IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v45y2025i1d10.1007_s10669-024-09997-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping life cycle assessment (LCA) scientific research in agriculture: what do we still have to do?

Author

Listed:
  • Kássio R. G. Lucas

    (University of California)

  • Carlos Eduardo Caldarelli

    (State University of Londrina)

  • Maurício Ursi Ventura

    (State University of Londrina)

  • Longlong Tang

    (Institute for Agro-Environmental Sciences, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization)

  • Kiyotada Hayashi

    (EarthShift Global, Asia G.K)

  • Naoki Yoshikawa

    (The University of Shiga Prefecture)

Abstract

Scientific literature documents and dictates the direction of knowledge and to recognize it we rely on techniques that compile information to point out the next paths in science. One of the promising techniques is bibliometric analysis, especially when applied to the recent and under developing approach, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Considering that the methodology still has limitations and can generate simplified results, we sought to map its characteristics in agricultural use, characterizing the evolution and trends of scientific research when using LCA in the agricultural sector over a period of twenty years, from 2002 to 2022. We used bibliometric analysis for a systematic review of the literature, using the Scopus repository as a database. To organize and process the data, we used the VOSviewer software. It was found 4943 articles, of which the publication peaks occurred in the last ten years, published predominantly by journals related to environmental sciences. This is due to the study characteristics being mainly focused on methodology improving. They have been produced mainly in the USA, Europe, and China, without emphasis on regions, such as Latin America, Africa, and Asia, although they largely concentrate global agricultural production and with relevant sustainability challenges. Through bibliometric analysis, three main clusters were formed: Impact Assessment (which deals with methodological development); Types of products (about raw materials for alternative energy production); and Substances and activities (particularly substances related to greenhouse gas emissions and activities related to animal and feed farming). We note that the methodology still neglects certain types of impacts, such as biodiversity loss, soil degradation, and partly the (eco) toxicity of pesticides. The methodology is still insufficient for decision-making, with a limited understanding of agricultural functions and difficulties in modeling certain persistent effects, although it continues to be strategically improved. Graphical abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Kássio R. G. Lucas & Carlos Eduardo Caldarelli & Maurício Ursi Ventura & Longlong Tang & Kiyotada Hayashi & Naoki Yoshikawa, 2025. "Mapping life cycle assessment (LCA) scientific research in agriculture: what do we still have to do?," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:45:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10669-024-09997-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-024-09997-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-024-09997-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-024-09997-4?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. Dehdarirad, Tahereh & Nasini, Stefano, 2017. "Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 371-388.
    2. van Eck, N.J.P. & Waltman, L., 2009. "How to Normalize Co-Occurrence Data? An Analysis of Some Well-Known Similarity Measures," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-001-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    3. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    4. Thomassen, M.A. & van Calker, K.J. & Smits, M.C.J. & Iepema, G.L. & de Boer, I.J.M., 2008. "Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 95-107, March.
    5. Xinping Chen & Zhenling Cui & Mingsheng Fan & Peter Vitousek & Ming Zhao & Wenqi Ma & Zhenlin Wang & Weijian Zhang & Xiaoyuan Yan & Jianchang Yang & Xiping Deng & Qiang Gao & Qiang Zhang & Shiwei Guo , 2014. "Producing more grain with lower environmental costs," Nature, Nature, vol. 514(7523), pages 486-489, October.
    6. Shiau, Wen-Lung & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Yang, Han Suan, 2017. "Co-citation and cluster analyses of extant literature on social networks," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 390-399.
    7. Hayo M. G. Werf & Marie Trydeman Knudsen & Christel Cederberg, 2020. "Towards better representation of organic agriculture in life cycle assessment," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(6), pages 419-425, June.
    8. Tahereh Dehdarirad & Stefano Nasini, 2017. "Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis," Post-Print hal-01745330, HAL.
    9. Jyri Seppälä & Lauren Basson & Gregory A. Norris, 2001. "Decision Analysis Frameworks for Life‐Cycle Impact Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 5(4), pages 45-68, October.
    10. Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2009. "How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(8), pages 1635-1651, August.
    11. Ole Ellegaard & Johan A. Wallin, 2015. "The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1809-1831, December.
    12. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan & Noyons, Ed C.M., 2010. "A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 629-635.
    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. María Pinto & Rosaura Fernández-Pascual & David Caballero-Mariscal & Dora Sales, 2020. "Information literacy trends in higher education (2006–2019): visualizing the emerging field of mobile information literacy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1479-1510, August.
    2. Lilian Cervo Cabrera & Carlos Eduardo Caldarelli & Marcia Regina Gabardo Camara, 2020. "Mapping collaboration in international coffee certification research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2597-2618, September.
    3. Evi Sachini & Nikolaos Karampekios & Pierpaolo Brutti & Konstantinos Sioumalas-Christodoulou, 2020. "Should I stay or should I go? Using bibliometrics to identify the international mobility of highly educated Greek manpower," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 641-663, October.
    4. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    5. Jiang, Chenming & Bhat, Chandra R. & Lam, William H.K., 2020. "A bibliometric overview of Transportation Research Part B: Methodological in the past forty years (1979–2019)," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 268-291.
    6. E. Sachini & K. Sioumalas-Christodoulou & C. Chrysomallidis & G. Siganos & N. Bouras & N. Karampekios, 2021. "COVID-19 enabled co-authoring networks: a country-case analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5225-5244, June.
    7. Philipp Korom, 2019. "A bibliometric visualization of the economics and sociology of wealth inequality: a world apart?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 849-868, March.
    8. Juntao Zheng & Niancai Liu, 2015. "Mapping of important international academic awards," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 763-791, September.
    9. Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2018. "A Research Agenda on Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Francesco Paolo Appio & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Alberto Minin, 2014. "Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 623-661, October.
    11. Guadalupe Palacios-Núñez & Gabriel Vélez-Cuartas & Juan D. Botero, 2018. "Developmental tendencies in the academic field of intellectual property through the identification of invisible colleges," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1561-1574, June.
    12. Patrick Röhm, 2018. "Exploring the landscape of corporate venture capital: a systematic review of the entrepreneurial and finance literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 279-319, August.
    13. Hric, Darko & Kaski, Kimmo & Kivelä, Mikko, 2018. "Stochastic block model reveals maps of citation patterns and their evolution in time," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 757-783.
    14. Israel R. Orimoloye & Olusola O. Ololade, 2021. "Global trends assessment of environmental health degradation studies from 1990 to 2018," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 3251-3264, March.
    15. Igors Skute, 2019. "Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 237-265, July.
    16. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    17. João J. M. Ferreira & Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Cristina I. M. A. S. Fernandes & Marjan S. Jalali & Mário L. Raposo & Carla S. Marques, 2016. "What do we [not] know about technology entrepreneurship research?," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 713-733, September.
    18. Abreu, Emmanuel Sousa de & Kimura, Herbert & Sobreiro, Vinicius Amorim, 2019. "What is going on with studies on banking efficiency?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 195-219.
    19. Mathieu P.A. Steijn, 2020. "Improvement on the association strength: implementing a probabilistic measure based on combinations without repetition," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2043, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2020.
    20. Dzikowski, Piotr, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of born global firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 281-294.

    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:spr:envsyd:v:45:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10669-024-09997-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.