This document analyzes the environmental and economic impacts of local agricultural production compared to imports for various crops in Israel using life cycle assessment. The study finds that: - For apples and onions, local production has lower environmental impacts than imports. However, for almonds and potatoes, imports have lower impacts than local production which relies heavily on chemicals. - The main environmental damages for both local production and imports are impacts on human health from inorganic chemicals and climate change, as well as depletion of natural resources. - An economic analysis finds that local production has a higher economic value than imports for some crops like pears and almonds when considering profits, scenic value, and avoided environmental impacts of imports. -

1. Economic Evaluation of Local and
Global Ecological Services-
for Various Agricultural Branches
Prof. Nava Haruvy
Sarit Shalhevet
navaharu@netvision.net.il
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

2. Background
 There is an increase in the awareness of environmental
issues.
 Agriculture makes an important contribution to the
environment through landscape conservation.
 But agriculture also uses chemicals – fertilizers and
pesticides – with negative environmental impacts.
 However, local agricultural production substitutes imported
produce, thereby reducing the environmental impacts
caused by transporting produce, through energy and
vehicle usage.
Background
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

3. Goal
 To analyze the environmental impacts of local agricultural
production compared to the alternative of imports.
 We ask: In which crops does the local production reduce
the environmental impacts caused by food imports?
The selected crops are
Crops with high import volume in Israel:
Apples, pears, almonds, walnuts, onions, potatoes, garlic
and chickpeas.
The method
Life Cycle Assessment.
Goal
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

4. Life Cycle Assessment
A method for evaluation environmental impacts along
the entire life cycle – starting from the stage of
obtaining the raw materials, through the stages of
production, packing, product usage, and until the end-
of-life (disposal) stage.
The analysis involves collecting data on the use of
materials, energy, and the waste created in each
stage of the product life cycle.
The environmental impact was examined for each
environmental component separately, and for the
weighted total environmental impact.
LCA
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

5. 1. Human Health
 Carcinogens.
 Organic chemicals.
 Inorganic chemicals.
 The ozone layer.
 Global climate change.
2. Ecosystems
 Eco-toxicity.
 Acidification.
 Land use.
Specific Categories
3. Natural resources
 Non-renewable minerals.
General Categories
1. Human health.
2. Ecosystems.
3. Natural resources.
Categories
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

6. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
 Human Health
Decrease in life expectancy: DALY -Disability Adjusted
Life Years.
 Ecosystems
Percent of potentially disappearing species in
different regions (multiplied by the region size and
the damage time span).
 Natural resources
Additional energy needed for obtaining these
materials in the future.
Evaluation
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

7. Calculating the Environmental Impact
 Local production– use of chemicals.
 Local production- use of water resources.
 Imports- use of transportation.
Calculation
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

8. Calculating the Environmental Impact of Local
Production (detailed)
 Use of chemicals (fertilizers and pesticides)
o Data on the use of fertilizers and pesticides was taken
from the extension service crop budgets.
o The average damage was calculated for the total
quantity (without division into specific types).
 Use of water resources
o We assumed that it will be necessary to desalinate all
the water for agricultural use.
o The damage was calculated based on the amount of
energy needed for water desalination using the
reverse osmosis technology.
It was found that the environmental impact of potential water
desalination is much lower than the use of chemicals.
Local production
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

9. Calculating the Environmental Impacts of Imports
• The environmental damage from imports is caused by
the impact of the use of vehicles (airplane, ship, truck),
and the energy required for transportation.
• The weighted distance that the product travels from its
production area to the Tel Aviv wholesale market was
calculated as “food miles”.
• It was based on the distance from each exporting
country, multiplied by the relative share of that country
in the imports to Israel.
Imports
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

10. Environmental Impact for each crop by specific category
(weighted impact in points)- Local production (chemicals)
Resourc
es
EcosystemsHuman health
Non-
renewabl
e
minerals
Land
use
Acidific
ation
Eco-
toxicity
Ozone
layer
Radi
ation
Global
climate
change
Inorga
nic
chemic
als
Organ
ic
chemi
cals
Carci
nogen
s
Crop
0.1310.4600.2110.0140.028X0.9142.7000.0240.027
Apples
0.2520.9870.3450.0310.060X1.7304.9100.0490.056
Pears
1.5303.9203.3600.1270.247X11.20035.7000.2510.277
Almonds
0.1220.2740.2930.0090.018X0.9072.9700.0190.021
Onions
0.2180.6500.4220.0210.040X1.5604.8200.0380.042
Potatoes
In local production- the main environmental damages by specific
category are caused by: human health- inorganic emissions and global
climate change, and by natural resource depletion.
Local production- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

