Mapping life cycle assessment (LCA) scientific research in agriculture: what do we still have to do?

Kássio R. G. Lucas (), Carlos Eduardo Caldarelli (), Maurício Ursi Ventura (), Longlong Tang (), Kiyotada Hayashi () and Naoki Yoshikawa ()
Additional contact information
Kássio R. G. Lucas: University of California
Carlos Eduardo Caldarelli: State University of Londrina
Maurício Ursi Ventura: State University of Londrina
Longlong Tang: Institute for Agro-Environmental Sciences, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization
Kiyotada Hayashi: EarthShift Global, Asia G.K
Naoki Yoshikawa: The University of Shiga Prefecture

Environment Systems and Decisions, 2025, vol. 45, issue 1, 1-16

Abstract: Abstract Scientific literature documents and dictates the direction of knowledge and to recognize it we rely on techniques that compile information to point out the next paths in science. One of the promising techniques is bibliometric analysis, especially when applied to the recent and under developing approach, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Considering that the methodology still has limitations and can generate simplified results, we sought to map its characteristics in agricultural use, characterizing the evolution and trends of scientific research when using LCA in the agricultural sector over a period of twenty years, from 2002 to 2022. We used bibliometric analysis for a systematic review of the literature, using the Scopus repository as a database. To organize and process the data, we used the VOSviewer software. It was found 4943 articles, of which the publication peaks occurred in the last ten years, published predominantly by journals related to environmental sciences. This is due to the study characteristics being mainly focused on methodology improving. They have been produced mainly in the USA, Europe, and China, without emphasis on regions, such as Latin America, Africa, and Asia, although they largely concentrate global agricultural production and with relevant sustainability challenges. Through bibliometric analysis, three main clusters were formed: Impact Assessment (which deals with methodological development); Types of products (about raw materials for alternative energy production); and Substances and activities (particularly substances related to greenhouse gas emissions and activities related to animal and feed farming). We note that the methodology still neglects certain types of impacts, such as biodiversity loss, soil degradation, and partly the (eco) toxicity of pesticides. The methodology is still insufficient for decision-making, with a limited understanding of agricultural functions and difficulties in modeling certain persistent effects, although it continues to be strategically improved. Graphical abstract

Keywords: Bibliometric analysis; Scientific production; Crop; Farming; Animal husbandry (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-024-09997-4 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:envsyd:v:45:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10669-024-09997-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.springer.com/journal/10669

DOI: 10.1007/s10669-024-09997-4

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment Systems and Decisions from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().