environmental implications of eco-labeling for rice farming systems

Clicks: 148
ID: 136545
2018
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #759 of 935 articles by views in journal of physics: conference series

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 935 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Concerns about climate change have forced countries to strengthen regulations, standards, and certifications related to greenhouse gas emissions. Various policies targeting farm products, such as carbon labeling and the Environmentally-Friendly Agricultural Product Certification (EFAPC) for agricultural products, have been implemented in South Korea to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural sector. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implications of the various certification systems for rice farming, including organic farming, non-pesticide farming, and low-pesticide farming. For this study, we constructed a life cycle inventory (LCI) of rice farming systems including conventional, low-pesticide, non-pesticide, and organic farming systems in South Korea. Finally, we compared international farming systems in South Korea, the U.S., and the EU. The rice farming systems with eco-labeling certifications have reduced the environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of rice farming by country were highest in the U.S. (100.0), followed by the EU (53.7), and Korea’s conventional (48.6), low-pesticide (35.8), non-pesticide (28.9), and organic (16.7) farming practices. These results may be useful in proliferating and improving the methodology to evaluate eco-labeling and carbon labeling systems.
Reference Key
kim2018sustainabilityenvironmental Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Solhee Kim;Taegon Kim;Timothy M. Smith;Kyo Suh
Journal journal of physics: conference series
Year 2018
DOI
10.3390/su10041050
URL
http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1050
Keywords
climate change life cycle assessment

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.