ArticleJournal of the science of food and agriculture2025
Carbon footprint for farms in the Czech Republic: a benchmark-based assessment.
Article in Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClimate change is a pressing environmental and social challenge that demands effective monitoring of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. One widely adopted approach for this is quantifying the carbon footprint (CF). Given that agriculture is a major contributor to GHG emissions, we have developed a comprehensive framework for CF accounting at the farm level. This framework has been tested on 12 farms in the Czech Republic to assess both data availability and calculation accuracy.
resultsOur study examines how various farm characteristics, such as turnover, land area and number of employees, influence the overall CF and enable meaningful comparisons between farms. We found that absolute farm CFs are significantly influenced by the size effect, making them unsuitable for benchmarking purposes. By contrast, relative farm CFs (per turnover, per area and per employee) are not affected by the size effect, but can be affected by a scale effect. Additionally, we investigated whether a focus on animal husbandry leads to higher relative CFs. By calculating the share of animal husbandry (SoAH) in farm operations, we discovered a significant correlation between SoAH and relative CFs, with the strongest correlation observed for CF per turnover (0.87).
conclusionWe argue that farms with high shares of SoAH are unlikely to reduce their relative CFs to the levels of farms with zero or low SoAH. We therefore propose applying benchmarking to farms with similar SoAH. We also propose that further research should focus on defining and validating relevant reference values, comprising a benchmark set that reflects different farm types. © 2025 The Author(s). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.