The role of seasonality in lettuce consumption: a case study of environmental and social aspects
- 1.9k Downloads
Background, aim and scope
Considerable debate surrounds the assessment of the environmental impacts and the ethical justification for providing a year-round supply of fresh produce to consumers in the developed countries of northern Europe. Society is seeking environmentally sustainable supply chains which maintain the variety of fresh food on offer throughout the year. This paper compares the environmental impacts of different supply chains providing lettuce all year round to the UK and considers consumers' meanings of—and attitudes to—available options. Lettuce has been selected as a case study as its consumption has grown steadily during the last two decades and the supply chains through cold months are protected cropping in the UK and field cropping in Spain; during warm months, lettuce is sourced from field cropping in the UK.
Materials and methods
Data were collected from farms supplying each of these supply chains, and life cycle assessment methodology was used to analyse a range of impacts associated with producing (from plant propagation to harvesting and post-harvest cooling) and delivering 1 kg of lettuce to a UK Regional Distribution Centre (RDC). The downstream stages (i.e. retailing, consumption and waste management) are the same regardless of the origin of the product and were omitted from the comparison. The impacts considered included potential to induce global warming and acidification as well as three inventory indicators (primary energy use, land use and water use). Qualitative data were collected in order to assess the consumer considerations of purchasing lettuce also during winter.
Importation of Spanish field-grown lettuce into the UK during winter produced fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than lettuce produced in UK-protected systems at that time (0.4–0.5 vs. 1.5–3.7 kg CO2-eq/kg lettuce in RDC). Refrigerated transport to the UK was an important element of the global warming potential associated with Spanish lettuce (42.5% of emissions), whilst energy for heating dominated the results in UK-protected cultivation (84.3% of emissions). Results for acidification were more variable and no overall trends are apparent. Results from qualitative social analysis revealed complex and multidimensional meanings of freshness and suggested that the most striking seasonal variation in vegetable/salad eating was a tendency to consume more salads in the summer and more cooked vegetables in the winter, thus suggesting that in-home consumption alone cannot explain the rise in winter imports of lettuce to the UK.
UK field-grown lettuce had the lowest overall environmental impact; however, those lettuces are only available in summer, so consumers therefore need to either accept the environmental impacts associated with eating lettuce in the winter or to switch consumption to another food product in the winter. When lettuces were field-grown in Spain and then transported by road to the UK, the overall impacts were similar to the UK field lettuces. The variation within farms of the same country employing different cultivation regimes and practices was bigger than between farms of different countries.
This paper has explored the environmental consequences of consuming lettuce year-round in the UK. Whilst recognising the small sample size, the comparative analysis of the different supply chains does suggest that seasonality can be an important variable when defining the best choice of lettuce from an environmental point of view.
Recommendations and perspectives
Further studies considering more production sites and product types are required to obtain conclusions whose general validity is clear and for different types of fresh produce. A clear distinction to be made in such studies is whether crops are produced in open fields or under protection. New characterisation methods are needed for environmental impacts derived from the use of key agricultural resources such as land and water. Social studies to investigate consumer preferences and the possibility of moving to more seasonal diets should be an integral part of these studies using samples composed of both urban and rural consumers and using a mixed methodology with both quantitative and qualitative components.
KeywordsConsumers' meanings and attitudes Food miles Fresh produce LCA Life cycle assessment Lettuce Seasonality
This work was part of a larger project entitled ‘Comparative assessment of environmental, community and nutritional impacts of consuming fruit and vegetable produced locally and overseas’ (RES-224-25-0044) which was funded under the UK Research Councils Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) Programme. We thank the RELU programme for all their support. We are also very grateful to the horticultural businesses which participated in the project and gave so freely of their time and expertise. Dr. Hospido acknowledges Caixa Galicia Foundation for financial support during her postdoctoral stay at CES; she is currently funded by the Isidro Parga Pondal programme (Xunta de Galicia). Dr. Milà i Canals acknowledges GIRO CT (http://www.giroct.net) for its logistical support. Dr. McLaren’s recent involvement was funded through the New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science and Technology Programme ‘Building Capacity for Sustainable Development: the Enabling Research’ (CO9X0310). Preliminary results were presented in the 5th International Conference LCA in Foods (http://www.sik.se/lcafoods2007/). Two anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments that helped improving this paper.
