-functionality in relation to the stated problem are provided (beside some other aspects). The importance to differentiate between attributional and consequential approaches is discussed in detail. This consistent approach contributes towards more harmonised use of LCA and LCC for informed decision for handling side flows in the food supply chain.

The focus of the specific recommendations given in this report is primarily on change-oriented studies on interventions for side flows since foot print studies are to a higher degree covered in existing frameworks such as the ILCD-handbook and the PEF framework under development.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. , 111 p.
Series
SP Rapport, ISSN 0284-5172 ; 2017:01
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-27973ISBN: 978-91-88349-84-2 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-27973DiVA: diva2:1070695
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 641933
Note

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 641933. Project coordination and editing provided by SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden.

Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy.

Available from: 2017-02-02 Created: 2017-02-02 Last updated: 2017-03-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1981 kB)27 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 1981 kBChecksum SHA-512
233483caad7f38ece92dd37d5f9a25d188823123dc80019e86b8e52a0b04f14b809ca5e74883f414ba1c8fddfffdc172f23ddda21e7db42ee2366e15fae531d2
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

http://eu-refresh.org/generic-strategy-lca-and-lcc
By organisation
Agrifood and Bioscience
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 31 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 177 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.28.0