Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Conventional and Conservation Tillage Systems for Energy Crop Cultivation in Northern Italy

Elena Tamisari, Daniela Summa, Fabio Vincenzi, Marta Massolin, Marco Rivaroli, Giuseppe Castaldelli and Elena Tamburini ()
Additional contact information
Elena Tamisari: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Daniela Summa: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Fabio Vincenzi: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Marta Massolin: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Marco Rivaroli: Agricultural Foundation F.lli Navarra, Via Conca 73/B, Malborghetto di Boara, 44122 Ferrara, Italy
Giuseppe Castaldelli: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Elena Tamburini: Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via L. Borsari 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy

Resources, 2025, vol. 14, issue 12, 1-25

Abstract: Sustainable agriculture is a key pillar of the transition to agri-food systems that ensure global food security and the preservation of resources and ecosystems. This study evaluates the environmental impacts of different soil management practices in an agricultural system producing energy crops (maize and sorghum), using a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach, comparing conventional tillage, minimum tillage and no-tillage agricultural practices. The results show no significant differences between conventional and minimum tillage in most impact categories, while no-tillage shows a significant reduction in environmental impact of almost 50%. The hotspot analysis shows that organic fertilisation, especially the application of digestate, is the main contributor to environmental impacts, particularly in the Climate Change and Eutrophication categories. The results highlight key methodological challenges in LCA, such as the allocation of impacts between digestate and biogas production, and the need to integrate biological and chemical soil processes. While conservation agriculture can improve soil health, its environmental benefits are not fully captured by LCA. This study highlights the need to integrate LCA methodologies with complementary analyses to better assess the sustainability of agricultural practices and support informed decision-making.

Keywords: conservation agriculture; sustainability; Life Cycle Assessment (LCA); soil health (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/14/12/180/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/14/12/180/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jresou:v:14:y:2025:i:12:p:180-:d:1803714

Access Statistics for this article

Resources is currently edited by Ms. Donchian Ma

More articles in Resources from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().