Evaluating Cut Flower Sustainability: An Environmental and Social Life Cycle Framework for Rose Production in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global floriculture industry has expanded significantly, driven by increasing consumer demand and facilitated by international trade agreements. This growth, particularly in the cut flower sector, has shifted production from North America to equatorial regions like Colombia and Ecuador, where favorable climatic conditions and lower production costs prevail. This transition has raised concerns about environmental sustainability and social justice within the industry. This research project explored some of these issues by calculating the carbon footprint of roses grown in North America and comparing the results with case study data from Ecuador. The primary research questions were: 1) What are the environmental and social impacts of rose production in North America? 2) Will the carbon footprint of greenhouse grown roses in California be less than those grown in more northerly climates in North America? 3) Will the carbon footprint of greenhouse grown roses in North America be higher than those grown in Ecuador, based on case study data from South America? 4) Will the environmental and social life cycle data collected for North American farms, when compared with information gathered on South American rose operations, support the commonly held notion that local is more sustainable? 5) Is it possible to create a set of principles that can incorporate environmental and social metrics in a way that offers industry representatives and consumers a means of choosing a sustainable rose? To calculate the carbon footprint of roses grown in North America, I distributed questionnaires to four rose farms that agreed to participate in this study: two from California, one from Minnesota, and one from Ontario, Canada. Data were analyzed according to the recent product footprint category rules for cut flowers established by researchers in the EU. Similar calculations were made based on a data set of a rose farm in Ecuador. The North American results were compared with the calculations from the Ecuadorian data set. Social metrics obtained for the North American farms were also compared with data on minimum and living wages for Ecuador, providing a simple means of examining potential social sustainability for rose workers. The results from this study represent the first known carbon footprint calculations for cut flowers grown in North America. The primary data obtained from North American farms substantiates previous research in other countries that heat and electricity in temperate climates is a significant contributor to CO2e emissions. Heat and electricity accounted for between 68%-99% of kgCO2e emissions per stem across all four North American farms for the cultivation phase of production. By comparison, only 22% of the overall kgCO2e emissions per stem were associate with cultivation for roses grown in Ecuador. Based on environmental and social analyses, this study concludes by advocating for a simple approach to estimating carbon footprint and basic social sustainability by gathering data on environmental and social ‘hotspots’ that can provide meaningful insights into sustainability that should be achievable by flower farmers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".