Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Life cycle assessment of organic and conventional non-Bt cotton products from Mali

  • LCA FOR AGRICULTURE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Cotton is the most produced natural fibre in the world, with an annual output of 23 million t of lint in the period 2000–2013. Africa produced in average 6% of that output, and despite being a relatively minor contributor to global cotton supply chains, it has been estimated that a large percentage of the continent’s population depends on cotton cultivation for their livelihood. Most published cotton LCAs focused on the main global producers (India, China, USA), a few consider African cotton, and none to date Malian cotton. This work presents an LCA of the Malian cotton sector, consisting of an agricultural phase and ginning operations, in contrast with other African and global cotton LCAs.

Material and methods

The goal of the study is to assess the absolute and relative environmental impacts of Malian cotton, per agricultural production system type, including the processing of seed cotton in ginning plants to produce cotton fibre bales (cradle to processing plant gate). Inventories were built for the two initial phases in the production cycle of cotton fibre, namely, the agricultural phase and the ginning phase. The main agricultural production system types were identified, according to distinctive differences in yields and technical processes―such as phytosanitary strategies―as well as the main processes performed in ginning plants. Operational data, representing the period 2002–2010, were provided by the Malian Company for the Development of Textiles (CMDT). It included yields and input and their uncertainty data. Direct field emissions of the agricultural phase were estimated following the AGRIBALYSE methodology, adapted when necessary to tropical conditions (e.g. a modified version of the Indigo-N model set was used to estimate N losses). Impact assessment was based on the European-sanctioned ILCD 2011 Midpoint+ v1.0.9, May 2016 method. Sensitivity was explored with scenarios and uncertainty data was propagated with Monte Carlo.

Results and discussion

The agricultural phase of cotton production in Mali differs from that of the largest producing countries, in that it is non-irrigated and non-mechanised and that non-Bt varieties are used. Instead, Malian cotton is rainfed―thus produced during the rainy season, from April/May to October/November―in rotation with maize or sorghum, manual work is prevalent up to the harvest, ploughs are towed by animals, and local varieties are grown (mainly STAM 59A and NTA 90-5). Malian yields were in the order of 400 kg lint/ha in the period 2001–2018, corresponding to ~ 1 t seed cotton/ha. The dominant production system, conventional agriculture, was sub-classified into three sub-types based on the phytosanitary strategy followed: calendar (81%), threshold control (15%) and targeted (4%). An average conventional system type was also constructed, as a production-weighted average of calendar, targeted and threshold. An existing marginal production of organic (0.5‰) cotton was also modelled. Organic cotton products (seed cotton, lint and cottonseed) feature lower impacts than conventional both per t and per ha (except for the toxicity, climate change and eutrophication impact categories), despite comparatively lower yields, due to lower input intensity. A single score–based contribution analysis confirms that, for conventional cotton, pesticide application is the main contributor to impacts, followed by mineral fertilisers. For organic cotton, the main drivers of impacts are natural pesticides and organic fertilisation. The overwhelming contribution of pesticides is largely due to the provision of organophosphorus compounds, specifically the insecticide profenofos. Moreover, the ginning phase contributed very little to the overall impacts (up to 3%). When data uncertainty is considered, the impacts per t of lint are always lower for organic cotton.

Conclusions

Impacts were generally larger for conventional than from organic cotton. The main hotspots are related to pesticide use, and therefore, efforts should focus on that factor, despite pesticide inputs being already relatively lower than elsewhere. Climate change indicators for Malian cotton products were compared with literature values, having similar orders of magnitude. Malian cotton production features lower yields than the main global producers do, which is mainly due to low soil fertility and, to a lesser extent, to its dependence on rainwater. A shift towards organic cotton would be desirable only if the yield gap can be overcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Based on work in progress by the first author and colleagues on comparison of simple direct emission models used in agricultural LCA. Publication expected in early 2020

  2. SALCA is the Swiss Agricultural Life Cycle Assessment model set and dataset collection, developed by Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon: https://www.agroscope.admin.ch/agroscope/en/home/topics/environment-resources/life-cycle-assessment/life-cycle-assessment-methods/life-cycle-assessment-method-salca.html

