IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v71y2025ics2212041624000937.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying spatially explicit LCA midpoint characterization factors to assess the impact of specific farming practices on ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Lago-Olveira, Sara
  • Moreira, Maria Teresa
  • González-García, Sara

Abstract

The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is a scientifically sound tool, endorsed by the European Commission, for conducting environmental assessments. Despite its standardized approach, certain areas require improvement, particularly concerning impacts on ecosystem structure, function, and associated ecosystem services. Given the significant pressure of agriculture on global ecosystems, research has attempted to establish characterization factors (CFs) that reflect the impact of agricultural practices on ecosystem services. However, the current CFs lack precision and are unable to differentiate between the various types and intensities of agricultural management. This study aims to contribute to the evolving LCA field by introducing novel CFs that allow for the assessment of the impacts and benefits of growing wheat under different agricultural practices on three ecosystem services: water purification, soil erosion control, and carbon sequestration. Spatially explicit, nonlinear models (InVEST and RothC) were used, with the Galician region of northwestern Spain as the spatial setting. The quantified CFs indicated that wheat cultivated with conventional tillage, straw removal and without cover crop exhibited the least favorable outcomes in terms of ecosystem service supply, specifically water purification (13.29 kg N·ha−1·y-1), soil erosion control (11.71 t soil·ha−1·y-1), and carbon sequestration (45.41 t C·ha−1·y-1). In contrast, the combination of conservation tillage, straw return and cover crop resulted in the highest ecosystem services gains (−0.46 kg N·ha−1·y-1, 2.64 t soil·ha−1·y-1, 7.05 t C·ha−1·y-1, respectively). The geographical specificity of the CFs presented here, combined with the detailed classification of agricultural land use, offers essential insights into the potential gains and losses of ecosystem services resulting from various farming practices. This information can assist industry stakeholders and policymakers in making well-informed agricultural management decisions, and in developing strategies that prevent unintended environmental burden shifting.