11. Environmental Impact for each crop by specific category
(weighted impact in points)- Imports
Resour
ces
EcosystemsHuman health
Non-
renewab
le
minerals
Land
use
Acidific
ation
Eco-
toxicit
y
Ozone
layer
Radia
tion
Global
climate
change
Inorgani
c
chemica
ls
Organi
c
chemic
als
Carcin
ogens
Crop
5.4701.0800.9420.2190.0150.0053.5308.0200.0720.509Apples
4.6500.9300.5740.1830.0130.0042.6405.6000.0600.425Pears
5.5401.1100.6840.2180.0160.0053.1506.6700.0710.506Almonds
1.7700.3490.3050.0710.0050.0021.1402.6000.0230.165Onion
1.8900.3720.3260.0760.0050.0021.2202.7700.0250.176
Potatoes
Also in imports- the main environmental damages by specific category are
caused from: human health- inorganic emissions and global climate
change, and natural resource depletion.
Imports- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

12. Weighted environmental impact for each crop - by general
categories
TotalResourcesEcosystemsHuman
health
Crop
4.5070.1310.6863.690ApplesChemicals
8.4220.2521.3606.810Pears
56.5301.5307.40047.600Almonds
4.60.1220.5763.930Onions
7.7980.2181.0906.490Potatoes
19.8105.4702.24012.100ApplesImports
15.0804.6501.6908.740Pears
17.9505.5402.01010.400Almonds
6.4351.7700.7253.940Onions
6.8641.8900.7744.200Potatoes
•The main damage in local production and import is affecting human health.
•The environmental impact is higher for imports - apples, pears and onions.
•The environmental impact is higher for chemicals- almonds and potatoes.
Local production & imports- General categories
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

13. Figure 1: Environmental Impact of Imports
The crops are shown from left to right in ascending
order of environmental damage
Imports- Environmental damage
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

14. Figure 2: Environmental Impact of Chemicals
The crops are shown from left to right in
ascending order of environmental damage
Local production- Environmental damage
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

15. Figure A: Apples – Cumulative environmental impacts - by
specific category
Detailed Analysis by Crop - Apples
In apples- the environmental damage from imports is almost 4 times higher
than the damage from local production – mainly inorganic chemicals,
minerals and climate change.
Apples- Cumulative- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

16. Figure B: Apples – Cumulative environmental impacts -
by general category
In apples:
•The environmental damage from imports- is mainly human health,
resources and ecosystems.
•The environmental damage from chemicals- is mainly human health, and
ecosystems.
Apples- Cumulative- General category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

17. Figure C: Apples – Environmental impacts – Comparison by
specific category
In apples- the environmental damage from imports is higher in
every specific category (including climate change).
Apples- Comparison- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

18. Figure D: Apples – Environmental impacts – Comparison by
general category
In apples- the environmental damage from imports is higher than chemicals in
every general category.
Therefore, from the viewpoint of the impact on the environment, it is
better to grow apples locally than to import them.
Apples- Cumulative- General category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

19. Apples- Emissions with the main impact on global climate change
Chemical emittedProduction
process:
fertilizers &
pesticides
Production
process:
Desalination
Process:
Imports
Total1.37E-0051.11E-0075.30E-005
Carbon dioxide1.14E-005x3.33E-005
Carbon dioxide, fossilX1.08E-0071.67E-005
Methane1.80E-006x1.39E-006
Di-nitrogen monoxide3.36E-0071.15E-0091.16E-006
Methane, fossilX2.64E-0092.51E-007
Carbon monoxide2.28E-007x1.50E-007
Carbon dioxide, biogenicX9.39E-0094.23E-008
The main factor affecting global climate change is carbon dioxide
Inventory Analysis
Apples- Inventory analysis
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

20. Figure A: Almonds – Cumulative environmental impacts -
by specific category
In almonds- the environmental damage from local production is about 3 times higher
than the damage from imports – mainly inorganic chemicals and climate change.
Detailed Analysis by Crop - Almonds
Almonds- Cumulative- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

21. Figure B: Almonds – Cumulative environmental impacts -
by general category
In almonds:
•The environmental damage from imports- is mainly human health, resources and
ecosystems.
•The environmental damage from chemicals- is mainly human health, and
ecosystems.
Almonds- cumulative- General category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

22. Figure C: Almonds – Environmental impacts – Comparison
by specific category
In almonds :
•The environmental damage from local production is higher in the
categories of: inorganic chemicals and climate change,
•The impact of imports is higher in the category of non-renewable mineral
resource use.
Almonds- Comparison- Specific category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

