Organizational Life Cycle Assessment of a wildlife park in northern Germany

Abstract Purpose Organizational Life Cycle Assessment (O-LCA) quantifies environmental impacts and identifies key environmental hotspots within a company’s value chain. Assessment of environmental impacts from animals has been carried out for livestock production, pet keeping, and hunting. One not yet considered application relates to touristic activities that involve animal husbandry, such as zoos or animal parks. Thus, the aim of this paper is to conduct the first O-LCA for a wildlife park and identify related hotspots. Method O-LCA was applied in the context of a wildlife park in northern Germany from a cradle-to-gate perspective for the reference period of 2022 considering the impact categories climate change (GWP), acidification (AP), eutrophication (EP), and photochemical ozone formation (POCP). The number of visitors (437,049 people) and animals of 16 different animal groups (787 animals of more than 100 species (e.g., wolves and birds)) was set as reference flow as the organizations’ activities are focused on tourism and animal species conservation. Information on animal feed, litter, suppliers, and transportation was derived from the animal care department's data, complemented by interviews with park experts and analysis of relevant documents and invoices. Results and discussion The organization had emissions of around 3,176 t CO 2 -eq. (GWP), 15 t SO 2 -eq. (AP), 6.5 t PO 4 3- eq. (EP), and 7.2 t NO X -eq. (POCP) in 2022. Transportation of visitors being the main hotspot across all impact categories (e.g., 57.5% of GWP). Methane from ruminant respiration additionally accounts for 16 t CO 2 -eq. (0.5% of total GWP). For AP and EP, feed and food for Animal Care show high impacts with 23–27%, respectively. The lowest impacts show Electricity & Heat and End of Life of waste generated on site with around 1–8%. Carrying out a sensitivity analysis for the main hotspot transportation of visitors shows a 40% potential reduction for GWP, when visitors from Hamburg (90%) would use public transport exclusively. Conclusion This paper is the first to apply O-LCA to a wildlife park, identifying environmental hotspots and filling a gap in the assessment of tourism-related impacts on animals. This study pioneers the application of O-LCA to wildlife parks, identifying environmental hotspots in a tourism context. By analyzing multiple impact categories and park operations, we have gained a comprehensive understanding of the environmental footprint of wildlife parks.