The hidden costs of livestock environmental sustainability: The case of Podolian Cattle
The Sustainability of Agro-Food and Natural Resource Systems in the Mediterranean Basin, Page: 47-56
2015
- 20Citations
- 37Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Book Chapter Description
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is currently one of the most widely used methods for assessing the environmental impacts and performance of livestock products. According to this procedure, intensification of animal production is generally advocated to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions compared with extensive grazing systems due to the use of selected breeds, with enhanced productivity, and the significant reductions in CH 4 emissions consequent to the use of concentrates rather than forages. In addition, the impact of intensive systems on land use is much lower. However, free-ranging Podolian cattle show a number of positive environmental effects, such as increased climate stability, improved soil functionality, water quality and footprint and preservation from fires along with maintaining an economically active social community in otherwise unproductive, marginal areas. Other beneficial effects of extensive Podolian farming system include low competition with human nutrition and high level of animal health and welfare. An economic evaluation of these non-commodity outputs should be indirectly estimated by the avoided costs (e.g. reduced veterinary interventions and therapy treatments) or the lack of profits (e.g. direct payments for the enhancement of environmental performance) that would have incurred in their absence. These economic evaluations should be used in order to allocate them as further outputs to be included in the LCA in order to achieve a more accurate estimation of the impact of the Podolian farming system.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84944068217&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16357-4_4; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-16357-4_4; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16357-4_4; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-16357-4_4
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know