Agricultural and Food Product Assessment—Methodological Choices in Sustainability Reporting Using the LCA Method

Consumers are increasingly exposed to environmental claims on food products. These claims often lack scientific validation and there are different methodologies that can be used for grounding these claims, which can lead to misleading results. The European Union’s (EU) Environmental Footprint methodology excludes the aggregation of environmental impacts, including damage to human health. This fact reduces transparency and limits the consumers’ ability to make information-based sustainable choices. This study aims to address this issue by calculating aggregated impacts on human health via life cycle assessment (LCA) in the agriculture and food-production sectors. In the study the IMPACT World+ method was used, including trustworthy databases and proper functional unit definition. The assessment encompassed three types of vegetables, four types of fruit, and four types of ready meals. The study also attempts to assess the impact of different farming systems (organic and conventional) on human health. Two standardised functional units, i.e., the unit based on product weight and product energy value were considered for each group of products. Our findings showed significant differences in results when different functional units were used. Additionally, no conclusion could be drawn regarding which farming system is more sustainable. Therefore, it is essential that the regulator clearly defines the criteria for selecting the appropriate functional unit in LCA within the agriculture and food-production sectors. In the absence of these criteria, results should be presented for all alternatives. Although not required by EU regulation, the authors suggest that companies should nevertheless disclose information regarding the environmental impact of agriculture and food production on human health, as this is important for consumers.