Comparative Techno-Economic and Carbon Footprint Analysis of Semi-Extensive and Intensive Beef Farming

Angelo Frascarelli, Stefano Ciliberti (), Sofia Maria Lilli, Paolo Pascolini, Jacopo Gabriele Orlando and Margherita Tiradritti
Additional contact information
Angelo Frascarelli: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Via Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy
Stefano Ciliberti: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Via Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy
Sofia Maria Lilli: Ce.S.A.R. (Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, University of Perugia), Via Risorgimento 3/b, 06051 Deruta, Italy
Paolo Pascolini: Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Via Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy
Jacopo Gabriele Orlando: Impact and Sustainability Division—Aboca S.p.A. Società Agricola, Loc. Aboca 20, 52037 Sansepolcro, Italy
Margherita Tiradritti: Impact and Sustainability Division—Aboca S.p.A. Società Agricola, Loc. Aboca 20, 52037 Sansepolcro, Italy

Agriculture, 2025, vol. 15, issue 5, 1-15

Abstract: The environmental impact of beef cattle production varies significantly across farming systems, influenced by factors like feed, management practices, and land use. By applying the LCA perspective with “from cradle to farm gate” boundaries and using the CAP’2ER ® tool, this study evaluates the carbon footprint of two farming models in Italy: a semi-extensive cow-calf beef production and an intensive farm for calf fattening. The carbon footprint was calculated using two functional units: kilograms of live meat gross production (LMGP), and a monetary unit. The first model showed a lower carbon footprint, with 13.4 kg CO 2 eq/kg LMGP and 1.96 kg CO 2 eq/EUR, compared to the second one 19.2 kg CO 2 eq/kg LMGP and 5.20 kg CO 2 eq/EUR. The use of monetary value as a functional unit is rarely explored in the literature, since most studies have focused on weight-based metrics, favoring intensive systems with longer lifecycles compared to extensive farming. Furthermore, contrary to findings in the literature for semi-extensive systems like adaptive multi-paddock grazing, the tool used for the calculation did not detect any carbon sequestration. These findings highlight the need for further investigation into diverse functional units to assess the environmental and economic performance of farming systems. Expanding this approach could inform policies and consumer decisions, promoting sustainable beef production aligned with climate goals and the European Green Deal agenda.

Keywords: beef; carbon footprint; semi-extensive farming (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/5/472/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/5/472/ (text/html)

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:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:5:p:472-:d:1597259

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture is currently edited by Ms. Leda Xuan

More articles in Agriculture from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().