Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services

Andrea Bragaglio, Ada Braghieri, Corrado Pacelli and Fabio Napolitano
Additional contact information
Andrea Bragaglio: Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, sp Casamassima, km 3, 70010 Valenzano (BA), Italy
Ada Braghieri: Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy
Corrado Pacelli: Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy
Fabio Napolitano: Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 9, 1-15

Abstract: We aimed to assess whether the environmental impacts in terms of global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), and land occupation (LO) of beef can be decreased when ecosystem and cultural/provisioning services are included in the evaluation. We used four Italian production systems: Fat, with beef imported calves kept in confinement; CoCaI, with beef cows and calves kept in confinement; SpEx, with beef cows and calves kept on pasture and finishing conducted in confinement; and Pod, with Podolian cows and calves kept on pasture and finishing conducted in confinement. After the economic allocation, the GWP of system Pod decreased considerably and showed values lower than those computed for systems CoCaI and SpEx ( P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). System Pod showed the lowest AP and EP as compared with all the other systems ( P < 0.01). Systems Fat and CoCaI showed the smallest LO, with values lower than systems Pod ( P < 0.05) and SpEx ( P < 0.001). We conclude that the environmental impacts of extensive and local beef production systems in terms of GWP, AP, and EP was markedly reduced when the provision of accessory services was included in the calculation. Conversely, LO did not markedly change due to the high absolute values needed to allow pasture-based feeding. The estimation of additional positive aspects linked to the use of natural pastures, such as removal of carbon dioxide, increased biodiversity, and exploitation of feeds nonedible by humans, may allow a further reduction of LO.

Keywords: beef cattle; Podolian breed; life cycle assessment; ecosystem services; environmental impact (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3828/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3828/ (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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3828-:d:355313

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

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