This paper addresses the distinction between integrated assessment and sustainability assessment (SA), and, using a systemic approach, outlines how to move from integrated assessment to SA. The fundamental differences may be identified at three levels: ontological, methodological and epistemological. We present a novel methodological framework for SA, based on a literature meta-review of multi-scale and multi-purpose appraisal methodologies and related methods, models, and indicators. SA is considered as a structured procedure encompassing different field-specific analytical methods and models, depending on the specific application and decision context. External inputs to the methodology are the “values” to be considered in the analysis and the (political) boundaries defined for them, including also the sustainability framework in which the analysis is carried out . Internal elements of the methodology comprise the choice of the approach (e.g. “what-if” vs. “what-to”), the scenario settings and the possible analytical tools and indicators for the numerical analysis. Uncertainty quantification tools are then key elements of the assessment framework. We discuss the relevance of and challenges for the development of SA, with a specific focus on applicability in specific decision contexts, highlighted.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

Life cycle thinking is increasingly seen as a key concept for ensuring a transition towards more sustainable production and consumption patterns. As food production systems and consumption patterns are among the leading drivers of impacts on the environment, it is important to assess and improve food-related supply chains as much as possible. Over the years, life cycle assessment has been used extensively to assess agricultural systems and food processing and manufacturing activities, and compare alternatives “from field to fork” and through to food waste management. Notwithstanding the efforts, several methodological aspects of life cycle assessment still need further improvement in order to ensure adequate and robust support for decision making in both business and policy development contexts. This paper discusses the challenges for life cycle assessment arising from the complexity of food systems, and recommends research priorities for both scientific development and improvements in practical implementation. In summary, the intrinsic variability of food production systems requires dedicated modelling approaches, including addressing issues related to: the distinction between technosphere and ecosphere; the most appropriate functional unit; the multi-functionality of biological systems; and the modelling of the emissions and how this links with life cycle impact assessment. Also, data availability and interpretation of the results are two issues requiring further attention, including how to account for consumer behaviour.JRC.D.1-Bio-econom

Food consumption is amongst the main drivers of environmental impacts. On one hand, there is the need of fulfil a fundamental human need related to nutrition and on the other hand this is posing critical threats to the environment. In order to assess the impact associated to food consumption, a LCA based methodology has been applied to a basket of products, selected as representative of EU consumption. Firstly, a food basket of products has been identified in order to represent the average food and beverage consumption in Europe, reflecting relative importance of the products in terms of mass and economic value. The products in the basket are: pig meat, beef, poultry, milk, cheese, butter, bread, sugar, sunflower oil, olive oil, potatoes, oranges, apples, mineral water, roasted coffee, beer, pre-prepared dishes. For each product in the basket, an inventory model has been developed, highly disaggregated and based on a modular approach, built on statistical data. The environmental impact of the average food consumption of a European citizen has been characterised using ILCD methodology for the life cycle impact assessment. The overall results indicate that in the majority of the impact categories the most burdening consumed foods are meat products (beef, pork and poultry) and dairy products (cheese, milk and butter). The agricultural phase is the most impacting lifecycle stage of the basket food, due to the contribution of agronomic and zoo-technical activities. Food processing and logistics follow in importance, due to their energy intensity and the related emissions to atmosphere, occurring during the production of heat, steam and electricity and during transport. Regarding the end of life, human excretion and wastewater treatments are posing burdens related to euthrophying substances which are higher than that of the agriculture, transports and processing. Moreover, food losses which occur during the whole life cycle, during agricultural/industrial phases and at home, in terms of food waste, have to also be taken in consideration, since they can contribute up to 60% of the initial weight of the food. The results of the study go beyond the assessment of possible impacts associated to food consumption. In fact, the overall methodology may represent a baseline for testing eco-innovation scenarios for impact reduction as well as for setting targetsJRC.D.3-Land Resource

• A systematized food waste accounting at macro scale level was developed for Europe. • The accounting follows Mass Flow Analysis concepts, ensuring closed mass balance. • Disaggregated values per food supply chain stages and per food groups are presented. • Hotspots and food groups with higher share of food waste were identified. • The stage contributing the most to food waste varies depending on the food group.