Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production in Chongming ecological island



Evaluate environmental load of the agriculture industry by taking Chongming Island of Shanghai as a case study. Propose feasible approaches to reduce the environmental impact of agriculture industry based on the research findings.


The research boundary of our study covers from raw material extraction to agriculture product (cradle to product). Two stages are identified based on life cycle thinking: agricultural material production and planting process. In the agriculture material stage, we evaluated the consumption of agricultural machinery and equipment for diesel, gasoline and electricity; then, the embodied environmental impact of these energy sources are calculated based on life cycle assessment (LCA). For the planting stage, we calculated the environmental impact caused by agriculture sowing, fertilizing, and spraying of pesticides also according to the LCA method.

Results and discussion

The environmental impacts of Chongming Island in 2015 are found as ecosystem damage (2.44E+11 species year), human health (2.86E+10 DALY), and resources consumption (1.15E+09 $). The primary environmental impacts in the agricultural material production stage are revealed as marine ecological toxicity (1.01E+06), freshwater eutrophication (5.26E+05), and human toxicity (4.04E+05), of which 90% of the impacts are caused by the production of nitrogen fertilizer, phosphorus fertilizer, and potassium fertilizer. The main environmental impacts in the agricultural planting stage are freshwater ecotoxicity (1.27E+06), freshwater eutrophication (7.70E+05), and terrestrial ecotoxicity (7.70E+05), which are mainly caused by pesticide residues and loss of nitrogen fertilizer, phosphorus fertilizer, and potassium fertilizer.


The results of the environmental impact analysis of the Chongming agricultural production of 2008–2015 showed that there was a significant decline trend in 2011 and 2012, mainly due to the significant reduction in the use of nitrogen fertilizer. The main measures for the practitioner to reduce the potential ecological damage to agricultural production are controlling the N, P, and K fertilizer application and pesticide spray volume. In addition, the ecological environment can be improved by exploring techniques and measures for efficient utilization of agricultural resources such as optimizing the amount of fertilizer and application rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7


  1. Bartl K, Verones F, Hellweg S (2012) Life cycle assessment based evaluation of regional impacts from agricultural production at the peruvian coast. Environ Sci Technol 46(18):9872–9880

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Brentrup F, Kusters J, Kuhlmann H et al (2004) Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production systems using the life cycle assessment method I. Theoretical concept of a LCA method tailored to agriculture production. Eur J Agron 20(3):247–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chong T, Li M, Ai-qing W et al (2007) Calculation and analysis of agricultural ecological footprint in Bashang area of Hebei Province. J Chin Soc Eco-Agric 15(3):151–154 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chongming Statistical Yearbook (2016) Shanghai Chongming County Bureau of Statistics. https://pan.baidu.com/s/1WIMlomplyc1KIsRawv2yBA (in Chinese)

  5. Cowell SJ, Clift R (1997) Impact assessment for LCAs involving agricultural production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2(2):99–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008. A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level, 1st edn. Report I: characterisation, pp 1–126

  7. Heinonen J, Säynäjoki A, Junnonen JM, Pöyry A, Junnila S (2016) Pre-use phase lca of a multi-story residential building: can greenhouse gas emissions be used as a more general environmental performance indicator? Build Environ 95:116–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Huang B, Mauerhofer V (2016) Low carbon technology assessment and planning case analysis of building sector in Chongming, Shanghai. Renew Energ 86:324–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Huang B, Zhao F, Fishman T (2018) Building material use and associated environmental impacts in China 2000–2015. Environ Sci Technol 52(23):14006–14014

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Huijbregts MAJ, Steinmann ZJN, Elshout PMF, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, Zijp M, Hollander A, van Zelm R (2017) Recipe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22(2):138–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. ISO 14040 (2006) International standard. In: Environmental management – life cycle assessment – principles and framework. International Organization for Normalization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jungbluth N, Büsser S, Frischknecht R, Flury K, Stucki M (2012) Feasibility of environmental product information based on life cycle thinking and recommendations for Switzerland. J Clean Prod 28:187–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Khoshnevisan B, Shafiei M, Rajaeifar MA, Tabatabaei M (2016) Biogas and bioethanol production from pinewood pre-treated with steam explosion and n-methylmorpholine-n-oxide (nmmo): a comparative life cycle assessment approach. Energy 114:935–950

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Klöpffer W, Grahl B (2016) Life cycle assessment (LCA): a guide to best practice. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1063–1066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Laurent A, Olsen SI, Hauschild MZ (2011) Normalization in EDIP97 and EDIP2003: updated European inventory for 2004 and guidance towards a consistent use in practice. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16:401–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewis KA, Bardon KS (1998) A computer-based environmental management system for agriculture. Environ Model Softw 13(2):123–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ma Z (2008) Effects of heavy metals on farmland soil and agricultural product safety and its management evaluation system. China Agricultural University, Beijing, pp 54–72 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mishima S, Tanoiguchi S, Komada M (2005) Adaptation of life cycle assessment (LCA) to agricultural production on a regional scale in Japan. Trans Ecol Environ. https://doi.org/10.2495/ECO050661

  19. Owsianiak M, Laurent A, Bjørn A, Hauschild MZ (2014) IMPACT 2002+, ReCiPe 2008 and ILCD’s recommended practice for characterization modelling in life cycle impact assessment: a case study-based comparison. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(5):1007–1021

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Paolotti L, Boggia A, Castellini C, Rocchi L, Rosati A (2016) Combining livestock and tree crops to improve sustainability in agriculture: a case study using the life cycle assessment (LCA) approach. J Clean Prod 131:351–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Peng X, Wu X, Wu F et al (2015) Life cycle assessment of winter wheat summer maize rotation system in Guanzhong region of Shaanxi. J Agro Environ Sci 4:809–816 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Poritosh R, Daisuke N, Takahiro O et al (2009) A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. J Food Eng 90(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rigby D, Woodhouse P, Young T, Burton M (2001) Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice. Ecol Econ 39:463–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. The First National Pollution Source Census Leading Group Office (2009) The first national pollution source census: agricultural pollution source fertilizer loss coefficient manual. the State Council, Beijing (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tolle DA (1997) Regional scaling and normalization in LCIA. Development and application of methods. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2:197–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang X, Zhao X, Wang Y et al (2017) Carbon footprint analysis of rice production in China. Resour Sci 39(4):713–722 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Yang Y, Lin W (2015) Environmental impact assessment of different maize planting patterns—based on LCA. Agric Mech Res 12:1–6 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

Download references


The research work is supported by grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71403170). Zhibo Lu is financially supported by the Shanghai Science and Technology Committee (No. 15DZ1208103).

Author information



Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Beijia Huang or Zhibo Lu.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Responsible editor: Zuoren Nie

Electronic supplementary material


(DOCX 41 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, S., Huang, B., Zhao, F. et al. Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production in Chongming ecological island. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24, 1937–1947 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01614-w

Download citation


  • Agricultural production
  • Environmental impact evaluation
  • Fertilizer
  • Life cycle assessment
  • Pesticide