IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i19p11063-d651024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprint of Honey in Different Beekeeping Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Arianna Pignagnoli

    (Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali—CRPA S.p.A, Viale Timavo 43/2, 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy)

  • Stefano Pignedoli

    (Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali—CRPA S.p.A, Viale Timavo 43/2, 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy)

  • Emanuele Carpana

    (CREA Research Centre for Agriculture and Environment, Via Di Saliceto 80, 40128 Bologna, Italy)

  • Cecilia Costa

    (CREA Research Centre for Agriculture and Environment, Via Di Saliceto 80, 40128 Bologna, Italy)

  • Aldo Dal Prà

    (Centro Ricerche Produzioni Animali—CRPA S.p.A, Viale Timavo 43/2, 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy)

Abstract

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been increasingly used for the improvement of the environmental performance of products and services, including agro-food chains. Pollination by honeybees can be regarded as one of the functions of an apicultural system and is of utmost importance for both natural ecosystems and agriculture. Furthermore, the beekeeping chain can represent an instrument for the protection and conservation of honeybee diversity when local subspecies are used. The Carbon Footprint of honey evaluates greenhouse gas emissions throughout the Life Cycle Assessment—more specifically, emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane. To this aim, data from beekeeping farms were collected, including data on annual honey production, other hive products, the geographical locations of the apiaries, processing plants, technologies used, and fuel and energy consumption. Based on the ISO 14040 method for the use of Life Cycle Assessment, the Carbon Footprints that were calculated for honey ranged from 1.40 to 2.20 kg CO 2 e/kg of honey for migratory beekeeping and from 0.380 to 0.48 kg CO 2 e/kg of honey for non-migratory beekeeping. The movements for the management of migratory beehives (on average, 44 km/hive for farm 1, 32 km/hive for farm 2, and 13 km/hive for farm 3) represented the main impact in migratory beekeeping systems, and they were quantified as 1.234, 1.113, and 0.68 CO 2 e/kg of honey. However, electricity represented the main impact of systems without migratory practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Arianna Pignagnoli & Stefano Pignedoli & Emanuele Carpana & Cecilia Costa & Aldo Dal Prà, 2021. "Carbon Footprint of Honey in Different Beekeeping Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:11063-:d:651024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/11063/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/11063/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon G. Potts & Vera Imperatriz-Fonseca & Hien Ngo & Jacobus C. Biesmeijer & Tom Breeze & Lynn Dicks & Luigi Garibaldi & Josef Settele & A.J. Vanbergen & Marcelo A. Aizen & Saul A. Cunningham & Conna, 2016. "Summary for policymakers of the assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on pollinators, pollination and food production," Post-Print hal-01946814, HAL.
    2. Ioannis Arzoumanidis & Luigia Petti & Andrea Raggi & Alessandra Zamagni, 2013. "Life Cycle Assessment for the Agri-Food Sector," Springer Books, in: Roberta Salomone & Maria Teresa Clasadonte & Maria Proto & Andrea Raggi (ed.), Product-Oriented Environmental Management Systems (POEMS), edition 127, chapter 0, pages 105-122, Springer.
    3. Ioannis Arzoumanidis & Andrea Raggi & Luigia Petti, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Honey: Considering the Pollination Service," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, March.
    4. Joana Almeida & Wouter M.J. Achten & Bruno Verbist & Reindert F. Heuts & Eddie Schrevens & Bart Muys, 2014. "Carbon and Water Footprints and Energy Use of Greenhouse Tomato Production in Northern Italy," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 898-908, December.
    5. Cristina Bianca Pocol & Peter Šedík & Ioan Sebastian Brumă & Antonio Amuza & Aurica Chirsanova, 2021. "Organic Beekeeping Practices in Romania: Status and Perspectives towards a Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, March.
    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. Ioannis Arzoumanidis & Andrea Raggi & Luigia Petti, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Honey: Considering the Pollination Service," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Ehsan Rahimi & Pinliang Dong, 2022. "What are the main human pressures affecting Iran’s protected areas?," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 682-691, December.
    3. Premaratne Samaranayake & Weiguang Liang & Zhong-Hua Chen & David Tissue & Yi-Chen Lan, 2020. "Sustainable Protected Cropping: A Case Study of Seasonal Impacts on Greenhouse Energy Consumption during Capsicum Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-23, August.