Suggested Citation

  • Lago-Olveira, Sara & Moreira, Maria Teresa & González-García, Sara, 2025. "Quantifying spatially explicit LCA midpoint characterization factors to assess the impact of specific farming practices on ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:71:y:2025:i:c:s2212041624000937
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000937
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101686?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Hamel & A. Guerry & S. Polasky & B. Han & J. Douglass & M. Hamann & B. Janke & J. Kuiper & H. Levrel & H. Liu & E. Lonsdorf & R. Mcdonald & C. Nootenboom & Z. Ouyang & R. Remme & R. Sharp & Léa Tar, 2021. "Mapping the benefits of nature in cities with the InVEST software," Post-Print hal-03318222, HAL.
    2. Alena J. Raymond & James R. Tipton & Alissa Kendall & Jason T. DeJong, 2020. "Review of impact categories and environmental indicators for life cycle assessment of geotechnical systems," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(3), pages 485-499, June.
    3. Baustert, Paul & Othoniel, Benoit & Rugani, Benedetto & Leopold, Ulrich, 2018. "Uncertainty analysis in integrated environmental models for ecosystem service assessments: Frameworks, challenges and gaps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PB), pages 110-123.
    4. Natalia Mikosch & Tina Dettmer & Benjamin Plaga & Marko Gernuks & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2022. "Relevance of Impact Categories and Applicability of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods from an Automotive Industry Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer & Sarah Sim & Perrine Hamel & Benjamin Bryant & Ryan Noe & Carina Mueller & Giles Rigarlsford & Michal Kulak & Virginia Kowal & Richard Sharp & Julie Clavreul & Edward Price & S, 2017. "Life cycle assessment needs predictive spatial modelling for biodiversity and ecosystem services," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, April.
    6. Blanco, Carlos Felipe & Marques, Alexandra & van Bodegom, Peter M., 2018. "An integrated framework to assess impacts on ecosystem services in LCA demonstrated by a case study of mining in Chile," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 211-219.
    7. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Isabelle Tsakok, 2020. "Successful Agricultural Transformation: Selected Challenges in the Emerging Global Environment," Policy briefs on Agriculture Markets, Policies and Food Security 2002, Policy Center for the New South.
    9. Katerina Georgiou & Robert B. Jackson & Olga Vindušková & Rose Z. Abramoff & Anders Ahlström & Wenting Feng & Jennifer W. Harden & Adam F. A. Pellegrini & H. Wayne Polley & Jennifer L. Soong & William, 2022. "Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Babí Almenar, Javier & Petucco, Claudio & Sonnemann, Guido & Geneletti, Davide & Elliot, Thomas & Rugani, Benedetto, 2023. "Modelling the net environmental and economic impacts of urban nature-based solutions by combining ecosystem services, system dynamics and life cycle thinking: An application to urban forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    11. Maia de Souza, Danielle & Lopes, Gabriela Russo & Hansson, Julia & Hansen, Karin, 2018. "Ecosystem services in life cycle assessment: A synthesis of knowledge and recommendations for biofuels," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 200-210.
    12. Posner, Stephen & Verutes, Gregory & Koh, Insu & Denu, Doug & Ricketts, Taylor, 2016. "Global use of ecosystem service models," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 131-141.
    13. Hayo M. G. Werf & Marie Trydeman Knudsen & Christel Cederberg, 2020. "Towards better representation of organic agriculture in life cycle assessment," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(6), pages 419-425, June.
    14. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    15. Boumans, Roelof & Roman, Joe & Altman, Irit & Kaufman, Les, 2015. "The Multiscale Integrated Model of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Simulating the interactions of coupled human and natural systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 30-41.
    16. Elliot, T. & Torres-Matallana, J.A. & Goldstein, B. & Babí Almenar, J. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Proença, V. & Rugani, B., 2022. "An expanded framing of ecosystem services is needed for a sustainable urban future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    17. Weidema, Bo Pedersen, 2009. "Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1591-1598, April.
    18. Ricardo F. M. Teixeira & Tiago G. Morais & Tiago Domingos, 2018. "A Practical Comparison of Regionalized Land Use and Biodiversity Life Cycle Impact Assessment Models Using Livestock Production as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Boumans, Roelof & Costanza, Robert & Farley, Joshua & Wilson, Matthew A. & Portela, Rosimeiry & Rotmans, Jan & Villa, Ferdinando & Grasso, Monica, 2002. "Modeling the dynamics of the integrated earth system and the value of global ecosystem services using the GUMBO model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 529-560, June.
    20. Potschin-Young, M. & Haines-Young, R. & Görg, C. & Heink, U. & Jax, K. & Schleyer, C., 2018. "Understanding the role of conceptual frameworks: Reading the ecosystem service cascade," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 428-440.
    21. Wieland, Raoul & Ravensbergen, Sarah & Gregr, Edward J. & Satterfield, Terre & Chan, Kai M.A., 2016. "Debunking trickle-down ecosystem services: The fallacy of omnipotent, homogeneous beneficiaries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 175-180.
    22. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Ingram, Jane Carter & Shapiro, Carl D. & La Notte, Alessandra & Maes, Joachim & Vallecillo, Sara & Casey, C. Frank & Glynn, Pierre D. & Heris, Mehdi P. & Johnson, Justin A. & Lau, 2021. "Lessons learned from development of natural capital accounts in the United States and European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    23. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Babí Almenar, Javier & Petucco, Claudio & Sonnemann, Guido & Geneletti, Davide & Elliot, Thomas & Rugani, Benedetto, 2023. "Modelling the net environmental and economic impacts of urban nature-based solutions by combining ecosystem services, system dynamics and life cycle thinking: An application to urban forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    3. Costanza, Robert, 2020. "Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    4. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    5. Baustert, Paul & Othoniel, Benoit & Rugani, Benedetto & Leopold, Ulrich, 2018. "Uncertainty analysis in integrated environmental models for ecosystem service assessments: Frameworks, challenges and gaps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PB), pages 110-123.
    6. Benedetto Rugani & Philippe Osset & Olivier Blanc & Enrico Benetto, 2023. "Environmental Footprint Neutrality Using Methods and Tools for Natural Capital Accounting in Life Cycle Assessment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-30, June.
    7. Thomas Elliot & Javier Babí Almenar & Samuel Niza & Vânia Proença & Benedetto Rugani, 2019. "Pathways to Modelling Ecosystem Services within an Urban Metabolism Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    9. Stephen B. Stewart & Anthony P. O’Grady & Daniel S. Mendham & Greg S. Smith & Philip J. Smethurst, 2022. "Digital Tools for Quantifying the Natural Capital Benefits of Agroforestry: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-32, September.
    10. Kenny, Daniel C. & Costanza, Robert & Dowsley, Tom & Jackson, Nichelle & Josol, Jairus & Kubiszewski, Ida & Narulla, Harkiran & Sese, Saioa & Sutanto, Anna & Thompson, Jonathan, 2019. "Australia's Genuine Progress Indicator Revisited (1962–2013)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Xu, Xibao & Jiang, Bo & Tan, Yan & Costanza, Robert & Yang, Guishan, 2018. "Lake-wetland ecosystem services modeling and valuation: Progress, gaps and future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 19-28.
    12. Maia de Souza, Danielle & Lopes, Gabriela Russo & Hansson, Julia & Hansen, Karin, 2018. "Ecosystem services in life cycle assessment: A synthesis of knowledge and recommendations for biofuels," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 200-210.
    13. Kenny, Daniel C., 2017. "Modeling of natural and social capital on farms: Toward useable integration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 356(C), pages 1-13.
    14. Kolosz, B.W. & Athanasiadis, I.N. & Cadisch, G. & Dawson, T.P. & Giupponi, C. & Honzák, M. & Martinez-Lopez, J. & Marvuglia, A. & Mojtahed, V. & Ogutu, K.B.Z. & Van Delden, H. & Villa, F. & Balbi, S., 2018. "Conceptual advancement of socio-ecological modelling of ecosystem services for re-evaluating Brownfield land," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 29-39.
    15. Elliot, Thomas & Bertrand, Alexandre & Babí Almenar, Javier & Petucco, Claudio & Proença, Vânia & Rugani, Benedetto, 2019. "Spatial optimisation of urban ecosystem services through integrated participatory and multi-objective integer linear programming," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 409(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Dang, Anh Nguyet & Jackson, Bethanna Marie & Benavidez, Rubianca & Tomscha, Stephanie Anne, 2021. "Review of ecosystem service assessments: Pathways for policy integration in Southeast Asia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    17. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Anderson, Sharolyn & Sutton, Paul, 2017. "The future value of ecosystem services: Global scenarios and national implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 289-301.
    18. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    19. van den Heuvel, Lotte & Blicharska, Malgorzata & Masia, Sara & Sušnik, Janez & Teutschbein, Claudia, 2020. "Ecosystem services in the Swedish water-energy-food-land-climate nexus: Anthropogenic pressures and physical interactions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    20. Taghikhah, Firouzeh & Borevitz, Justin & Costanza, Robert & Voinov, Alexey, 2022. "DAESim: A dynamic agro-ecosystem simulation model for natural capital assessment," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 468(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:71:y:2025:i:c:s2212041624000937. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.