23. Figure D: Almonds – Environmental impacts – Comparison
by general category
In almonds- the environmental damage from chemicals is higher than imports in
every general category.
Hence, from the viewpoint of the impact on the environment, it is better to
import almonds than to grow them locally.
Almonds- Cumulative- General category
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

24. Calculation of the Economic Value
Positive impacts in local production
Calculated by value of agricultural scenery and profits
for the farmers.
o Estimation of the farmers’ income (extension service
budgets).
o Estimation of the value of agricultural scenery
(willingness-to-pay surveys).
Economic value- Positive impacts
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

25. Calculation of the Economic Value- continued
Negative impacts in local production and in imports
Value calculated for human health damages by
o Decrease in life expectancy- DALY (Disability Adjusted
Life Years),
o Income per person
o Exposure ratio (impact on the entire population of the
country).
We assumed that only about 0.1% of the people that live in
rural areas (which is 8.3% of the total country
population), is exposed to most of the environmental
impacts of crop production.
Economic value- Negative impacts
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

26. The economic value per capita of the crops’ environmental
impacts (NIS/year per ton of produce)
Human health (negative impact)
Scenic value
(positive
impact)*
Water
desalination
Chemicals in
crop
productionImportsCrop
1.390.011.705.59Apples
1.790.013.144.04Pears
34.840.2022.004.80Almonds
0.930.011.821.82Onions
1.120.013.001.94Potatoes
* The value of scenery per hectare of production is in similar order of magnitude
for all the crops, and the large gaps in the value of the scenery per ton of produce
are caused by the large variation in yield per hectare between crops.
Economic value- per capita
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

27. Profits
for
farmers
Value of the
agricultural
scenery
Negative
environmental
impacts of
local
production
Negative
environmental
impacts of
importCrop
5443791,0043,276Apples
1,6584881,8492,364Pears
9,8189,48713,0072,813Almonds
382601,0681,066Onions
2293121,7621,136Potatoes
The economic value for the entire population of Israel of the
crops’ environmental Impacts (NIS/year per ton of produce)
Economic value- total population
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

28. Calculation of the economic value under varying
assumptions (NIS/year per ton of produce)
3) Local production
from the global
perspective:
2) Local production
(including import
prevention)
1) Local production
Crop
4,2003,196-81Apples
4,5102,661297Pears
22,1189,1116,298Almonds
1,364296-770Onions
1,678-85-1,221Potatoes
Definitions
1) Local production:
Profit + Scenery – Environmental impacts of local production.
2) Local production including import prevention:
Profit + Scenery – Environmental impacts of local production + Environmental
Impacts of imports.
3) Local production from the global perspective:
Profit + Scenery + Environmental Impacts of imports (Without the environmental
impacts of local production)
Economic value- varying assumptions
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

29. Calculation of the economic value under varying
assumptions (NIS/year per ton of produce)
3) Local
production from
the global
perspective:
2) Local
production
(including
import
prevention)
1) Local
production:Crop
4,2003,196-81Apples
4,5102,661297Pears
22,1189,1116,298Almonds
1,364296-770Onions
1,678-85-1,221Potatoes
Conclusions
•The economic value of local production (without accounting for the prevention of
imports) is high for pears and almonds, and low for apples, onions and potatoes.
•When the environmental damage of imports is taken into account, it is better to grow
locally all the crops in the list, except for potatoes.
•From the global perspective, local production is preferred.
Economic value- varying assumptions- conclusions
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

30. Summary
 The main damage from local production and
imports, is damage to human health
 In the category of impact on human health – the
value of inorganic chemicals (respiratory damage)
is the highest, followed by the impact on climate
change.
 The main impacts on the environment by specific
category –are inorganic chemicals emissions,
global climate change, and use of non-renewable
minerals.
 The environmental damage of water desalination is
relative low, and does not in itself justify imports.
 According to inventory analysis – carbon dioxide
emissions have the greatest impact on global
climate change.
Summary
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

31. Conclusions
From environmental view-point
 The environmental damage from imports is higher -
for apples, pears and onions, which it is better to
grow locally.
 The environmental damage of local production is
higher –for almonds and potatoes, which it is better
to import.
Conclusions- environmental
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress

32. Conclusions- continued
Regarding also economic value
 The economic value of local production (without
accounting for the prevention of imports) is high for
pears and almonds, and low for apples, onions and
potatoes.
 When the environmental damage of imports is taken
into account, it is better to grow locally all the crops
in the list, except for potatoes.
Conclusions- economic
Prof. Nava Haruvy, Local Economy Congress