Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study has been to investigate the effect of different allocation methods on life cycle assessment (LCA) results of products derived from line-caught cod and the consequences of applying these methods considering the main aims of this case study. These aims were for internal improvement work and communication of results to the market.
Methods
Standard LCA methodology was applied. Mass allocation, economic allocation, a novel hybrid allocation and gross energy content allocation have been tested on a case study, and the results are discussed. In the case study, allocation problems in the studied case arose in the fishing and processing stages. Avoidance of allocation by splitting of processes, biological causality and system expansion or the avoided product approach was deemed to be not feasible.
Results and discussion
Economic allocation gave a much larger spread of impacts between the different products than mass allocation, especially for processing residue, due to large price differences. Hybrid allocation gave impacts in between mass and economic allocation because the set factors give a higher value for products that are for human consumption. Energy allocation gave results close to mass allocation because the energy content is quite similar in different species and products. Economic allocation is sensitive to price changes, the others are not. When used for evaluating environmental performance improvement measures that change the relative yields for human consumption and other purposes, the different methods used reflected very different results. When used in communication to the market, the different allocation methods yield results that could lead to different behaviours by market actors.
Conclusions
The different allocation methods gave very different results for the studied products; hence in order to achieve comparability between products, the same method must be used in all the cases. Different allocation methods might be appropriate for different purposes. For external communication to the market, mass allocation might be the preferred method in most cases. For internal improvement work, both economic and mass allocation could be used, but economic allocation might be the best alternative. The comparability of LCA results of products from wild-caught fish is limited, due to the lack of an agreed standard method. It is recommended to consider the different applications of the results when developing such a method. Different purposes might require different methodological choices, e.g. allocation methodology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayer NW, Tyedmers PH, Pelletier NL, Sonesson U, Scholz A (2007) Co-product allocation in life cycle assessments of seafood production systems: review of problems and strategies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(7):480–487
Cederberg C, Mattsson B (2000) Life cycle assessment of milk production—a comparison of conventional and organic farming. J Cleaner Prod 8:49–60
Eyjólfsdóttir HR, Jónsdóttir H, Yngvadóttir E et al. (2003) Environmental effects of fish on the consumers dish—life cycle assessment of Icelandic frozen cod products. Final Report May 2003. Icelandic Fisheries Laboratories and IceTec, Iceland
Hospido A, Tyedmers P (2005) Life cycle environmental impacts of Spanish tuna fisheries. Fish Res 76:174–186
Hospido A, Vazquez ME, Cuevas A, Feijoo G, Moreira MT (2006) Environmental assessment of canned tuna manufacture with a life-cycle perspective. Resour Conserv Recycl 47:56–72
ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. ISO, Geneva; http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue.htm
ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines. International Organisation for Standardisation; http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue.htm. ISO, Geneva
Schau EM, Fet AM (2008) LCA studies of food products as background for environmental product declarations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(3):255–264
Schau EM, Ellingsen H, Endal A, Aanondsen SA (2009) Energy consumption in Norwegian fisheries. J Cleaner Prod 17:325–334
Svanes E, Vold M, Hanssen OJ (2011) Environmental sustainability of cod (Gadus morhua) from autoline fisheries. Int J Life Cycle Assess (in press)
Thrane M (2005) LCA on Danish fish products and application of system expansion in the fishery. Life cycle assessment of seafood: 3rd workshop. IFL project report 28–03
Thrane M (2006) LCA of Danish fish products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(1):66–74
Vázquez-Rowe I, Iribarren D, Moreira MT, Feijoo G (2010) Combined application of life cycle assessment and data envelopment analysis as a methodological approach for the assessment of fisheries. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:272–283
Winther U, Ziegler F, Skontorp Hognes E et al. (2009) Carbon Footprint and energy use in Norwegian seafood products. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture
Ziegler F (2006) Environmental life cycle assessment of seafood products from capture fisheries. PhD Thesis, Department of Marine Ecology, Faculty of Science, Gothenburg University
Ziegler F (2008) Presentation at open meeting introducing the research project carbon footprint and energy use in Norwegian seafood products. 20 November 2008, Oslo, Norway
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank our research partners in Nofima Norconserv. We would also like to thank the Norwegian Research Council and the companies Domstein ASA and Mustad Longline for the financial support and supplying the necessary data for the assessments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Svanes, E., Vold, M. & Hanssen, O.J. Effect of different allocation methods on LCA results of products from wild-caught fish and on the use of such results. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16, 512–521 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0288-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0288-4