Circular Economy Initiatives in Food Manufacturing Industry

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4996705/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Circular Economy Initiatives in Food Manufacturing Industry

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4996705/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

The case company is an European food manufacturer, building a plant-based meals product family, which is the focus of this thesis. With sustainability as a guiding concept, the company uses cutting-edge tactics to minimize its environmental impact and satisfy the growing demand for environmentally friendly eating options. The case company introduces an internship program with an emphasis on sustainability and environmental impact assessment to achieve more sustainability targets. To assess the company's carbon footprint, pinpoint opportunities for improvement, and carry out significant environmental projects, this effort seeks to leverage the experience of aspiring environmentalists. The company aims to foster an inventive and enduring corporate culture by working together with both internal and external stakeholders and promoting constructive transformation within the food industry. Performing thorough life cycle assessments (LCAs) of the company’s product line, with an emphasis on particular goods, is a top priority for the internship program. This allows participants to learn important information about the environmental impact of each stage of the product life cycle - manufacturing, distribution, usage, and disposal. The company will also be positioned as a pioneer in sustainable product creation, providing benchmarks and best practices, through industry reviews and comparative studies. A dashboard that will visualize key results and data in an understandable way is being worked on. Decision-makers in the organization will find this dashboard to be a useful tool as it will help them monitor developments, pinpoint areas for development, and effectively convey sustainability accomplishments. Moreover, sentiment analysis is essential for understanding customer perspective. Through the examination of reviews, social media comments, and other digital feedback, the organization can obtain profound insights into the opinions and emotional responses of its customers through sentiment analysis. With this knowledge, the company is better able to improve customer happiness overall, customize marketing techniques to better connect with their audience, and improve their products based on consumer preferences and problem issues. In the end, the company’s data-driven strategy helps it maintain its competitiveness in the market, strengthening client loyalty and accelerating long-term company growth.

1.1 Background

The growing trend of plant-based ready-to-eat meals is centered on sustainability, which presents a strong argument for reducing environmental damage and encouraging better eating habits. Adopting more sustainable food practices is vital as worries over climate change, resource depletion, and animal welfare gain momentum on a worldwide scale. Plant-based diets, which are known to have the ability to lower greenhouse gas emissions, conserve water, and protect biodiversity, have emerged as a crucial tactic in this effort.

Moving toward plant-based diets offers substantial potential to reduce environmental effects in the food chain, per research by Springmann et al (2018). People can significantly reduce their carbon footprint and ease the strain on natural ecosystems by substituting plant-derived items for animal products. The potential of plant-based diets to lessen the land use, water consumption, and deforestation connected to cattle agriculture is further highlighted by Poore et al. (2018). These results highlight the critical role that readyto-eat plant-based meals play in advancing sustainability throughout the food supply chain.

Furthermore, the move to a plant-based diet is in line with larger initiatives to solve issues with public health and food security. The negative environmental effects of conventional meat production, such as deforestation, soil erosion, and water contamination, are highlighted by Lynch (2019). In order to create more resilient and equitable food systems, food makers and consumers alike should prioritize plant-based alternatives in ready-to-eat meal options.

But there are obstacles in the way of producing plant-based, ready-to-eat meals that are sustainable. Complex supply chains, sourcing ingredients, and packaging materials provide significant challenges that call for teamwork to overcome. However, continued innovation and technical developments offer hope for getting over these obstacles and increasing the selection of sustainable food options.

In summary, including sustainability into plant-based ready-to-eat meals is a critical first step in creating a food system that is both more resilient and environmentally conscientious. Through the utilization of plantbased components, diners can savor tasty and nourishing meals while concurrently lessening their environmental impact. It is still possible to bring about a profound shift in the field of food sustainability as long as cooperation and awareness are maintained.

1.2 Aim of the study

The general aim of the master’s project at the case company is to support environmental responsibility in the company's operations and to improve the company's sustainability initiatives. Following standard framework doing a thorough life cycle assessment (LCA) of the company's present product portfolio, with an emphasis on particular products, is one of the main goals. Throughout their manufacturing, distribution, usage, and disposal, this research will offer invaluable insights into the environmental impact of these items. In addition to internal evaluations, an industry evaluation and comparison of comparable items on the market are being carried out. With the help of this comparative study, the case company will be able to establish itself as a pioneer in the creation and administration of sustainable products by giving it access to insightful benchmarks and industry best practices. Along with creating a dashboard that will visualize key results and data in an understandable way is being worked on. Decision-makers in the organization will find this dashboard to be a useful tool as it will help them monitor developments, pinpoint areas for development, and effectively convey sustainability accomplishments. Furthermore, sentiment analysis is necessary to comprehend the viewpoint of the customer. Sentiment analysis provides the company with deep insights into the thoughts and feelings of its consumers through the analysis of reviews, social media comments, and other digital feedback. With this understanding, the company is better equipped to raise customer satisfaction levels overall, tailor marketing strategies to engage customers more effectively, and enhance product offerings in response to customer preferences and concerns.

Overall, addressing these challenges will require a multidisciplinary approach, analysis, effective communication, and collaboration both within the case company and with external partners. The successful execution of the project can help the company achieve its sustainability objectives and drive positive change in the food industry.

1.3 Thesis structure

The literature review section includes a summary of existing works and their relevance to the study conducted at the case company. The purpose of the literature review part is to first introduce relevant tools in research perspective and their usability to execute the study in a scientific manner.

After the literature review, Chaps. 3 and 4 emphasize on putting the theory into execution. Chapter 3 is the experimental part of the study, and it conducts a comparative LCA for some selected items from the case company. To achieve the desired accurate results, data from scientific papers and materials has been selected and used.

Chapters 5 include the recommendations and tools for visualizing and reducing the impact as well as better understanding customer’s perspective through sentiment analysis. The concept of eco design has been implemented to optimize the impact in this section and the effect of vitamin fortification is discussed in this chapter. Discussion and conclusion aims to discuss the results of the assessment.

2.1 Plant based ready to eat food

Ready-to-eat food is defined as having been prepared ahead of time and requiring little to no additional preparation. These products meet the needs of consumers who lead busy lives by providing quick and simple solutions for meals on-the-go. With options ranging from pre-made salads and sandwiches to microwaveable major dishes and snack bars, ready-to-eat food has become a global standard in homes. Recent years have seen a surge in the popularity of plant-based ready-to-eat foods due to changing dietary tastes and environmental concerns. Customers who are concerned about their health as well as vegetarians and vegans will find these plant-based items intriguing because they don't contain any animal ingredients. Vegetable sushi rolls, lentil soups, grain bowls, and dairy-free desserts are just a few of the many tasty and nourishing plant-based ready-to-eat options that are available.

Given the influence that ready-to-eat food has on the environment and society, sustainability is an important factor to consider when producing and consuming it. Adopting sustainable practices is essential because the food business contributes significantly to deforestation, water scarcity, and greenhouse gas emissions. Because plant-based diets have been demonstrated to have smaller carbon footprints and need fewer natural resources, plant-based ready-to-eat food presents a more environmentally friendly option than conventional ones Springmann et al. (2018). Manufacturers of ready-to-eat food can lessen their environmental impact and promote a healthier planet by adopting plant-based ingredients and sustainable packaging materials.

2.2 Shifting from Meat based meals to plant based meals

A significant change is occurring in the global food scene as more and more people are turning from traditional meat-based goods to plant-based substitutes. This movement marks the beginning of a new age in food choices and consumption patterns and is motivated by a combination of ethical, environmental, and health concerns. Growing knowledge of the negative environmental effects of conventional meat production is one of the main forces motivating the shift to plant-based meat substitutes. Research referenced in "Novel plant-based meat alternatives: future opportunities and health considerations" by Flint et al. (2023) indicates that the cattle sector significantly contributes to deforestation, water pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions. Many customers are choosing plant-based alternatives as a more sustainable option as they become more aware of these challenges.

Moreover, people are reevaluating their meat consumption due to ethical concerns about animal welfare. The misery that billions of animals endure every year is brought to light in this study, along with the inherent cruelty of industrialized animal husbandry. The demand for plant-based meat products is rising as a result of customers' growing ethical consciousness and their desire to find cruelty-free substitutes Flint et al. (2023). A major factor in the trend toward plant-based diets is health concerns. Plant-based diets are linked to several health advantages, including a lower risk of chronic illnesses including diabetes, heart disease, and some types of cancer, according to research included in the report. Customers can enjoy the flavor and texture of meat while cutting back on their intake of cholesterol, saturated fats, and other dangerous ingredients frequently found in animal products by selecting plant-based meat substitutes Flint et al. (2023).