    4. G Liliana Bravo Monroy, 2017. "Ecological and Cultural Values of Water Bodies: Recognising a Plural-Values Approach of Ecosystems," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 1(3), pages 589-591, August.
    5. Andy Felix Jităreanu & Mioara Mihăilă & Alexandru-Dragoș Robu & Florin-Daniel Lipșa & Carmen Luiza Costuleanu, 2022. "Dynamic of Ecological Agriculture Certification in Romania Facing the EU Organic Action Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Bellassen Valentin & Drut Marion & Antonioli Federico & Brečić Ružica & Donati Michele & Ferrer-Pérez Hugo & Gauvrit Lisa & Hoang Viet & Knutsen Steinnes Kamilla & Lilavanichakul Apichaya & Majewski E, 2021. "The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 113-126, December.
    7. Bezerra, Antonio Diego M. & Pacheco Filho, Alípio J.S. & Bomfim, Isac G.A. & Smagghe, Guy & Freitas, Breno M., 2019. "Agricultural area losses and pollinator mismatch due to climate changes endanger passion fruit production in the Neotropics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 49-57.
    8. Giacomo Falcone & Anna Irene De Luca & Teodora Stillitano & Alfio Strano & Giuseppa Romeo & Giovanni Gulisano, 2016. "Assessment of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Vine-Growing Combining Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Costing and Multicriterial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-34, August.
    9. David Urbán-Duarte & José Fernando De La Torre-Sánchez & Yooichi Kainoh & Kazuo Watanabe, 2021. "Biodiversity and Stage of the Art of Three Pollinators Taxa in Mexico: An Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    10. Diop, Bassirou & Sanz, Nicolas & Duplan, Yves Jamont Junior & Guene, El Hadji Mama & Blanchard, Fabian & Pereau, Jean-Christophe & Doyen, Luc, 2018. "Maximum Economic Yield Fishery Management in the Face of Global Warming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 52-61.
    11. Teklewold, Hailemariam & Kassie, Menale & Abro, Zewdu & Mulungu, Kelvin & Sevgan, Subramanian, 2021. "The Role of Pollination Services and Disrupting Cropping Patterns in Closing Nutrition Gap in Sub-Saharan Africa," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315241, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Perennes, Marie & Diekötter, Tim & Groß, Jens & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2021. "A hierarchical framework for mapping pollination ecosystem service potential at the local scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    13. Olatz Etxegarai-Legarreta & Valeriano Sanchez-Famoso, 2022. "The Role of Beekeeping in the Generation of Goods and Services: The Interrelation between Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Sociocultural Utilities," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Simeon Marnasidis & Apostolos Kantartzis & Chrisovalantis Malesios & Fani Hatjina & Garyfallos Arabatzis & Efstathia Verikouki, 2021. "Mapping Priority Areas for Apiculture Development with the Use of Geographical Information Systems," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Thomas Sawe & Anders Nielsen & Katrine Eldegard, 2020. "Crop Pollination in Small-Scale Agriculture in Tanzania: Household Dependence, Awareness and Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-13, March.
    16. Moritz von Cossel & Yasir Iqbal & Iris Lewandowski, 2019. "Improving the Ecological Performance of Miscanthus ( Miscanthus × giganteus Greef et Deuter) through Intercropping with Woad ( Isatis tinctoria L.) and Yellow Melilot ( Melilotus officinalis L.)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-12, September.
    17. J. Tzilivakis & D. J. Warner & A. Green & K. A. Lewis, 2019. "Spatial analysis of the benefits and burdens of ecological focus areas for water-related ecosystem services vulnerable to climate change in Europe," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 205-233, February.
    18. Ehsan Rahimi & Pinliang Dong, 2023. "Identifying barriers and pinch-points of large mammal corridors in Iran," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(2), pages 285-297, June.
    19. Aliz Feketéné Ferenczi & Isván Szűcs & Andrea Bauerné Gáthy, 2023. "Evaluation of the Pollination Ecosystem Service of the Honey Bee ( Apis mellifera ) Based on a Beekeeping Model in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-14, June.
    20. Moritz Von Cossel & Iris Lewandowski & Berien Elbersen & Igor Staritsky & Michiel Van Eupen & Yasir Iqbal & Stefan Mantel & Danilo Scordia & Giorgio Testa & Salvatore Luciano Cosentino & Oksana Maliar, 2019. "Marginal Agricultural Land Low-Input Systems for Biomass Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-25, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:11063-:d:651024. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.