Carbon footprints of food production in China (1979–2009)
Lin Jianyi, Hu Yuanchao, Cui Shenghui*, Kang Jiefeng, Xu Lilai
A carbon footprint accounting of food production is useful for acquainting policy makers with both thepotentials and the challenges of GHG mitigation in agriculture. In this study, a hybrid Economic Input-Output and Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA) model was developed to investigate the carbon footprintof Chinese food production from 1979 to 2009. The change patterns and compositions of emissionsources, impacts of urbanization, carbon footprint and carbon emission factors of 15 food types wereexamined. Research results indicate that the total carbon footprint of food production had doubled inthose three decades, alongside rapid urbanization. The emission sources showing the most dramaticincreases were synthetic fertilizer, direct energy use, enteric fermentation and manure management.Among all types of food, the carbon footprint of rice production increased most, and the carbonfootprint of milk, bovine meat, fruit and vegetable production also grew rapidly due to increasingyields. There was an overall decreasing trend for carbon emission factors of rice, vegetable, fruit andanimal-food production from 1979 to 2009. Notably, the carbon emission factors of most vegetablefood production rebounded after hitting bottom in 1999 due principally to enhanced agricultural input.Compared with the U.S.A., China had a higher ratio of indirect carbon footprint in its food productionsystem, which showed high material input and energy intensity. China had smaller carbon emissionfactors from rice and pigmeat production, but larger carbon emission factors from bovine meat productionthan the U.S.A., indicating the relative strengths and weaknesses of Chinese food-productiontechnology. Mitigation solutions rely upon better balancing the dietary structure, improving the productivityof animal foods, and reducing agricultural inputs, especially synthetic fertilizer.
Key words：Carbon footprint; Food production; Hybrid EIO-LCA; China
Volume：90
Page：97-103
Journal：Journal of Cleaner Production