2.3 Innovation in plant based ready to eat meals

The way that people consume food is changing dramatically, with convenience, health, and sustainability becoming more and more important. Plant-based ready-to-eat meals have become a viable option in this regard, providing consumers with tasty and nourishing options that complement their lifestyle choices and values. The discovery of innovative plant-based components and food preparation techniques has been made possible thanks in large part to scientific study. Research has examined the nutritional characteristics and sensory qualities of a variety of plant-based foods, such as grains, legumes, nuts, seeds, and substitute proteins. For instance, Eisner et al. (2020) investigate the application of innovative plant-based proteins, like rice and pea protein, in the creation of meat analogs with enhanced flavor and texture. Furthermore, the application of fermentation techniques to improve the nutritional profile and digestibility of plant-based ingredients is a result of advancements in food science Samtiya et al. (2021). Plant-based ready-to-eat meal production has been transformed by cutting-edge food processing technologies. Research has investigated how to enhance the texture, flavor, and shelf life of plant-based goods by the use of processes like extrusion, high-pressure processing, and heat processing. To make plant-based snacks with improved nutritional value and sensory attributes, for instance, looks into the usage of extrusion technology. Additionally, the development of sophisticated forms and textures for plant-based food items has been made possible by advances in 3D food printing technology Wang et al. (2022).

The advantages of plant-based diets for health and their ability to lower the risk of chronic diseases have been highlighted by scientific studies. Research has indicated that it is possible to create plant-based readyto-eat meals that maximize the consumption of vital nutrients and minimize the consumption of processed foods, saturated fats, and cholesterol. For instance, McClements et al. (2021) research shows how plantbased components like whole grains, fruits, and vegetables can be used to create meals that are higher in nutrients and have less salt. Furthermore, studies on plant-based diets have linked to gains in weight control, cardiovascular health, and general wellbeing Tran et al. (2020).

2.4 Climate change and plant based ready to eat foods

One of the most important issues confronting humanity today is climate change, which has profound effects on ecosystems, weather patterns, and food security. Adopting plant-based diets has become a viable way to lessen greenhouse gas emissions and the environmental impact of food production in the face of this challenge. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal agriculture make for a sizeable amount of world emissions, making them a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Gerber et al. (2013) found that methane emissions from enteric fermentation and nitrous oxide emissions from manure management in the cattle production industry account for around 14.5% of all greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. The environmental effects of animal husbandry have been further exacerbated by the growth of livestock grazing and feed production, which has resulted in habitat degradation and deforestation. Bodo et al. (2021). Diets based primarily on plants have been found to be an effective way to mitigate climate change and cut greenhouse gas emissions. Transitioning to plant-based diets (PBDs) has the potential to reduce diet-related land use by 76%, diet-related greenhouse gas emissions by 49%, eutrophication by 49%, and green and blue water use by 21% and 14%, according to research by Gibbs, J. and Cappuccio (2022). This is mostly due to a decrease in the emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from cattle farming. In addition, compared to animal-based meals, plant-based diets use a lot less energy, water, and land, making them a more sustainable option for feeding the world's expanding population Alcorta et al. (2021). Plant-based readyto-eat foods are essential for encouraging environmental sustainability and helping people switch to plant based diets. These meals make it simpler for people to cut back on their intake of animal products by providing them with tasty, wholesome, and easy substitutes for conventional meat and dairy products. According to research by Prag et al. (2020) switching to plant-based substitutes for meat and dairy products could drastically lower greenhouse gas emissions and the amount of land needed for food production. Furthermore, as they use fewer resources and emit fewer emissions during production and processing, plant based ready-to-eat foods frequently have a smaller environmental impact than their animal-based equivalents Gantner et al. (2023).

2.5 Summary of literature review

The emphasis on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of plant-based ready-to-eat meals has increased due to growing customer demand for sustainable food options. A systematic framework for assessing the

environmental effects of products at every stage of their life cycle − from the extraction of raw materials to disposal − is offered by LCA, as defined by ISO 14040:2006. ISO 14040:2006 provides a clear structure and basic principles that lay the groundwork for LCA This standard highlights the necessity of using a thorough methodology to evaluate environmental consequences, making sure that every phase of a product's life cycle is taken into account. It outlines the four key stages of life cycle assessment (LCA): inventory analysis, impact assessment, aim and scope determination, and interpretation. This approach is essential for assessing the sustainability of plant-based diets since it guarantees uniformity and comparability among various LCA studies.

The Agri-footprint 6 methodology report (2022) by Tyszler et al. (2022) which expands upon the ISO framework, provides comprehensive guidelines suited especially for agricultural products. It improves the accuracy of LCA by offering a wealth of agricultural data, which is essential for evaluating plant-based foods. The information on crop productivity, fertilizer use, and land use included in the study conducted by Tyszler et al. (2022) is essential to comprehending the environmental effects of plant-based ready-to-eat meals. An LCA that is more accurate compared to conducting LCA using other database be achieved by using the Agri-footprint database, which incorporates these detailed datasets. A thorough analysis of LCA in food supply chains was carried out by Vidergar et al. (2021), highlighting important phases and effect categories in the food production process. Their research highlights the significance of appropriately assessing environmental impacts by taking into account all life cycle stages, from farming techniques to transportation and packaging.

Understanding the complete environmental impact of plant-based ready-to-eat meals requires this comprehensive viewpoint. In-depth analyses of particular meal comparisons by Takacs et al. (2022) show the considerable environmental advantages of plant-based diets over animal substitutes. According to their research, which was published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, meals that are plant-based typically consume less water, less land, and emit less greenhouse gases. In order to promote plant-based diets as a more sustainable choice, this comparative analysis is essential.

A more comprehensive framework for LCA is offered by Toniolo et al. (2021) work on sustainability science methodologies, which focuses on evaluation, prioritizing, improvement, design, and optimization. Through the identification of critical areas for reducing environmental effect, their approaches provide insights into improving the sustainability of food items.

Developing more sustainable plant-based ready-to-eat meals requires a comprehensive approach. The effects of plant-based diets on the environment have been explicitly evaluated in a number of research. A thorough data collection was carried out by Potter et al. (2021) in order to provide a consumer guide for plant-based foods. Their results validate the idea that plant-based diets are more environmentally friendly, offering useful information to customers who want to make eco-friendly decisions.

The life cycle environmental effects of ready-made meals across various cuisines and recipes were investigated by Rivera et al. (2019). Their study emphasizes how different component choices and cooking techniques can have different effects on the environment. The significance of recipe-specific LCA in determining the actual environmental impact of ready-to-eat plant-based meals is underscored by this study. Table 1 represents summary of works from the literature review and their application on the study conducted for the LCA of plant based ready to eat food in this study

Table 1

Literature review application
SL	Resource	Application
1	ISO 14040, E., 2006. Life cycle assessment Principles and framework. In Environmental management.	Guidelines for conducting LCA following ISO Standard
2	Tyszler, H.B.M., Braconi, M.V.P.N. and van Rijn, N.D.J., 2022. Agri-footprint 6 Methodology Report.	A deep understanding of the industry's present environmental impact, which help identify key areas for intervention and improvement.
3	Vidergar, P., Perc, M. and Lukman, R.K., 2021. A survey of the life cycle assessment of food supply chains. Journal of cleaner production, 286, p.125506.	Selection of methods for the LCA
4	Takacs, B., Stegemann, J.A., Kalea, A.Z. and Borrion, A., 2022. Comparison of environmental impacts of individual meals-Does it really make a difference to choose plant-based meals instead of meat-based ones?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 379, p.134782.	Comparison criteria between Meat and Plant based food products
5	Toniolo, S., Borsoi, L. and Camena, D., 2021. Life cycle assessment: methods, limitations, and illustrations. In Methods in Sustainability Science (pp. 105–118). Elsevier.	Guidelines for creating a sustainability dashboard
6	Küster, A. and Patino-Echeverri, D., 2021. A review of environmental life cycle assessments of diets: plantbased solutions are truly sustainable, even in the form of fast foods. Sustainability, 13(17), p.9926.	Promotion and adoption methodology of sustainable eating practices including sentiment analysis
7	Potter, H.K. and Ros, E., 2021. Multi-criteria evaluation of plant-based foods–use of environmental footprint and LCA data for consumer guidance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, p.124721.	Referencing common food ingredients and recipes climate impact
8	Rivera, X.C.S. and Azapagic, A., 2019. Life cycle environmental impacts of ready-made meals considering different cuisines and recipes. Science of the total environment, 660, pp.1168–1181.	Understanding and implication of the elements impacting food product sustainability.

LCA is a systematic process that evaluates how products or activities impact the environment at each stage of their life cycle, from raw material extraction to disposal. As stated in ISO 14040:2006, life cycle assessment is "the compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle." The methodology considers all stages of a product's life, including resource acquisition, production, transportation, use, and disposal at the end, to assess environmental effects such as energy consumption, releases into the air, water, and land, and resource depletion. LCA provides useful information on how well products and processes perform environmentally in order to lessen negative environmental effects. Making decisions and allocating resources are aided by this information. Additionally, LCA can help identify areas that need improvement and guide the development of environmentally friendly products and processes.

A LCA framework is shown in Fig. 1, along with an explanation of its main elements and how they function together. The framework is divided into three primary sections: Impact Assessment, Inventory Analysis, and Goal and Scope Definition. Every stage contributes to the Interpretation stage, which evaluates the findings. The framework's goal is to provide direction for decision-making across a range of domains, such as marketing, public policy, strategic planning, and product creation and enhancement. This methodical methodology guarantees a thorough assessment of the environmental effects of a product over the course of its life cycle.

