The agro-production chain environmental management in the agricultural production-consumption chain

  • Helias A. Udo de Haes
  • Geert R. de Snoo
LCA and Ecolabelling


After promoting environmental certification of companies in a chain perspective (Udo de Haes & De Snoo, 1996) now the agro-production chain is worked out as a case study. The role of the different links in the chain, such as agricultural producers, processing industry, wholesale companies and retailers is discussed. Also the role of consumers and authorities is described. For every company in the chain the advantages of a company based approach will be a better image and a guaranteed-sale and/or supply. In comparison with a product based approach (ecolabelling) the steering forces in the agro-production chain will be the retailers and not the consumers. Because consumers only get information at company level the approach is less dependent on consumers behaviour in the shop.


Company certification certification environmental certification product company LCA life cycle assesment life cycle approach product policy environmental management systems EMAS ISO agricultural production retailers 


  1. Udo de Haes, H.A., G.R. de Snoo (1996): Companies and products: two vehicles for a life cycle approach? Int.J. LCA 1 (3): 168–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Uno de Haes, H.A.,J-E Blnsahel, R. Clift,C.R. Fussler,R. Gresshammer,A.A. Jensen, ill press: Report of the Groupe des Sages on EU Ecolabelling Programme, a SFTAC-Furope publication, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  3. Taylor, A.P. (1996): Overall business impact assessment (OBIA). Proceedings 4th Symposium for Case Studies LCA. 3 Dec. 1996 Brussels, Belgium: 181–187Google Scholar
  4. International Organization for Standardization (1995): Environ- mental management system-specification with guidance for use. Draft internationanl standard ISO/DIS 14001Google Scholar
  5. EEC (1993): KKC Council Regulation no. 1836/93. Allowing voluntary participation by companies in the industrial sector in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS). Official Journal of the European Communities (10-7-1993, No I. 168): 1–17Google Scholar
  6. Rufer, D.F. (1996): Application of ecobalances for change management and education in business. Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Kcobalance. The New Stage of LCA as a Common Language. 18-20 nov. 1996 Tsukuba, Japan: A3–7: 60–65Google Scholar
  7. Stichting Milieukeur (1996): Certificatieschcma voor de teelt van aardappelen, tarwe, paprika en uien. Stichting Milieukeur, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
  8. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1991): Code of good agricultural practice for the protection of water. UK: Environment Protection Division, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and FoodGoogle Scholar
  9. MBT (Milieubewuste Teelt) (1996): Milieubewuste teelt in 1996. Brochure Centraal Bureau van de tuinbouwveilingen in Neder- land. ZoetermeerGoogle Scholar
  10. Scherphoe, W. (1993): Het groen label is van start gegaan. Rund- vee, Schapen en Paarden-Bulletin 1–93: 7–1 1Google Scholar
  11. Schowetter, T. (1996): naar een optimum tussen natuur en techniek. 19NU 32 (3):28–31Google Scholar
  12. MBT (Milieubewuste Teelt) (1996): Registratiemap Milieubewuste Teelt vollegrondsgroenten, glasgroenten, paddestoelen, appels en peren, 1996. Stichting Milieubewuste teelt, ZoetermeerGoogle Scholar
  13. Sainsbury (1996): J. Sainsbury plc. Environment Report 1996. LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Braunschweg, A.,R. Muller-Wenk (1993): Ökobilanzen für Unternehmungen: eine Wegleitung für die Praxis. Haupt, Bern, Stuttgart, WienGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helias A. Udo de Haes
    • 1
  • Geert R. de Snoo
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre of Environmental Science (CML)Leiden UniversityThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations