Life Cycle Assessment of Protected Strawberry Productions in Central Italy

Alessio Ilari, Giuseppe Toscano, Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom, Daniele Duca and Ester Foppa Pedretti
Additional contact information
Alessio Ilari: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Giuseppe Toscano: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Daniele Duca: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Ester Foppa Pedretti: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 9, 1-14

Abstract: Agricultural activities in Europe cover half of the total area of the continent and are simultaneously a cause of environmental impact and victims of the same impact. Horticultural or fruit crops are considered highly intensive and often employ many crop inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, and various materials. Strawberry falls into this group, and it has grown in acreage and production more than others globally. The aim of this study is to compare the environmental impact of two strawberry cultivation systems in central Italy, a mulched soil tunnel and a soilless tunnel system. The method used to assess the impact is LCA, widely applied in agriculture and supported by international standards. The data used are mainly primary, related to 2018, and representative of the cultivation systems of central Italy. For impact assessment, the method selected was the CML_IA baseline version. From the results obtained, the two systems show a similar impact per kg of strawberries produced (e.g., for global warming: 0.785 kg CO 2 eq for soilless, 0.778 kg CO 2 eq for mulched soil tunnel). Reduced differences can be observed for the use of crop inputs (greater for the tunnel) and the use of materials and technology (greater for soilless). The mitigation measures considered concern the replacement of the packaging (excluding plastic) and the growing medium of the soilless using perlite and compost from insect breeding.

Keywords: sustainability; environmental impact; soilless; tunnel; agricultural structures; greenhouse (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4879/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4879/ (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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:4879-:d:544076

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

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