- Andersson K, Ohlsson T (1998) Life cycle assessment of bread produced on different scales. Chalmers Tekniska Hogskola, Göteborg (Sweden)Google Scholar
- Antón M.A, Castells F, Montero JI, Muñoz P (2003) Most significant substances of LCA to Mediterranean Greenhouse Horticulture. In: Halberg N (ed) Life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector. Proceedings from the 4th International Conference, October 6–8, 2003, Bygholm, Denmark. DIAS Report no. 61, Tjele (Denmark)Google Scholar
- Arrouays D, Balesdent J, Germon JC, Jayet PA, Soussana JF, Stengel P (2002) Contribution à la lutte contre l’effet de serre. Stocker du carbone dans les sols agricoles de France? Paris (France) INRA (in French)Google Scholar
- Audsley E (coord.), Alber S, Clift R, Cowell S, Crettaz P, Gaillard G, Hausheer J, Jolliet O, Kleijn R, Mortensen B, Pearce D, Roger E, Teulon H, Weidema B, Van Zeijts H (1997) Harmonisation of environmental life cycle assessment for agriculture. Final report, Concerted Action AIR3-CT94-2028, European Commission, DG VIGoogle Scholar
- Blythman J (2004) Shopped—the shocking power of British supermarkets. Fourth Estate, London (UK)Google Scholar
- Brosnan T, Sun DW (2001) Precooling techniques and applications for horticultural products - a review. Int J Refrig 24:154–170Google Scholar
- DEFRA (2006) Basic horticultural statistics. Available from http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/bhs/2006/vegetable%20details.xls
- DEFRA (2007) UK household purchased quantities of food and drink. Available from http://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/ efs/datasets/UKHHcons.xls
- Edwards-Jones G, Milà i Canals L, Hounsome N, Truninger M, Koerber G, Hounsome B, Cross PA, York EH, Hospido A, Plassmann K, Harris IM, Edwards RT, Day GAS, Tomos AD, Cowell SJ, Jones DL (2008a) Testing the assertion that ‘local food is best’: the challenges of an evidence based approach. Trends Food Sci Technol 19:265–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus HJ, Doka G, Heck T, Hellweg S, Hischier R, Nemecek T, Rebitzer G, Spielmann M (2004) Overview and methodology. Ecoinvent report no. 1. Dübendorf (Switzerland) Swiss Centre for Life Cycle InventoriesGoogle Scholar
- Fortescue, S. (2005) Long-distance dinners. Miles to market and price comparison. Farmers Weekly, 23 December 2005, p 20Google Scholar
- Guinée J (ed), Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, de Koning A, van Oers L, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, de Bruijn H, van Duin R, Huijbregts MAJ, Lindeijer E, Roorda AAH, van der Ven BL, Weidema BP (2002) Life cycle assessment. An operational guide to the ISO standards. Leiden University (The Netherlands). VROM & CMLGoogle Scholar
- Hamilton A (2006) Christmas lunch will fly 84,000 miles to your table. Article in The Times dated 20th November, 2006. Available from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article642552.ece. Accessed 26.06.07
- Hauschild MZ, Thyø K, Jensen KH (2007) Estimating pesticide emissions for life cycle assessment of agricultural products. SETAC Europe 17th Annual Meeting. Abstracts. Porto (Portugal), 20th–24th May 2007Google Scholar
- Milà i Canals L, Muñoz I, McLaren SJ, Brandão M (2007c) LCA methodology and modelling considerations for vegetable production and consumption. CES Working Paper 02/07. ISSN 1464-8083. Available from http://www.ces-surrey.org.uk/
- Milà i Canals L, Muñoz I, Hospido A, Plassmann K, McLaren SJ (2008) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of domestic vs. imported vegetables. Case studies on broccoli, salad crops and green beans. CES Working Paper 01/08. ISSN 1464-8083. Available from http://www.ces-surrey.org.uk/
- Nemecek T, Heil A, Huguenin O, Meier S, Erzinger S, Blaser S, Dux D, Zimmermann A (2004) Life cycle inventories of agricultural production systems. Ecoinvent report no. 15, Agroscope FAL Reckenholz and FAT Taenikon, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, Switzerland (for ecoinvent members only)Google Scholar
- Saunders C, Barber A, Taylor G (2006) Food miles—comparative energy/emissions performance of New Zealand’s agriculture industry. AERU Research Report no. 285. Lincoln University, Lincoln, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
- Smith A, Watkiss P, Tweddle G, McKinnon A, Browne M, Hunt A, Treleven C, Nash C, Cross S (2005) The validity of food miles as an indicator of sustainable development. ED50254-103. Oxon (UK)Google Scholar
- The Carbon Trust (2004) Energy benchmarks and saving measures for protected greenhouse horticulture in the UK. Report ECG091. Available from www.thecarbontrust.co.uk/energy
- Warde A (1997) Consumption, food and taste—culinary antinomies and commodity culture. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Wilkinson S (2004) Focus group research. In: Silverman D (ed) Qualitative research—theory, method and practice, 2nd edn. Sage, London, pp 177–199Google Scholar