3.1 Goal and scope

By describing its goal, an LCA's purpose and objectives can be understood in detail. According to ISO 14040:2006, the purpose statement should outline the study's intended application, target audience, and expected outcomes. As per Azapagic et al. (2004), a well-defined objective ensures that the LCA considers relevant issues and provides valuable insights for decision-making. Setting reasonable expectations, focusing resources on areas that have the most impact, and prioritizing evaluation efforts are all aided by it. The goal of LCA must be clearly defined in order to provide an accurate assessment of the environmental implications. If it is not obvious which components are being analyzed and why, the results of an LCA may not be applicable or may not address the specific concerns of stakeholders. Determining the purpose and scope of an LCA is the first step in carrying out an LCA, according to ISO 14040:2006, to ensure that the assessments that come after are pertinent and goal oriented. Having a clear goal makes it easier to make judgments and carry out comparative investigations. When LCA objectives align with stakeholder interests and expectations, evaluating different products or processes becomes easier and informed decisions may be made more easily. For example, a study by Zamagni et al. (2012) demonstrates how precisely defining the goal of LCA makes it possible to make pertinent comparisons between different packaging materials based on environmental performance parameters. Beyond just addressing environmental issues, LCA also considers sustainability. LCA, which incorporates social, economic, and environmental elements to provide a more comprehensive examination of processes and products, can support sustainable decision-making. This all-encompassing approach is supported by frameworks such as the Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and the Triple Bottom Line analysis. Sala et al. (2020).

The range of life cycle phases raw material extraction, production, use, and disposal, that are considered in life cycle assessments is defined by system boundaries. The selection of these boundaries is important since it influences the reliability and thoroughness of the assessment Laurent et al. (2020). A thorough understanding of system boundaries ensures that all significant environmental impacts are taken into account, providing a thorough perspective on the sustainability of products and processes. According to Rebitzer et al. (2004) in the "Journal of Cleaner Production", defining system boundaries is essential to conducting a comprehensive effect evaluation. LCA incorporates all relevant life cycle stages to ensure that no significant environmental impact is overlooked. Using this comprehensive method, stakeholders can prioritize treatments and detect hotspots over the course of the entire life cycle. The phenomenon of burden shifting, or the transfer of environmental impacts from one stage of the life cycle to another, can be lessened with the use of clearly defined system boundaries. Rebitzer et al. (2004) highlight the risks associated with omitting specific stages of a research in their study. When the entire life cycle isn't taken into consideration, underestimating the environmental impact of processes and goods can lead to unwise decisions. System boundaries are crucial for meaningfully comparing various products or processes. Consistent system limits are necessary for relevant and trustworthy comparison evaluations, claim Zamagni et al. (2013). Maintaining consistency in the study's scope enables stakeholders to evaluate options' environmental performance and reach educated conclusions. Transparent system boundaries improve the validity of life cycle evaluations by providing interested stakeholders with a better grasp of the theory and methodology employed in the study.

According to Heilungs et al. (2002) in their book "The Computational Structure of Life Cycle Assessment," clearly defined limits increase the transparency of LCA results, facilitating peer review and validation. This transparency builds stakeholder confidence and makes decision-making processes more resilient. For the purpose of evaluating a few chosen goods, the system boundaries for this study were drawn from Cradle to Gate.

The functional unit in LCA refers to the quantifiable measure of a system's or product's performance. It serves as the standard for assessing environmental impacts and makes it easier to compare different solutions in an intelligent manner. According to Arzoumanidis et al. (2020), selecting a good functional unit is crucial since it determines the scope and parameters of the research, which has an impact on the accuracy and dependability of LCA outcomes. One of the primary benefits of the functional unit is its ability to facilitate the comparison of different processes or products. According to Guinée et al. (2002) in the Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards, the functional unit provides a standard framework for comparing choices, allowing stakeholders to analyze environmental performance objectively. Making educated decisions is made easier and more sustainable options can be found with the help of this comparison method. The functional unit is crucial in establishing the characteristics and extent of the LCA research. According to Hauschild et al. (2015), the functional unit chosen determines whether environmental impacts and life cycle stages are included in the analysis. By identifying the intended use of the system or product, stakeholders can tailor the LCA to specific environmental concerns and goals. Transparent documentation from the functional unit enhances the uniformity and transparency of LCA studies. As stated in ISO 14040 (2006), "Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework," a clear definition of the functional unit aids stakeholders in understanding the basis of the study and assessing its reliability. Peer review and validation are facilitated by open communication within the functional unit, which increases confidence in the precision of LCA results.

3.2 Life cycle inventory analysis (LCI)

Creating an inventory of all the inputs (materials, energy, etc.) and outputs (waste, emissions, etc.) related to each stage of a product's life cycle, from the extraction of raw materials to its disposal at the end of its useful life, is the task of a life cycle inventory (LCI) study. As stated in Bjørn et al. (2018), this quantitative method offers a foundation for assessing environmental consequences and identifying opportunities for change throughout the life cycle.

LCI study provides a comprehensive inventory of the resources consumed and emissions associated with a process or product as a baseline review. In the study, Weidema et al (2019) discovered that the use of LCI data aids stakeholders in understanding the environmental implications of different life cycle stages and in prioritizing areas for intervention. Decision-making and policy related to sustainability are aided by the entire picture of resource flows and environmental repercussions provided by LCI analysis. LCI analysis facilitates the identification of hotspots, or life cycle stages with significant environmental implications. LCI data, according to Cu Margni, M. and Curran, M.A (2012), assist stakeholders in identifying environmentally hazardous or inefficient places so that their efforts can be focused on mitigating their consequences. By quantifying inputs and outputs at every level, life cycle impact (LCI) analysis provides valuable insights into the reasons behind environmental deterioration and optimization potential. When LCI data is openly reported, environmental assessments become more transparent and accountable. According to ISO 14044 (2006), which states this in the standard "Environmental management, Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines," accurate and consistent reporting of LCI data helps stakeholders understand the basis for environmental assessments and evaluate their reliability.

3.3 Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

An essential tool in the pursuit of sustainable development is the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), which offers a comprehensive examination of the effects products or processes have on the environment, society, and economy throughout the duration of their entire life cycles. Sustainability is becoming more and more important in a society where it is becoming a global imperative. LCIA ensures that the environmental and social impact of processes and products is fully understood by considering every stage of the life cycle of the product. This approach, endorsed by reputable publications such as the ISO 14040 standard (ISO, 2006), prevents the overlooking of significant importance of LCIA. Figure 2, referred from the study conducted by Verones et al. (2020) illustrates the connections between areas of protection (such human health, the quality of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, and natural resources) and impact categories (including climate change, ozone depletion, and water stress). Because environmental impacts are interrelated and need a comprehensive approach in environmental assessments, each impact category has an impact on one or more areas of protection.

The effectiveness of LCIA depends on careful model selection that strikes a balance between relevance, data accessibility, and complexity. To guarantee reliable evaluations, Zamagni et al. (2013) emphasize how crucial it is to match LCIA models with the information and tools at hand. Practical and data-driven, models should capture pertinent environmental and social indicators. Certain environmental impacts at mid-point in cause-and-effect chains are quantified by midpoint indicators, such GWP. For example, the GWP quantifies the length of time that greenhouse gas emissions could potentially contribute to global warming. The use of midway indicators, such as GWP, to shed light on particular environmental impacts and facilitate the development of tailored mitigation plans is emphasized by Laratte et al. (2014).

In impact assessment, the choice of suitable models is crucial since it affects the precision and dependability of the outcomes. Model selection should be based on how well they capture the intricate relationships that exist between environmental factors and human activity. Finkbeiner et al. (2010) have emphasized that model selection should take into account factors including uncertainty, data availability, and scales in both space and time. Every effect category has an endpoint impact or a midpoint impact. The term "midpoint impact" describes the consequences that arise within a product's life cycle. These are quantifiable effects that can be traced back to the initial emissions, but they are not directly connected to the chain's final affects Hauschild et al. (2015).

The goal of endpoint impact assessment is to appraise the ultimate results, or endpoints, of environmental consequences, such as alterations in human health, biodiversity, or ecosystem services. A thorough grasp of the effects of human activity is provided by this holistic approach, which also makes well-informed decision-making easier. Endpoint indicators provide information on a systems' or products' overall environmental performance, as de Haes et al. (2002) pointed out. It is frequently necessary to integrate various models for endpoint effect assessment in order to fully capture the complexity of environmental systems. For instance, the evaluation of effects on biodiversity and ecosystem health is made possible by the combination of ecosystem service models and LCA. The necessity of interdisciplinary cooperation and model integration is emphasized by research by Hertwich et al. (2015) in order to increase the reliability of endpoint impact evaluations.

Table 2 provides examples of Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) data and describes the various environmental consequences at both the midpoint and endpoint levels. Carbon dioxide and chlorofluorocarbons are two examples of LCI data that are used to evaluate global warming and ozone depletion at the midway level. Local and regional assessments of acidification and eutrophication are conducted using sulfur oxides and phosphates, respectively, as case studies. When evaluated locally, ozone production and terrestrial toxicity are related to hazardous substances that impact rodents and non-methane hydrocarbons. Endpoint categories that incorporate total emissions and resource utilization, ranging from global to local, include human health and resource depletion. Based on waste volumes and land alterations, land use impacts can be evaluated globally and locally, at both the midpoint and endpoint levels.

