| SN: |
6573 |
| Title: |
Comparative Assessment of Environmental, Community and Nutritional Impacts of Consuming Fruit and Vegetables Produced Locally and Overseas, 2004-2008 |
| Alternative title: |
Comparative Merits of Consuming Vegetables Produced Locally and Overseas |
| Persistent identifier: |
10.5255/UKDA-SN-6573-1 |
| Depositor(s): |
Edwards-Jones,G., University of Wales, Bangor. School of the Environment and Natural Resources |
|
Principal investigator(s):
|
Edwards-Jones,G., University of Wales, Bangor. School of the Environment and Natural Resources
|
| Data collector(s): |
Edwards-Jones,G., University of Wales, Bangor. School of the Environment and Natural Resources
|
| Sponsor(s): |
Economic and Social Research Council
Natural Environment Research Council
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
|
| Grant number: |
RES-224-25-0044 |
Consumer behaviour - Economics
Environmental and conservation issues - Environment, conservation and land use
Nutrition - Health
Rural life - Society and culture
Social attitudes and behaviour - Society and culture
This is a mixed method data collection. The study is part of the Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) programme.
This research tried to answer the question ' Which is best: to produce vegetables in the UK, or to import produce from overseas?'. This research answered this question by comparing a range of characteristics of vegetables produced in UK, Spain, Uganda and Kenya. The research team considered a range of issues related to the environment, economy, consumer perception, nutrition and community. From an environmental perspective the research team considered whether fewer greenhouse gases were released from producing food in the UK, or by importing it from overseas. This required them to measure gases released from vegetable fields in the four countries and estimate the gases released during transport from field to final consumer. The research team also considered the nutritional value of fresh imported food, compared with UK produced food which was stored for several months prior to consumption. The research team considered the social and economic advantages of home and overseas produced food, by undertaking a large survey of consumers, and also by working in a more detailed way with three rural case study communities. Finally the research team brought all the results together in one case study site and sought to identify the overall advantages and disadvantages of the home and overseas produced fruit and vegetables.
The life cycle assessment data were withheld due to their disclosive nature (farm management details).
Ecological data from this study are available at the Environmental Information Data Centre of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.
Further information and documentation for this study may be found through the RELU Knowledge Portal: Comparative merits of consuming vegetables produced locally and overseas.
|
Main Topics:
Vegetables, local food, imported food, nutrition, consumer, life cycle assessment, socio-economics, greenhouse gas emission, and carbon footprint.
|
|
Time period:
|
01 January 2004 - 01 December 2008 |
|
Dates of fieldwork:
|
January 2004, December 2008 |
|
Country:
|
Kenya
Spain
Uganda
United Kingdom
|
|
Geography:
|
Bristol
Hull
Liverpool
Anglesey
Herefordshire
Lincolnshire
Worcestershire
|
|
Spatial units:
|
No spatial unit
|
|
Observation units:
|
Individuals
Other
Geographic Units
|
|
Kind of data:
|
Textual
Image
Numeric
|
|
Universe:
|
Cross-national; Subnational
1. Sociology interviews: ordinary consumers, and key agents of the local food sector in Anglesey, Hereford, Worcester and Lincolnshire. 2. Economic survey: mothers under 60 years old and not retired living in urban areas (Bristol, Hull, Liverpool), responsible mainly or jointly for household grocery shopping, with at least one child under 16 living in the same household. 3. Plant biochemistry: vegetables produced in the UK, Spain and Africa.
|
|
Time dimensions:
|
Cross-sectional (one-time) study
|
|
Sampling procedures:
|
Simple random sample; Purposive selection/case studies
|
|
Number of units:
|
1. Sociology interviews: 50 interviews with ordinary consumers, 7 focus group interviews with 41 consumers, 14 interviews with key agents of the local food sector. 2. Economic survey: 1200 mothers under 60 years old and not retired, responsible mainly or jointly for household grocery shopping, with at least one child under 16 living in same household. 3. Plant biochemistry: 248 samples of metabolite extracts from vegetables. 4. Life cycle assessment: crops on 20 farms.
|
|
Method of data collection:
|
Face-to-face interview; Physical measurements; Focus group
|
|
Weighting:
|
No weighting used
|
Publications may be found via the RELU Knowledge Portal: Comparative merits of consuming vegetables produced locally and overseas.
Bauer, C., Dubreuil,A., and Gaillard,G., (2007)'Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment with LCA', International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12(1), pp. 2-4
Cross, P., Edwards,R., Hounsome,B., and Edwards-Jones,G. (2008) 'Comparative assessment of migrant farm worker health in conventional and organic horticultural systems in the United Kingdom', Journal of Science of the Total Environment, 391(1), pp. 55-65
Edwards-Jones, G. and Cross,P. (2006) 'Variation in pesticide hazard from arable crop production in Great Britain from 1992 to 2002 : pesticide risk indices and policy analysis', Journal of Crop Protection, 25(10), pp. 1101-1108
Edwards-Jones, G. and Cross,P. (2006) 'Variation in pesticide hazard from vegetable production in Great Britain from 1991 to 2003', Journal of Pest Management Science, 62(11), pp. 1058-1064
Hounsome N., Grail B., Tomos D., Hounsome B. and Edwards-Jones G. (2009) 'High-throughput antioxidant profiling in vegetables by Fourier-Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance mass spectrometry'. In: R.D. Hancock (eds) Antioxidant Properties of Crops II. Functional Plant Science and Biotechnology, 4 (Special Issue 1), pp.1-10.
Hounsome N., Hounsome .B, Tomos D. and Edwards-Jones G. (2009) 'Changes in antioxidant compounds in white cabbage during winter storage', Postharvest Biology and Technology, 52(2), pp.173-179
