IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v148y2016icp95-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A life cycle assessment of the effect of intensification on the environmental impacts and resource use of grass-based sheep farming

Author

Listed:
  • O'Brien, D.
  • Bohan, A.
  • McHugh, N.
  • Shalloo, L.

Abstract

Intensification is a strategy that is reported to increase the productivity and environmental performance of livestock farms, but most life cycle assessments (LCA) of livestock (particularly sheep) only consider greenhouse gas (GHG) or carbon footprint (CF). The goal of our LCA study was to assess the effect of intensification on several measures of environmental impact and resource use for grass-based sheep farms. The impacts we considered in addition to CF were acidification and eutrophication. The resource use measures we assessed were fossil fuel energy demand, land occupation and land use efficiency in terms of human digestible protein (HDP) production. Both environmental and resource use measures were expressed per kg of sheep live weight (LW) produced. The sheep production systems we assessed were Irish case study farms that represented average lowland, average hill, intensive lowland mid-season (IMS) and intensive early-season (IES) systems. Our results showed that the food-related environmental impacts and resource use of the average lowland sheep farm could be improved by intensifying grass and animal production. In addition, there was significant potential to increase production within area-based regulatory limits on nitrogen and phosphorus. However, increasing animal production by feeding more concentrate was less efficient and increased environmental impacts compared to increasing grass production, because concentrate required significantly more resources than pasture to produce and generated more emissions. There was limited potential to produce meat from the average hill farm that was located on marginal land. This generally led to the average hill farm having the highest product-related environmental impacts, but this system had the lowest nutrient surpluses per unit area. Modeling assumptions regarding carbon sequestration by grassland had a large effect on farm carbon footprints. The average hill farm had the highest carbon footprint when sequestration was excluded, but the opposite was the case when it was included. Therefore, we recommend clearly documenting the contribution of uncertain carbon sinks such as grassland sequestration to carbon footprints of sheep production systems. Additionally, we suggest that the assessment of land use efficiency should not be confined to HDP production and instead an index or scoring system should be used that accounts for the textile products and ecosystem services (e.g., landscape conservation) of sheep farms. The latter can be quantified using data from agri-environmental schemes or farm surveys and would provide additional important information on the environmental benefits of sheep farming.