References

  • Andriulo A, Mary B, Guerif J et al (1999) Modelling soil carbon dynamics with various cropping sequences on the rolling pampas. Agron EDP Sci 19:365–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Avadí A, Corson MS, van der Werf HMG (2017) Modelling environmental effects of selected agricultural management strategies with regional statistically based screening LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:12–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1300-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basset-Mens C, Acosta-Alba I, Avadí A et al (2018) Towards specific guidelines for applying LCA in South contexts. The 11th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food sector, Bangkok, pp 17–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard M, Coulibaly K, Bognini S et al (2014) Diversité de la qualité des engrais organiques produits par les paysans d’afrique de l’ouest: Quelles conséquences sur les recommandations de fumure? Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ 18:512–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Boafo YA, Balde BS, Saito O, Gasparatos A (2018) Stakeholder perceptions of the outcomes of reforms on the performance and sustainability of the cotton sector in Ghana and Burkina Faso : a tale of two countries. Cogent Food Agric 4:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2018.1477541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bockstaller C, Girardin P (2010) Mode de calcul des indicateurs agri-environnementaux de la methode Indigo®. INRA, Colmar

    Google Scholar 

  • Boufateh Ben Arari I (2011) Contribution à l’évaluation de la supply chain pour la filière textile: définition de critères de developpement durable. PhD thesis. Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille. Available at http://ori.univ-lille1.fr/notice/view/univ-lille1-ori-18992

  • Boulay A-M, Bare J, De Camillis C et al (2015) Consensus building on the development of a stress-based indicator for LCA-based impact assessment of water consumption: outcome of the expert workshops. Int J Life Cycle Assess:577–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0869-8

  • Boulay AM, Bare J, Benini L et al (2018) The WULCA consensus characterization model for water scarcity footprints: assessing impacts of water consumption based on available water remaining (AWARE). Int J Life Cycle Assess 23:368–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1333-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouwman AF (1996) Direct emission of nitrous oxide from agricultural soils. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 46:53–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00210224

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brankatschk G, Finkbeiner M (2015) Modeling crop rotation in agricultural LCAs - challenges and potential solutions. Agric Syst 138:66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brentrup F, Kiisters J, Lammel J, Kuhlmann H (2000) Methods to estimate on-field nitrogen emissions from crop production as an input to LCA studies in the agricultural sector. Int J Life Cycle Assess 5:349–357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brockmann D, Pradel M, Hélias A (2018) Agricultural use of organic residues in life cycle assessment: current practices and proposal for the computation of field emissions and of the nitrogen mineral fertilizer equivalent. Resour Conserv Recycl 133:50–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.01.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulle C, Margni M, Patouillard L, Boulay AM, Bourgault G, Bruille V, Cao V, Hauschild M, Henderson A, Humbert S, Kashef-Haghighi S, Kounina A, Laurent A, Levasseur A, Liard G, Rosenbaum RK, Roy PO, Shaked S, Fantke P, Jolliet O (2019) IMPACT World + : a globally regionalized life cycle impact assessment method. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:1653–1674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01583-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burns IG (1976) Equations to predict the leaching of nitrate uniformly incorporated to a known depth or uniformly distributed throughout a soil profile. J Agric Sci 86:305–313. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600054769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Z, Tao X, Khan A et al (2018) Biomass accumulation, photosynthetic traits and root development of cotton as affected by irrigation and description of experimental site. Front Plant Sci 9:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COMIFER (2013) Calcul de la fertilisation azotée - Cultures annuelles et prairies. COMIFER- Comité Français d’Étude et de Développement de la Fertilisation Raisonée, Groupe Azote

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotton Inc. (2012) Life cycle assessment of Cotton Fiber & Fabric. Full Report, Cotton Incorporated and PE International

    Google Scholar 

  • Dembele B, Bett HK, Mutai M, Le Bars M (2017) Dynamics and adaptation of agricultural farming systems in the boost of cotton cropping in southern Mali. African J Agric Res 12:1552–1569. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2017.12159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkman TJ, Birkved M, Hauschild MZ (2012) PestLCI 2.0: a second generation model for estimating emissions of pesticides from arable land in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:973–986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0439-2