Table 2

Life cycle impact categories (The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006).
Impact Category	Mid-/Endpoint	Scale	Examples of LCI Data
Global Warming	Midpoint	Global	Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Methane (CH4), Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), Methyl Bromide (CH3Br)
Ozone Depletion	Midpoint	Global	Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), Halons Methyl Bromide (CH3Br)
Acidification	Midpoint	Regional , Local	Sulfur Oxides (Sox), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Hydrochloric Acid(HCl), Hydrofluoric Acid (HF) Ammonia (NH4)
Eutrophication	Midpoint	Local	Phosphate (PO4), Nitrogen Oxide (NO), Nitrogen Dioxide,(NO2), Nitrates, Ammonia (NH4)
Ozone formation	Midpoint	Local	Non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC)
Terrestrial Toxicity	Midpoint	Local	Toxic chemicals with a reported lethal concentration to rodents
Aquatic Toxicity	Midpoint	Local	Toxic chemicals with a reported lethal concentration to fish
Human Health	Endpoint	Global, Regional , Local	Total releases to air, water, and soil.
Resource Depletion	Endpoint	Global, Regional , Local	Quantity of minerals used, Quantity of fossil fuels used, Water footprint
Land Use	Midpoint/ Endpoint	Global, Regional , Local	Quantity disposed of in a landfill or other land modifications

Table 3 lists different environmental models along with the impact categories they address, including acidification, global warming, ozone depletion, and toxicity. A multitude of topics are covered by models such as CML2002, Eco-indicator 99, EDIP 2003, EPS 200, Impact 2002+, and ReCiPe, which include acidification, global warming, ozone depletion, and human toxicity.

Table 3

Impact category and associated models Margni et al. (2012).
Model
CED									✔
CML2002	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Eco-indicator 99	✔	✔	✔	✔		✔		✔	✔		✔
EDIP 2003/EDIP978	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
EPS 200	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Impact 2002+	✔	✔	✔		✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
IPCC	✔
LIME	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
LUCAS	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
MEEuP	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
ReCiPe	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
Swiss Ecoscarcity	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
TRACI	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔
USEtox							✔	✔	✔

The selection of impact categories, category indicators, and characterization models is the first stage in LCA as per ISO standards (Fig. 3; ISO 14040, 2006). Classification entails dividing the inventory data into impact groups according to the endpoints and environmental mechanisms they represent. The inventory data is categorized in this step based on pertinent environmental stresses, including resource depletion, acidification, eutrophication, greenhouse gas emissions, and ozone depletion. To maintain comparability and consistency across various LCIA studies, ISO 14044 stresses the significance of employing a consistent and rigorously scientific classification scheme. Quantifying the possible environmental effects of the inventory data within each impact category is a necessary step in the characterization process. In order to enable comparison and aggregation across several effect categories, this phase converts the inventory data into commonly used units of measurement, such as kilograms of CO₂ equivalents or kilograms of sulfur dioxide equivalents. When characterizing the environmental impacts associated with each inventory item, ISO 14044 advises using scientific methodologies such as cause-effect models, fate and transport models, and others. Table 4 illustrates the damage pathways from the study conducted by Huijbregts et al., (2017) for a range of environmental issues across multiple protection domains. Only the climate change category is mentioned here, rest of the table is put in appexdix.. Increased sickness and natural catastrophes are two ways that climate change affects human health. It also has an impact on freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems by causing the extinction of species (IPCC 2013; Joos et al. 2013; De Schryver et al. 2009). Skin cancer and cataracts are caused by stratospheric ozone depletion (WMO 2011; Hayashi et al. 2006), whilst ionizing radiation is linked to an increase in cancer and genetic disorders (Frischknecht et al. 2000; De Schryver et al. 2011). By generating respiratory and cardiovascular disorders, particulate matter and photochemical ozone production are harmful to human health (Van Zelm et al. 2016). According to Roy et al. (2014) and Helmes et al. (2012), freshwater eutrophication and terrestrial acidification cause the extinction of aquatic and plant species. Chemical exposure causes toxicity, which affects both human health and different ecosystems (Van Zelm et al. 2009). Ecosystems that consume more water become malnourished and produce less (Pfister et al. 2009). Due to habitat modification brought on by land use, species are lost (De Baan et al. 2013; Curran et al. 2014). Because of the extraction of minerals and fossil fuels, resource scarcity drives up costs (Vieira et al. 2016).

Table 4

Damage pathways in ReCipe 2016 (Huijbregts et al., 2017).
Environmental problem	Area of protection	Damage pathways	References
Climate change	Human health	Years of life lost and disability brought on by an increase in malaria, diarrhea, hunger, and natural disasters as a result of a rise in the average world temperature	IPCC 2013; Joos et al. 2013; De Schryver et al. 2009
	Ecosystems (terrestrial)	Loss of species as a result of shifting biome distributions brought on by rising global temperatures	IPCC 2013; Joos et al. 2013
	Ecosystems (freshwater)	Loss of fish species as a result of reduced river discharge	Hanafiah et al. 2011

Quantitative measurements known as category indicators are employed to depict the environmental impacts associated with each impact category. These indicators offer a way to standardize the expression of the impacts' extent and relevance. The adoption of scientifically and policy-relevant indicators that encapsulate the principal environmental issues linked to every impact category is encouraged by ISO 14044. Global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), and human toxicity potential (HTP) are examples of common category indicators. In order to make comparisons across various effect categories easier, normalization entails scaling the category indicators to a standard reference scale. This phase enables a more relevant comparison of environmental impacts by taking into account changes in the category indicators' magnitude and units of measurement. To promote uniformity in the interpretation of the results and standardize the category indicators, ISO 14044 advises using normalization factors such global or regional averages. By weighting, the various impact categories are given varying degrees of relevance or significance according to stakeholder preferences, policy aims, or other factors. By taking this action, decision-makers can sort environmental issues into priority lists and concentrate their efforts on resolving the most pressing issues. Recognizing the subjective character of weighting, ISO 14044 suggests open, participatory methods to guarantee the validity and trustworthiness of the weighting procedure. The LCIA procedure is shown in Fig. 3 as referred from ISO 14040, 2006, with emphasis on both required and optional components. The selection of impact categories, category indicators, and characterization models are required components. The results of the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) are then assigned through classification. This results in the characterisation, or category indicator results, being calculated. After that, the LCIA profile is created using the category indicator results. Grouping, weighting, and normalization, which determines the significance of outcomes in relation to reference data—are optional components that might improve the assessment. This methodical procedure guarantees a comprehensive assessment of a process's or product's environmental effects.

3.4 Interpretation

Finding important environmental problems and hotspots across the life cycle is the first step in evaluating LCA results. In order to help identify pertinent elements, publications like Guinée et al. (2011) provide a thorough overview of the environmental challenges addressed by LCAs. The standard method supporting the determination of relevant factors is also described on ISO 14044 (2006) guideline presented in Fig. 3. The significance of making sure that all pertinent inputs and outputs are taken into account at every point of the life cycle is emphasized by ISO standards. Research works such as Jørgensen et al. (2010) offer approaches for evaluating completeness and assisting practitioners with data gathering and validation. Sensitivity analysis is a useful tool for assessing how important parameters and assumptions affect LCA outcomes. Studies like Hauschild et al. (2018) provide information about influence of sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment results. It is essential to guarantee internal consistency in the LCA study. To improve the trustworthiness of outcomes, ISO standards and literature, such as Martin et al. (2018) offer recommendations on confirming consistency throughout the assessment process's many stages. As referred from ISO 14044, 2006 Fig. 4 illustrates the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) framework, highlighting the three primary elements that comprise it: impact assessment, inventory analysis, and aim and scope determination. These elements contribute to the interpretation stage, which is where important problems are found and assessed using a variety of techniques. Finally, the framework forms conclusions, constraints, and suggestions. The LCA's results have direct bearing on marketing, public policy, strategic planning, and product development.

3.5 Understanding customer perspective (Sentiment Analysis)

Moreover, as the internship is addressing two pillars of sustainable development (environmental and social) for social development, sentiment analysis is essential for understanding customer perspective. Through the examination of reviews, social media comments, and other digital feedback, the case company can obtain profound insights into the opinions and emotional responses of its customers through sentiment analysis.

Sentiment analysis is a branch of natural language processing (NLP) that examines textual data to ascertain the writer's sentiment. This might be classified as neutral, negative, or positive feelings. More sophisticated methods can also identify the degree to which particular sensations, like joy, rage, or contempt, are present. Sentiment analysis offers important insights into consumer perceptions and may be used to a wide range of data sources, such as social media posts, online reviews, and survey results Thao et al. (2023).

3.5.1 Application of sentiment analysis

Rich data on consumer experiences can be found in reviews on food delivery apps and e-commerce sites. Examining these reviews enables one to pinpoint frequent compliments and grievances regarding aspects like flavor, texture, packaging, and nutritional worth. Salehan et al. (2016) illustrate how sentiment mining can be used to forecast the effectiveness of online customer reviews, underscoring its importance for bettering products.

