Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper employs a comparative environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) to analyse the supply chain impacts of three grocery products (beef, bread, and sugar). The study is motivated by the urgent need to alleviate the considerable environmental degradation engendered by the food sector, which, if inadequately addressed, will intensify climate change and resource depletion. Focusing on key logistics elements −raw material sourcing, processing, packaging, transportation, and storage (i.e. from “cradle − to − gate”) with a distinct classification of inbound (production/processing, storage, transport of inputs) and outbound logistics (transport of finished products and packaging) the research utilizes the SimaPro v.9.1 software and the ReCiPe2016 midpoint (E) methodology following ISO 14040/14044 standards. This methodological framework was chosen for its extensive array of 10 impact indicators, which facilitate a comprehensive assessment of environmental pressures, transcending a singular focus on issues such as carbon footprint. The results reveal that beef possesses the most significant supply chain impact per item (41%), succeeded by sugar (34%) and bread (24%). Nevertheless, when adjusted for annual consumption patterns in South Africa, bread production emerges as the principal source of emissions (100% across indicators), while the transportation of bread and the packaging of sugar also exhibit remarkably high impacts (>88% and > 60%, respectively). The research identifies that the environmental hotspots for beef and bread are predominantly located in the production and processing phases, whereas for sugar, these hotspots are primarily concentrated in logistics-related stages such as packaging and storage. The findings offer critical strategic contributions for transitioning to a green economy. Moreso, results from the study yield actionable insights for enterprises to formulate sustainable strategies aimed at the most detrimental logistical components, inform carbon reduction policies, and promote the innovative and sustainable production of product lines, thereby enhancing both economic and environmental resilience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Masilela et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: