IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i23p10466-d1800517.html

AI Advice for Amateur Food Production: Assessing Sustainability of LLM Recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Krzyżewska

    (Department of Hydrology and Climatology, Institute of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Maria Curie Skłodowska University, 20-718 Lublin, Poland)

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly consulted by amateur gardeners who rely on them for diagnosing plant problems and selecting management strategies. This study evaluates whether such AI systems promote environmentally sustainable or chemically oriented practices. Fifteen real images of edible plants showing typical health issues were collected during 2024–2025, and four major models—ChatGPT 5.0, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Perplexity AI (standard version)—were queried in October 2025 using an identical user-style prompt. Each response was coded across four sustainability dimensions (ecological prevention, diagnostic reasoning, nutrient management, and chemical control) and aggregated into a composite Eco-Score (−1 to +1). Across cases, all models prioritized preventive and low-impact advice, emphasizing pruning, hygiene, compost, and organic sprays while recommending synthetic fungicides or pesticides only occasionally. The highest sustainability alignment was achieved by Perplexity AI (Eco-Score = 0.71) and Gemini 2.5 Pro (0.69), followed by ChatGPT 5.0 (0.57) and Claude Sonnet 4.5 (0.41). Although the models frequently converged in general reasoning, no case achieved full agreement in Eco-Score values across systems. These findings demonstrate that current LLMs generally reinforce sustainable reasoning but vary in interpretative reliability. While they can enhance ecological awareness and accessible plant care knowledge, their diagnostic uncertainty underscores the need for human oversight in AI-assisted amateur food production.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Krzyżewska, 2025. "AI Advice for Amateur Food Production: Assessing Sustainability of LLM Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-21, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:23:p:10466-:d:1800517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/23/10466/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/23/10466/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:23:p:10466-:d:1800517. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.