Social media sites such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter are useful for sentiment research in real time. Finding trends and public opinion can be achieved by monitoring hashtags and remarks pertaining to plant based RTE foods. Chen and Zhang (2022) demonstrated the possibility of social media sentiment analysis for food goods by investigating popular perceptions of alternative meat in China using social media data and transfer learning.

Survey responses that are structured can be examined to identify areas for development and to learn more about particular facets of customer satisfaction. Using sentiment analysis, Thao et al. (2023) investigated consumer perceptions of vegetarian cuisine, offering insights into consumer expectations and preferences.

3.5.2 Sentiment analysis methodology

The approach of sentiment analysis consists of multiple essential procedures intended to identify, evaluate, and extrapolate subjective information from textual data. Thao et al. (2023) state that the procedure usually starts with data collection, which involves gathering textual data from a variety of sources, including social media, online reviews, and survey replies. After that, the data is preprocessed using techniques like tokenization, stemming, lemmatization, and stop word removal in order to eliminate noise and unnecessary information. After the data has been cleaned, it is analyzed using machine learning techniques (where models are trained on labeled datasets to classify text into sentiment categories) or lexicon-based approaches (which rely on predefined dictionaries of words loaded with sentiment). In order to increase accuracy, advanced techniques may also use hybrid approaches that combine machine learning with lexicon-based techniques.Lastly, the data is visualized and analyzed to offer useful insights into the attitudes and opinions of the consumer. In order to effectively capture the complexities of consumer sentiments on plant-based and vegetarian diets, Thao et al. (2023) states that robust analytical methodologies and thorough context evaluation are necessary for effective sentiment analysis.

3.6 Analysis of data

The databases and methodologies chosen for the study's LCA are validated in Table 5. It enumerates three primary techniques, each linked to certain databases and references: ReCiPe 2016, EcoInvent v3.6, and GaBi. ReCiPe 2016, which makes use of the Agri-footprint database, is the best appropriate for this study because of its thorough effect evaluation that includes midway and endpoint indicators. While GaBi offers a wide range of datasets for environmental impact assessments, EcoInvent v3.6 delivers comprehensive LCA data for a variety of processes. The study comes to the conclusion that the best approach for carrying out the LCA is to use the ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint (H) technique in conjunction with the Agri-footprint database. These techniques were put into practice using SimaPro LCA software, which ensures a comprehensive and verified life cycle assessment

Table 5

Method and database selection
Method	Description	Database	Reference
ReCiPe 2016	Comprehensive impact assessment method offering midpoint (e.g., GWP) and endpoint indicators.	Agrifootprint	Huijbregts et al (2016)
Ecoinvent v3.6	Widely used LCA database containing extensive data for various processes, including GWP factors.	Ecoinvent	Wernet et al (2016)
GaBi	A comprehensive LCA software and database that provides extensive datasets for environmental impact assessments.	GaBi	Curran et al. (2013)

4.1 Interpretation of the results

The procurement of raw materials and transportation both contribute significantly to Product 1, which has the largest GWP at 0.690 kg CO2 eq/meal. On the other hand, Products 2 and 3 exhibit lower GWPs of 0.541 kg CO2 equivalent per meal and 0.487 kg CO2 equivalent per meal, respectively, suggesting somewhat smaller environmental effects. As it happens, Product 3 has the largest calorie count 499 kcal per meal and is the most energy-efficient choice. The need of waste management techniques in reducing environmental effects is highlighted by the decrease in GWP for all items during the disposal and recycling phases. These findings highlight the importance of appropriately assessing the environmental footprints of food products by taking into account their whole lifecycle, from manufacture to disposal.

The results also draw attention to the possibility of streamlining the food industry's manufacturing and distribution procedures to reduce carbon emissions and improve sustainability.

4.2 Uncertainties of the results

An effective method for assessing how a product's life cycle, which includes the extraction, manufacturing, use, and disposal of raw materials affects the environment is life cycle assessment, or LCA. But assumptions, methodological choices, and data quality concerns can have a big impact on LCA results. Heijungs et al. (2004) Results can be inconsistent as a result of problems with representativeness, accuracy, and precision in data. According to Finnveden et al (1999), energy consumption estimates derived from equipment power ratings may not precisely represent actual conditions. This is particularly true in regions such as Europe that see notable seasonal variations. Uncertainty is also a result of methodological decisions made on impact assessment techniques and system boundaries. Different techniques to effect evaluation and assumptions regarding waste disposal scenarios can lead to variations in outcomes as stated by Lloyd et al. (2007). An additional degree of unpredictability is introduced by seasonal variations in energy and resource consumption, such as higher heating demands in the winter. In order to address these uncertainties, high-quality, region-specific data must be incorporated, LCA procedures must be continuously improved, and sophisticated modeling methods like Monte Carlo simulations that offer a variety of possible outcomes and their probability must be used .Weidema et al. (1996).

4.3 Dashboard for visualization

After the completion of the LCA of 3 selected products a dashboard has been developed to visualize the results to internal and external stakeholders. The case company has benefited greatly from the implementation of a carbon footprint dashboard, which offers a thorough and up-to-date analysis of the carbon emissions from their three primary products. This dashboard, which was created with Looker Studio (Google, n.d.) and Airtable (Airtable, n.d.) illustrated on Fig. 17, incorporates extensive data on all aspects of the product lifecycle, from transportation and raw materials to preprocessing, packaging, disposal, and recycling effects. The dashboard helps the company to make well-informed decisions and promptly resolve high-emission regions by providing a visual representation of both daily and monthly emissions. Additionally, it monitors carbon offset activities, supporting the business's environmental goals. Studies like et al. (2009) indicate that accurate reporting of carbon emissions and openness in accounting are essential for efficient environmental management and lowering greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. In line with research that highlights the significance of corporate transparency in environmental performance, The case company’s dashboard not only encourages compliance with environmental regulations but also improves its corporate image by showcasing a dedication to sustainability and accountability. Schaltegger et al. (2010).

4.4. GWP Impact reduction

4.4.1 General finding and recommendation

Based on the raw material contributions and supply chain logistics of three distinct products, the table 25 offers a thorough analysis of the major conclusions and suggestions. With recommendations centered on local sourcing, supply chain optimization, and sustainable agricultural techniques, Product 1's raw material impacts are primarily attributed to the use of plant-based cream, Thai-sourced jasmine rice, and Northern European-sourced plant mate flakes. Product 2 emphasizes how cultivating soybeans, corn, and oats affects the environment. Ingredients from Southern Europe make a major contribution to this product, highlighting the need for effective transportation options. With additional components like tomatoes and parsley imported from across Europe, Product 3 highlights the significant influence of soy protein in veggieballs. The suggestions place a strong emphasis on ways to lessen environmental effects by using better sourcing and transportation practices.

Table 6

General recommendations to reduce the GWP on 3 products
Product	Key Findings	Recommend ation
	Production of coconut cream contributes 49% of total RMs	•Local sourcing and production. Sonesson et al. (2018) • Supply chain optimization (Using rail or sea freight instead of road. Li et al. (2019) • Resource efficient farming, sustainable and water saving irrigation. Baum et al. (2020)
	Plant mate flakes contains pea protein ( Farming 9% and processing 15% contribution)
	Jasmine rice and coconut cream comes from Asia (~ 10000 km)
	Plant mate flakes comes from North of Europe (> 1000km)
	Vege bacon contains soybean, the farming and processing of soybean contributes 22.4% of total RMs
	For spaghetti the farming procedure of corns contribute 17.3%
	For oat cream the farming of oat 17.2% and rapeseed oil contributes 13.8%
	Spaghetti comes from South of Europe
	Vege bacon comes across Europe and needs reefer truck
	The vegeballs contains soy protein, contributes 49% of total RMs impact
	For macaroni the production and processing of corn contributes 12% of total RMs
	Tomato crushed and tomato puree comes from South of Europe
	Parsley comes from other side of Europe and needs reefer truck

4.4.2 GWP increase and contribution of fortified vitamin

Plant based meals are healthier and have less of an impact on the environment than diets based on animals, they typically require less land, water, and carbon emissions. Plant-based meals are becoming more and more popular. To guarantee proper nutrition, however, fortification is frequently required, particularly for vitamins that are frequently present in animal products. According to a study by Bruins et al. (2021), the production of these nutrients is primarily responsible for the large rise in the GWP of plant-based ready-toeat meals that are fortified with vitamins and minerals. To lessen these effects, renewable energy sources and efficient industrial methods are required. Northern Europe is particularly susceptible to vitamin D insufficiency due to its winters and less sunlight, which emphasizes the significance of vitamin D fortification. Greenhouse gas emissions from sheep husbandry are among the significant environmental effects of synthetic vitamin D manufacturing, which uses resources like lanolin, fish oil, or ergosterol. Cashman et al. (2024). A good substitute that considerably increases serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels is UV-exposed mushroom, which naturally produces vitamin D2. Keegan et al. (2013). Although vitamin D3 is generally more effective, mushrooms exposed to UV light have less of an environmental impact than sources obtained from animals, especially when driven by renewable energy. A comparison of the vitamin D2 content (Sun dried and artificial ultraviolet dried) has been shown on the illustration below

4.5 Design thinking (an approach to implement sentiment analysis)

Empathizing is the first step in the design thinking process. It entails learning about the thoughts, feelings, and experiences of consumers, especially with relation to ready-to-eat (RTE) plant-based foods. This necessitates examining feedback for sentiment as well as the underlying feelings and experiences from a variety of sources, including surveys, social media, and internet reviews. Frequently noted problems include minimal customer engagement with existing feedback techniques, difficulties synthesizing findings, and absence of a systematic way to gather input. The synthesized information from the empathize step is used in the define stage to pinpoint important problems, like grievances over flavor, packaging, or nutritional value. Businesses can concentrate their efforts on the most important issues by clearly describing these difficulties. Buchanan et al. *1992). Establishing a methodical feedback process, giving sales and product development teams rapid insights, enhancing product quality, and raising customer happiness are some of the goals of this stage. The customer satisfaction index, net promoter score, and response rate are examples of key performance indicators (KPIs) that are used to gauge success. The ideation and prototyping step includes making physical prototypes of these solutions, including dashboards or visualization tools that show sentiment data in a useful way, is known as prototyping. Cross et al. (2011). The illustration on Fig. 19 shows the design thinking process

It is very important to study the current process to ideate for the improved process. Below flow chart shows the current customer feedback collection process of new products.

