Please wait a minute...
Journal of Integrative Agriculture
Advanced Online Publication | Current Issue | Archive | Adv Search
Assessing the impact of global soybean trade on reducing greenhouse gas emissions

Yujia Yi, Liu Lv, Yangfen Chen#

Institute of Agricultural Economics and Development, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences

Download:  PDF in ScienceDirect  
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  Large-scale global soybean trade raises concerns about emissions and transfers of greenhouse gas (GHG) while meeting the demand of importing countries. In this study, we calculate GHG emissions embodied in global soybean trade from 2001 to 2022 by using life cycle assessment (LCA), and assess the impact of global soybean trade on reducing GHG emissions by employing counterfactual analysis. The results show that the expansion of international soybean consumption has driven a more than threefold increase in the GHG emissions. Due to large differences in emission factors from cultivation and relevant land-use change (LUC) across countries, global soybean trade has contributed to a reduction of 272.79 Mt CO2-eq in global GHG emissions in 2022 compared to the scenario of no trade. Since 2017, the GHG reduction contribution of global soybean trade presents an alarming trend of fluctuating or even deterioration influenced by factors such as geopolitical competition. Importing countries, represented by China, and exporting countries, represented by Brazil, have contributed to reduce GHG emissions by respectively mitigating domestic GHG emissions from agriculture and producing low-carbon products with comparative advantages. The study provides new evidence for the role of globalization in reducing GHG emissions. Additionally, it deepens the study and understanding of the environmental impact of agricultural trade by incorporating LUC emissions and assessing the overall impact.
Keywords:  soybean trade       agricultural trade              reduction of greenhouse gas emissions              global climate change       life cycle assessment              counterfactual analysis  
Online: 18 February 2026  
Fund: 

The research is funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (72073129), the National Social Science Foundation of China (21&ZD093), and the Science and Technology Innovation Project of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS-CSAERD-202402; 10-IAED-RC-09-2025; 10-IAED-05-2024).

Cite this article: 

Yujia Yi, Liu Lv, Yangfen Chen. 2026. Assessing the impact of global soybean trade on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, Doi:10.1016/j.jia.2026.02.034

[1] Adom F, Maes A, Workman C, Clayton-Nierderman Z, Thoma G, Shonnard D. 2012. Regional carbon footprint analysis of dairy feeds for milk production in the USA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17, 520-534.

[2] Ali T, Huang J, Wang J, Xie W. 2017. Global footprints of water and land resources through China's food trade. Global food security, 12, 139-145.

[3] Arrieta E M, Cuchietti A, Cabrol D, Gonzalez A D. 2018. Greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiencies for soybeans and maize cultivated in different agronomic zones: A case study of Argentina. Science of the Total Environment, 625, 199-208.

[4] Austin K G, Heilmayr R, Benedict J J, Burns D N, Eggen M, Grantham H, Greenbury A, Hill J K, Jenkins C N, Luskin M S, Manurung T, Rasmussen L V, Rosoman G, Rudorff B, Satar M, Smith C, Carlson K M. 2021. Mapping and monitoring zero-deforestation commitments. BioScience, 71(10), 1079-1090.

[5] Bhatti U A, Bhatti M A, Tang H, Syam M S, Awwad E M, Sharaf M, Ghadi Y Y. 2024. Global production patterns: Understanding the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions, agriculture greening and climate variability. Environmental Research, 245, 118049.

[6] Buratti C, Barbanera M, Fantozzi F. 2012. A comparison of the European renewable energy directive default emission values with actual values from operating biodiesel facilities for sunflower, rape and soya oil seeds in Italy. Biomass and bioenergy, 47, 26-36.

[7] Chen W, Hong J, Li Z, Wang Y, Zhang T, Geng Y. 2024. Spatio-temporal evolution of carbon emission efficiency and influencing factors of Chinas soybean production from 2011 to 2020. China Population Resources and Environment, 34(02), 70-80.

[8] Chen Y, Wang S, Lu S. 2022. The impact of agricultural products trade on agricultural carbon emissions-The threshold effect of digital rural development. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition) , 6, 45-57.

[9] Chen Z Y, Zhao L T, Cheng L, Qiu R X. 2025. How does China respond to the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism? An approach of global trade analysis. Energy Policy, 198, 114486.

[10] Dalin C, Konar M, Hanasaki N, Rinaldo A, Rodriguez-Iturbe I. 2012. Evolution of the global virtual water trade network. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 109(16), 5989-5994.

[11] De Boer H C, Van Krimpen M M, Blonk H, Tyszler M. 2014. Replacement of soybean meal in compound feed by European protein sources: effects on carbon footprint, 819, Wageningen UR Livestock Research.

[12] Dyer J A, Vergé X P C, Desjardins R L, Worth D E, McConkey B G. 2010. The impact of increased biodiesel production on the greenhouse gas emissions from field crops in Canada. Energy for Sustainable Development, 14(2), 73-82.

[13] Eliasson K, West C D, Croft S A, Green J M. 2023. A spatially explicit approach to assessing commodity-driven fertilizer use and its impact on biodiversity. Journal of Cleaner Production, 382, 135195.

[14] Escobar N, Tizado E J, zu Ermgassen E K, Löfgren P, Börner J, Godar J. 2020. Spatially-explicit footprints of agricultural commodities: Mapping carbon emissions embodied in Brazils soy exports. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102067.

[15] Flynn H C, Canals L M I, Keller E, King H, Sim S, Hastings A, Wang S, Smith P. 2012. Quantifying global greenhouse gas emissions from land-use change for crop production. Global Change Biology, 18(5), 1622-1635.

[16] Fonjong L, Zama R N. 2023. Climate change, water availability, and the burden of rural womens triple role in Muyuka, Cameroon. Global Environmental Change, 82, 102709.

[17] Fragalli A, González A, Panhoca L. 2017. Energy and carbon life cycle inventory of a conventional agricultural production in Paraná-Brazi. Brazil. R. Paranaense Desenv., 38, 43-54.

[18] Giusti G, Galo N R, Pereira R P T, Silva D A L, Filimonau V. 2023. Assessing the impact of drought on carbon footprint of soybean production from the life cycle perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 425, 138843.

[19] Green J M, Croft S A, Durán A P, Balmford A P, Burgess N D, Fick S, Gardner T A, Godar J, Suavet C, Virah-Sawmy M, Young L E. 2019. Linking global drivers of agricultural trade to on-the-ground impacts on biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(46), 23202-23208.

[20] Gross A, Bromm T, Polifka S, Schierhorn F. 2022. The carbon footprint of milk during the conversion from conventional to organic production on a dairy farm in central Germany. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 42(3), 37.

[21] Gu W, Wang F, Siebert S, Kummu M, Wang X, Hong C, Zhou F, Zhu Q, Liu Y, Qin Y. 2024. The asymmetric impacts of international agricultural trade on water use scarcity, inequality and inequity. Nature Water2(4), 324-336.

[22] Haq M E. 2014. Carbon Footprint of Selected Cereal and Legume Crops Cultivated in the Old Brahmaputra Floodplain Soil. Bangladesh: Bangladesh Agricultural University.

[23] He R, Zhu D, Chen X, Cao Y, Chen Y, Wang X. 2019. How the trade barrier changes environmental costs of agricultural production: An implication derived from Chinas demand for soybean caused by the US-China trade war. Journal of Cleaner Production, 227, 578-588.

[24] Huang G, Yao G, Zhao J, Lisk M D, Yu C. 2019. Zhang, X. The environmental and socioeconomic trade-offs of importing crops to meet domestic food demand in China. Environmental Research Letters, 14(9), 094021.

[25] Huang X M, Chen C Q, Chen M Z, Song Z W, Deng A X, Zhang J, Zheng C Y, Zhang W J. 2016. Carbon footprints of major staple grain crops production in three provinces of Northeast China during 2004-2013. The Journal of Applied Ecology, 27(10), 3307-3315.

[26] IPCC. 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment. Cambridge University Press.

[27] IPCC. 2022. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. In: Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press.

[28] IPCC. 2023. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. In: Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 35-115.

[29] Jungbluth N, Frischknecht R. 2007. Life cycle assessment of imported agricultural products e impacts due to deforestation and burning of residues. In 5th International Conference: LCA in Foods Gothenburg.

[30] Lam W Y, Sim S, Kulak M, van Zelm R, Schipper A M, Huijbregts M A. 2021. Drivers of variability in greenhouse gas footprints of crop production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 315, 128121.

[31] Lamnatou C, Ezcurra-Ciaurriz X, Chemisana D, Plà-Aragonés L M. 2016. Environmental assessment of a pork-production system in North-East of Spain focusing on life-cycle swine nutrition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 105-115.

[32] Lathuillière M J, Johnson M S, Galford G L, Couto E G. 2014. Environmental footprints show China and Europes evolving resource appropriation for soybean production in Mato Grosso, Brazil. Environmental Research Letters, 9(7), 074001.

[33] Li Y, Yi F, Yuan C. 2023. Influences of large-scale farming on carbon emissions from cropping: Evidence from China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 22(10), 3209-3219.

[34] Liu X, Yu L, Cai W, Ding Q, Hu W, Peng D, Li W, Zhou Z, Huang X, Yu C, Gong P. 2021. The land footprint of the global food trade: Perspectives from a case study of soybeans. Land Use Policy, 111, 105764.

[35] Luo L, Xing Z, Chu B, Zhang H, Wang H. 2024. Virtual land trade and associated risks to food security in China. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 106, 107461.

[36] Lun F, Sardans J, Sun D, Xiao X, Liu M, Li Z, Wang C, Hu Q, Tang J, Ciais P, Janssens I A. 2021. Influences of international agricultural trade on the global phosphorus cycle and its associated issues. Global Environmental Change, 69, 102282.

[37] Maciel, V G, Zortea R B, Grillo I B, Ugaya C M L, Einloft S, Seferin M. 2016. Greenhouse gases assessment of soybean cultivation steps in southern Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 747-753.

[38] Masuda, K. 2023. Combined Application of a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm and Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices in Japanese Rice Farms. Sustainability, 15(13), 10059.

[39] Mempel F, Corbera E. 2021. Framing the frontierTracing issues related to soybean expansion in transnational public spheres. Global Environmental Change, 69, 102308.

[40] Mohammadi A, Rafiee S, Jafari A, Dalgaard T, Knudsen M T, Keyhani A, Mousavi-Avval S H, Hermansen J E. 2013. Potential greenhouse gas emission reductions in soybean farming: a combined use of life cycle assessment and data envelopment analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 54, 89-100.

[41] Molotoks A, Green J, Ribeiro V, Wang Y, West C. 2023. Assessing the value of biodiversityspecific footprinting metrics linked to South American soy trade. People and Nature.

[42] Niu K, Guo H, Liu J. 2023. Can food security and low carbon be achieved simultaneously? -An empirical analysis of the mechanisms influencing the carbon footprint of potato and corn cultivation in irrigation areas. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 22(4), 1230-1243.

[43] Oliveira G M, Ziegert R F, Pacheco A, Berning L, Sotirov M, Dürr J, Braun D, Nunes F S M, Soares-Filho B S, Börner J. 2024. Blind spots in the EUs Regulation on Deforestation-free products. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 8(8), 1382-1383.

[44] Özilgen M, Sorgüven E. 2011. Energy and exergy utilization, and carbon dioxide emission in vegetable oil production. Energy, 36(10), 5954-5967.

[45] Patthanaissaranukool W, Polprasert C. 2016. Reducing carbon emissions from soybean cultivation to oil production in Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 170-178.

[46] Qi Y, Li H M, Xu M. 2008. Accounting embodied carbon in import and export in China. China Population, Resources and Environment, 18(3), 8-13.

[47] Raucci G S, Moreira C S, Alves P A, Mello F F, de Almeida Frazão L, Cerri C E P, Cerri C C. 2015. Greenhouse gas assessment of Brazilian soybean production: a case study of Mato Grosso State. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 418-425.

[48] Romeiko X X, Lee E K. Sorunmu Y, Zhang X. 2020. Spatially and temporally explicit life cycle environmental impacts of soybean production in the US Midwest. Environmental Science and Technology, 54(8), 4758-4768.

[49] SaberiKamarposhti M, Why N K, Yadollahi M, Kamyab H, Cheng J, Khorami M. 2024. Cultivating a sustainable future in the artificial intelligence era: A comprehensive assessment of greenhouse gas emissions and removals in agriculture. Environmental Research, 118528.

[50] Sauer S. 2018. Soy expansion into the agricultural frontiers of the Brazilian Amazon: The agribusiness economy and its social and environmental conflicts. Land use policy, 79, 326-338.

[51] Shakoor A, Zaib G, Ming X. 2025. Tracing the contribution of cattle farms to methane emissions through bibliometric analyses. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 24(4), 1220-1233.

[52] Sun J, Yang L, Wang X, Lun F, Lu M, Sun X, Yang P, Wu W, Liu J. 2024. Workable solutions for sustainably feeding the Chinese population. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 205, 107530.

[53] Sun J, Mooney H, Wu W, Tang H, Tong Y, Xu Z, Huang B, Cheng Y, Yang X, Wei D, Zhang F. 2018. Importing food damages domestic environment: Evidence from global soybean trade. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(21), 5415-5419.

[54] Tilman D, Clark M. 2014. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515(7528), 518-522.

[55] Wang W, Chen Y, Pei X. 2024. Can agricultural trade openness facilitate agricultural carbon reduction? Evidence from Chinese provincial data. Journal of Cleaner Production, 441, 140877.

[56] Wiloso E I, Sinke P, Muryanto, Setiawan A A R, Sari A A, Waluyo J, Putri A M H, Guinée J. 2019. Hotspot identification in the Indonesian tempeh supply chain using life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 24, 1948-1961.

[57] Wu Y, Mao X, Lu J, Wang M, Zhang Q, Song P, Liu Z, Gong W. 2022. Dairy Trade Helps to Alleviate Global Carbon Emission Pressure. Environmental Science and Technology, 56(17), 12656-12666.

[58] Xiong X Z, Han Z, Sun Y.M, Yang C. 2023. Study of Chinas animal products import pattern and its resource and environmental effects. Journal of Natural Resources, 38(5), 1378-1392.

[59] Yao G, Hertel T W, Taheripour F. 2018. Economic drivers of telecoupling and terrestrial carbon fluxes in the global soybean complex. Global Environmental Change, 50, 190-200.

[60] Zhao H, Chang J, Havlík P, van Dijk M, Valin H, Janssens C, Ma L, Bai Z, Herrero M, Smith P, Obersteiner M. 2021. Chinas future food demand and its implications for trade and environment. Nature Sustainability, 4(12), 1042-1051.

[1] Yajie Gao, Song Wang, Anqi Di, Chao Hai, Di Wu, Zhenting Hao, Lige Bu, Xuefei Liu, Chunling Bai, Guanghua Su, Lishuang Song, Zhuying Wei, Zhonghua Liu, Lei Yang, Guangpeng Li. Myostatin promotes proliferation of bovine muscle satellite cells through activating TRPC4/Ca2+/calcineurin/NFATc3 pathway[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1125-1136.
[2] Jie Shuai, Qiang Tu, Yicong Zhang, Xiaobo Xia, Yuhua Wang, Shulin Cao, Yifan Dong, Xinli Zhou, Xu Zhang, Zhengguang Zhang, Yi He, Gang Li. Silence of five Fusarium graminearum genes in wheat host confers resistance to Fusarium head blight[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1051-1063.
[3] Shuangxi Zhang, Xinlin Wei, Rongbo Wang, Hejing Shen, Hehuan You, Langjun Cui, Yi Qiang, Peiqing Liu, Meixiang Zhang, Yuyan An. Nicotinamide mononucleotide confers broad-spectrum disease resistance in plants[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1064-1073.
[4] Cong Huang, Min Zheng, Yizhong Huang, Liping Cai, Xiaoxiao Zou, Tianxiong Yao, Xinke Xie, Bin Yang, Shijun Xiao, Junwu Ma, Lusheng Huang. Unraveling genetic underpinnings of purine content in pork[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1099-1113.
[5] Xiaoqin Liu, Xinhao Fan, Junyu Yan, Longchao Zhang, Lixian Wang, Honor Calnan, Yalan Yang, Graham Gardner, Rong Zhou, Zhonglin Tang. An InDel in the promoter of ribosomal protein S27-like gene regulates skeletal muscle growth in pigs[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1114-1124.
[6] Yulong Guo, Wanzhuo Geng, Botong Chen, Zhimin Cheng, Yihao Zhi, Yanhua Zhang, Donghua Li, Ruirui Jiang, Zhuanjian Li, Yadong Tian, Xiangtao Kang, Hong Li, Xiaojun Liu. Genome-wide characteristic and functional analyses of the BMP gene family reveal its role in response to directed selection in chicken (Gallus gallus)[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1150-1164.
[7] Jinxiang Gao, Bing Li, Pei Qin, Sihao Zhang, Xiaoting Li, Yebitao Yang, Wenhao Shen, Shan Tang, Jijun Li, Liang Guo, Jun Zou, Jinxing Tu. A single nucleotide substitution in BnaC02.LBD6 promoter causes blade shape variation in Brassica napus[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 879-892.
[8] Jili Xu, Shuo Liu, Zhiyuan Gao, Qingdong Zeng, Xiaowen Zhang, Dejun Han, Hui Tian. Genome-wide association study reveals genomic regions for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium use efficiency in bread wheat[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 847-863.
[9] Xiukun Li, Jing Hao, Hongtao Deng, Shunli Cui, Li Li, Mingyu Hou, Yingru Liu, Lifeng Liu. Identification of a pleiotropic QTL and development of KASP markers for 100-pod weight, 100-seed weight, and shelling percentage in peanut[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 893-902.
[10] Shuwei Zhang, Jiajia Zhao, Haiyan Zhang, Duoduo Fu, Ling Qiao, Bangbang Wu, Xiaohua Li, Yuqiong Hao, Xingwei Zheng, Zhen Liang, Zhijian Chang, Jun Zheng. Structural chromosome variations from Jinmai 47 and Jinmai 84 affected agronomic traits and drought tolerance of wheat[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 864-878.
[11] Zhenlong Wang, Pin He, Xuyao Li, Tieshan Liu, Saud Shah, Hao Ren, Baizhao Ren, Peng Liu, Jiwang Zhang, Bin Zhao. Enhancing yield of modern maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids through optimization of population photosynthetic capacity and light-nitrogen use efficiency under high planting density[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 938-951.
[12] Ping Lin, Shanshan Liu, Zhidan Fu, Kai Luo, Yiling Li, Xinyue Peng, Xiaoting Yuan, Lida Yang, Tian Pu, Yuze Li, Taiwen Yong, Wenyu Yang. Rhizosphere flavonoids alleviate inhibition of soybean nodulation caused by shading under maize–soybean strip intercropping[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 952-964.
[13] Yunrui Chen, Dayong Fan, Ziliang Li, Yujie Zhang, Yang He, Minzhi Chen, Wangfeng Zhang, Yali Zhang. Critical role of outside xylem hydraulic conductance in regulating stomatal conductance and water use efficiency in cotton across different planting densities[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 965-976.
[14] Ming Li, Jingjing Wang, Jia’nan Wen, Juan J. Loor, Qianming Jiang, Jingyi Wang, Huijing Zhang, Yue Yang, Wei Yang, Bingbing Zhang, Chuang Xu. ACSL4 is a target for β-hydroxybutyrate-induced increase in fatty acid content and lipid droplet accumulation in bovine mammary epithelial cells[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 1137-1149.
[15] Jieyu Dai, Ze Xu, Qianjin Zhan, Jingwen Zhu, Lijun Cao, Zhanling Lu, Yuting Xu, Tongyang Kang, Yanan Hu, Caiping Zhao. Genome-wide identification of the peach LOB/LBD genes and the positive role of the PpNAP4–PpLOB1 module in peach fruit softening[J]. >Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2026, 25(3): 977-988.
No Suggested Reading articles found!