The Use of Environmental Information in Decision Making

Charlotte Lagerberg Fogelberg1 & Fredrik Fogelberg2

1Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden2Hedmark University College, Norway

Jurmala, May 11-14 2005

15 Swedish Environmental Quality Objectives

Reduced climate impact

Clean air

Natural acidification only

A non-toxic environment

A protective ozone layer

A safe radiation environment

Zero eutrophication

Flourishing lakes and streams

15 Swedish Environmental Quality Objectives

Good-quality groundwater

A balanced marine environment, flourishing coastal areas and archipelagos

Thriving wetlands

Sustainable forests

A varied agricultural landscape

A magnificent mountain landscape

A good built environment

Environmental Policy of the Swedish Government

» The overall aim isto hand over to the nextgeneration a societyin which the majorenvironmental problemshave been solved.«

The Swedish Parliament (Riksdagen) 1999

Divided Responsibility

15 national quality objectivesCentral authorities

Regional authorities

Local authorities

regional objectives

local objectives

interim targets for each

Political frameworks

1992 UN conference in Rio de Janeiro

Agenda 21 + conventions on climate and biodiversity

Promote the inclusion of social aspects and environmental costs into the prices of goods and services

Develop programmes to promote increased awareness in areas such as education, public information, consumer information, advertising and media

Develop and introduce efficient tools for consumer information on issues relating to human health and safety

Promote public procurement that develops and distributes environmentally sound goods and services

2002 UN conference in Johannesburg measures to

Sustainable consumption of foodstuffs, housing and transport

Swedish governmental investigation

Final conclusions and suggestions by end of May 2005

Some opinions of the governmental investigator

Consider our values, attitudes and habits in favour of a smarter and more caring lifestyle

Policy must be used more forcefully to speed up development of greener technology

change price relations in favour of greater social consumption

Economic growth Life satisfactionMaterial welfareEconomic welfare

Public procurement of foods

Swedish Environmental Management Council Governmental assignment Public procurement is governed by law

diskriminering) – how the demands for quotation are expressed is essential for lawful choice

Easy-to-use instrument for purchasing organisations caring about environmental issues

All types of simple ”non-composed” foods Food services Suggestions ready 2005, implementation 2006

E-info

”Designing and evaluating the impacts of environmental information in food service institutions and the food wholesale sector”

Funding from the Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research

Investigate the behaviour of food purchasing managers in general and in particular regarding their use of environmental information

Environmental profiles of foods Scenarios

Vegetables and meats

Carrot Tomato Apple Beans and peas Broccoli Onion Chicken Beef

Parameters for the environmental profiles

Resource use: water + plant nutrients + chemicals + packaging materials

Fuel use: electricity + gaseous fuels + diesel + petrol

Land use for primary production

Different origin

Carrot

Tomato

Onion

Beef

Sweden

Netherlands

Italy

Sweden

Denmark

Netherlands

Spain

Denmark

Poland

(Hungary)Sweden

Brazil

Ireland

Poland

Storage on farm or packing house

Fresh carrot

,

Carrot production

,

Inputs such as water, electricity, diesel, soap, chemicals, crop protection agents, fertilizers, lime

Discardedcarrots

Animal feed

Washing and packing, incl all processes in the packing house

Storage at wholesaler

Handling at food service institutions

Discardedcarrots

Animal feed

Discarded carrots

?

Beef, grazing system

Management of grazinglands

Cows grazing

Feedsupplements

Castratedbulls grazing

Slaughtering and cutting, incl all processes of the slaughterhouse

Different parts ready for shipping to different markets

Calf for dairy cowrecruitment

Calf slaughteredfor veal meat

Calf to be raisedfor meat

Storage

By products

Inputs such as water, electricity, diesel, soap, medicines, vaccinations, chemicals for water treatment, cleaning, liming, termite control

Shipping to Sweden

Management of grazinglands

Cows grazing

Feedsupplements

Castratedbulls grazing

Slaughtering and cutting, incl all processes of the slaughterhouse

Different parts ready for shipping to different markets

Calf for dairy cowrecruitment

Calf slaughteredfor veal meat

Calf to be raisedfor meat

Storage

By products

Inputs such as water, electricity, diesel, soap, medicines, vaccinations, chemicals for water treatment, cleaning, liming, termite control

Shipping to Sweden

Complex supply chain

B B B

A

CC C CC

DD DD

E

Primary producers, Spain2

EE

Primary producers, Spain1

Primary producers, The Netherlands

Primary producers, Sweden

EEE

Many purchasing managers involved

What you see depends on how you look.

Herman Verhagen (Change 52)

Profiles depend on method

Testing purchaser’s decision

Three environmental aspects were used energy use greenhouse gas emissions toxic substances

Price Values of env parameters ± 90% of mean Price ± 7% of mean

Apples and minced meat

Testing purchaser’s decision

I prefer A and

B equally

I prefer A

I prefer B

Product alternative A:Energy use: 92.3 MJ/kgGreenhouse gas emissions: 26.6 kg CO2-eqv/kgToxic substances: 0.2 g/kgLand use: 33.3 m2/kgPrice: 40.00 SEK/kg

Product alternative B:Energy use: 4.9 MJ/kgGreenhouse gas emissions: 1.4 kg CO2-eqv/kgToxic substances: 3.2 g/kgLand use: 33.3 m2/kgPrice: 34.80 SEK/kg

Testing purchaser’s decision again

I prefer A and

B equally

I prefer A

I prefer B

Product alternative A:Energy use: 92.3 MJ/kg (-)Greenhouse gas emissions: 26.6 kg CO2-eqv/kg (-)Toxic substances: 0.2 g/kg (+)Land use: 33.3 m2/kgPrice: 40.00 SEK/kg

Product alternative B:Energy use: 4.9 MJ/kg (+)Greenhouse gas emissions: 1.4 kg CO2-eqv/kg (+)Toxic substances: 3.2 g/kg (-)Land use: 33.3 m2/kgPrice: 34.80 SEK/kg

Preliminary results

Price by far dominated the preferences

”Toxic substances” was the dominating environmental parameter

Environmental parameters had greater impact on choice when labelled with + and –

Different environmental parameters significant for different products

Final project seminar November 15, 2005

Thank you for your attention!