From the ideate steps an improved process has been made. The following illustration of BPMN shows the improved process of customer feedback collection system. It mostly represents the foreground process that customer is facing.

For the product development team, the collection and representation of information from customer is represented on the following BPMN diagram that consists analysis and improvement process.

On testing phase, the QR code packaged food has been launched. The feedback collection was done by using typeform platform. After collecting the data, the sentiment analysis has been done with r programming code. The code is attached on the appendix.

4.5.1 Sentiment analysis methodology

The sentiment analysis process flow in the R programming language that has been used for the analysis, as explained by Thao et al. (2023), is depicted in Fig. 24. Data gathering from social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram is the first step in the process. The required R packages, including dplyr, tidytext, ggplot2, snowball, and tidyr, are installed first. Functions like clean_text are then used to tokenize, filter, and stem the text data. Next, the cleaned data is read, from Google Sheet. To classify comments into good, negative, or neutral feelings, keywords are extracted. Sentiment categories are added as a new column when the classification procedure is applied. A bar plot made with ggplot2 is used to display sentiment counts after the categorized data has been saved as a CSV file.

4.5.2 Result and validation

The sentiment analysis results on Fig. 25 shows a significant improvement in a number of parameters. First of all, survey completion rates have increased significantly since the QR code on packaging was put into place, going from 65–90%. This enhancement highlights how well the improved process engages respondents and extracts insightful comments. Furthermore, the sentiment count obtained from Facebook posts shows an 80% positive attitude, with 14% neutral and 6% negative feelings. This distribution points to an audience that views the content favorably, which is good for the brand's engagement and reputation. The Net Promoter Score (NPS) has also increased significantly, rising from a previous score of 63–85%. This significant rise is a reflection of increased customer satisfaction and loyalty and shows how sentiment analysis may positively influence both customer sentiment and overall business performance.

This research gave insights into the environmental effects of the case company's product line through a thorough life cycle analysis. The study identified key factors contributing to environmental deterioration by looking at many stages of the product lifecycles, such as manufacture, distribution, usage, and disposal. It placed special emphasis on transportation and raw material use as important drivers of greenhouse gas emissions. Based on data from industry standards and scientific literature, the comparative LCA showed that Product 1 had the largest GWP at 0.613 kg CO2 equivalent per meal. This was mainly because of raw material utilization and transportation. Whereas Product 3 is the most calorie-efficient, Products 2 and 3 showed lower GWP values of 0.463 and 0.409 kg CO2 equivalent per meal, respectively.

These results are consistent with previous research, which emphasizes the value of a comprehensive approach to food lifecycle assessments in order to precisely measure environmental footprints and pinpoint areas for mitigation. Apart from the internal evaluations, the case company was positioned as a leader in sustainable product creation and management by the industry review and comparison with similar products in the market. In addition to offering helpful benchmarks, this comparison research also emphasized industry best practices that the company may implement to strengthen its sustainability initiatives even further.

Creating a dashboard to display important LCA data and results has shown to be a useful tool for the organization's decision makers. This dashboard makes it easier to identify areas for development, track progress in real time, and effectively communicate sustainability accomplishments. A tool like this is essential for keeping sustainability initiatives moving forward and making sure the business is on course to fulfill its environmental targets. Furthermore, the incorporation of sentiment analysis has yielded profound insights into the opinions and contentment of customers. Survey completion rates increased dramatically from 65–90% as a result of the improved customer feedback system and sentiment analysis procedure, showing greater engagement and more insightful input.

Furthermore, a sentiment analysis of Facebook posts revealed that 80% of the feelings were positive and only 6% were unfavorable, indicating that the company's initiatives were well-received. The unfavorable sentiments lead to further improvement. The noteworthy increase in the Net Promoter Score (NPS) from 63–85% indicates that these initiatives are having a beneficial effect on customer satisfaction and loyalty. The idea of eco-design used to maximize product effect. The company's sustainability approach became even more intricate when natural source of vitamin has taken into consideration instead of fortification. .

In conclusion, the case company now has the knowledge and resources needed to significantly advance sustainability, thanks to the research results. By combining LCA methods with thorough industry benchmarking and sophisticated sentiment analysis, the case company is able to maintain a better foundation for its continuous sustainability initiatives and stay at the forefront of environmental innovation and responsibility.

In conclusion, this research provided a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impacts of the case company's product line through a detailed life cycle analysis (LCA). By examining various stages of the product lifecycle—from manufacturing to disposal—the study highlighted key drivers of environmental degradation, particularly raw material use and transportation. Product 1 was identified as having the highest global warming potential (GWP) per meal, primarily due to its resource-intensive production and distribution processes, while Products 2 and 3 demonstrated lower GWP values. These findings align with existing research, reinforcing the importance of a holistic approach to lifecycle assessments to accurately quantify environmental footprints and target areas for improvement.

The study also positioned the case company as a leader in sustainable product development through industry benchmarking and comparison with market competitors. This not only provided valuable insights but also suggested best practices that the company can adopt to enhance its sustainability efforts. Additionally, the development of a dashboard to present key LCA data has proven to be an effective tool for tracking progress, identifying opportunities for improvement, and communicating sustainability achievements. This aligns with the company's long-term environmental goals and supports the continuous advancement of its sustainability initiatives.

Moreover, the integration of sentiment analysis provided deeper insights into customer perceptions and engagement. The improvements in customer feedback systems and sentiment analysis led to a significant increase in survey completion rates and revealed overwhelmingly positive responses to the company's sustainability efforts. The boost in the Net Promoter Score (NPS) further indicates that these initiatives are enhancing customer satisfaction and loyalty. Finally, the adoption of eco-design principles and a focus on natural vitamin sourcing instead of fortification have added depth to the company’s sustainability strategy, reinforcing its commitment to creating environmentally responsible products. Overall, this research highlights the case company's strengths while identifying areas for continued innovation and environmental stewardship

