The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combining environmentally and economically sustainable dairy and beef production in Sweden
Open accessAbstract
To achieve a more sustainable food sector, a supply chain approach is needed. In this study, experts in different areas along supply chains co-operated in an interactive process to define future environmentally sustainable supply chains of milk and beef. The basis was to use existing techniques, to have production performance corresponding to the best quartile of today and to consider other sustainability aspects, such as economics. The work resulted in concrete descriptions of alternative product chains for delivered milk and beef. To also permit concrete descriptions of the latter part of the product chains, two consumer-packed end products were selected for monitoring, namely fresh milk and sirloin steak. The production systems investigated comprised cropping, livestock production, industrial processing and production, logistics, packaging and wastage and distribution, but not retailers or consumers. The study area was a Swedish county and the reference level was its production of milk and beef in 2012. The future product chains were assumed to deliver the same amounts of commodities as in 2012, but with reduced environmental impact. Primary production was required to be at least as profitable as today. Beside description of the current situation, three alternative scenarios were created, focusing on delivery of ecosystem services, plant nutrient circulation and minimising climate impact, respectively. Life cycle assessments were performed for these four scenarios (reference plus three alternative scenarios) for single-product chains and county-wide. Furthermore, production costs in primary production were calculated for the four scenarios. The results revealed great potential to reduce the negative environmental impact of Swedish dairy and beef production at current volumes, irrespective of whether ecosystem services, plant nutrient circulation or climate impact is in focus. The single most important factor for decreased environmental impact for livestock production was increased production efficiency. Measures in agriculture, especially concerning feeds, were critical, but actions in processing and distribution also contributed. All alternative scenarios resulted in lower production costs than at present. It was obvious that as dairy and beef systems are connected, the potential for their environmental improvement must be analysed together. In conclusion, increased efficiency can decrease the negative environmental impact of Swedish cattle production and also reduce costs to the farmer.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Many beef farmers in Sweden face financial struggles (Hessle et al. 2017)”
From Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition (2022) · cites this paper as Hessle et al. 2017
Citations
Cites
Environmental Impacts of Different Dairy Farming Systems in the Po Valley
Battini, F., Agostini, A., Tabaglio, V., & Amaducci, S. (2016) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.062 · Cited by 112
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Cederberg, 2003, Systems expansion and allocation in life cycle assessment of milk and beef production, International Journal of LCA, 8, 350, 10.1007/BF02978508 · DOI
- Flysjö, 2011, The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden, Agric. Syst., 104, 459, 10.1016/j.agsy.2011.03.003 · DOI
- Marton, 2016, Comparing the environmental performance of mixed and specialized dairy farms: the role of systems level analyzed, J. Clean. Prod., 124, 73, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.074 · DOI
- Mogensen, 2015, Greenhouse gas emissions from beef production systems in Denmark and Sweden, Livest. Sci., 174, 126, 10.1016/j.livsci.2015.01.021 · DOI
- Peters, 2010, Red meat production in Australia: life cycle assessment and comparison with overseas studies, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 1327, 10.1021/es901131e · DOI
- Pierrehumbert, 2015, Climate impact of beef: an analysis considering multiple time scales and production methods without use of global warming potentials, Environ. Res. Lett., 10, 10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/085002 · DOI
- Rockström, 2009, A safe operating space for humanity, Nature, 461, 472, 10.1038/461472a · DOI · Paper page
- Roer, 2013, Environmental impacts of combined milk and meat production in Norway according to a life cycle assessment with expanded system boundaries, Livest. Sci., 155, 384, 10.1016/j.livsci.2013.05.004 · DOI
- Röling, 1997, The soft side of land: socio-economic sustainability of land use systems, ITC Journal, 3, 248
- Seuring, 2008, From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management, J. Clean. Prod., 16, 1699, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020 · DOI
- Sonesson, 2015, Paths to a sustainable food sector - integrated design and LCA of future food supply chains, the case of pork production in Sweden, International Journal of LCA
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition
Resare Sahlin, K., Carolus, J., von Greyerz, K., Ekqvist, I., & Röös, E. (2022) · Agronomy for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1007/s13593-021-00737-5 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Hessle, A., Bertilsson, J., Stenberg, B., Kumm, K.-I., & Sonesson, U.
- Affiliations
- Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
- RISE Research Institutes of Sweden (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Hessle, Anna
- Venue
- Agricultural Systems
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 156
- Pages
- 105-114
- ISSN
- 0308-521X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2709178935
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 3.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Agricultural Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- VINNOVA
- Formas
- Swedish Food Federation
- Svensk Dagligvaruhandel (Swedish Perishable Retailers)
- Swedish Farmers' Foundation for Agricultural Research (2011-03764)
- Region Västra Götaland
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Keywords
- dairy production, beef production, supply chain sustainability, dairy supply chain, beef supply chain, ecosystem services, climate impact reduction, production efficiency, production costs, life cycle assessment, feed efficiency, food processing and distribution
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review