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

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 fo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andrea Bragaglio, Ada Braghieri, Corrado Pacelli, Fabio Napolitano
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2020-05-01
Series:Sustainability
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3828
id doaj-1aa68c16346a4fd389c06ea1e42f06fe
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1aa68c16346a4fd389c06ea1e42f06fe2020-11-25T02:00:30ZengMDPI AGSustainability2071-10502020-05-01123828382810.3390/su12093828Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem ServicesAndrea Bragaglio0Ada Braghieri1Corrado Pacelli2Fabio Napolitano3Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, sp Casamassima, km 3, 70010 Valenzano (BA), ItalyScuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, ItalyScuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, ItalyScuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell’Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, ItalyWe 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.https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3828beef cattlePodolian breedlife cycle assessmentecosystem servicesenvironmental impact
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Andrea Bragaglio
Ada Braghieri
Corrado Pacelli
Fabio Napolitano
spellingShingle Andrea Bragaglio
Ada Braghieri
Corrado Pacelli
Fabio Napolitano
Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
Sustainability
beef cattle
Podolian breed
life cycle assessment
ecosystem services
environmental impact
author_facet Andrea Bragaglio
Ada Braghieri
Corrado Pacelli
Fabio Napolitano
author_sort Andrea Bragaglio
title Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
title_short Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
title_full Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
title_fullStr Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
title_full_unstemmed Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services
title_sort environmental impacts of beef as corrected for the provision of ecosystem services
publisher MDPI AG
series Sustainability
issn 2071-1050
publishDate 2020-05-01
description 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.
topic beef cattle
Podolian breed
life cycle assessment
ecosystem services
environmental impact
url https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3828
work_keys_str_mv AT andreabragaglio environmentalimpactsofbeefascorrectedfortheprovisionofecosystemservices
AT adabraghieri environmentalimpactsofbeefascorrectedfortheprovisionofecosystemservices
AT corradopacelli environmentalimpactsofbeefascorrectedfortheprovisionofecosystemservices
AT fabionapolitano environmentalimpactsofbeefascorrectedfortheprovisionofecosystemservices
_version_ 1724960090742587392