Author Contribution

The whole research has been done by solely me as part of my master's thesis

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Airtable (n.d.) Airtable, editor. Available at: https://airtable.com/.
Alcorta A, Porta A, Tárrega A, Alvarez MD, Vaquero MP. 2021. Foods for plant-based diets: Challenges and innovations. Foods, 10(2), p.293.
Arzoumanidis I, D’Eusanio M, Raggi A, Petti L. 2020. Functional unit definition criteria in life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment: a discussion. In Perspectives on Social LCA: Contributions from the 6th International Conference (pp. 1–10). Springer International Publishing.
Azapagic A. 2004. Life cycle thinking and life cycle assessment (LCA). Sustainable Development in Practice: Case Studies for Engineers and Scientists, p.426.
Baum R, Bienkowski J, Holka M. 2020. Analysis of sustainability performance of different farming types using life cycle approach.
Berlin J. Environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of ready meals: LCA of two meals; pork and chicken & screening assessments of six ready meals. SIK Institutet för livsmedel och bioteknik; 2010.
Bilgen SE. Structure and environmental impact of global energy consumption. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2014;38:890–902.
Bjørn A, Moltesen A, Laurent A, Owsianiak M, Corona A, Birkved M, Hauschild MZ. 2018. Life cycle inventory analysis. Life cycle assessment: Theory and practice, pp.117–165.
Bodo T, Gimah BG, Seomoni KJ. Deforestation and habitat loss: Human causes, consequences and possible solutions. J Geographical Res. 2021;4(2):22–30.
Bruins MJ, Létinois U. 2021. Adequate Vitamin D Intake Cannot Be Achieved within Carbon Emission Limits Unless Food Is Fortified: A Simulation Study. Nutrients. 2021; 13 (2): 592. Vitamin D in the New Decade, p.383.
Buchanan R. Wicked problems in design thinking. Des Issues. 1992;8(2):5–21.
Cashman KD. Vitamin D fortification of foods–sensory, acceptability, cost, and public acceptance considerations. The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; 2024. p. 106494.
Chen J, Song N, Su Y, Zhao S, Zhang Y. Learning user sentiment orientation in social networks for sentiment analysis. Inf Sci. 2022;616:526–38.
Clark MA, Domingo NG, Colgan K, Thakrar SK, Tilman D, Lynch J, Azevedo IL, Hill JD. Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5 and 2 C climate change targets. Science. 2020;370(6517):705–8.
Cross N. 2011. Understanding design thinking. Notes on doctoral re-search in design: Contributions from the Politecnico Di Milano. FrancoAngeli, pp.p19-37.
Curran M, Hellweg S, Beck J. Is there any empirical support for biodiversity offset policy? Ecol Appl. 2014;24(4):617–32.
Dahmani J, Nicklaus S, Grenier JM, Marty L. 2022. Nutritional quality and greenhouse gas emissions of vegetarian and non-vegetarian primary school meals: A case study in Dijon, France. Frontiers in Nutrition, 9, p.997144.
Davis SJ, Caldeira K. 2010. Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 107(12), pp.5687–5692.
De Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T. Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2013;18:1216–30.
de Haes HAU. 2002. 12. Industrial ecology and life cycle assessment. A handbook of industrial ecology, p.138.
De Schryver AM, Brakkee KW, Goedkoop MJ, Huijbregts MA. 2009. Characterization factors for global warming in life cycle assessment based on damages to humans and ecosystems.
De Schryver AM, van Zelm R, Humbert S, Pfister S, McKone TE, Huijbregts MA. Value choices in life cycle impact assessment of stressors causing human health damage. J Ind Ecol. 2011;15(5):796–815.
Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). (2022) Greenhouse Gas Reporting: Conversion Factors 2022.
Eisner P, Weisz U, Osen R, Mittermaier S. 2020. Innovative Food Products: New Methods of Preparing Plant-Based Raw Materials Lead to Healthy Alternatives for Conventional Foods and Protein Sources. Biological Transformation, pp.37–62.
Ernstoff A, Tu Q, Faist M, Del Duce A, Mandlebaum S, Dettling J. 2019. Comparing the environmental impacts of meatless and meat-containing meals in the United States. Sustainability, 11(22), p.6235.
Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M. Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability. 2010;2(10):3309–22.
Finnveden G, Potting J. Eutrophication as an impact category: State of the art and research needs. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 1999;4:311–4.
Flint M, Bowles S, Lynn A, Paxman JR. 2023. Novel plant-based meat alternatives: future opportunities and health considerations. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 82(3), pp.370–385.
Frischknecht R, Braunschweig A, Hofstetter P, Suter P. Human health damages due to ionising radiation in life cycle impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2000;20(2):159–89.
Gantner V, Gregić M, Radović Č. 2023, October. Sustainability of a plant-based diet. In Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium, modern trends in livestock production, 4–6 October 2023, Belgrade, Serbia (pp. 8–23). Institute for Animal Husbandry, Belgrade-Zemun, Serbia.
Gerber PJ, Hristov AN, Henderson B, Makkar H, Oh J, Lee C, Meinen R, Montes F, Ott T, Firkins J, Rotz A. Technical options for the mitigation of direct methane and nitrous oxide emissions from livestock: a review. animal. 2013;7(s2):220–34.
Gibbs J, Cappuccio FP. 2022. Plant-based dietary patterns for human and planetary health. Nutrients, 14(8), p.1614.
Google (n.d.) Looker Studio. https://lookerstudio.google.com/u/0/
Guinée JB. Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards. Volume 7. Springer Science & Business Media; 2002.
Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Zamagni A, Masoni P, Buonamici R, Ekvall T, Rydberg T. 2011. Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future.
Hanafiah MM, Xenopoulos MA, Pfister S, Leuven RS, Huijbregts MA. Characterization factors for water consumption and greenhouse gas emissions based on freshwater fish species extinction. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(12):5272–8.
Hauschild MZ, Huijbregts MA. Introducing life cycle impact assessment. Springer Netherlands; 2015. pp. 1–16.
Hauschild MZ. 2018. Introduction to LCA methodology. Life cycle assessment: theory and practice, pp.59–66.
Hauschild MZ, Dreyer LC, Jørgensen A. Assessing social impacts in a life cycle perspective—Lessons learned. CIRP Ann. 2008;57(1):21–4.
Hayashi K, Nakagawa A, Itsubo N, Inaba A. Expanded damage function of stratospheric ozone depletion to cover major endpoints regarding life cycle impact assessment (12 pp). Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2006;11:150–61.
Heijungs R, Huijbregts MA. 2004. A review of approaches to treat uncertainty in LCA.
Heijungs R, Suh S. The computational structure of life cycle assessment. Volume 11. Springer Science & Business Media; 2002.
Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Lankreijer RM, de Haes U, Wegener Sleeswijk HA, Ansems A, Eggels AMM, Van Duin PG, R. and, De Goede HP. 1992. Environmental life cycle assessment of products: guide and backgrounds (part 1). CML, Leiden, pp.1–96.
Heller MC, Keoleian GA, Willett WC. Toward a life cycle-based, diet-level framework for food environmental impact and nutritional quality assessment: a critical review. Environ Sci Technol. 2013;47(22):12632–47.
Helmes RJ, Huijbregts MA, Henderson AD, Jolliet O. Spatially explicit fate factors of phosphorous emissions to freshwater at the global scale. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2012;17:646–54.
Hertwich EG, Gibon T, Bouman EA, Arvesen A, Suh A.
Vega MI, Shi L. 2015. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(20), pp.6277–6282.
Huijbregts MA, Steinmann ZJ, Elshout PM, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, Zijp M, Hollander A, Van Zelm R. ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2017;22:138–47.
Huijbregts MAJ, Zoran JN, Steinmann PMF, Elshout G, Stam F, Verones M, Vieira M, Zijp A, Hollander, Van Zelm R. ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2017;22:138–47.
IEA. (2020), Average CO2 intensity of power generation from coal power plants, 2000–2020, IEA, Paris. Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/average-co2-intensity-of-power-generationfrom-coal-power-plants-2000-2020
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers; 2014.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2014) Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers.
ISO, 14040 E. 2006. Life cycle assessment Principles and framework. In Environmental management.
Joos F, Roth R, Fuglestvedt JS, Peters GP, Enting IG, Von Bloh W, Brovkin V, Burke EJ, Eby M, Edwards NR, Friedrich T. Carbon dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of greenhouse gas metrics: a multi-model analysis. Atmos Chem Phys. 2013;13(5):2793–825.
Jørgensen A, Finkbeiner M, Jørgensen MS, Hauschild MZ. Defining the baseline in social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2010;15:376–84.
Keegan R-JH, Lu Z, Bogusz JM, Williams JE. and Michael F. Holick. Photobiology of vitamin D in mushrooms and its bioavailability in humans. Dermato-endocrinology 5, 1 (2013): 165–76.
Keoleian GA, Heller MC. 2018. Beyond Meat's beyond burger life cycle assessment: a detailed comparison between a plant-based and an animal-based protein source.
Kustar A, Patino-Echeverri D. 2021. A review of environmental life cycle assessments of diets: plantbased solutions are truly sustainable, even in the form of fast foods. Sustainability, 13(17), p.9926.
Laratte B, Guillaume B, Kim J, Birregah B. Modeling cumulative effects in life cycle assessment: The case of fertilizer in wheat production contributing to the global warming potential. Sci Total Environ. 2014;481:588–95.
Laurent A, Weidema BP, Bare J, Liao X, Maia de Souza D, Pizzol M, Sala S, Schreiber H, Thonemann N, Verones F. Methodological review and detailed guidance for the life cycle interpretation phase. J Ind Ecol. 2020;24(5):986–1003.
Leuenberger M, Jungbluth N, Büsser S. 2010, September. Environmental impact of canteen meals: comparison of vegetarian and meat based recipes. In Proceedings of the International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food, Bari, Italy (pp. 22–24).
Li H, Deng Q, Zhang J, Olubunmi Olanipekun A, Lyu S. 2019. Environmental impact assessment of transportation infrastructure in the life cycle: Case study of a fast track transportation project in China. Energies, 12(6), p.1015.
Lloyd SM, Ries R. Characterizing, propagating, and analyzing uncertainty in life-cycle assessment: a survey of quantitative approaches. J Ind Ecol. 2007;11(1):161–79.