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dowd-Uribe B, Schnurr MA (2016) Briefing: Burkina Faso’s reversal on genetically modified cotton and the implications for Africa. Afr Aff (Lond) 115:161–172. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adv063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutartre P (1993) Horizon de surface de sols ferrugineux tropicaux cultivés d’Afrique de l’Ouest (Burkina Faso et Mali). PhD thesis. Université de Lorraine. Available from http://www.theses.fr/1993NAN10307

  • EC (2018) Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules Guidance v6.3

  • EC-JRC (2012) Characterisation factors of the ILCD recommended life cycle impact assessment methods. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EMEP/CORINAIR (2006) Air polluant emission inventory guidebook. European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, Danemark

    Google Scholar 

  • EMEP/EEA (2009) Air pollutant emission inventory guidebook. European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, Danemark

    Google Scholar 

  • EMEP/EEA (2013) EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2013: technical guidance to prepare national emission inventories. European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, Danemark

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2015) World reference base for soil resources 2014. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. Update 2015. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

  • FAO (2017) Country fact sheet on food and agriculture policy trends: Mali. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2019a) FAOSTAT Database

  • FAO (2019b) Land & water: cotton. In: Crop Inf

  • Foster RG (2005) Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation – Version 2 (RUSLE2). USDA – Agricultural Research Service, Washington D.C., USA

  • Gerardeaux E, Jordan-meille L, Constantin J, et al (2010) Changes in plant morphology and dry matter partitioning caused by potassium deficiency in Gossypium hirsutum ( L .). Environ Exp Bot 67:451–459. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2009.09.008

  • Henry M, Valentini R, Bernoux M (2009) Soil carbon stocks in ecoregions of Africa. Biogeosci Discuss 6:797–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hien E, Ganry F, Hien V, Oliver R (2003) Dynamique du carbone dans un sol de savane du sud-ouest Burkina sous l’effet de la mise en culture et des pratiques culturales. In: Jamin J.Y., Seiny Boukar L., Floret C. (éditeurs scientifiques), 2003. Savanes africaines : des espaces en mutation, des acteurs face à de nouveaux défis. Actes du colloque, mai 2002, Garoua, Cameroun. Prasac, N’Djamena, Tchad - Cirad, Montpellier, France. Cirad - Prasac, p 11

  • ICA-Bremen (2018) Cotton varieties by origin 2017/2018. ICA Bremen International Quality Testing and Research Centre

  • ICAC (2016) Cotton: world statistics. Bulletin of the International Cotton Advisory Committee. October 2016. Washington: International Cotton Advisory Committee

  • IPCC (2006) 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

  • ITC (2011) Coton et changement climatique. Impacts et options de réduction et d’adaptation. Centre du commerce international (ITC). Available from http://www.intracen.org/Le-Coton-et-le-Changement-Climatique-Impacts-et-les-options-de-mitigation-et-dadaptation/

  • Keita B (2000) Les sols dominants du Mali. In: Quatorzième Réunion du Sous-Comité ouest et centre africain de corrélation des sols pour la mise en valeur des terres, Abomey, Bénin, 9-13 octobre 2000. pp 95–103

  • Koch P, Salou T (2016) AGRIBALYSE ® : Rapport Méthodologique - Version 1.3. ART, INRA, ADEME

  • Laurent F, Castillon P (1987) Le reliquat azoté sortie hiver. Perspect Agric:47–57

  • Ma S, He F, Tian D et al (2018) Variations and determinants of carbon content in plants: a global synthesis. Biogeosciences 15:693–702. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-693-2018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MacCarthy DS, Sommer R, Vlek PLG (2009) Modeling the impacts of contrasting nutrient and residue management practices on grain yield of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) in a semi-arid region of Ghana using APSIM. F Crop Res 113:105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcin M (2014) Evaluation environnementale par l’analyse du cycle de vie (ACV) du coton. Etat des lieux et application au cas du Mali, Montpellier SupAgro

    Google Scholar 

  • Matlock M, Nalley L, Clayton-Niederman Z (2009) Carbon life cycle assessment of United States cotton: a view of cotton production practices and their associated carbon emissions for counties in 16 cotton producing states. Prepared for Cotton Incorporated, Fayetteville

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalley L, Popp M, Niederman Z et al (2012) How potential carbon policies could affect where and how cotton is produced in the United States. J Agric Resour Econ 41:215–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nalley LL, Danforth DM, Niederman Z, Teague TG (2013) A scan level cotton carbon life cycle assessment: has bio-tech reduced the carbon emissions from cotton production in the USA? J Cotton Sci 17:80–88

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nemecek T, Kagi T (2007) Life cycle inventories of agricultural production systems data v2.0 (2007). Swiss Center For Life Cycle Inventories

  • Nemecek T, Schnetzer J (2012) Methods of assessment of direct field emissions for LCIs of agricultural production systems. Data v3.0

  • Nemecek T, Bengoa X, Lansche J, et al (2015) World Food LCA Database: methodological guidelines for the life cycle inventory of agricultural products. Version 3.0

  • Núñez M, Pfister S, Antón A et al (2013) Assessing the environmental impact of water consumption by energy crops grown in Spain. J Ind Ecol 17:90–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00449.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PE International (2014) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of cotton made in Africa (CmiA). Cotton made in Africa

  • Pertry I, Sanou EIR, Speelman S, Ingelbrecht I (2016) The success story of Bt cotton in Burkina Faso: a role model for sustainable cotton production in other cotton-growing countries ? In: Buck S De, Ingelbrecht I, Heijde M, Montagu M Van (eds) Innovative farming and forestry across the emerging world : the role of genetically modified crops and trees,. Ghent, Belgium: International Industrial Biotechnology Network (IIBN), pp 81–93

  • Pfister S, Bayer P (2014) Monthly water stress : spatially and temporally explicit consumptive water footprint of global crop production. J Clean Prod 73:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfister S, Koehler A, Hellweg S (2009) Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater consumption in LCA. Environ Sci Technol 43:4098–4104

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard J, Faist-Emmenegger M, Zah R, Hilty LM (2017) Regionalized LCI modeling: the case of regionalized cotton datasets. In: Otjacques B, HItelberger P, Naumann S, Wohlgemuth V (eds) EnviroInfo2017, From science to society: the bridge provided by environmental informatics. Shaker Verlag, p 7

  • Renou A, Téréta I, Togola M (2011) Manual topping decreases bollworm infestations in cotton cultivation in Mali. Crop Prot 30:1370–1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2011.05.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richner W, Oberholzer H-R, Freiermuth R, et al (2014) Modell zur Beurteilung der Nitrat- auswaschung in Ökobilanzen - SALCA-NO3

  • Rosenbaum RK, Bachmann TM, Gold LS et al (2008) USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:532–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-008-0038-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rudenko I, Bekchanov M, Djanibekov U, Lamers JP a. (2013) The added value of a water footprint approach: micro- and macroeconomic analysis of cotton production, processing and export in water bound Uzbekistan. Glob Planet Change 110:143–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2013.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saffih-Hdadi K, Mary B (2008) Modeling consequences of straw residues export on soil organic carbon. Soil Biol Biochem 40:594–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.08.022

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salou T, Le Mouël C, van der Werf HMG (2016) Environmental impacts of dairy system intensification: the functional unit matters! J Clean Prod:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.019

  • Sandin G, Peters GM, Svanström M (2013) Moving down the cause-effect chain of water and land use impacts: an LCA case study of textile fibres. Resour Conserv Recycl 73:104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.01.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvie PJ, Renou A, Vodounnon S et al (2013) Threshold-based interventions for cotton pest control in West Africa : what ’ s up 10 years later ? Crop Prot 43:157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.09.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sipperly E, Edinger K, Teamhy S, Jasper N (2014) Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic cotton cultivation for the production of a t-shirt

  • Sissoko F, Autfray P, Keita A, Konaté C (2007) SCV et Agronomie dans les Systèmes Cotonniers. In: Agroécologie et Techniques Innovantes dans les Systèmes de Production Cotonniers. Séminaire 24–28/9/2007, SODECOTON, Project ESA, Maroua, Cameroun. p 16

  • Sommer R, Bossio D (2014) Dynamics and climate change mitigation potential of soil organic carbon sequestration. J Environ Manag 144:83–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.017

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tabeaud M (1980) Quelques aspects des bilans hydriques au Mali. Ann Georgr 89:37–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TextileExchange (2014) The life cycle assessment (LCA) of organic cotton fiber - A global average

