Energy performance and climate impacts of conventional and organic farming systems. A meta-analysis
慣行農業と有機農業のエネルギー性能と気候影響：メタ分析 (AI 翻訳)
Horvat SMA, De Paepe JL, Álvarez R
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本メタ分析では、有機農業と慣行農業のエネルギー使用とGHG排出を比較した。系統的な方法論の調和により、有機農業は単位面積当たりの非再生可能エネルギー使用が20%、GHG排出が40%低いが、生産単位当たりでは有意差がなくなることを示した。また、有機肥料の非再生可能エネルギーを考慮すると、有機農業のエネルギー使用が従来評価より約20%増加することを明らかにした。
English
This global meta-analysis compares energy use and GHG emissions between organic and conventional farming. After harmonizing methods, organic systems show 20% lower non-renewable energy and 40% lower GHG per area, but non-significant per product. Including organic fertilizer energy increases organic energy use by ~20%.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本でも有機農業推進が進むが、本分析は有機農業のエネルギー・GHG評価において方法論の重要性を示す。GX文脈では、農業分野の脱炭素化施策の基礎資料となる。
In the global GX context
This study highlights methodological harmonization in agricultural sustainability assessment, relevant for climate mitigation policies. It demonstrates that system boundaries and energy accounting significantly influence conclusions, which is critical for designing effective decarbonization strategies in agriculture.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a robust methodological framework for comparing energy and GHG in agriculture.
🏛政策担当者:Informs agricultural climate policy design by clarifying the role of system boundaries and yield considerations.
📄 Abstract（原文）
<title>Abstract</title> <p>We conducted a global meta-analysis comparing total, renewable, and non-renewable energy use, as well as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, between organic and conventional agricultural systems. Previous comparisons have been limited by methodological inconsistencies, particularly differences in system boundaries, energy accounting, and reporting units. To improve comparability, we reconstructed and harmonized primary data from 45 peer-reviewed studies for the energy dataset and 31 studies for the GHG emissions dataset by standardizing units and system boundaries and by incorporating previously omitted non-renewable energy associated with organic fertilizer production, composting, and transport through a newly developed manure energy coefficient (2.1 MJ kg⁻¹). We further distinguished renewable from non-renewable energy sources and evaluated results on both area- and product-based functional units. Organic systems showed 20% lower non-renewable energy use and 40% lower GHG emissions per unit area than conventional systems. However, these differences became non-significant when expressed per unit of product, highlighting the importance of yield differences between systems. Importantly, incorporating the non-renewable energy associated with organic fertilizers increased estimated energy use in organic systems by approximately 20% on an area basis and 24% on a product basis compared with previous assessments. Our findings demonstrate that methodological harmonization substantially influences sustainability assessments and provides a more robust framework for future comparisons of agricultural systems under climate change mitigation goals.</p>
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- Research Square https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9858978/v1first seen 2026-06-04 04:25:12 · last seen 2026-06-15 04:42:27
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。