The results of this study are preliminary and are characterized with high
assumption uncertainties. However, it is possible to conclude that the application of
circular economy principles to the production of traditional foods via innovative
processing methods involving agri-food waste streams could allow for improvement of their environmental performances.
References
1. Tukker A, Goldbohm RA, de Koning A, Verheijden M, Kleijn R, Wolf O, et al,
Environmental impacts of changes to healthier diets in Europe. Ecol. Econ. [Internet]. 70,
2011;
1776–88.
Available
from:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S092180091100190X.
2. Nemecek T, Jungbluth N, Mila i Canals L, Schenck R, Environmental impacts of food
consumption and nutrition: where are we and what is next? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.
[Internet]. 21, 2016; 607–20. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-0161071-3.
3. Sala S, Anton A, McLaren S.J, Notarnicola B, Saouter E, Sonesson U, In quest of reducing
the environmental impacts of food production and consumption. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet].
140,
2017;387–98.
Available
from:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S0959652616313956.
4. van der Goot A.J, Pelgrom P.J.M, Berghout J.A.M, Geerts M.E.J, Jankowiak L, Hardt N.A,
et al, Concepts for further sustainable production of foods. J. Food Eng. [Internet]. 168, 2016;
42–51. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S026087741500309X.
5. Smetana S, Mathys A, Knoch A, Heinz V, Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of most
known meat substitutes. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. [Internet]. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 20,
2015; 1254–67. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0931-6.
6. Smetana S, Palanisamy M, Mathys A, Heinz V, Sustainability of insect use for feed and food:
Life Cycle Assessment perspective. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet]. 137, 2016; 741–51. Available
from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652616310447.
7. Tuomisto H.L, Ellis M, Steer M, Could cellular agriculture reduce environmental impacts?
Putt. LCA into Pract. Int. Conf. Life Cycle Assess. Food 2016. Dublin, Ireland; 2016.
p. 1110–5.
8. Raats J, Meat (substitutes) comparing environmental impacts. A Case study comparing Quorn
and pork. Training thesis at Centre for Energy and Environmental Studies, University of
Groningen. Retrieved from http://www.temoa.info/node/209029. University of Groningen;
2007.
9. Håkansson S, Gavrilita P, Bengoa X, Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Pork vs. Tofu.
Stockholm; 2005.
10. Head M, Sevenster M, Croezen H, Life Cycle Impacts of Protein-rich Foods for Superwijzer.
Delft; 2011.
11. Blonk H, Kool A, Luske B, de Waart S, ten Pierick E, Milieueffecten van Nederlandse
consumptie van eiwitrijke producten. Gevolgen van vervanging van dierlijke eiwitten anno
2008.
12. Berardy A, A Consequential Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Seitan and Beef.
SSEBE-CESEM-2012-CPR-002 Course Project Report Series. 2012.
13. Finnigan T, Lemon M, Allan B, Paton I, Mycoprotein, Life Cycle Analysis and the Food 2030
Challenge. Asp. Appl. Biol. 102, 2010; 81–90.
14. Tuomisto H.L, de Mattos M.J.T, Environmental impacts of cultured meat production.
Environ. Sci. Technol. [Internet]. 45, 2011; 6117–23. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/21682287.
152
S. Smetana et al.
assumption uncertainties. However, it is possible to conclude that the application of
circular economy principles to the production of traditional foods via innovative
processing methods involving agri-food waste streams could allow for improvement of their environmental performances.
References
1. Tukker A, Goldbohm RA, de Koning A, Verheijden M, Kleijn R, Wolf O, et al,
Environmental impacts of changes to healthier diets in Europe. Ecol. Econ. [Internet]. 70,
2011;
1776–88.
Available
from:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S092180091100190X.
2. Nemecek T, Jungbluth N, Mila i Canals L, Schenck R, Environmental impacts of food
consumption and nutrition: where are we and what is next? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.
[Internet]. 21, 2016; 607–20. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-0161071-3.
3. Sala S, Anton A, McLaren S.J, Notarnicola B, Saouter E, Sonesson U, In quest of reducing
the environmental impacts of food production and consumption. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet].
140,
2017;387–98.
Available
from:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S0959652616313956.
4. van der Goot A.J, Pelgrom P.J.M, Berghout J.A.M, Geerts M.E.J, Jankowiak L, Hardt N.A,
et al, Concepts for further sustainable production of foods. J. Food Eng. [Internet]. 168, 2016;
42–51. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S026087741500309X.
5. Smetana S, Mathys A, Knoch A, Heinz V, Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of most
known meat substitutes. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. [Internet]. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 20,
2015; 1254–67. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0931-6.
6. Smetana S, Palanisamy M, Mathys A, Heinz V, Sustainability of insect use for feed and food:
Life Cycle Assessment perspective. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet]. 137, 2016; 741–51. Available
from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652616310447.
7. Tuomisto H.L, Ellis M, Steer M, Could cellular agriculture reduce environmental impacts?
Putt. LCA into Pract. Int. Conf. Life Cycle Assess. Food 2016. Dublin, Ireland; 2016.
p. 1110–5.
8. Raats J, Meat (substitutes) comparing environmental impacts. A Case study comparing Quorn
and pork. Training thesis at Centre for Energy and Environmental Studies, University of
Groningen. Retrieved from http://www.temoa.info/node/209029. University of Groningen;
2007.
9. Håkansson S, Gavrilita P, Bengoa X, Comparative Life Cycle Assessment Pork vs. Tofu.
Stockholm; 2005.
10. Head M, Sevenster M, Croezen H, Life Cycle Impacts of Protein-rich Foods for Superwijzer.
Delft; 2011.
11. Blonk H, Kool A, Luske B, de Waart S, ten Pierick E, Milieueffecten van Nederlandse
consumptie van eiwitrijke producten. Gevolgen van vervanging van dierlijke eiwitten anno
2008.
12. Berardy A, A Consequential Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Seitan and Beef.
SSEBE-CESEM-2012-CPR-002 Course Project Report Series. 2012.
13. Finnigan T, Lemon M, Allan B, Paton I, Mycoprotein, Life Cycle Analysis and the Food 2030
Challenge. Asp. Appl. Biol. 102, 2010; 81–90.
14. Tuomisto H.L, de Mattos M.J.T, Environmental impacts of cultured meat production.
Environ. Sci. Technol. [Internet]. 45, 2011; 6117–23. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/21682287.
152
S. Smetana et al.