The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges
Open accessAbstract
Life cycle thinking is increasingly seen as a key concept for ensuring a transition towards more sustainable production and consumption patterns. As food production systems and consumption patterns are among the leading drivers of impacts on the environment, it is important to assess and improve food-related supply chains as much as possible. Over the years, life cycle assessment has been used extensively to assess agricultural systems and food processing and manufacturing activities, and compare alternatives “from field to fork” and through to food waste management. Notwithstanding the efforts, several methodological aspects of life cycle assessment still need further improvement in order to ensure adequate and robust support for decision making in both business and policy development contexts. This paper discusses the challenges for life cycle assessment arising from the complexity of food systems, and recommends research priorities for both scientific development and improvements in practical implementation. In summary, the intrinsic variability of food production systems requires dedicated modelling approaches, including addressing issues related to: the distinction between technosphere and ecosphere; the most appropriate functional unit; the multi-functionality of biological systems; and the modelling of the emissions and how this links with life cycle impact assessment. Also, data availability and interpretation of the results are two issues requiring further attention, including how to account for consumer behaviour.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Priefer, C., Jörissen, J., & Bräutigam, K.-R. (2016) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.03.004 · Cited by 434
Environmental impacts of food consumption and nutrition: Where are we and what is next?
Nemecek, T., Jungbluth, N., i Canals, L. M., & Schenck, R. (2016) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1071-3 · Cited by 219
Cited by
The environmental costs and benefits of high-yield farming
Balmford, A., Amano, T., Bartlett, H., Chadwick, D., Collins, A., Edwards, D., Field, R., Garnsworthy, P., Green, R., Smith, P., et al. (2018) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0138-5 · Cited by 343
Blockchain-based life cycle assessment: An implementation framework and system architecture
Zhang, A., Zhong, R. Y., Farooque, M., Kang, K., & Venkatesh, V. G. (2020) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104512 · Cited by 319
Krishnan, R., Agarwal, R., Bajada, C., & Arshinder, K. (2020) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118374 · Cited by 268
Jia, F., Shahzadi, G., Bourlakis, M., & John, A. (2024) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140364 · Cited by 119
Lynch, J. (2019) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2019.02.003 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Notarnicola, B., Sala, S., Anton, A., McLaren, S. J., Saouter, E., & Sonesson, U.
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 140
- Pages
- 399-409
- ISSN
- 0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2441705456
- Cited by
- 683
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 39.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.071
- The paper
- Notarnicola, B., Sala, S., Anton, A., McLaren, S. J., Saouter, E., & Sonesson, U. (2017). The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.071
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.