IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v483y2023ics0304380023001709.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of comprehensive performance of kiwifruit production in China, Iran, and Italy based on emergy and carbon emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Qiuwen
  • Ma, Xiaohan
  • Hu, Jiayu
  • Zhang, Xiaohong

Abstract

Extensive kiwifruit farming patterns worldwide are generating increasing environmental stress and thus hindering their sustainability. Comprehensive performance, based on resource efficiency and resource structure, pollutant emissions’ impact and carbon emission, is still not clear for this planting system. Therefore, this study proposes a comprehensive evaluation of kiwifruit planting systems by combining emergy analysis with carbon emission accounting method. The proposed approach not only considers the resource efficiency and resource structure of this planting system, as well as its carbon emission intensity, but also describe tradeoffs among emergy sustainability, pollutant emissions’ impacts and carbon emission intensity using the proposed index - Co-benefit index (CBI). Finally, four kiwifruit planting systems from China (Kiwifruit planting system in Sichuan province (SCPS) and Kiwifruit planting system in Shaanxi (SXPS)), Italy (Kiwifruit planting system in Italy (ITPS)) and Iran (Kiwifruit planting system in Iran (IRPS)), as case studies, are investigated using the presented approach. The study results show that (1) carbon emission intensity (CO2-eq/kg product) embodies trends of SXPS (0.16) > ITPS (0.15) > SCPS (0.12) > IRPS (0.11); (2) pollutant emissions’ impact intensity follows the trends of SXPS (2.54E+14) > ITPS (1.58E+14) > SCPS (8.29E+13) > IRPS (2.56E+13) in units of sej/t product; (3) environmental sustainability reveals trends of IRPS > ITPS > SXPS > SCPS mainly due to different environmental load rates. Generally, the four systems are not sustainable in the long term due to their high dependence on nonrenewable resources (especially labor and services (L&S) and chemical fertilizers); (4) results of Co-benefit index reflect the trends of IRPS > SCPS > ITPS > SXPS accordingly. Some targeted measures are proposed for SCPS, SXPS and ITPS. Considering low sustainability level, it is urgent for the four kiwifruit planting systems to further improve their utilization rate of chemical fertilizer and resource structure in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Qiuwen & Ma, Xiaohan & Hu, Jiayu & Zhang, Xiaohong, 2023. "Comparison of comprehensive performance of kiwifruit production in China, Iran, and Italy based on emergy and carbon emissions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 483(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:483:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023001709
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110439
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380023001709
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110439?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammadi, Ali & Rafiee, Shahin & Mohtasebi, Seyed Saeid & Rafiee, Hamed, 2010. "Energy inputs – yield relationship and cost analysis of kiwifruit production in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 1071-1075.
    2. Mostashari-Rad, Fatemeh & Nabavi-Pelesaraei, Ashkan & Soheilifard, Farshad & Hosseini-Fashami, Fatemeh & Chau, Kwok-wing, 2019. "Energy optimization and greenhouse gas emissions mitigation for agricultural and horticultural systems in Northern Iran," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    3. Claudio Baudino & Nicole Roberta Giuggioli & Rossella Briano & Stefano Massaglia & Cristiana Peano, 2017. "Integrated Methodologies (SWOT, TOWS, LCA) for Improving Production Chains and Environmental Sustainability of Kiwifruit and Baby Kiwi in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Federica Rossi & Camilla Chieco & Nicola Di Virgilio & Teodoro Georgiadis & Marianna Nardino, 2021. "Is Agriculture Always a GHG Emitter? A Combination of Eddy Covariance and Life Cycle Assessment Approaches to Calculate C Intake and Uptake in a Kiwifruit Orchard," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Zhuang, Minghao & Liu, Yize & Yang, Yi & Zhang, Qingsong & Ying, Hao & Yin, Yulong & Cui, Zhenling, 2022. "The sustainability of staple crops in China can be substantially improved through localized strategies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Gengyuan Liu & Zhifeng Yang & Bin Chen & Yan Zhang & Meirong Su & Lixiao Zhang, 2013. "Emergy Evaluation of the Urban Solid Waste Handling in Liaoning Province, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Helene Seidel-Sterzik & Sarah McLaren & Elena Garnevska, 2018. "A Capability Maturity Model for Life Cycle Management at the Industry Sector Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    8. Ukidwe, Nandan U. & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2007. "Industrial and ecological cumulative exergy consumption of the United States via the 1997 input–output benchmark model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1560-1592.
    9. Wouter Schram & Atse Louwen & Ioannis Lampropoulos & Wilfried van Sark, 2019. "Comparison of the Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Potential of Energy Communities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, November.
    10. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "Assessing the global environmental sources driving the geobiosphere: A revised emergy baseline," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 126-132.
    11. Brown, Mark T. & Campbell, Daniel E. & De Vilbiss, Christopher & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "The geobiosphere emergy baseline: A synthesis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 92-95.