  • TextileExchange (2018) Organic Cotton Market Report:2018

  • Thinkstep (2018) Life cycle assessment of cotton cultivation systems. Better cotton, conventional cotton and organic cotton. C&A Foundation

  • Ton P (2010) Cotton & climate change: impacts and options to mitigate and adapt. Ton Consulting, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Towett EK, Shepherd KD, Tondoh JE et al (2015) Total elemental composition of soils in Sub-Saharan Africa and relationship with soil forming factors. Geoderma Reg 5:157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2015.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA (2018) 2018 West Africa cotton and products annual. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service

  • USDA (2019) World agricultural production

  • van Zeijts H, Leneman H, Wegener Sleeswijk A (1999) Fitting fertilisation in LCA: allocation to crops in a cropping plan. J Clean Prod 7:69–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(98)00040-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velden NM, Patel MK, Vogtländer JG (2013) LCA benchmarking study on textiles made of cotton, polyester, nylon, acryl, or elastane. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19:331–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0626-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Verones F, Hellweg S, Azevedo LB, et al (2019) LC-Impact v0.5. A spatially differentiated life cycle impact assessment approach. EU FP7 project LC-IMPACT

  • VIB (2017) Cotton in Africa. Universiteit Gent, VIB International Plant Biotechnology Outreach

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser F, Dargush P, Smith C (2011) Which carbon footprint tool for the cotton supply chain. In: Kranthi DKR, Venugopalan DMV, Balasubramanya DRH, et al. (eds) Book of papers, world cotton research conference on technologies for prosperity, Renaissance Convention Centre, Mumbai 7-11 November 2011

  • Waghmare SV, Vishwas DH, Singh M (2016) Effect of weather parameters on growth and yield of Bt cotton hybrids at different sowing dates. Adv Life Sci 5:4910–4913

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B et al (2016) The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:1218–1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan Z-W, Zhu Y-N, Shi J-K, Liu X, Huang L (2012) Life-cycle assessment of continuous pad-dyeing technology for cotton fabrics. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:659–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0470-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the people who supported this work: Sandra Payen (CIRAD) for her assistance in the water footprint calculation and her helpful comments, Anthony Benoit (CIRAD) for his assistance with the calculation method of land clearing impacts and general advice, Cécile Bessou (CIRAD) for her assistance with the calculation method of nitrogen emissions and other helpful comments, and Arnaud Hélias (SupAgro) for supervising the study and providing constructive comments. We are also very grateful to the Malian Company for the Development of Textiles for sharing the data we used on Malian cotton, in particular to Ousmane Cissé. We also would like to thank the ELSA team for hosting and supporting the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CIRAD, UPR Recyclage et Risque, F-34398, Montpellier, France

    Angel Avadí

  2. CIRAD, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France

    Angel Avadí, Maéva Marcin, Yannick Biard, Alain Renou, Jean-Paul Gourlot & Claudine Basset-Mens

  3. ELSA, Research Group for Environmental Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment, 2 Place Pierre Viala, 34060, Montpellier, France

    Angel Avadí, Maéva Marcin, Yannick Biard & Claudine Basset-Mens

  4. CIRAD, UPR AÏDA, F-34398, Montpellier, France

    Maéva Marcin, Alain Renou & Jean-Paul Gourlot

  5. CIRAD, UPR HortSys, F-34398, Montpellier, France

    Yannick Biard

  6. CIRAD, UPR HortSy, F-97285, Le Lamentin, Martinique, France

    Claudine Basset-Mens

Authors
  1. Angel Avadí
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maéva Marcin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yannick Biard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alain Renou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jean-Paul Gourlot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Claudine Basset-Mens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angel Avadí.

Additional information

Editorial Responsibility: Greg Thoma

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 7 Selected cotton LCA studies (including grey literature)
Full size table
Table 8 Data for N direct field emissions and soil organic carbon sequestration estimations
Full size table
Table 9 Water Stress Index (WSI) characterisation factors for Malian cotton
Full size table
Table 10 Coefficients of variation (%) around ILCD midpoint results for Malian cotton
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Avadí, A., Marcin, M., Biard, Y. et al. Life cycle assessment of organic and conventional non-Bt cotton products from Mali. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 678–697 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01731-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01731-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation