LCA for open systems

a review of the influence of natural and anthropogenic factors on aquaculture systems

Siti Dina Razman Pahri, Ahmad Fariz Mohamed, Abdullah Samat

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in the aquaculture sector have included marine fish, freshwater fish, and shellfish species within closed (CAS), semiclosed (SCAS), and open aquaculture systems (OAS). The absence of a physical boundary separating open aquaculture systems from natural ecosystems has caused complications in determining the actual environmental conditions of individual aquaculture systems and has resulted in questionable LCA impact analysis results. This paper reviews how natural and anthropogenic factors were managed in the previous LCA studies for aquaculture systems. Methods: Ten recent peer-reviewed documents on the LCA study of various aquaculture systems have been selected for content analysis. The disparities between OAS, SCAS, and CAS were outlined. Natural and anthropogenic factors were then identified and analyzed to ascertain their impact on the LCA process. Results and discussion: Natural factors such as seasonal variations, biological interactions, and flooding were indicated in the OAS, SCAS, and CAS. For anthropogenic factors, industrial energy inputs and human activities were stated in SCAS and OAS. None of the anthropogenic factors were considered in CAS as these systems are isolated distinctly from natural ecosystems. LCA studies of the OAS have a few approaches: the development of the virtual boundary, a longer period of data collection, harmonization with other environmental management tools, and the need to diversify the LCA study in various regions. Conclusions: For SCAS and OAS, the interaction between the aquaculture system and flood hazards, temporal changes, dilution effects due to the seasonal variation, disease, and local anthropogenic activities can be studied further. An LCA study of OAS will be more reliable if natural and anthropogenic factors are seen as supportive variables in determining the life cycle impact analysis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1324-1337
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Volume20
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jul 2015

Fingerprint

aquaculture system
life cycle
anthropogenic factor
human activity
seasonal variation
ecosystem
shellfish
fish
environmental management
aquaculture
dilution
flooding

Keywords

  • Anthropogenic factors
  • Closed aquaculture system (CAS)
  • LCA
  • Natural factors
  • Open aquaculture system (OAS)
  • Semiclosed aquaculture system (SCAS)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

@article{6fd6ef80d19846ba817cd65876f20f3d,
title = "LCA for open systems: a review of the influence of natural and anthropogenic factors on aquaculture systems",
abstract = "Purpose: Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in the aquaculture sector have included marine fish, freshwater fish, and shellfish species within closed (CAS), semiclosed (SCAS), and open aquaculture systems (OAS). The absence of a physical boundary separating open aquaculture systems from natural ecosystems has caused complications in determining the actual environmental conditions of individual aquaculture systems and has resulted in questionable LCA impact analysis results. This paper reviews how natural and anthropogenic factors were managed in the previous LCA studies for aquaculture systems. Methods: Ten recent peer-reviewed documents on the LCA study of various aquaculture systems have been selected for content analysis. The disparities between OAS, SCAS, and CAS were outlined. Natural and anthropogenic factors were then identified and analyzed to ascertain their impact on the LCA process. Results and discussion: Natural factors such as seasonal variations, biological interactions, and flooding were indicated in the OAS, SCAS, and CAS. For anthropogenic factors, industrial energy inputs and human activities were stated in SCAS and OAS. None of the anthropogenic factors were considered in CAS as these systems are isolated distinctly from natural ecosystems. LCA studies of the OAS have a few approaches: the development of the virtual boundary, a longer period of data collection, harmonization with other environmental management tools, and the need to diversify the LCA study in various regions. Conclusions: For SCAS and OAS, the interaction between the aquaculture system and flood hazards, temporal changes, dilution effects due to the seasonal variation, disease, and local anthropogenic activities can be studied further. An LCA study of OAS will be more reliable if natural and anthropogenic factors are seen as supportive variables in determining the life cycle impact analysis.",
keywords = "Anthropogenic factors, Closed aquaculture system (CAS), LCA, Natural factors, Open aquaculture system (OAS), Semiclosed aquaculture system (SCAS)",
author = "Pahri, {Siti Dina Razman} and Mohamed, {Ahmad Fariz} and Abdullah Samat",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1007/s11367-015-0929-0",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "1324--1337",
journal = "International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment",
issn = "0948-3349",
publisher = "Springer Science + Business Media",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - LCA for open systems

T2 - a review of the influence of natural and anthropogenic factors on aquaculture systems

AU - Pahri, Siti Dina Razman

AU - Mohamed, Ahmad Fariz

AU - Samat, Abdullah

PY - 2015/7/23

Y1 - 2015/7/23

N2 - Purpose: Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in the aquaculture sector have included marine fish, freshwater fish, and shellfish species within closed (CAS), semiclosed (SCAS), and open aquaculture systems (OAS). The absence of a physical boundary separating open aquaculture systems from natural ecosystems has caused complications in determining the actual environmental conditions of individual aquaculture systems and has resulted in questionable LCA impact analysis results. This paper reviews how natural and anthropogenic factors were managed in the previous LCA studies for aquaculture systems. Methods: Ten recent peer-reviewed documents on the LCA study of various aquaculture systems have been selected for content analysis. The disparities between OAS, SCAS, and CAS were outlined. Natural and anthropogenic factors were then identified and analyzed to ascertain their impact on the LCA process. Results and discussion: Natural factors such as seasonal variations, biological interactions, and flooding were indicated in the OAS, SCAS, and CAS. For anthropogenic factors, industrial energy inputs and human activities were stated in SCAS and OAS. None of the anthropogenic factors were considered in CAS as these systems are isolated distinctly from natural ecosystems. LCA studies of the OAS have a few approaches: the development of the virtual boundary, a longer period of data collection, harmonization with other environmental management tools, and the need to diversify the LCA study in various regions. Conclusions: For SCAS and OAS, the interaction between the aquaculture system and flood hazards, temporal changes, dilution effects due to the seasonal variation, disease, and local anthropogenic activities can be studied further. An LCA study of OAS will be more reliable if natural and anthropogenic factors are seen as supportive variables in determining the life cycle impact analysis.

AB - Purpose: Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies in the aquaculture sector have included marine fish, freshwater fish, and shellfish species within closed (CAS), semiclosed (SCAS), and open aquaculture systems (OAS). The absence of a physical boundary separating open aquaculture systems from natural ecosystems has caused complications in determining the actual environmental conditions of individual aquaculture systems and has resulted in questionable LCA impact analysis results. This paper reviews how natural and anthropogenic factors were managed in the previous LCA studies for aquaculture systems. Methods: Ten recent peer-reviewed documents on the LCA study of various aquaculture systems have been selected for content analysis. The disparities between OAS, SCAS, and CAS were outlined. Natural and anthropogenic factors were then identified and analyzed to ascertain their impact on the LCA process. Results and discussion: Natural factors such as seasonal variations, biological interactions, and flooding were indicated in the OAS, SCAS, and CAS. For anthropogenic factors, industrial energy inputs and human activities were stated in SCAS and OAS. None of the anthropogenic factors were considered in CAS as these systems are isolated distinctly from natural ecosystems. LCA studies of the OAS have a few approaches: the development of the virtual boundary, a longer period of data collection, harmonization with other environmental management tools, and the need to diversify the LCA study in various regions. Conclusions: For SCAS and OAS, the interaction between the aquaculture system and flood hazards, temporal changes, dilution effects due to the seasonal variation, disease, and local anthropogenic activities can be studied further. An LCA study of OAS will be more reliable if natural and anthropogenic factors are seen as supportive variables in determining the life cycle impact analysis.

KW - Anthropogenic factors

KW - Closed aquaculture system (CAS)

KW - LCA

KW - Natural factors

KW - Open aquaculture system (OAS)

KW - Semiclosed aquaculture system (SCAS)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84939270645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84939270645&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11367-015-0929-0

DO - 10.1007/s11367-015-0929-0

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 1324

EP - 1337

JO - International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

JF - International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

SN - 0948-3349

IS - 9

ER -