Suggested Citation

  • O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A. & McHugh, N. & Shalloo, L., 2016. "A life cycle assessment of the effect of intensification on the environmental impacts and resource use of grass-based sheep farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 95-104.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:148:y:2016:i:c:p:95-104
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2016.07.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X1630333X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.07.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katharina Plassmann, 2012. "Accounting for carbon removals," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(1), pages 4-6, January.
    2. Belflower, Jeff B. & Bernard, John K. & Gattie, David K. & Hancock, Dennis W. & Risse, Lawrence M. & Alan Rotz, C., 2012. "A case study of the potential environmental impacts of different dairy production systems in Georgia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 84-93.
    3. Thomassen, M.A. & van Calker, K.J. & Smits, M.C.J. & Iepema, G.L. & de Boer, I.J.M., 2008. "Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 95-107, March.
    4. Flysjö, Anna & Henriksson, Maria & Cederberg, Christel & Ledgard, Stewart & Englund, Jan-Eric, 2011. "The impact of various parameters on the carbon footprint of milk production in New Zealand and Sweden," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 459-469, July.
    5. Basset-Mens, Claudine & Ledgard, Stewart & Boyes, Mark, 2009. "Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1615-1625, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luis Javier R. Barron & Aitor Andonegi & Gonzalo Gamboa & Eneko Garmendia & Oihana García & Noelia Aldai & Arantza Aldezabal, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Pasture-Based Dairy Sheep Systems: A Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Cristóvão Fraga Andrade Pereira da Rocha & Catarina de Sousa Tavares Pinho da Silva & Rafaela Martins da Silva & Manuel Joaquim da Silva Oliveira & Belmira de Almeida Ferreira Neto, 2023. "The Dietary Carbon Footprint of Portuguese Adults: Defining and Assessing Mitigation Scenarios for Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Pablo L. Peri & Yamina M. Rosas & Brenton Ladd & Ricardo Díaz-Delgado & Guillermo Martínez Pastur, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Lamb and Wool Production at Farm Gate and the Regional Scale in Southern Patagonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-26, April.
    4. Asante, Bright O. & Temoso, Omphile & Addai, Kwabena N. & Villano, Renato A., 2019. "Evaluating productivity gaps in maize production across different agroecological zones in Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Villano, Renato & Asante, Bright Owusu & Bravo-Ureta, Boris, 2019. "Farming systems and productivity gaps: Opportunities for improving smallholder performance in the Forest-Savannah transition zone of Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 220-227.
    6. Tsakiridis, Andreas & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Kilcline, Kevin, 2020. "A Comparison of Environmental and Economic Sustainability across Seafood and Livestock Product Value Chains," Working Papers 309507, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    7. Emma Moberg & Hanna Karlsson Potter & Amanda Wood & Per-Anders Hansson & Elin Röös, 2020. "Benchmarking the Swedish Diet Relative to Global and National Environmental Targets—Identification of Indicator Limitations and Data Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, February.
    8. Ying Zhang & Xiaobin Dong & Xue-Chao Wang & Mengxue Liu & Peng Zhang & Ranran Liu & Jiuming Huang & Shuheng Dong, 2022. "Study on the Relationship between Low-Carbon Circular Farming and Animal Husbandry Models and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of Yongchang County, Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Farrell, L. & Herron, J. & Pabiou, T. & McHugh, N. & McDermott, K. & Shalloo, L. & O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A., 2022. "Modelling the production, profit, and greenhouse gas emissions of Irish sheep flocks divergent in genetic merit," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hafiz Muhammad Abrar Ilyas & Majeed Safa & Alison Bailey & Sara Rauf & Marvin Pangborn, 2019. "The Carbon Footprint of Energy Consumption in Pastoral and Barn Dairy Farming Systems: A Case Study from Canterbury, New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Van Middelaar, C.E. & Berentsen, P.B.M. & Dijkstra, J. & De Boer, I.J.M., 2013. "Evaluation of a feeding strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from dairy farming: The level of analysis matters," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 9-22.
    3. Belflower, Jeff B. & Bernard, John K. & Gattie, David K. & Hancock, Dennis W. & Risse, Lawrence M. & Alan Rotz, C., 2012. "A case study of the potential environmental impacts of different dairy production systems in Georgia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 84-93.
    4. Philip Shine & John Upton & Paria Sefeedpari & Michael D. Murphy, 2020. "Energy Consumption on Dairy Farms: A Review of Monitoring, Prediction Modelling, and Analyses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-25, March.
    5. Anna Kuczuk & Janusz Pospolita, 2020. "Sustainable Agriculture – Energy and Emergy Aspects of Agricultural Production," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 1000-1018.
    6. O’Brien, Donal & Shalloo, Laurence & Patton, Joe & Buckley, Frank & Grainger, Chris & Wallace, Michael, 2012. "A life cycle assessment of seasonal grass-based and confinement dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 33-46.
    7. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    8. White, Robin R., 2016. "Increasing energy and protein use efficiency improves opportunities to decrease land use, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions from dairy production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 20-29.
    9. Chun-Youl Baek & Kyu-Hyun Park & Kiyotaka Tahara & Yoon-Young Chun, 2017. "Data Quality Assessment of the Uncertainty Analysis Applied to the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of a Dairy Cow System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Lucio Cecchini & Biancamaria Torquati & Chiara Paffarini & Marco Barbanera & Daniele Foschini & Massimo Chiorri, 2016. "The Milk Supply Chain in Italy’s Umbria Region: Environmental and Economic Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Nina Repar & Pierrick Jan & Thomas Nemecek & Dunja Dux & Reiner Doluschitz, 2018. "Factors Affecting Global versus Local Environmental and Economic Performance of Dairying: A Case Study of Swiss Mountain Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Huang, Wei, 2022. "Demand for plant-based milk and effects of a carbon tax on fresh milk consumption in Sweden," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 518-529.
    13. Shyian, Natalia & Kolosha, Valerii, 2020. "Формування Ціни На Молоко В Україні В Контексті Світових Тенденцій," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(4), December.
    14. Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico & van der Ham, Corinda, 2014. "Costs and benefits associated with the externalities generated by Dutch agriculture," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Jan Willem Erisman & Allison Leach & Albert Bleeker & Brooke Atwell & Lia Cattaneo & James Galloway, 2018. "An Integrated Approach to a Nitrogen Use Efficiency (NUE) Indicator for the Food Production–Consumption Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-29, March.
    16. Bonamigo, Andrei & Ferenhof, Helio Aisenberg & Forcellini, Fernando Antonio, 2017. "Dairy Ecosystem Barriers Exposed - A Case Study In A Family Production Unit At Western Santa Catarina, Brazil," Organizações Rurais e Agroindustriais/Rural and Agro-Industrial Organizations, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Departamento de Administracao e Economia, vol. 19(1), January.
    17. Graeme J. Doole, 2010. "Evaluating Input Standards for Non‐Point Pollution Control under Firm Heterogeneity," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 680-696, September.
    18. Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Scrimgeour, Frank & Marsh, Dan, 2011. "Analysis of environmental and economic efficiency using a farm population micro-simulation model," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 81(7), pages 1344-1352.
    19. Kraatz, Simone, 2012. "Energy intensity in livestock operations – Modeling of dairy farming systems in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 90-106.
    20. José A. Gómez-Limón & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Ernest Reig-Martínez, 2011. "Eco-efficiency Assessment of Olive Farms in Andalusia," Working Papers 1105, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:148:y:2016:i:c:p:95-104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.