Purpose: There is an imperative to accurately assess the environmental sustainability of crop system interventions in the context of food security and climate change. Previous studies have indicated that the incorporation of legumes into cereal rotations could reduce overall environmental burdens from cropping systems. However, most life cycle assessment (LCA) studies focus on individual crops and miss environmental consequences of inter-annual crop sequence and nutrient cycling effects. This review investigates state-of-the-art representation of inter-crop rotation effects within legume LCA studies. Methods: A literature review was undertaken, starting with a search for all peer-reviewed articles with combinations of ‘LCA’, ‘legumes’ and ‘rotations’ or synonyms thereof. In total, 3180 articles were obtained. Articles were screened for compliance with all of the following requirements: (i) reporting results based on LCA or life cycle inventory methodology; (ii) inclusion of (a) legume(s); (iii) the legume(s) is/are analysed within the context of a wider cropping system (i.e. rotation or intercropping). Seventy articles satisfying these requirements were analysed. Results and discussion: We identified three broad approaches to legume LCA. Most studies involved simple attributional LCA disregarding important interactions across years and crops in rotations. N-fertilizer reduction through legume residue N carryover is either disregarded or the benefit is attributed to the following crop in such studies, whilst N leaching burdens from residues are usually attributed to the legume crop. Some studies applied robust allocation approaches and/or complex functional units to enable analysis of entire rotation sequences, accounting for nutrient cycling and break crop effects. Finally, a few studies applied consequential LCA to identify downstream substitution effects, though these studies did not simultaneously account for agronomic effects of rotational sequence changes. Conclusions: We recommend that LCA studies for legume cropping systems should (i) evaluate entire rotations; (ii) represent nitrogen and ideally carbon cycling; (iii) for attributional studies, define at least two functional units, where one should encompass the multifunctional outputs of an entire rotation and the other should enable product footprints to be calculated; (iv) for CLCA studies, account for both agronomic changes in rotations and markets effects; (v) include impact categories that reflect hotspots for agricultural production.

Consumers are increasingly asking for foods that are healthier, more humane, and environmentally sustainable. Recently, chickpea cooking water—aquafaba—has gained popularity as a potential egg substitute that complies with these criteria. However, research on the environmental impact of this ingredient is lacking. We performed a comparative attributional life cycle assessment (LCA) of mayonnaise made with aquafaba as the emulsifying agent, and traditional mayonnaise made with egg yolk. The vegan mayonnaise was found not to be as environmentally sustainable as the egg-based product. The vegan mayonnaise had a significantly (p < 0.05) lower impact across 4 categories, but a significantly higher impact across 8 categories out of 16, including climate change and resource-use-energy-carriers. The majority of categories under which vegan mayonnaise underperformed were related to the electricity needed for aquafaba processing. These impacts can be mitigated with a “cleaner” electricity grid, or onsite renewable electricity generation. Substituting the Mexican grid, where the aquafaba is currently processed, for the Canadian grid, where the mayonnaise is produced, reduced the carbon footprint of the vegan mayonnaise by 37%, making it similar to the egg-based product. As sunflower oil production was linked to extensive environmental burdens, we performed additional sensitivity analyses around oil processing, sunflower production, and other vegetable oils. Our study shows that substituting egg yolk with aquafaba could cause an increase in the environmental footprint of mayonnaise due to high processing costs, illustrating that vegan options do not always have a smaller environmental footprint, and can represent a trade-off in their comparatively more humane and healthier offer.

Industrialised agriculture is heavily reliant upon synthetic nitrogen fertilisers and imported protein feeds, posing environmental and food security challenges. Increasing the cultivation of leguminous crops that biologically fix nitrogen and provide high protein feed and food could help to address these challenges. We report on the innovative use of an important leguminous crop, pea (Pisum sativum L.), as a source of starch for alcohol (gin) production, yielding protein-rich animal feed as a co-product. We undertook life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the environmental footprint of 1 L of packaged gin produced from either 1.43 kg of wheat grain or 2.42 kg of peas via fermentation and distillation into neutral spirit. Allocated environmental footprints for pea-gin were smaller than for wheat-gin across 12 of 14 environmental impact categories considered. Global warming, resource depletion, human toxicity, acidification and terrestrial eutrophication footprints were, respectively, 12%, 15%, 15%, 48% and 68% smaller, but direct land occupation was 112% greater, for pea-gin versus wheat-gin. Expansion of LCA boundaries indicated that co-products arising from the production of 1 L of wheat- or pea-gin could substitute up to 0.33 or 0.66 kg soybean animal feed, respectively, mitigating considerable greenhouse gas emissions associated with land clearing, cultivation, processing and transport of such feed. For pea-gin, this mitigation effect exceeds emissions from gin production and packaging, so that each L of bottled pea gin avoids 2.2 kg CO2 eq. There is great potential to scale the use of legume starches in production of alcoholic beverages and biofuels, reducing dependence on Latin American soybean associated with deforestation and offering considerable global mitigation potential in terms of climate change and nutrient leakage - estimated at circa 439 Tg CO2 eq. and 8.45 Tg N eq. annually.