Low-Intensity Farming Systems in the Conservation of the Countryside

Bignal, Eric M.; McCracken, David I.

doi:10.2307/2404973

Cited by 443 publications

(266 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

251

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of C and R pastures resulted in lower GHG emissions than the R-IF or C-IF pastures because N fertilizer was reduced and it took fewer hours of machinery operation to fertilize and irrigate. Although low-intensity pasture systems (low water and chemical use) are commonly perceived as beneficial to the environment (Bignal and McCracken, 1996), in this scenario the costs were prohibitive to improved sustainability. Given the constrictions on agricultural land availability (Lambin and Meyfroidt, 2011), scenarios which required substantial increases in land use were not practically feasible.…”

Section: Water Usementioning

confidence: 96%

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

White

Brady

Capper³

et al. 2014

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSystem sustainability balances environmental impact, economic viability and social acceptability. Assessment methods to investigate impacts of enterprise management and consumer decisions on sustainability of beef cattle operations are critically needed. Tools of this nature are especially important given the predictions of climate variability and the dependence of beef production systems on forage availability. A model optimizing nutritional and pasture management was created to examine the environmental impact of beef production. The model integrated modules calculating cradle-to-farm gate environmental impact, diet cost, pasture growth and willingness to pay (WTP). Least-cost diet and pasture management options served as a baseline to which environmental-impact reducing scenarios were compared. Economic viability was ensured by a constraint limiting change in diet cost to less than consumer WTP. Increased WTP was associated with improved social acceptability. Model outputs were evaluated by comparing to published data. Sensitivity analysis of the WTP constraint was conducted. A series of scenarios then examined how forecasted changes in precipitation patterns might alter forage supply and opportunities to reduce environmental impact in three regions in the United States. On a national scale, single-objective optimization indicated individual reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG), land use and water use of 3.6%, 5.4% and 4.3% were possible by changing diets. Multi-objective optimization demonstrated that GHG, land and water use could be simultaneously reduced by 2.3%. To achieve this change, cow-calf diets relied on grass hay, continuously-or rotationally-grazed irrigated and fertilized pasture as well as rotationally-grazed pasture. Stocker diets used rotationally-grazed, irrigated and fertilized pasture and feedlot diets used grass hay as a forage source. The model was sensitive to consumer WTP. When alternative precipitation patterns were simulated, opportunities to decrease the environmental impact of beef production in the Pacific Northwest and Texas were reduced by precipitation changes; whereas opportunities in the Midwest improved. Economic viability, rather than biological limitations, reduced the potential to improve environmental impact under future precipitation scenarios. Decreased spring rainfall resulted in lower pasture yields and required greater use of stored forages. Related increases in diet cost reduced opportunities to appropriate funds toward investment in environmental-impact reducing pasture management strategies. The model developed in this study is a robust tool that can be used to assess the impacts of enterprise management and consumer decisions on beef production sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Water Usementioning

confidence: 96%

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

White

Brady

Capper³

et al. 2014

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…wetlands, woods, riverine habitats), as well as social systems of food procurement. Mosaic landscapes with a variety of farmed and non-farmed habitats are known to be good for birds as well as farms (Bignall & McCracken 1996;Shennan et al 2005;Woodhouse et al 2005;Wade et al 2008). …”

Section: Improving Natural Capital For Agroecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural sustainability: concepts, principles and evidence

Pretty

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

1,376

746

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns about sustainability in agricultural systems centre on the need to develop technologies and practices that do not have adverse effects on environmental goods and services, are accessible to and effective for farmers, and lead to improvements in food productivity. Despite great progress in agricultural productivity in the past half-century, with crop and livestock productivity strongly driven by increased use of fertilizers, irrigation water, agricultural machinery, pesticides and land, it would be over-optimistic to assume that these relationships will remain linear in the future. New approaches are needed that will integrate biological and ecological processes into food production, minimize the use of those non-renewable inputs that cause harm to the environment or to the health of farmers and consumers, make productive use of the knowledge and skills of farmers, so substituting human capital for costly external inputs, and make productive use of people's collective capacities to work together to solve common agricultural and natural resource problems, such as for pest, watershed, irrigation, forest and credit management. These principles help to build important capital assets for agricultural systems: natural; social; human; physical; and financial capital. Improving natural capital is a central aim, and dividends can come from making the best use of the genotypes of crops and animals and the ecological conditions under which they are grown or raised. Agricultural sustainability suggests a focus on both genotype improvements through the full range of modern biological approaches and improved understanding of the benefits of ecological and agronomic management, manipulation and redesign. The ecological management of agroecosystems that addresses energy flows, nutrient cycling, population-regulating mechanisms and system resilience can lead to the redesign of agriculture at a landscape scale. Sustainable agriculture outcomes can be positive for food productivity, reduced pesticide use and carbon balances. Significant challenges, however, remain to develop national and international policies to support the wider emergence of more sustainable forms of agricultural production across both industrialized and developing countries.

show abstract

“…Particularly for European landscapes, a large proportion of which are diverse forms of grasslands, and many of which are highly valued for biodiversity (Habel et al, 2013), researchers have emphasised the importance of the continuation of traditional management (Bignal and McCracken, 1996;Isselstein et al, 2005;Schmitt and Rakosy, 2007;Bezak and Halada, 2010;Krause and Culmsee, 2013;Birge and Herzon, 2014;Molnar, 2014), the threat of abandonment of such practices and the potential loss of associated traditional ecological knowledge (Hopkins and Holz, 2006;Prince et al, 2012;Babai and Molnar, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The threat of abandonment in socio-ecological landscapes: Farmers’ motivations and perspectives on high nature value grassland conservation

McGinlay

Gowing

Budds

2017

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Future sustainability of the conservation management of socio-ecological landscapes is typically reliant on on-going agricultural management. Such management may be threatened by changes in the drivers of management and the fragility of the stakeholder networks that deliver management. This study examined evidence for the risk of abandonment in a series of case study high nature value (HNV) grassland sites. The work found that the motivation of farmers to participate in the conservation management was typically limited and often marginal. Landowners and conservation stakeholders who relied on partner farmers to manage such sites often struggled to recruit and retain their help, leading to intermittent turnover in managing farmers and to some sites being under-managed. A trend towards greater financial incentivisation of farmers was evident, which policy-makers responsible for agri-environment schemes should note, and elsewhere some conservation organisations were seen to be bringing grassland management in-house. Primary reasons for farmer turnover and difficulty of recruitment included a lack of candidate farmers in the local landscape, and the marginal and fluctuating economics of grassland management. Farmers' motivations to participate in conservation management of such systems may continue to weaken and abandonment may therefore become a significant risk to the successful conservation of such systems. Conservation stakeholders need to foster good relations with their farmer-manager partners and not further depress their limited motivations to participate, as well as consider carefully whether farmer stakeholders are being adequately compensated for their efforts. Highlights Abandonment is a key risk to the management of some socio-ecological landscapes  Risks result from the difficulty in recruiting and retaining managing farmers  Farmers' motivations to participate are limited by marginal economic benefits  Trend towards increased financial incentivisation of farmers to improve retention

show abstract

Low-Intensity Farming Systems in the Conservation of the Countryside

Cited by 443 publications

References 19 publications

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

Agricultural sustainability: concepts, principles and evidence

The threat of abandonment in socio-ecological landscapes: Farmers’ motivations and perspectives on high nature value grassland conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About