Lulovicova A, Bouissou S. 2024. Use of territorial LCA framework for local food systems assessment: Methodological developments and application. Int J Life Cycle Assess, pp.1–17.
Lynch J. Availability of disaggregated greenhouse gas emissions from beef cattle production: A systematic review. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2019;76:69–78.
Margni M, Curran MA. 2012. Life cycle impact assessment. Life cycle assessment handbook: a guide for environmentally sustainable products, pp.67–104.
Margni M, Curran MA. 2012. Life cycle impact assessment. Life cycle assessment handbook: a guide for environmentally sustainable products, pp.67–104.
Martin M, Røyne F, Ekvall T, Moberg Å. 2018. Life cycle sustainability evaluations of bio-based value chains: reviewing the indicators from a Swedish perspective. Sustainability, 10(2), p.547.
McClements DJ, Grossmann L. 2021. A brief review of the science behind the design of healthy and sustainable plant-based foods. NPJ science of food, 5(1), p.17.
Nijdam D, Rood T, Westhoek H. The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food Policy. 2012;37(6):760–70.
Nölle N, Argyropoulos D, Müller J, Biesalski HK. Temperature stability of vitamin D2 and color changes during drying of UVB-treated mushrooms. Drying Technol. 2018;36(3):307–15.
Notarnicola B, Sala S, Anton A, McLaren SJ, Saouter E, Sonesson U. The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: A review of the challenges. J Clean Prod. 2017;140:399–409.
Olin M, Leinonen V, Martikainen S, Mäkinen UV, Oikarinen H, Mikkonen S, Karjalainen P. 2023. Engine preheating under real-world subfreezing conditions provides less than expected benefits to vehicle fuel economy and emission reduction for light-duty vehicles. Applied Energy, 351, p.121805.
Özçelik Z, Özçelik Y, Tunca NY. Life Cycle Impact Assessment Analysis on a Cooling System. Engineering Approaches on Sustainability; 2016. p. 77.
Pfister S, Koehler A, Hellweg S. Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater consumption in LCA. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43(11):4098–104.
Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science. 2018;360(6392):987–92.
Potter HK, Röös E. 2021. Multi-criteria evaluation of plant-based foods–use of environmental footprint and LCA data for consumer guidance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, p.124721.
Prag AA, Henriksen CB. 2020. Transition from animal-based to plant-based food production to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture—the case of Denmark. Sustainability, 12(19), p.8228.
Prata JC, Silva ALP, Duarte AC, Rocha-Santos T. The road to sustainable use and waste management of plastics in Portugal. Volume 16. Frontiers of environmental science & engineering; 2022. pp. 1–16.
Ramirez CA, Patel M, Blok K. How much energy to process one pound of meat? A comparison of energy use and specific energy consumption in the meat industry of four European countries. Energy. 2006;31(12):2047–63.
Rebitzer G, Ekvall T, Frischknecht R, Hunkeler D, Norris G, Rydberg T, Schmidt WP, Suh S, Weidema BP, Pennington DW. Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environ Int. 2004;30(5):701–20.
Rivera XCS, Azapagic A. Life cycle environmental impacts of ready-made meals considering different cuisines and recipes. Sci Total Environ. 2019;660:1168–81.
Robertson GL. Packaging and food and beverage shelf life. The stability and shelf life of food. Woodhead Publishing; 2016. pp. 77–106.
Roy DP, Wulder MA, Loveland TR, Woodcock CE, Allen RG, Anderson MC, Helder D, Irons JR, Johnson DM, Kennedy R, Scambos TA. Landsat-8: Science and product vision for terrestrial global change research. Remote Sens Environ. 2014;145:154–72.
Roy P, Nei D, Orikasa T, Xu Q, Okadome H, Nakamura N, Shiina T. A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. J Food Eng. 2009;90(1):1–10.
Sala S, Reale F, Cristobal-Garcia J, Marelli L, Pant R. 2016. Life cycle assessment for the impact assessment of policies. Life thinking and assessment in the European policies and for evaluating policy options, 28380.
Salehan M, Kim DJ. Predicting the performance of online consumer reviews: A sentiment mining approach to big data analytics. Decis Support Syst. 2016;81:30–40.
Samtiya M, Aluko RE, Dhewa T, Moreno-Rojas JM. 2021. Potential health benefits of plant foodderived bioactive components: An overview. Foods 2021, 10, 839.
Schaltegger S, Burritt RL. Sustainability accounting for companies: Catchphrase or decision support for business leaders? J World Bus. 2010;45(4):375–84.
Shamsudin S, Merikan BD, Herawan S, Ab Razak J. 2018. A study on the use of renewable energy for coconut dehusking. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 150, p. 04006). EDP Sciences.
Sonesson U, Davis J, Hallström E, Woodhouse A. Dietary-dependent nutrient quality indexes as a complementary functional unit in LCA: a feasible option? J Clean Prod. 2019;211:620–7.
Springmann M, Clark M, Mason-D’Croz D, Wiebe K, Bodirsky BL, Lassaletta L, De Vries W, Vermeulen SJ, Herrero M, Carlson KM, Jonell M. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature. 2018;562(7728):519–25.
Statistics Europe (n. d.) Energy consumption by sector, Table 12vk. https://statfin.stat.fi/PxWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__ehk/statfin_ehk_pxt_12vk.px/table/tableViewLay out1/ (Accessed: 25 June 2024).
Takacs B, Stegemann JA, Kalea AZ, Borrion A. 2022. Comparison of environmental impacts of individual meals-Does it really make a difference to choose plant-based meals instead of meat-based ones? Journal of Cleaner Production, 379, p.134782.
Thao TTH, Thanh HT. Exploring consumer opinions on vegetarian food by sentiment analysis method. Ho Chi Minh City open Univ J science-economics Bus Adm. 2023;13(2):69–84.
Toniolo S, Borsoi L, Camana D. Life cycle assessment: methods, limitations, and illustrations. Methods in Sustainability Science. Elsevier; 2021. pp. 105–18.
Tran E, Dale HF, Jensen C, Lied GA. Effects of plant-based diets on weight status: a systematic review. Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity; 2020. pp. 3433–48.
Tyszler HBM, Braconi MVPN, van Rijn NDJ. 2022. Agri-footprint 6 Methodology Report.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Lifecycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program; 2021.
Van Zelm R, Huijbregts MA, Posthuma L, Wintersen A, van de Meent D. Pesticide ecotoxicological effect factors and their uncertainties for freshwater ecosystems. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2009;14:43–51.
Van Zelm, Rosalie P, Preiss T, van Goethem R, Van Dingenen, Huijbregts M. Regionalized life cycle impact assessment of air pollution on the global scale: Damage to human health and vegetation. Atmos Environ. 2016;134:129–37.
Verones F, Hellweg S, Antón A, Azevedo LB, Chaudhary A, Cosme N, Cucurachi S, de Baan L, Dong Y, Fantke P, Golsteijn L. LC-IMPACT: A regionalized life cycle damage assessment method. J Ind Ecol. 2020;24(6):1201–19.
Vidergar P, Perc M, Lukman RK. A survey of the life cycle assessment of food supply chains. J Clean Prod. 2021;286:125506.
Vieira DR, Calmon JL, Coelho FZ. Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to the manufacturing of common and ecological concrete: A review. Constr Build Mater. 2016;124:656–66.
Walichnowska P, Idzikowski A. Assessment and analysis of the environmental impact of the thermo-shrinkable packaging process on the way the packaging machine is powered based on LCA. Manage Syst Prod Eng. 2023;31(3):355–60.
Wang M, Li D, Zang Z, Sun X, Tan H, Si X, Tian J, Teng W, Wang J, Liang Q, Bao Y. 3D food printing: Applications of plant-based materials in extrusion-based food printing. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2022;62(26):7184–98.
Weidema BP, Wesnæs MS. Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators. J Clean Prod. 1996;4(3–4):167–74.
Weidema BP. Consistency check for life cycle assessments. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2019;24:926–34.
Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B, Reinhard J, Moreno-Ruiz E, Weidema B. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2016;21:1218–30.
Wiedmann TO, Lenzen M, Barrett JR. 2009. Companies on the scale: Comparing and benchmarking the sustainability performance of businesses. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 13(3), pp.361383.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO). (2011) WMO Statement on the Status of the Global Climate in 2011.
WRAP. Material Change. The Case for Material Productivity; 2022.
Zamagni A. Life cycle sustainability assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2012;17:373–6.
Zamagni A, Pesonen HL, Swarr T. 2013. From LCA to Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: concept, practice and future directions. The international journal of life cycle assessment, 18, pp.16371641.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Revision requested
30 Sep, 2024
Reviews received at journal
26 Sep, 2024
Reviews received at journal
25 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
18 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
15 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
14 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
12 Sep, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
12 Sep, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
11 Sep, 2024
Submission checks completed at journal
05 Sep, 2024
First submitted to journal
29 Aug, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Circular Economy Initiatives in Food Manufacturing Industry

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Aim of the study

1.3 Thesis structure

2. Conceptual framework

2.1 Plant based ready to eat food

2.2 Shifting from Meat based meals to plant based meals

2.3 Innovation in plant based ready to eat meals

2.4 Climate change and plant based ready to eat foods

2.5 Summary of literature review

3. Methodology

3.1 Goal and scope

3.2 Life cycle inventory analysis (LCI)

3.3 Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)

3.4 Interpretation

3.5 Understanding customer perspective (Sentiment Analysis)

3.5.1 Application of sentiment analysis

3.5.2 Sentiment analysis methodology

3.6 Analysis of data

4. Findings

4.1 Interpretation of the results

4.2 Uncertainties of the results

4.3 Dashboard for visualization

4.4. GWP Impact reduction

4.4.1 General finding and recommendation

4.4.2 GWP increase and contribution of fortified vitamin

4.5 Design thinking (an approach to implement sentiment analysis)

4.5.1 Sentiment analysis methodology

4.5.2 Result and validation

5. Discussion

6. Conclusion

Declarations

Author Contribution

Data Availability

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1