    12. Yuan, Shen & Peng, Shaobing, 2017. "Trends in the economic return on energy use and energy use efficiency in China's crop production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 836-844.
    13. Soltanali, Hamzeh & Nikkhah, Amin & Rohani, Abbas, 2017. "Energy audit of Iranian kiwifruit production using intelligent systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 646-654.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chen, Yuhong & Lyu, Yanfeng & Yang, Xiangdong & Zhang, Xiaohong & Pan, Hengyu & Wu, Jun & Lei, Yongjia & Zhang, Yanzong & Wang, Guiyin & Xu, Min & Luo, Hongbin, 2022. "Performance comparison of urea production using one set of integrated indicators considering energy use, economic cost and emissions’ impacts: A case from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Xiang, Qing & Pan, Hengyu & Ma, Xiaohan & Yang, Mingdong & Lyu, Yanfeng & Zhang, Xiaohong & Shui, Wei & Liao, Wenjie & Xiao, Yinlong & Wu, Jun & Zhang, Yanzong & Xu, Min, 2024. "Impacts of energy-saving and emission-reduction on sustainability of cement production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    3. Liu, Gengyuan & Hao, Yan & Dong, Liang & Yang, Zhifeng & Zhang, Yan & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2017. "An emergy-LCA analysis of municipal solid waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 131-143.
    4. Elahi, Ehsan & Zhang, Zhixin & Khalid, Zainab & Xu, Haiyun, 2022. "Application of an artificial neural network to optimise energy inputs: An energy- and cost-saving strategy for commercial poultry farms," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PB).
    5. Yongqiang Zhang & Hao Sun & Maosheng Ge & Hang Zhao & Yifan Hu & Changyue Cui & Zhibin Wu, 2023. "Difference in Energy Input and Output in Agricultural Production under Surface Irrigation and Water-Saving Irrigation: A Case Study of Kiwi Fruit in Shaanxi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Vitória Toffolo Luiz & Rafael Araújo Nacimento & Vanessa Theodoro Rezende & Taynara Freitas Avelar de Almeida & Juliana Vieira Paz & Biagio Fernando Giannetti & Augusto Hauber Gameiro, 2023. "Sustainability Assessment of Intensification Levels of Brazilian Smallholder Integrated Dairy-Crop Production Systems: An Emergy and Economic-Based Decision Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Cristiano, S. & Ulgiati, S. & Gonella, F., 2021. "Systemic sustainability and resilience assessment of health systems, addressing global societal priorities: Learnings from a top nonprofit hospital in a bioclimatic building in Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    8. Pan, Hengyu & Geng, Yong & Jiang, Ping & Dong, Huijuan & Sun, Lu & Wu, Rui, 2018. "An emergy based sustainability evaluation on a combined landfill and LFG power generation system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 310-322.
    9. Mattei, F. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P. & Scardi, M., 2021. "Global assessment of marine phytoplankton primary production: Integrating machine learning and environmental accounting models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 451(C).
    10. Lyu, Yanfeng & Yang, Xiangdong & Ma, Xiaohan & Pan, Hengyu & Zhang, Xiaohong, 2023. "Promoting coordinated development of the fertilizer production-crop plantation combined system through an integrated approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 478(C).
    11. Yinan Xu & Yingxing Zhao & Peng Sui & Wangsheng Gao & Zhijun Li & Yuanquan Chen, 2021. "Emergy-Based Evaluation on the Systemic Sustainability of Rural Ecosystem under China Poverty Alleviation and Rural Revitalization: A Case of the Village in North China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, July.
    12. Hossein Jargan & Abbas Rohani & Armaghan Kosari-Moghaddam, 2022. "Application of modeling techniques for energy analysis of fruit production systems," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2616-2639, February.
    13. Lee, Dong Joo & Brown, Mark T., 2021. "Estimating the Value of Global Ecosystem Structure and Productivity: A Geographic Information System and Emergy Based Approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 439(C).
    14. Qingsong Wang & Hongkun Xiao & Qiao Ma & Xueliang Yuan & Jian Zuo & Jian Zhang & Shuguang Wang & Mansen Wang, 2020. "Review of Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment: Coupling Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    15. Yang, Qing & Liu, Gengyuan & Casazza, Marco & Campbell, Elliot T. & Giannetti, Biagio F. & Brown, Mark T., 2018. "Development of a new framework for non-monetary accounting on ecosystem services valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 37-54.
    16. Zhicheng Gao & Rongjin Wan & Qian Ye & Weiguo Fan & Shihui Guo & Sergio Ulgiati & Xiaobin Dong, 2020. "Typhoon Disaster Risk Assessment Based on Emergy Theory: A Case Study of Zhuhai City, Guangdong Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    17. Duian Lu & Jie Cheng & Zhenzhou Feng & Li Sun & Wei Mo & Degang Wang, 2022. "Emergy Synthesis of Two Oyster Aquaculture Systems in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    18. Oliveira, M. & Zucaro, A. & Santagata, R. & Ulgiati, S., 2022. "Environmental assessment of milk production from local to regional scales," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 463(C).
    19. Yeşim Aytop, 2023. "Determination of Energy Consumption and Technical Efficiency of Cotton Farms in Türkiye," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-14, July.
    20. Siegel, Eric & Brown, Mark T. & De Vilbiss, Chris & Arden, Sam, 2016. "Calculating solar equivalence ratios of the four major heat-producing radiogenic isotopes in the Earth's crust and mantle," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 140-147.

    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:ecomod:v:483:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023001709. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.