{"type": "FeatureCollection", "features": [{"id": "10.1016/j.spc.2024.04.005", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-07-25T16:17:11Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2024-04-08", "title": "Unravelling life cycle impacts of coffee: Why do results differ so much among studies?", "description": "Coffee beans are a major agricultural product and coffee is one of the most widely traded commodities and consumed beverages globally. Supply chains and cropping systems are very diverse, with contrasted potentials and performance, as well as environmental impacts. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies are needed to inform on reduction in impacts, but there is a lack of comprehensive understanding of the variability of existing LCA results and impacts of the cropping systems and their trade-offs along the supply chains. In an attempt to address this knowledge gap, the paper presents a systematic literature review of coffee LCA, considering a total of 34 studies covering 234 coffee systems. Global warming potential (GWP) was the impact category most reported in the literature, but the results varied greatly at both the farm and drink levels. For the former, the GWP values ranged from 0.15 to 14.5 (median: 3.6) kg CO 2 eq./kg green coffee beans and for the latter the values ranged from 2 to 23 (median: 8.8) kg CO 2 eq./kg consumed coffee in drinks. Main contributors to the GWP of production of green coffee beans were land use change (LUC), fertilisers and wet processing. However, there were great inconsistencies across studies in terms of LUC accounting, field emissions and wet process modelling. Green coffee beans production was also the main contributor to the GWP of coffee consumed, followed by brewing and coffee cup washing. Some studies covered other impacts, in addition to GWP. At both the farm and drink levels, fertilisers and pesticides were the main contributors to eutrophication and acidification, and to ecotoxicity, respectively. Brewing was the second main contributor at the drink level, in some cases the top contributor for energy -related indicators. Assumptions on packaging, cup washing and waste disposal were highly variable across studies. Water impact indicators were hardly comparable due to the system variability and method inconsistencies. Given the large diversity of coffee cropping systems worldwide, but also the diversity of possible coffee drinks, we recommend that LCA studies be standardised with respect to the definition of the functional unit, including consistent quality aspects for both green coffee beans (moisture) and coffee drinks (organoleptic properties). They should also be more thorough in detailing processes at all stages. More attention should be paid to the farming system complexity and a mass balance should be ensured when assessing biomass flows concerning LUC, co -products and residue emissions. Finally, more primary data would be needed to decipher the cropping system diversity, as well as to characterise emissions from all inputs to the field and bean processing, notably for wet and semi -wet processing.", "keywords": ["[SDV.SA]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Agricultural sciences", "traitement des d\u00e9chets", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_24420", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_37938", "F08 - Syst\u00e8mes et modes de culture", "Coffea", "Coffee", "7. Clean energy", "630", "333", "irrigation", "12. Responsible consumption", "Life cycle assessment", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_9000105", "11. Sustainability", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_35352", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_1720", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_1721", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_2018", "syst\u00e8me de culture", "pratique culturale", "analyse du cycle de vie", "agroforesterie", "2. Zero hunger", "[SDV.SA] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Agricultural sciences", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_28379", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_34836", "E90 - Structure agraire", "r\u00e9chauffement global", "Agriculture", "Coffea arabica", "Environmental impacts", "15. Life on land", "Carbon footprint", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_207", "6. Clean water", "f\u00e8ve de caf\u00e9", "\u00e9cotoxicit\u00e9", "13. Climate action", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_3954", "impact sur l'environnement", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_1971", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_36259", "\u00e9valuation de l'impact"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.04.005"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/Sustainable%20Production%20and%20Consumption", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1016/j.spc.2024.04.005", "name": "item", "description": "10.1016/j.spc.2024.04.005", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1016/j.spc.2024.04.005"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2024-06-01T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "1893/33794", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-07-25T16:25:19Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2021-12-30", "title": "Global maps of soil temperature", "description": "Abstract

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2\uffc2\uffa0m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1\uffe2\uff80\uff90km2resolution for 0\uffe2\uff80\uff935 and 5\uffe2\uff80\uff9315\uffc2\uffa0cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1\uffe2\uff80\uff90km2pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse\uffe2\uff80\uff90grained air temperature estimates from ERA5\uffe2\uff80\uff90Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium\uffe2\uff80\uff90Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10\uffc2\uffb0C (mean\uffc2\uffa0=\uffc2\uffa03.0\uffc2\uffa0\uffc2\uffb1\uffc2\uffa02.1\uffc2\uffb0C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6\uffc2\uffa0\uffc2\uffb1\uffc2\uffa02.3\uffc2\uffb0C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (\uffe2\uff88\uff920.7\uffc2\uffa0\uffc2\uffb1\uffc2\uffa02.3\uffc2\uffb0C). The observed substantial and biome\uffe2\uff80\uff90specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near\uffe2\uff80\uff90surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil\uffe2\uff80\uff90related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications.