Complementary land use in the Richmond River catchment: Evaluating economic and environmental benefits

Leslie Beardmore, Elizabeth Heagney and Caroline A. Sullivan

Land Use Policy, 2019, vol. 87, issue C

Abstract: Agricultural land uses can contribute to land degradation, water quality decline, and loss of ecosystem function and biodiversity in the surrounding catchment. Trees can assist in catchment management, and re-afforestation strategies have been implemented in an effort to mitigate agricultural impacts and improve degraded land and waterways worldwide. Re-afforestation strategies often target private land, and their success relies on landholder participation. Landholders’ decisions about land-use allocation are driven primarily by the private financial costs and benefits associated with different farming strategies. This research assesses the private on-farm financial impact and the public environmental benefit of land use transition from beef grazing to a mixed beef grazing-forestry system in the Richmond River catchment on the east coast of Australia. GIS analysis identified more than 30% of the catchment as beef grazing land potentially available for re-afforestation, across a variety of soil types and geomorphic characteristics. We used a farm-scale financial model to assess the costs and benefits associated with transition from grazing to a variety of cattle-forestry mixtures that were determined on the basis of their suitability to soil type and slope in different parts of a catchment. We also used a multi-criteria approach to assess the environmental outcomes associated with each transition. The results demonstrate that diversification to a mixed beef grazing-forestry system consistently provides environmental benefit, but the financial impact on landholders varies depending on soil type. Landholders on ferrosol and vertosol soils in this catchment have favourable options that can simultaneously deliver private and public benefits, whereas landholders on kurosol and dermosol soils are more restricted, with environmental improvements possible only as a trade-off with farm financial performance. Based on these results, we suggest that different policy mechanisms are required to encourage graziers in different parts of the catchment to shift towards mixed cattle-forestry systems.

Keywords: Public benefits; Private benefits; Environmental benefits; Land use change; Economic modelling (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718316247
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:87:y:2019:i:c:s0264837718316247

DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104070

Access Statistics for this article

Land Use Policy is currently edited by Jaap Zevenbergen

More articles in Land Use Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Joice Jiang ().