IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v138y2015icp66-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling crop rotation in agricultural LCAs — Challenges and potential solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Brankatschk, Gerhard
  • Finkbeiner, Matthias

Abstract

Despite large efforts there are still methodological challenges to bring life cycle modeling closer to agricultural reality. Here, we focus on the inclusion of the effects occurring between the crops grown in the same agricultural field in temporal succession. These so called crop-rotation effects are caused by changes in physical, chemical and biological properties of the agricultural land over time (presence and availability of different micro and macronutrients, soil structure, soil texture, phytosanitary conditions, presence of weeds, etc.) due to the rotation of crops. Since a huge number of parameters contribute to crop-rotation effects, they cannot be easily measured. Therefore, LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) studies with system boundaries containing only one vegetation period have a limited ability to include these effects — unless explicit modeling measures have been taken to include individual crop-rotation effects. Existing approaches for the inclusion of crop-rotation effects are described, e.g. via transferring certain amounts of nutrients and their environmental burdens to subsequent crops. Still, many crop-rotation effects between crops are not covered in recent LCA methodology; corresponding gaps are identified and described. Examples include reduced input of agrochemicals via improved phytosanitary conditions, stabilization of yields via reduction of harvest failures, improved yields via improved soil texture, soil structure and improved conditions for soil organisms. Overall, most crop-rotation effects are not properly addressed in current LCA practice. Thus, LCA results and the quality of derived recommendations are negatively affected — for example incentives for the (unlimited) removal of crop residues are set based on LCA results without considering potential adverse effects on soil fertility. In other words, these gaps might lead to unintended free-rider problems. A new approach for the modeling of crop-rotation effects is suggested. It consists of six steps. First, align the system boundary during the inventory analysis to the level of the whole crop rotation system; second, determine all inputs of the whole crop rotation; third, do the same for the outputs; fourth, convert all outputs to a common agriculture-specific denominator, the so-called Cereal Unit; fifth, calculate an output-specific allocation share using the ratio of each individual output to the sum of all outputs of the crop rotation; and sixth, apply the allocation shares to the sum of each input-type — resulting in the output-specific allocated input. One major advantage of this approach is the integration of crop-rotation systems into LCA, including all relationships between the individual crops of the crop rotation. Using this approach, LCA practice becomes able to depict crop rotations more accurately and to avoid the current practice of ignoring the effects between individual crops. It might enable LCA to consider the fundamental agricultural principle of crop rotations and to include interactions between one crop and the subsequent crop. Since these crop-rotation effects influence soil fertility, yields and overall sustainability of agricultural systems, the reliability of the evaluation of environmental impacts might be affected. Thus, the ability to consider the entire spectrum of crop rotation effects should be integrated into agricultural LCAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Brankatschk, Gerhard & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2015. "Modeling crop rotation in agricultural LCAs — Challenges and potential solutions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 66-76.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:138:y:2015:i:c:p:66-76
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.05.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X1500075X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.05.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter, Christiane & Specka, Xenia & Aurbacher, Joachim & Kornatz, Peter & Herrmann, Christiane & Heiermann, Monika & Müller, Janine & Nendel, Claas, 2017. "The MiLA tool: Modeling greenhouse gas emissions and cumulative energy demand of energy crop cultivation in rotation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 67-79.
    2. Regis Mauri, Geraldo, 2019. "Improved mathematical model and bounds for the crop rotation scheduling problem with adjacency constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 120-135.
    3. Peter, Christiane & Helming, Katharina & Nendel, Claas, 2017. "Do greenhouse gas emission calculations from energy crop cultivation reflect actual agricultural management practices? – A review of carbon footprint calculators," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 461-476.
    4. Prechsl, Ulrich E. & Wittwer, Raphael & van der Heijden, Marcel G.A. & Lüscher, Gisela & Jeanneret, Philippe & Nemecek, Thomas, 2017. "Assessing the environmental impacts of cropping systems and cover crops: Life cycle assessment of FAST, a long-term arable farming field experiment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 39-50.
    5. Kotir, Julius H. & Bell, Lindsay W. & Kirkegaard, John A. & Whish, Jeremy & Aikins, Kojo Atta, 2022. "Labour demand – The forgotten input influencing the execution and adoptability of alternative cropping systems in Eastern Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    6. Cerutti, Alessandro K. & Contu, Simone & Ardente, Fulvio & Donno, Dario & Beccaro, Gabriele L., 2016. "Carbon footprint in green public procurement: Policy evaluation from a case study in the food sector," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 82-93.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:138:y:2015:i:c:p:66-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.